Su From So Quotes

There are so many things I want to tell her, so many things she doesn't know; like how I remember when she first came home from the hospital, a big pink blob with a perma-smile, and she used to fall asleep while grabbing on to my pinter finger; how I sued to give her piggyback rides up and down the beach on Cape Cod, and she would tub on my ponytail to direct me one way or the other; how soft and furry her head was when she was first born; that the first time you kiss someone you'll be nervous, and it will be weird, and it won't be as good as you want it to be, and that's okay; how you should only fall in love with people who will fall in love back... I feel an ache in my throat, but i manage to smile. Two conflicting desires go through me at the same time, each as sharp as a razor blade: I want to see you grow up and Don't ever change.

Imagine having a disease so overwhelming that your mind causes you to want to murder yourself. Imagine having a malignant disorder that no one understands. Imagine having a dangerous affliction that even you can’t control or suppress. Imagine all the people living life in peace. Imagine the estate of John Lennon not suing me for using that last line. Then imagine that same (often fatal) disease being one of the most misunderstood disorders … one that so few want to talk about and one that so many of us can never completely escape from.

Brad (Lauren's ex) ignored Hayley (she's Brad's ex girlfriend) and looked at me, he did a top to toe and back again then his gaze moved to Tate. "I'm here to tell you I'm suing you," he announced. Jim-Billy, Nadine, Steg, Wing and my eyes moved to Tate. Tate stared at Brad then he said, "Come again?" "I'm suing you," Brad repeated. "For what?" Tate asked. "Alienation of affection," Brad answered. Without hesitation, Tate threw his head back and burst out laughing. Then he looked at me and remarked, "You're right, babe, this is fun." Ignoring Tate's comment, Brad declared, "You stole my wife." Tate looked back at Brad. "Yeah, bud, I did." Brad pointed at Tate and his voice was raised when he proclaimed, "See? You admit it." He threw his arm out. "I have witnesses." "Not that any judge'll hear your case, seein' as Lauren divorced your ass before I alienated her affection, but you manage it, I'll pay the fine. In the meantime, I'll keep alienating her affection. You should know, and feel free to share it with your lawyers," Tate continued magnanimously, "schedule's comin' out mornin' and night. Usually, in the mornin', she sucks me off or I make her come in the shower. Night, man…shit, that's even better. Definitely worth the fine." Sorry, it's just too long; I have to cut it off. But it continues…like that: "This is the good life?" (Brad) "Part of it," Tate replied instantly, taking his fists from the bar, leaning into his forearms and asking softly, in a tone meant both to challenge and provoke, "She ever ignite, lose so much control she'd attack you? Climb on top and fuck you so hard she can't breathe?" I watched Brad suffer that blow because I hadn't, not even close. We'd had good sex but not that good and Brad was extremely proud of his sexual prowess. He was convinced he was the best. And he knew, with Tate's words, he was wrong. "Jesus, you're disgusting," Brad muttered, calling up revulsion to save face. "She does that to me," Tate continued. "Fuck off," Brad snapped. "All the fuckin' time," Tate pushed. "Fuck off," Brad repeated. "It's fuckin' magnificent," Tate declared. "Thanks, honey," I whispered and grinned at him when his eyes came to me. I was actually expressing gratitude, although embarrassed by his conversation, but I was also kind of joking to get in Brad's face. Tate wasn't. His expression was serious when he said, "You are, Ace. Fuckin' magnificent.

(Dorothy) Dunnett is the master of the invisible, particularly in her later books. Where is this tension coming from? Why is this scene so agonizing? Why is this scene so emotional? Tension and emotion pervade the books, sometimes almost unbearably, yet when you look at the writing, at the actual words, there's nothing to show that the scene is emotional at all. I think it is because Dunnett layers her novels, meaning that each event is informed by what has come before (and what came before that, and what came before that) but Dunnett doesn't signpost in the text that this is happening, leaving it to the reader to bring the relevant information to the table

The U.S. has so many rules and regulations, because of fear of being sued, that kids give up on the opportunity for personal exploration. A pool has to be fenced so that it’s not an ‘attractive nuisance.’ Most New Guineans don’t have pools, but even the rivers that we frequented didn’t have signs saying ‘Jump at your own risk,’ because it’s obvious. Why would I jump unless I’m prepared for the consequences? Responsibility in the U.S. has been taken from the person acting and has been placed on the owner of the land or the builder of the house. Most Americans want to blame someone other than themselves as much as possible. In New Guinea I was able to grow up, play creatively, and explore the outdoors and nature freely, with the obligatory element of risk, however well managed, that is absent from the average risk-averse American childhood. I had the richest upbringing possible, an upbringing inconceivable for Americans.

Great Scott!” said Peter. “So it was the horn--your own horn, Su--that dragged us all off that seat on the platform yesterday morning! I can hardly believe it; yet it all fits in.” “I don’t know why you shouldn’t believe it,” said Lucy, “if you believe in magic at all. Aren’t there lots of stories about magic forcing people out of one place--out of one world--into another? I mean, when a magician in The Arabian Nights calls up a Jinn, it has to come. We had to come, just like that.” “Yes,” said Peter, “I suppose what makes it feel so queer is that in the stories it’s always someone in our world who does the calling. One doesn’t really think about where the Jinn’s coming from.” “And now we know what it feels like for the Jinn,” said Edmund with a chuckle. “Golly! It’s a bit uncomfortable to know that we can be whistled for like that. It’s worse than what Father says about living at the mercy of the telephone.

And that got him to realize that, dressed only in his bathrobe, he was just one gust of wind away from being sued by our entire neighborhood for crimes against humanity. Even now his Poocha Loocha Libre boxers were disturbingly visible. I'd seen them before-they were a Father's Day present from me-but never on him. So now I needed to go eat my own eyeballs.

THE ORGANIC FOODS MYTH A few decades ago, a woman tried to sue a butter company that had printed the word 'LITE' on its product's packaging. She claimed to have gained so much weight from eating the butter, even though it was labeled as being 'LITE'. In court, the lawyer representing the butter company simply held up the container of butter and said to the judge, "My client did not lie. The container is indeed 'light in weight'. The woman lost the case. In a marketing class in college, we were assigned this case study to show us that 'puffery' is legal. This means that you can deceptively use words with double meanings to sell a product, even though they could mislead customers into thinking your words mean something different. I am using this example to touch upon the myth of organic foods. If I was a lawyer representing a company that had labeled its oranges as being organic, and a man was suing my client because he found out that the oranges were being sprayed with toxins, my defense opening statement would be very simple: "If it's not plastic or metallic, it's organic." Most products labeled as being organic are not really organic. This is the truth. You pay premium prices for products you think are grown without chemicals, but most products are. If an apple is labeled as being organic, it could mean two things. Either the apple tree itself is free from chemicals, or just the soil. One or the other, but rarely both. The truth is, the word 'organic' can mean many things, and taking a farmer to court would be difficult if you found out his fruits were indeed sprayed with pesticides. After all, all organisms on earth are scientifically labeled as being organic, unless they are made of plastic or metal. The word 'organic' comes from the word 'organism', meaning something that is, or once was, living and breathing air, water and sunlight. So, the next time you stroll through your local supermarket and see brown pears that are labeled as being organic, know that they could have been third-rate fare sourced from the last day of a weekend market, and have been re-labeled to be sold to a gullible crowd for a premium price. I have a friend who thinks that organic foods have to look beat up and deformed because the use of chemicals is what makes them look perfect and flawless. This is not true. Chemical-free foods can look perfect if grown in your backyard. If you go to jungles or forests untouched by man, you will see fruit and vegetables that look like they sprouted from trees from Heaven. So be cautious the next time you buy anything labeled as 'organic'. Unless you personally know the farmer or the company selling the products, don't trust what you read. You, me, and everything on land and sea are organic. Suzy Kassem, Truth Is Crying

America is a leap of the imagination. From its beginning, people had only a persistent idea of what a good country should be. The idea involved freedom, equality, justice, and the pursuit of happiness; nowadays most of us probably could not describe it a lot more clearly than that. The truth is, it always has been a bit of a guess. No one has ever known for sure whether a country based on such an idea is really possible, but again and again, we have leaped toward the idea and hoped. What SuAnne Big Crow demonstrated in the Lead high school gym is that making the leap is the whole point. The idea does not truly live unless it is expressed by an act; the country does not live unless we make the leap from our tribe or focus group or gated community or demographic, and land on the shaky platform of that idea of a good country which all kinds of different people share. This leap is made in public, and it's made for free. It's not a product or a service that anyone will pay you for. You do it for reasons unexplainable by economics--for ambition, out of conviction, for the heck of it, in playfulness, for love. It's done in public spaces, face-to-face, where anyone is free to go. It's not done on television, on the Internet, or over the telephone; our electronic systems can only tell us if the leap made elsewhere has succeeded or failed. The places you'll see it are high school gyms, city sidewalks, the subway, bus stations, public parks, parking lots, and wherever people gather during natural disasters. In those places and others like them, the leaps that continue to invent and knit the country continue to be made. When the leap fails, it looks like the L.A. riots, or Sherman's March through Georgia. When it succeeds, it looks like the New York City Bicentennial Celebration in July 1976 or the Civil Rights March on Washington in 1963. On that scale, whether it succeeds or fails, it's always something to see. The leap requires physical presence and physical risk. But the payoff--in terms of dreams realized, of understanding, of people getting along--can be so glorious as to make the risk seem minuscule.

Myriad Genetics, which holds the patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes responsible for most cases of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, charges $3,000 to test for the genes. Myriad has been accused of creating a monopoly, since no one else can offer the test, and researchers can’t develop cheaper tests or new therapies without getting permission from Myriad and paying steep licensing fees. Scientists who’ve gone ahead with research involving the breast-cancer genes without Myriad’s permission have found themselves on the receiving end of cease-and-desist letters and threats of litigation. In May 2009 the American Civil Liberties Union, several breast-cancer survivors, and professional groups representing more than 150,000 scientists sued Myriad Genetics over its breast-cancer gene patents. Among other things, scientists involved in the case claim that the practice of gene patenting has inhibited their research, and they aim to stop it. The presence of so many scientists in the suit, many of them from top institutions, challenges the standard argument that ruling against biological patents would interfere with scientific progress

They demanded legal clarity. So, beginning with California, states passed laws exempting doctors from prosecution if they prescribed opiates for pain within the practice of responsible health care. Numerous states approved so-called intractable pain regulations: Ohio, Oregon, Washington, and others. Soon what can only be described as a revolution in medical thought and practice was under way. Doctors were urged to begin attending to the country’s pain epidemic by prescribing these drugs. Interns and residents were taught that these drugs were now not addictive, that doctors thus had a mission, a duty, to use them. In some hospitals, doctors were told they could be sued if they did not treat pain aggressively, which meant with opiates. Russell

But the history of Hopkins Hospital certainly isn’t pristine when it comes to black patients. In 1969, a Hopkins researcher used blood samples from more than 7,000 neighborhood children—most of them from poor black families—to look for a genetic predisposition to criminal behavior. The researcher didn’t get consent. The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit claiming the study violated the boys’ civil rights and breached confidentiality of doctor-patient relationships by releasing results to state and juvenile courts. The study was halted, then resumed a few months later using consent forms. And in the late nineties, two women sued Hopkins, claiming that its researchers had knowingly exposed their children to lead, and hadn’t promptly informed them when blood tests revealed that their children had elevated lead levels—even when one developed lead poisoning. The research was part of a study examining lead abatement methods, and all families involved were black. The researchers had treated several homes to varying degrees, then encouraged landlords to rent those homes to families with children so they could then monitor the children’s lead levels. Initially, the case was dismissed. On appeal, one judge compared the study to Southam’s HeLa injections, the Tuskegee study, and Nazi research, and the case eventually settled out of court. The Department of Health and Human Services launched an investigation and concluded that the study’s consent forms “failed to provide an adequate description” of the different levels of lead abatement in the homes.

The biggest adjustment I had to make on moving from New Guinea to the U.S. was my lack of freedom. Children have much more freedom in New Guinea. In the U.S. I was not allowed to climb trees. I was always climbing trees in New Guinea; I still like to climb trees. When my brother and I came back to California and moved into our house there, one of the first things we did was to climb a tree and build a tree house; other families thought that was weird. The U.S. has so many rules and regulations, because of fear of being sued, that kids give up on the opportunity for personal exploration. A pool has to be fenced so that it’s not an ‘attractive nuisance.’ Most New Guineans don’t have pools, but even the rivers that we frequented didn’t have signs saying ‘Jump at your own risk,’ because it’s obvious. Why would I jump unless I’m prepared for the consequences? Responsibility in the U.S. has been taken from the person acting and has been placed on the owner of the land or the builder of the house. Most Americans want to blame someone other than themselves as much as possible. In New Guinea I was able to grow up, play creatively, and explore the outdoors and nature freely, with the obligatory element of risk, however well managed, that is absent from the average risk-averse American childhood. I had the richest upbringing possible, an upbringing inconceivable for Americans.” “A frustration

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the state legislature set up the Southeast Flood Control Commission to come up with a plan for protecting Louisiana from floods. They concluded that the best course of action was to fill in the canals and repair the shore. Since this was a task the oil companies had in their contracts agreed to do, and had not done, in 2014 the commission did what had never been done: it sued the ninety-seven responsible oil companies. Governor Jindal quickly squashed the upstart commission. He removed members from it. He challenged its right to sue. In another unprecedented move, the legislature voted to nullify—retroactively—the lawsuit by withdrawing the authority to file it from those who had done so. A measure (SB 553) called for costs of repairs to be paid, not by the oil companies, but by the state’s taxpayers.

What this means is that the entire business model for something like Chase’s credit card business is not much more than a gigantic welfare fraud scheme. These companies borrow hundreds of billions of dollars from the Fed at rock-bottom rates, then turn around and lend it out to the world at 5, 10, 15, 20 percent, as credit cards and mortgages, boat loans and aircraft loans, and so on. If you pay it back, great, it’s a 500 percent or 1,000 percent or 4,000 percent profit for the bank. If you don’t pay it back, the company can put your name in the hopper to be sued. A $5,000 debt on a credit card for the now-defunct Circuit City, which was actually a Chase card, became a $13,000 or $14,000 debt by the time the bank finished applying fees and penalties. Just like a welfare application, you have to read the fine print. “They make more on lawsuits than they make on credit interest,” says Linda.

Today, as I sit looking at the tarnished old brass morning-glory horn of May’s gramophone—as brassy as May herself—I wonder whether she ever saw any of the three motion pictures inspired by this small but significant part of her life. In a way it is painful to imagine her sitting in a movie theater, watching as a private hurt of hers was laid bare, even in fictionalized, literally “whitewashed” form … and with a happy ending that likely never graced her real life. But somehow I doubt she ever saw the movie, or was aware of the revenge Maugham had taken on her. Because if she had seen it, I can’t help but envision her sitting in the theater in a righteous lather, as the lights come up and the last frame of film fades from the screen. “Jesus H. Christ on a bicycle!” I hear her cry out, indignantly. “So where the hell is my piece of the take?” The “Sadie Thompson” I knew would have sued—and won.

Let’s talk about ‘Coexist’ bumper stickers for a second. You’ve definitely seen them around. They’re those blue strips with white lettering that assemble a collection of religious icons and mystical symbols (e.g., an Islamic crescent, a Star of David, a Christian cross, a peace sign, a yin-yang) to spell out a simple message of inclusion and tolerance. Perhaps you instinctively roll your eyes at these advertisements of moral correctness. Perhaps you find the sentiment worthwhile, but you’re not a wear-your-politics-on-your-fender type of person. Or perhaps you actually have ‘Coexist’ bumper stickers affixed to both your Prius and your Beamer. Whatever floats your boat, man; far be it from us to cast stones. But we bring up these particular morality minibillboards to illustrate a bothersome dichotomy. If we were to draw a Venn diagram of (a) the people who flaunt their socially responsible “coexist” values for fellow motorists, and (b) the people who believe that, say, an evangelical Christian who owns a local flower shop ought to be sued and shamed for politely declining to provide floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding, the resulting circles would more or less overlap. The coexist message: You people (i.e., conservatives) need to get on board and start coexisting with groups that might make you uncomfortable. It says so right here on my highly enlightened bumper sticker. But don’t you dare ask me to tolerate the ‘intolerance’ of people with whom I disagree. Because that’s different.

Imagine all the people living life in peace. Imagine the estate of John Lennon not suing me for using that last line. Then imagine that same (often fatal) disease being one of the most misunderstood disorders … one that so few want to talk about and one that so many of us can never completely escape from.

Manuela de La Mancha,” says a deep voice. It sounds strange to hear such a long name, but that’s the manada I’m pretending to be from. “Hola, Marilén,” I say to Tiago and Saysa’s great-grandmother, whom I met moments ago. “No sos bruja.” You’re not a witch. My tongue feels like sandpaper, and my mouth seals dry. Since our wolf-shadows roam outside the Citadel, and my fangs and claws are retracted, I didn’t think there would be any indicator of my identity— “No te preocupes, no vengo a interrogarte.” Don’t worry, I’m not here to interrogate you. She moves closer, and the way her steely eyes seem to see more than others reminds me of Perla. “Toda la vida soñé con conocerte,” she whispers. My whole life I’ve dreamt of meeting you. Her long black hair is in a tight, elegant bun that pulls her skin, stretching it so that if there’s a single wrinkle, I don’t see it. “La primera de nosotras que nació fuera de su jaula.” The first of us to be born outside her cage.

This canned music starts pumping from inside the half-tented amphitheater, twenty feet away across our faux-cobblestone Maine Street. It used to be called Main Street, but Disney apparently sued us in the nineties, so the owners painted an e onto the word Main---even though nothing about Maine Street is evocative of Maine. There are no lobster shacks. There are no fishermen. We are in Pennsylvania.

How did he do it? How did this adventurer and soldier; crippled in the service of his king and country; kidnapped and held in slavery in the dungeons of Algiers for five long years; who returned to his country hoping in vain to be granted a post worthy of his name and sacrifices; who was reduced to collecting taxes for an unpopular government; who was sued and sent to prison on multiple occasions—how did this man invent a way of writing that would be so different from what came before it and have such a profound impact on what would follow?

They went a few dozen yards through fairly open woodland, keeping a sharp look-out. Then they came to a place where the undergrowth thickened and they had to pass nearer to it. Just as they were passing the place, there came a sudden something that snarled and flashed, rising out from the breaking twigs like a thunderbolt. Lucy was knocked down and winded, hearing the twang of a bowstring as she fell. When she was able to take notice of things again, she saw a great grim-looking gray bear lying dead with Trumpkin’s arrow in its side. “The D.L.F. beat you in that shooting match, Su,” said Peter, with a slightly forced smile. Even he had been shaken by this adventure. “I--I left it too late,” said Susan, in an embarrassed voice. “I was so afraid it might be, you know--one of our kind of bears, a talking bear.” She hated killing things. “That’s the trouble of it,” said Trumpkin, “when most of the beasts have gone enemy and gone dumb, but there are still some of the other kind left. You never know, and you daren’t wait to see.” “Poor old Bruin,” said Susan. “You don’t think he was?” “Not he,” said the Dwarf. “I saw the face and I heard the snarl. He only wanted Little Girl for his breakfast. And talking of breakfast, I didn’t want to discourage your Majesties when you said you hoped King Caspian would give you a good one: but meat’s precious scarce in camp.

...at Newsweek only girls with college degrees--and we were called "girls" then--were hired to sort and deliver the mail, humbly pushing our carts from door to door in our ladylike frocks and proper high-heeled shoes. If we could manage that, we graduated to "clippers," another female ghetto. Dressed in drab khaki smocks so that ink wouldn't smudge our clothes, we sat at the clip desk, marked up newspapers, tore out releveant articles with razor-edged "rip sticks," and routed the clips to the appropriate departments. "Being a clipper was a horrible job," said writer and director Nora Ephron, who got a job at Newsweek after she graduated from Wellesley in 1962, "and to make matters worse, I was good at it.

No, you just opened a beverage and took a drink without a second thought. That’s trust! You don’t know any of the thousands of strangers in the supply chain, and yet you took a drink with absolute certainty that it wasn’t poison, or tainted, that there weren’t metal shavings or dead insects in the can. You trusted every one of those strangers so thoroughly that you didn’t even devote one second of thought to it. And you did it because a lifetime of experience has taught you that they can be trusted, almost without fail.” “They don’t do their jobs because they’re trustworthy, they do it because they don’t want to get fired or sued.” “Is that the only thing stopping you from poisoning somebody?” “No.” “That’s what you’ll find out here in the wastelands. Almost all of these people are just like you. They want to do the right thing, and every morning, they wake up and go do it. Every. Single. Day.

Interlaken Get a running start. Catch a good wind, he said: Be a good bird. I thought him German as his hand did the wave––tumult of syllables, the ocean. A gust carried us from the top of a ridge to where land helixes hug vague bodies of water, pebbled pastures skimming treelines across the range littered with wildflowers. Winds lilted: It’s not your day to go, as I watched clouds blush vermillion, flying in tandem as a crow does over reservoirs and glacial gorges. That high up, I thought maybe we could fall in love, full of pomp and spectacle, but he was a stranger, and to him, I was strange; possibly ugly. Everyone peddles timing––the random alchemy of abutting molecules––though I’ve grown weary of waiting. Stillness is the danger. So I spread out my arms, carved ciphers into ether while a choir could be heard along the nave where winding trails scissor the basin. Spiraling downward, I mouthed a new prayer, knelt in air for deliverance, morphing into needle of a compass, unbeholden to a place inhospitable: the mind. The mind bent on forgetting: I was blown wide open.

Sometimes reparations is used to justify a feeding frenzy in which minority claimants simply raid the U.S. Treasury en masse while government bureaucrats facilitate a large transfer of wealth from the taxpayer to these so-called historical victims. A scandalous example of this is the Pigford case. Some ninety-one black farmers had sued the U.S. government alleging a legacy of bias against African Americans. Rather than settle the suit and pay the farmers a reasonable compensation, the Obama administration used the lawsuit to make an absurdly expensive settlement. It agreed to pay out $1.33 billion to compensate not only the ninety-one plaintiffs but also thousands of Hispanic and female farmers who had never claimed bias in court. Encouraged by this largesse, law firms began to conjure up new claimants. Later reviews showed that some of these claimants were nursery-school-age children and even urban dwellers who had no connection to farming. In some towns, the number of people being paid was many times greater than the total number of farms. According to the New York Times, one family in Little Rock, Arkansas, had ten members each submit a claim for $50,000, netting $500,000 for the family without any proof of discrimination. Then the Native Americans got in on the racket, and the Obama administration settled with them, agreeing to fork over an additional $760 million. The government also reimbursed hundreds of millions of dollars in legal fees, a cornucopia for trial lawyers who also happen to be large contributors to Obama and the Democratic Party. Altogether the Pigford payout is estimated to have cost taxpayers a staggering $4.4 billion.3

Beginning in 2011, SpaceX won a series of contracts from NASA to develop rockets that could take humans to the International Space Station, a task made crucial by the retirement of the Space Shuttle. To fulfill that mission, it needed to add to its facilities at Cape Canaveral’s Pad 40, and Musk set his sights on leasing the most storied launch facility there, Pad 39A. Pad 39A had been center stage for America’s Space Age dreams, burned into the memories of a television generation that held its collective breath when the countdowns got to “Ten, nine, eight…” Neil Armstrong’s mission to the moon that Bezos watched as a kid blasted off from Pad 39A in 1969, as did the last manned moon mission, in 1972. So did the first Space Shuttle mission, in 1981, and the last, in 2011. But by 2013, with the Shuttle program grounded and America’s half-century of space aspirations ending with bangs and whimpers, Pad 39A was rusting away and vines were sprouting through its flame trench. NASA was eager to lease it. The obvious customer was Musk, whose Falcon 9 rockets had already launched on cargo missions from the nearby Pad 40, where Obama had visited. But when the lease was put out for bids, Jeff Bezos—for both sentimental and practical reasons—decided to compete for it. When NASA ended up awarding the lease to SpaceX, Bezos sued. Musk was furious, declaring that it was ridiculous for Blue Origin to contest the lease “when they haven’t even gotten so much as a toothpick to orbit.” He ridiculed Bezos’s rockets, pointing out that they were capable only of popping up to the edge of space and then falling back; they lacked the far greater thrust necessary to break the Earth’s gravity and go into orbit. “If they do somehow show up in the next five years with a vehicle qualified to NASA’s human rating standards that can dock with the Space Station, which is what Pad 39A is meant to do, we will gladly accommodate their needs,” Musk said. “Frankly, I think we are more likely to discover unicorns dancing in the flame duct.” The battle of the sci-fi barons had blasted off. One SpaceX employee bought dozens of inflatable toy unicorns and photographed them in the pad’s flame duct. Bezos was eventually able to lease a nearby launch complex at Cape Canaveral, Pad 36, which had been the origin of missions to Mars and Venus. So the competition of the boyish billionaires was set to continue. The transfer of these hallowed pads represented, both symbolically and in practice, John F. Kennedy’s torch of space exploration being passed from government to the private sector—from a once-glorious but now sclerotic NASA to a new breed of mission-driven pioneers.

there are continually turning up in life moral and rational persons, sages and lovers of human- ity who make it their object to live all their lives as morally and rationally as possible, to be, so to speak, a light to their neighbours simply in order to show them that it is possible to live morally and rationally in this world. And yet we all know that those very people sooner or later have been false to themselves, playing some queer trick, o en a most un- seemly one. Now I ask you: what can be expected of man since he is a being endowed with strange qualities? Show- er upon him every earthly blessing, drown him in a sea of happiness, so that nothing but bubbles of bliss can be seen Free eBooks at Planet eBook.com on the surface; give him economic prosperity, such that he should have nothing else to do but sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with the continuation of his species, and even then out of sheer ingratitude, sheer spite, man would play you some nasty trick. He would even risk his cakes and would deliberately desire the most fatal rubbish, the most uneco- nomical absurdity, simply to introduce into all this positive good sense his fatal fantastic element. It is just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly that he will desire to retain, simply in order to prove to himself—as though that were so neces- sary— that men still are men and not the keys of a piano, which the laws of nature threaten to control so completely that soon one will be able to desire nothing but by the cal- endar. And that is not all: even if man really were nothing but a piano-key, even if this were proved to him by natural science and mathematics, even then he would not become reasonable, but would purposely do something perverse out of simple ingratitude, simply to gain his point. And if he does not nd means he will contrive destruction and chaos, will contrive su erings of all sorts, only to gain his point! He will launch a curse upon the world, and as only man can curse (it is his privilege, the primary distinction be- tween him and other animals), may be by his curse alone he will attain his object—that is, convince himself that he is a man and not a piano-key! If you say that all this, too, can be calculated and tabulated—chaos and darkness and curses, so that the mere possibility of calculating it all be- forehand would stop it all, and reason would reassert itself, then man would purposely go mad in order to be rid of rea- 0 Notes from the Underground son and gain his point! I believe in it, I answer for it, for the whole work of man really seems to consist in nothing but proving to himself every minute that he is a man and not a piano-key! It may be at the cost of his skin, it may be by can- nibalism! And this being so, can one help being tempted to rejoice that it has not yet come o , and that desire still de- pends on something we don’t know?

And who knows (there is no saying with certainty), perhaps the only goal on earth to which mankind is striving Free eBooks at Planet eBook.com lies in this incessant process of attaining, in other words, in life itself, and not in the thing to be attained, which must always be expressed as a formula, as positive as twice two makes four, and such positiveness is not life, gentlemen, but is the beginning of death. Anyway, man has always been afraid of this mathematical certainty, and I am afraid of it now. Granted that man does nothing but seek that math- ematical certainty, he traverses oceans, sacri ces his life in the quest, but to succeed, really to nd it, dreads, I assure you. He feels that when he has found it there will be noth- ing for him to look for. When workmen have nished their work they do at least receive their pay, they go to the tavern, then they are taken to the police-station—and there is oc- cupation for a week. But where can man go? Anyway, one can observe a certain awkwardness about him when he has attained such objects. He loves the process of attaining, but does not quite like to have attained, and that, of course, is very absurd. In fact, man is a comical creature; there seems to be a kind of jest in it all. But yet mathematical certainty is a er all, something insu erable. Twice two makes four seems to me simply a piece of insolence. Twice two makes four is a pert coxcomb who stands with arms akimbo bar- ring your path and spitting. I admit that twice two makes four is an excellent thing, but if we are to give everything its due, twice two makes ve is sometimes a very charming thing too. And why are you so rmly, so triumphantly, convinced that only the normal and the positive—in other words, only what is conducive to welfare—is for the advantage of man? Notes from the Underground Is not reason in error as regards advantage? Does not man, perhaps, love something besides well-being? Perhaps he is just as fond of su ering? Perhaps su ering is just as great a bene t to him as well-being? Man is sometimes extraor- dinarily, passionately, in love with su ering, and that is a fact. ere is no need to appeal to universal history to prove that; only ask yourself, if you are a man and have lived at all. As far as my personal opinion is concerned, to care only for well-being seems to me positively ill-bred. Whether it’s good or bad, it is sometimes very pleasant, too, to smash things. I hold no brief for su ering nor for well-being either. I am standing for ... my caprice, and for its being guaran- teed to me when necessary. Su ering would be out of place in vaudevilles, for instance; I know that. In the ‘Palace of Crystal’ it is unthinkable; su ering means doubt, negation, and what would be the good of a ‘palace of crystal’ if there could be any doubt about it? And yet I think man will never renounce real su ering, that is, destruction and chaos. Why, su ering is the sole origin of consciousness. ough I did lay it down at the beginning that consciousness is the great- est misfortune for man, yet I know man prizes it and would not give it up for any satisfaction. Consciousness, for in- stance, is in nitely superior to twice two makes four. Once you have mathematical certainty there is nothing le to do or to understand. ere will be nothing le but to bottle up your ve senses and plunge into contemplation. While if you stick to consciousness, even though the same result is attained, you can at least og yourself at times, and that will, at any rate, liven you up. Reactionary as it is, corporal punishment is better than nothing.

What did the feds want from you?” I asked Sharanda after my second night of reading, note taking, and pacing in outrage at the injustice of it all. “They must have wanted something.” “They wanted me to flip on my friend,” she wrote back. “The one I opened Cooking on Lamar with. She was a police officer in Dallas, and they wanted me to say that she was my partner in carrying the drugs. But it wasn’t true. They had it all wrong. And I was so clueless at the time, I didn’t even get it. I didn’t even get that they wanted me to be a snitch. My mind just didn’t work like that. I didn’t know why they were putting all this on me. It wasn’t until way after when McMurrey came to visit me in prison and asked about her again that I even realized.” “He came to see you in prison?” “He sure did. They don’t ever give up. All they want is for you to flip on the next person. Basically told me if I gave her up they’d reduce my sentence. But none of it was even true. And how am I gonna just hand my suffering to somebody else? They didn’t know what they were talking about. Later my friend sued them for defamation and won. She’s still on the force now. She didn’t have nothing to do with any of it. And that’s the God-honest truth.” The feds were ready to reduce Sharanda’s sentence if she made up a story about her friend. How could they play with people’s lives like that? And to what end? They had stacked Sharanda’s case with absurd charges against her entire family just to get to a woman who Sharanda swore was innocent?

Foster children are much more likely than other children with similar problems to be prescribed multiple medications that will have no impact on their symptoms. These medications, particularly the so-called atypical antipsychotics (medications like Risperdal, Abilify, and Seroquel) can shorten life and have severe side effects, like weight gain great enough to increase risk for diabetes. The over prescribing and inappropriate prescribing of such medications to children in foster care has been so dramatic that the Government Accountability Office has issued a special report condemning it. Both the federal government and several states have sued Big Pharma for targeting foster care children, resulting in multi-million-dollar settlements. In the last few years, attention to these issues by legal groups, such as the National Center for Youth Law in Oakland, the press (an excellent example can be seen in the online series from the Mercury News by Karen de Sa), and advocacy groups such as Foster Youth in Action, has increased awareness of this problem. These investigations and advocacy are leading to some positive changes. For example, California passed legislation to monitor prescribing to children in foster care. But sadly, rather than joining in or even leading efforts to improve the quality of care for foster and adopted youth, most medical and psychiatric groups have resisted or even openly opposed these efforts. Change is hard, and it is hardest for those with the most to lose. As Annette Jackson and I wrote in 2014, “the academic or interest group most threatened by the innovations which challenge their existing frame of reference or perspective, will be the most vocal and hostile to the new ideas.

It was strange. A person's mood could be easily ruined, easily improved, and just as easily ruined again. An angry phone call from one's parents, or an increase in the tobacco tax that was all it took to ruin a perfectly happy weekend. He could only imagine how unhappy he would be if something actually bad happened, like being fired, getting into a car accident, or contracting a terminal illness. Indeed, if his happiness was so affected by some- thing as trifling as an angry phone call, what if he were confronted with a real catastrophe? All Jeong-su could do now was wait until his mood improved and he regained his desire to live. But for that, he'd probably need a few more packs of cigarettes.

Education was still considered a privilege in England. At Oxford you took responsibility for your efforts and for your performance. No one coddled, and no one uproariously encouraged. British respect for the individual, both learner and teacher, reigned. If you wanted to learn, you applied yourself and did it. Grades were posted publicly by your name after exams. People failed regularly. These realities never ceased to bewilder those used to “democracy” without any of the responsibility. For me, however, my expectations were rattled in another way. I arrived anticipating to be snubbed by a culture of privilege, but when looked at from a British angle, I actually found North American students owned a far greater sense of entitlement when it came to a college education. I did not realize just how much expectations fetter—these “mind-forged manacles,”2 as Blake wrote. Oxford upholds something larger than self as a reference point, embedded in the deep respect for all that a community of learning entails. At my very first tutorial, for instance, an American student entered wearing a baseball cap on backward. The professor quietly asked him to remove it. The student froze, stunned. In the United States such a request would be fodder for a laundry list of wrongs done against the student, followed by threatening the teacher’s job and suing the university. But Oxford sits unruffled: if you don’t like it, you can simply leave. A handy formula since, of course, no one wants to leave. “No caps in my classroom,” the professor repeated, adding, “Men and women have died for your education.” Instead of being disgruntled, the student nodded thoughtfully as he removed his hat and joined us. With its expanses of beautiful architecture, quads (or walled lawns) spilling into lush gardens, mist rising from rivers, cows lowing in meadows, spires reaching high into skies, Oxford remained unapologetically absolute. And did I mention? Practically every college within the university has its own pub. Pubs, as I came to learn, represented far more for the Brits than merely a place where alcohol was served. They were important gathering places, overflowing with good conversation over comforting food: vital humming hubs of community in communication. So faced with a thousand-year-old institution, I learned to pick my battles. Rather than resist, for instance, the archaic book-ordering system in the Bodleian Library with technological mortification, I discovered the treasure in embracing its seeming quirkiness. Often, when the wrong book came up from the annals after my order, I found it to be right in some way after all. Oxford often works such. After one particularly serendipitous day of research, I asked Robert, the usual morning porter on duty at the Bodleian Library, about the lack of any kind of sophisticated security system, especially in one of the world’s most famous libraries. The Bodleian was not a loaning library, though you were allowed to work freely amid priceless artifacts. Individual college libraries entrusted you to simply sign a book out and then return it when you were done. “It’s funny; Americans ask me about that all the time,” Robert said as he stirred his tea. “But then again, they’re not used to having u in honour,” he said with a shrug.

THE CHARM OF THE STONES CONSECRATED TO DIANA To find a stone with a hole in it is a special sign of the favour of Diana, He who does so shall take it in his hand and repeat the following, having observed the ceremony as enjoined: — Scongiurazione della pietra bucata. Una pietra bucata U ho trovato; Ne ringrazio il destin, E k) spirito che su questa via Mi ha portata, Che passa essere il mio bene, E la mia buona fortuna! Mi alzo la mattina al alba, E a passegio me ne vo Nelle valli, monti e campi, La fortuna cercarvo Della ruta e la verbena, Quello so porta fortuna Me lo tengo in senno chiuso £ saperlo nessuno no le deve, £ cosi cio che commendo, " La verbena far ben per me ! Benedica quella strege! Quella fata che mi segna!" Diana fu quella Che mi venne la notte in sogno E mi disse : " Se tu voir tener Le cattive persone da te lontano, Devi tenere sempre ruta con te, Sempre ruta con te e verbena!" Diana, tu che siei la regina Del cielo e della terra e dell* inferno, E siei la prottetrice degli infelici, Dei ladri, degli assassini, e anche Di donne di mali afifari se hai conosciuto, Che non sia stato V indole cattivo Delle persone, tu Diana, Diana li hai fatti tutti felici! Una altra volta ti scongiuro Che tu non abbia ne pace ne bene, Tu possa essere sempre in mezzo alle pene^ Fino che la grazia che io ti chiedo Non mi farai! THE CHARM OF THE STONES Invocation to the Holy-Stone} I have found A holy-stone upon the ground. O Fate! I thank thee for the happy find, Also the spirit who upon this road Hath given it to me; And may it prove to be for my true good And my good fortune I I rise in the morning by the earliest dawn, And I go forth to walk through (pleasant) vales. All in the mountains or the meadows fair, Seeking for luck while onward still I roam, Seeking for rue and vervain scented sweet, Because they bring good fortune unto all. I keep them safely guarded in my bosom, That none may know it—'tis a secret thing. And sacred too, and thus I speak the spell: " O vervain ! ever be a benefit, And may thy blessing be upon the witch Or on the fairy who did give thee to me ! " It was Diana who did come to me, All in the night in a dream, and said to me: " If thou would'st keep all evil folk afar, Then ever keep the vervain and the rue Safely beside thee I" I hole ii . But such a slone is IS really a claim to the ARADIA Great Diana I thou Who art the queen of heaven and of earth, And of the inferna! lands—yea, thou who art Protectress of all men unfortunate, Of thieves and murderers, and c Who lead an evil life, and yet hast known That their nature was not evil, thou, Diana, Hast still conferred on them some joy in life.' Or I may truly at another time So conjure thee that thou shalt have no peace Or happiness, for thou shalt ever be In suffering until thou grantest that Which 1 require in strictest faith from thee! [Here

His most memorable quote from the case was a persuasive shot at the British king himself: “That a King, by disallowing Acts of this salutary nature, from being the father of his people, degenerated into a Tyrant and forfeits all right to his subjects' obedience." His argument on behalf of the county was so persuasive that the jury awarded the minister the tidy sum of one cent, bringing the Crown’s efforts to naught and discouraging any other clergymen from suing.

Before we left, I asked Sven to catch me up on the sixteen months of history that I’d overshot since November 2016. Big mistake. After twenty minutes, I made him stop playing me Internet clips. “David, you look kind of green,” worried Sven. I took a deep breath. “He pulled out of the Paris climate deal because climate change is a hoax. He threatened to start a nuclear war with North Korea. He gave away intel methods to the Russians. In the Oval Office. “He says the FBI and the CIA are conspiring against him. He admits he fired the head of the FBI because of the Russia probe. He tried to fire the Special Counsel investigating him. He called the press ‘enemies of the people.’ He calls everything that isn’t from Fox News or The National Enquirer ‘fake news.’ “He starts every day posting boasts and threats on Twitter like a disturbed ten-year-old. He insulted the widow of a dead war hero. He dictated a false statement for his son about why he met with Russians. He says there are good people marching with the KKK and the Nazis. Everyone in his inner circle is either being investigated or indicted for obstruction, perjury, wife beating, failure to register as a foreign agent, money laundering and/or breaking campaign finance laws. “He called Africa a shithole. He paid off a porn star he screwed right after his son was born. And told her she reminded him of his daughter. He’s being sued for rape. And the only person he hasn’t got a single bad thing to say about is the journalist-murdering Russian dictator he colluded with.” “’Fraid so,” said Sven. “All that happened in just sixteen months?” I exclaimed. “How is he still president?” Sven shrugged, sympathetic. “It’s not like we weren’t warned. Bottom line, some very rich, powerful people are going to get far richer, and that’s how America is run at the moment.” “I swear to God, Sven, I’m tempted to go back and save Lincoln all over again. That can’t turn out any worse than this.

under oath he revealed the course was designed by taking holes from the courses he found on a PlayStation-era Tiger Woods video game. This resulted in Loudoun County being sued by Pebble Beach, Cog Hill and St. Andrews, not only for stealing from their courses, but for doing it so poorly that it damaged the original courses’ reputations.

When they reached the river, he turned left. “Tohobt Pah-e-hona, Blue Water River. You call it the Brazos, eh?” He pointed ahead of them. “Pah-gat-su, upstream.” Jabbing a thumb over his shoulder, he said, “Te-naw, downstream. You will listen good, Blue Eyes, and learn. Tosi tivo talk is dirt in my mouth.” His tone set Loretta off balance. Dirt in his mouth? If he hated the whites so much, why on earth had he taken her? Upstream, downstream, she couldn’t remember the words. She didn’t want to. The language of murderers. All she wanted was to be free of the whole filthy lot of them. Another rock jabbed her insole, and she winced, missing a step. He released her elbow and swept her off her feet into his arms. He took her so much by surprise that if she could have screamed, she would have. Their eyes locked, his mocking, hers wide. Though he now bore Loretta’s weight, her position was such that her back was in danger of breaking if she didn’t loop an arm around his neck. He stood there, looking down at her and waiting. Her mouth went dry. She wished he would just toss her over his shoulder again and be done with it. Being carried like a sack of grain wasn’t very dignified, but at least that way she didn’t have to cling to him. That determined glint she was coming to know too well crept into his eyes. He gave her a little toss, not enough to drop her, but enough to give her a start. Instinctively she hooked an arm around his neck. His lips slanted into a satisfied grin, a grin that said as clearly as if he had spoken that he would have the last word, always. He started walking again. The firm cords of muscle that ran down from his neck undulated beneath her fingers, his warm skin as smooth as fine-grained leather. His hair, silken and heavy, brushed against her knuckles. Beneath her wrist she could feel the crusty cut on his shoulder from Aunt Rachel’s bullet. Remembering the wound he had inflicted on his arm last night, she wondered just how many scars he had. Strangely, the longer she was around him, the less she noticed the slash on his cheek. His was the kind of face that suffered imperfections well, features chiseled, skin weathered to a tough, burnished brown, as rugged as the sharp-cut canyons and endless plains from whence he’d sprung.

You will eat”--unmistakable laughter played upon his face--“so you will stay strong. We cannot fight the big fight if you tremble from hunger.” Loretta lowered her gaze. A rush of conflicting emotions assailed her. She detested this man. She shouldn’t care if he didn’t get enough to eat or feel in the least guilty for having wasted his stupid meat. Yet she did. And for the life of her, she couldn’t accept part of his meager portion only to toss it away. She hated herself for that and hated him for eliciting such traitorous feelings within her. When she didn’t take the meat, he hunkered next to her. Why wouldn’t he leave her be? She was so tired, so awfully, horribly tired. Tired of being afraid. Tired of fighting him. Tired of fighting herself. “Hein ein mah-su-ite, what do you want?” he asked in a low voice. “The little rabbit is good. The tosi tivo, white men, eat rabbit, do they not?” Loretta kept her face averted. He sighed. “Blue Eyes, you will see into me, eh?” Because he was still holding the two pieces of meat, he didn’t have a free hand and nudged her shoulder with his forearm. “Nabone, look.” For the first time, she detected a note of entreaty in his voice, scarcely recognizable under his martial arrogance, but there. When she looked up, his eyes caught and held hers. After a long moment he said, “You are to-ho-ba-ka, the enemy. That is so, eh? Tosi mah-ocu-ah, a white woman? And I am the enemy to your people, a Te-j-as, a Comanche.” He held his arm out in front of him, his forearm waist high and horizontal, and made a writhing motion around to his side. “Snakes Who Come Back, eh?” His mouth tipped into a grin that transformed his face. For a moment he not only looked human, but handsome. “You like that, eh? Comanche and snakes, all the same?” The grin set her off balance, and again she averted her face. He shoved a piece of the meat under her nose. “The rabbit, he is not to-ho-ba-ka, the enemy. He is tao-yo-cha, a child of Mother Earth, eh? You can eat him. It is not surrender when we eat the gifts of Mother Earth.

On December 10, 1998, Daley had organized a conference with four other mayors to discuss suing the gun makers. Because of my book More Guns, Less Crime, which argued that Daley’s gun laws did more harm than good, reporters from the local CBS and Fox stations who were already at the conference asked me to meet them to talk about the lawsuits. I had originally planned to arrive after the mayors had finished their post-conference presentations. But the mayors were running behind schedule when I arrived, so CBS reporter Mike Flannery suggested that I attend the presentations. That way, I could better answer any questions that he might have. The presentations were followed by a question-and-answer period with press, some students, and others in the audience. When the audience started yelling questions, I raised my hand in an attempt to get called on. At that point a woman walked over to me and asked me if I was John Lott from the University of Chicago. I said that I was, and she informed me that I was not allowed to ask any questions. No explanation was given. Some audience members took notice.

Mid May 2012 Andy wrote in his Email reply: Dear Young, You are still the boy I grew to love and cherish forty-four years ago. The lyrics you sent, to “The Things You Are To Me” brought back many fond memories of our time together. You, young man, do have a way with words. In more ways than one, you always touched the core of my heart with your innocence and childlike approach to life. Walter is a lucky man to have you in his life. I wish I were in his shoes, you little ‘faerie’ boy, stirring up an emotional storm within me which I had kept hidden for so long. Now that our parents are deceased, we can be free from the emotional baggage imposed upon us. You had mentioned briefly that you are writing your memoirs. I hope you are not revealing anything that we pledged to never reveal. My advice to you is to stay clear of those subjects. It is not advisable to tamper with the school or the Society, especially when you swore an oath, a gentlemanly honor of confidentiality to never reveal any of our membership secrets. If the word gets out, the paparazzi will have a field day digging for whatever dirt they can find. I hate to see you being sued by any parties involved. I’m speaking to you as a trusted friend, confidant, and ex- lover. Tread with caution, Young! You are old enough to decide for yourself. I’m sure you don’t need your ex-Valet to tell you what to do. Please send my regards to Walter and maybe we’ll have a chance to meet one day, soon. Let’s continue our regular correspondence. My love always! Andy.

Groupon is a study of the hazards of pursuing scale and valuation at all costs. In 2010, Forbes called it the “fastest growing company ever” after its founders raised $135 million in funding, giving Groupon a valuation of more than $1 billion after just 17 months.5 The company turned down a $6 billion acquisition offer from Google and went public in 2011 with one of the biggest IPOs since Google’s in 2004.6 It was one of the original unicorns. However, the business model had serious problems. Groupon sometimes sold so many Daily Deals that participating businesses were overwhelmed . . . even crippled. Other businesses accused Groupon of strong-arming them to sign up for Daily Deals. Customers started to view the group discount (the company’s bread and butter) as a sign that a participating business was desperate. Businesses stopped signing up. Journalists suggested that Groupon was prioritizing customer acquisition over retention — growth over value — and that it had gone public before it had a solid, proven business model.7 Groupon is still a player, with just over $3 billion in annual revenue in 2015. But its stock has fallen from $26 a share to about $4 today, and it has withdrawn from many international markets. Also revealing is that the company is suing IBM for patent infringement, something that will not create customer value.8 Many promising startups have paid the price for rushing to scale. We can see clues to potential future failures in the recent “down rounds” (stock purchases priced at a lower valuation than those of previous investors) hitting companies like Foursquare, Gilt Group, Jet, Jawbone, and Technorati. In their rush to build scale, executives and founders search for shortcuts to sustainable, long-term revenue growth.

Marc Goodman is a cyber crime specialist with an impressive résumé. He has worked with the Los Angeles Police Department, Interpol, NATO, and the State Department. He is the chief cyber criminologist at the Cybercrime Research Institute, founder of the Future Crime Institute, and now head of the policy, law, and ethics track at SU. When breaking down this threat, Goodman sees four main categories of concern. The first issue is personal. “In many nations,” he says, “humanity is fully dependent on the Internet. Attacks against banks could destroy all records. Someone’s life savings could vanish in an instant. Hacking into hospitals could cost hundreds of lives if blood types were changed. And there are already 60,000 implantable medical devices connected to the Internet. As the integration of biology and information technology proceeds, pacemakers, cochlear implants, diabetic pumps, and so on, will all become the target of cyber attacks.” Equally alarming are threats against physical infrastructures that are now hooked up to the net and vulnerable to hackers (as was recently demonstrated with Iran’s Stuxnet incident), among them bridges, tunnels, air traffic control, and energy pipelines. We are heavily dependent on these systems, but Goodman feels that the technology being employed to manage them is no longer up to date, and the entire network is riddled with security threats. Robots are the next issue. In the not-too-distant future, these machines will be both commonplace and connected to the Internet. They will have superior strength and speed and may even be armed (as is the case with today’s military robots). But their Internet connection makes them vulnerable to attack, and very few security procedures have been implemented to prevent such incidents. Goodman’s last area of concern is that technology is constantly coming between us and reality. “We believe what the computer tells us,” says Goodman. “We read our email through computer screens; we speak to friends and family on Facebook; doctors administer medicines based upon what a computer tells them the medical lab results are; traffic tickets are issued based upon what cameras tell us a license plate says; we pay for items at stores based upon a total provided by a computer; we elect governments as a result of electronic voting systems. But the problem with all this intermediated life is that it can be spoofed. It’s really easy to falsify what is seen on our computer screens. The more we disconnect from the physical and drive toward the digital, the more we lose the ability to tell the real from the fake. Ultimately, bad actors (whether criminals, terrorists, or rogue governments) will have the ability to exploit this trust.

Line 10: The fact that the inhabitants of the Netherworld are said to be clad in feather garments is perhaps due to the belief that after death, a person's soul turned into a spirit or a ghost, whose nature was wind-like, as well as bird-like. The Mesopotamians believed in the body (*pagru*) and the soul. the latter being referred to by two words: GIDIM = *et.emmu*, meaning "spirit of the dead," "ghost;" and AN.ZAG.GAR(.RA)/LIL2 = *zaqi_qu*/*ziqi_qu*, meaning "soul," "ghost," "phantom." Living beings (humans and animals) also had ZI (*napis\/tu*) "life, vigor, breath," which was associated with the throat or neck. As breath and coming from one's throat, ZI was understood as moving air, i.e., wind-like. ZI (*napis\/tu*) was the animating life force, which could be shortened or prolonged. For instance...Inanna grants "long life (zi-su\-ud-g~a/l) under him (=the king) in the palace. At one's death, when the soul/spirit released itself from the body, both *et.emmu* and *zaqi_qu*/*ziqi_qu* descended to the Netherworld, but when the body ceased to exist, so did the *et.emmu*, leaving only the *zaqi_gu*. Those souls that were denied access to the Netherworld for whatever reason, such as improper buriel or violent or premature death, roamed as harmful ghosts. Those souls who had attained peace were occasionally allowed to visit their families, to offer help or give instructions to their still living relatives. As it was only the *et.emmu* that was able to have influence on the affairs of the living relatives, special care was taken to preserve the remains of the familial dead. According to CAD [The Assyrian Dictionary of the University of Chicago] the Sumerian equivalent of *zaqi_qu*/*ziqi_qu* was li/l, which referred to a "phantom," "ghost," "haunting spirit" as in lu/-li/l-la/ [or] *lilu^* or in ki-sikil-li/l - la/ {or] *lili_tu*. the usual translation for the word li/l, however, is "wind," and li/l is equated with the word *s\/a_ru* (wind) in lexical lists. As the lexical lists equate wind (*s\/a_ru* and ghost (*zaqi_qu*) their association with each other cannot be unfounded. Moreover, *zaqi_qu* derives from the same root as the verb *za^qu*, "to blow," and the noun *zi_qu*, "breeze." According to J. Scurlock, *zaqi_qu* is a sexless, wind-like emanation, probably a bird-like phantom, able to fly through small apertures, and as such, became associated with dreaming, as it was able to leave the sleeping body. The wind-like appearance of the soul is also attested in the Gilgamesh Epic XII 83-84, where Enkidu is able to ascend from the Netherworld through a hole in the ground: "[Gilgamesh] opened a hole in the Netherworld, the *utukku* (ghost) of Enkidu came forthfrom the underworld as a *zaqi_qu." The soul's bird-like appearance is referred to in Tablet VII 183-184, where Enkidu visits the Netherworld in a dream. Prior to his descent, he is changed into a dove, and his hands are changed into wings. - State Archives of Assyria Cuneiform Texts Volume VI: The Neo-Assyrian Myth of Istar's Descent and Resurrection {In this quote I haven't been able to copy some words exactly. I've put Assyrian words( normally in italics) between *asterisks*. The names of signs in Sumerian cuneiform (wedge-shaped writing) are normally in CAPITALS with a number slightly below the line after it if there's more than one reading for that sign. Assyriologists use marks above or below individual letters to aid pronunciation- I've put whatever I can do similar after the letter. E.g. *et.emmu" normally has the dot under the "t" to indicate a sibilant or buzzy sound, so it sounds something like "etzzemmoo." *zaqi_qu* normally has the line (macron) over the "i" to indicate a long vowel, so it sounds like "zaqeeqoo." *napis\/tu* normally has a small "v" over the s to make a sh sound, ="napishtu".}

I went to Yong-hui and she pointed to the cement terrace where our crocks of condiments stood. Written in the cement was "Myong-hui likes Yong-su."It's been there ever since the house was built. Yong-hui smiled. That was the happiest time for us. Father and Mother had carried home rocks from a ditch. They'd made steps with them and cemented the walls. We were still young and couldn't do hard work. Even so, there was much to do. For several days we didn't go to school. Every day was fun. (Cho 2006: 54)

I sued the City for “excessive force” and got a million bucks. Not one dime of which, by the way, came out of the pockets of the cops who planned the raid. As always, it came from the taxpayers. The criminal charges against Sonny were later dismissed, so the raid was a complete waste of time, money, and energy.

It is difficult to overstate the extent to which congressionally bestowed retroactive immunity represents a profound departure from basic norms of justice. Ordinary Americans are sued every day and forced to endure the severe hardships and sometimes ruinous costs of litigation. When that happens, it is the role of the courts alone to determine who is at fault and whether liability should be imposed. The Constitution vests “the judicial Power of the United States” in courts, not Congress. And when it comes to lawsuits brought against ordinary Americans, that is how such suits are always resolved: by courts issuing rulings on the merits. The very idea that Congress would intervene in such proceedings and act to protect ordinary Americans from lawsuits is too outlandish even to entertain. But when the wealthiest, most powerful, and most well-connected financial elites are caught red-handed violating the privacy rights of their customers and committing clear felonies, their lobbyists call for a new law that has no purpose other than to declare that the old laws do not apply to them. That is the living, breathing embodiment of our two-tiered justice system—a lawless Wild West for elites in which anything goes. Examining how the telecoms pursued the amazing feat of getting full immunity for their systematic lawbreaking highlights how and why the rule of law is so easily discarded in the United States. The

Shervin Pishevar’s other star investment, Uber, was embroiled in its own case about whether it was as humble and powerless as it claimed. A group of drivers had sued Uber, as well as its rival Lyft, in federal court, seeking to be treated as employees under California’s labor laws. Their case was weakened by the fact that they had signed agreements to be contractors not subject to those laws. They had accepted the terms and conditions that cast each driver as an entrepreneur—a free agent choosing her hours, needing none of the regulatory infrastructure that others depended on. They had bought into one of the reigning fantasies of MarketWorld: that people were their own miniature corporations. Then some of the drivers realized that in fact they were simply working people who wanted the same protections that so many others did from power, exploitation, and the vicissitudes of circumstance. Because the drivers had signed that agreement, they had blocked the easy path to being employees. But under the law, if they could prove that a company had pervasive, ongoing power over them as they did their work, they could still qualify as employees. To be a contractor is to give up certain protections and benefits in exchange for independence, and thus that independence must be genuine. The case inspired the judges in the two cases, Edward Chen and Vince Chhabria, to grapple thoughtfully with the question of where power lurks in a new networked age. It was no surprise that Uber and Lyft took the rebel position. Like Airbnb, Uber and Lyft claimed not to be powerful. Uber argued that it was just a technology firm facilitating links between passengers and drivers, not a car service. The drivers who had signed contracts were robust agents of their own destiny. Judge Chen derided this argument. “Uber is no more a ‘technology company,’ ” he wrote, “than Yellow Cab is a ‘technology company’ because it uses CB radios to dispatch taxi cabs, John Deere is a ‘technology company’ because it uses computers and robots to manufacture lawn mowers, or Domino Sugar is a ‘technology company’ because it uses modern irrigation techniques to grow its sugar cane.” Judge Chhabria similarly cited and tore down Lyft’s claim to be “an uninterested bystander of sorts, merely furnishing a platform that allows drivers and riders to connect.” He wrote: Lyft concerns itself with far more than simply connecting random users of its platform. It markets itself to customers as an on-demand ride service, and it actively seeks out those customers. It gives drivers detailed instructions about how to conduct themselves. Notably, Lyft’s own drivers’ guide and FAQs state that drivers are “driving for Lyft.” Therefore, the argument that Lyft is merely a platform, and that drivers perform no service for Lyft, is not a serious one.

Their political leaders lavish praise on them, even while granting their bosses a liability shield so they can’t be sued. The carrot and the stick: if they decide to quit, rather than continue to take chances, laws have been passed to deny them the same economic relief that other Americans enjoy during the pandemic. It incentivizes them to remain where they are and to keep dissecting meat for nonessential Americans. Many nonessential workers get to work from home. They sometimes make exponentially more money than the essential workers do.

This is why we are going overseas to study. Who is giving us the money to take the train, and money for tuition? Korea. Why? So that we can acquire strength, knowledge and civilisation, and bring them back with us. So that we can establish a solid foundation for the people's livelihood, based on modern civilisation. Isn't that why?" Hyong-sik pulled his wallet from his vest pocket, and took out a blue train ticket. "This train ticket contains the sweat of those people who are shivering in the rain, including the young man we saw. They are asking us to make sure that they are never put in such a needy position again.

Don’t let your ego get in the way of making the best possible decision. I was stung when Roy and Stanley sued the board for choosing me as CEO, and I certainly could have gone to battle with them and prevailed, but it all would have come at a huge cost to the company and been a giant distraction from what really mattered. My job was to set our company on a new path, and the first step was to defuse this unnecessary struggle. The easiest and most productive way to do that was to recognize that what Roy needed, ultimately, was to feel respected. That was precious to him, and it cost me and the company so little.

Every time my seven-year-old daughter puts on a pair of shorts, I remember the way we used to be. I think of my Hmong grandmother who came to this country in the autumn of her life, too old to shift with its seasons. My Hmong American mother who came to this country young enough to compromise pieces and parts of herself so that she could work and care for her children through the harshest of seasons. And I think of myself, a girl wanting desperately to celebrate spring and summer, to be strong for her mother and her grandmother, and who tried unsuccessfully in many ways to fit in. Now that Grandma is gone, my mother is an old woman, and I am a working mother myself, it is only in my memories that we get to be together the way we were then. My Asian American girl loves shorts and T-shirts, her thin legs often darkened by bruises from her runs around me, beside me, and often ahead of me. From the distance of nearly twenty years, I wish I could have told that young girl yearning to let her legs breathe free that all of our lives in America were just beginning, that where we were was only one part of our story. I wish I could have told her that her family was as good as they knew how to be to each other, and that in their own ways they were trying to help each other, not hurt. I want to tell the girl I used to be that these first years of life in America would teach her how to love across space and time, to one day stand strong in her family’s discomforts, and give her the power and the ability to declare them all: new Americans.

Los Hitler, los Mussolini... ¡Balas! ¡Balas! ¡Balas! ¡Balas! Las dos víboras de Europa que con la muerte se pactan. Pero ... allá vienen las viudas, las madres y las hermanas. El aire se va salado con la sal de tantas lágrimas. El agua del río huele a un millón de puñaladas. Por allá vienen las viudas, las madres y las hermanas. Subiendo la cuesta vienen todas ellas enlutadas, y su dolor canta el himno que hará el futuro de España. ¡Ochenta mil hombres muertos! The Hitlers, the Mussolinis... Bullets! Bullets! Bullets! Bullets! The two vipers of Europe who pact with death. But...there come the widows, the mothers and the sisters. The air leaves salted with the salt of so many tears. The water of the river smells of a million stab wounds. There come the widows the mothers and the sisters. Climbing the hill they come all in mourning and their pain sings the hymn that will make the future of Spain. Eighty thousand men dead! (From "Ochenta Mil/Eighty Thousand")

En el mismo instante alzó la frente, y con satánica convicción, que tenía cierta hermosura por ser convicción y por ser satánica, se dejó decir estas arrogantes palabras: «Mi marido eres tú... todo lo demás... ¡papas!». Elástica era la conciencia de Santa Cruz, mas no tanto que no sintiera cierto terror al oír expresión tan atrevida. Por corresponder, iba él a decir mi mujer eres tú; pero envainó su mentira, como el hombre prudente que reserva para los casos graves el uso de las armas. At the same moment, she raised her head, and with a satanical conviction, that had a certain beauty because it was conviction and because it was satanic, she allowed herself to say these arrogant words: "You are my husband... all the rest is... rubbish.!" Santa Cruz's conscience was flexible, but not so flexible to exempt him from a shiver of terror when he heard such a bold declaration. To reciprocate, he was going to say, "You are my wife," but he sheathed his lie, like a prudent man who saves his weapons for serious cases. Trans: Agnes Moncy Gullón

Quien supiera o pudiera apartar el ramaje vistoso de ideas más o menos contrahechas y de palabras relumbrantes, que el señorito de Santa Cruz puso ante los ojos de su mujer en la noche aquella, encontraría la seca desnudez de su pensamiento y de su deseo , los cuales no eran otra cosa que un profundísimo hastío de Fortunata y las ganas de perderla de vista lo más pronto posible. ¿Por qué lo que no se tiene se desea, y lo que se tiene se desprecia? Cuando ella salió del convento con corona de honrada para casarse; cuando llevaba mezcladas en su pecho las azucenas de la purificación religiosa y los azahares de la boda, parecíale al Delfín digna y lucida hazaña arrancarla de aquella vida. Hízolo así con éxito superior a sus esperanzas, pero su conquista le imponía la obligación de sostener indefinidamente a la víctima , y esto, pasado cierto tiempo, se iba haciendo aburrido, soso y caro. Sin variedad era él hombre perdido; lo tenía en su naturaleza y no lo podía remediar. Había que cambiar de forma de Gobierno cada poco tiempo, y cuando estaba en república, ¡le parecía la monarquía tan seductora...! Al salir de su casa aquella tarde, iba pensando en esto. Su mujer le estaba gustando más, mucho más que aquella situación revolucionaria que había implantado, pisoteando los derechos de dos matrimonios. If one had been able to cut through the shiny thicket of fake ideas and spurious words that Juanito Santa Cruz displayed to his wife that night, one would have discovered a bare, withered mind and an absence of desire; a man who absolutely sick of Fortunata and anxious to get rid of her as soon as possible. Why is it that we want what we don't have, and when we get it, we scorn it? When she emerged from the convent crowned with respectability and on the verge of marriage, when she bore on her bosom the lilies of religious purification and the orange blossoms of her wedding, the Dauphin considered it a worthy deed to pluck her from that life. And so he did, with more success than he hoped; but his conquest obliged him to support his victim indefinitely, and this, after a certain time, became boring, dull and costly. Without variety the man was lost; it was in his nature – he couldn't help it. He simply had to change regimes every so often; when the republic was in power, the monarchy was so tempting! As he left home the afternoon after their joint decision, he reflected on this. His wife was beginning to seem more appealing now, much more than that revolutionary situation that he had created by trampling on two marriages. Translation: Agnes Moncy Gullón

Cuando se quedaron solos los Delfines, Jacinta se despachó a su gusto con su marido, y tan cargada de razón estaba y tan firme y valerosa, que apenas pudo él contestarle, y sus triquiñuelas fueron armas impotentes y risibles contra la verdad que afluía de los labios de la ofendida consorte. Esta le hacía temblar con sus acerados juicios, y ya no era fácil que el habilidoso caballero triunfara de aquella alma tierna, cuya dialéctica solía debilitarse con la fuerza del cariño. Entonces se vio que la continuidad de los sufrimientos había destruido en Jacinta la estimación a su marido, y la ruina de la estimación arrastró consigo parte del amor, hallándose por fin este reducido a tan míseras proporciones, que casi no se le echaba de ver. La situación desairada en que esto le ponía, inflamaba más y más el orgullo de Santa Cruz, y ante el desdén no simulado, sino real y efectivo, que su mujer le mostraba, el pobre hombre padecía horriblemente, porque era para él muy triste, que a la víctima no le doliesen ya los golpes que recibía. No ser nadie en presencia de su mujer, no encontrar allí aquel refugio a que periódicamente estaba acostumbrado, le ponía de malísimo talante. Y era tal su confianza en la seguridad de aquel refugio, que al perderlo, experimentó por vez primera esa sensación tristísima de las irreparables pérdidas y del vacío de la vida, sensación que en plena juventud equivale al envejecer , en plena familia equivale al quedarse solo, y marca la hora en que lo mejor de la existencia se corre hacia atrás, quedando a la espalda los horizontes que antes estaban por delante. Claramente se lo dijo ella, con expresiva sinceridad en sus ojos, que nunca engañaban. When the Dauphins were left alone, Jacinta dealt with her husband in her own way; she was so right, so firm, and valiant that he could hardly retaliate, his petty tricks becoming mere laughable, impotent weapons against the truth that flowed from the lips of the wronged wife. She made him tremble with her steely judgements, and it was no longer easy for the clever gentleman to triumph over that tender soul whose dialectics had usually weakened under the force of his affection. Then it became evident that the continuity of Jacinta's suffering had destroyed her respect for her husband, and the ruins of that respect had destroyed some of her love, and then the greater part of it, until it was finally reduced to such miserable proportions that it was scarcely visible. The ungraceful position in which Santa Cruz found himself inflamed his pride all the more; and with this disdain – no longer disguised, but now real and effective – that his wife was showing him the poor man suffered horribly, because it was very sad for him that his blows could no longer hurt his victim. To be a nobody to his wife, not to find in her that periodic refuge to which he was accustomed, put him in a very bad frame of mind. And his confidence in the security of that refuge was such that, upon losing it, he experienced for the first time in his life that terrible sadness produced by irreparable losses and the emptiness of life; a sensation which in the prime of youth equals aging; when surrounded by one's family, equals loneliness; which convinces one that the best of life is behind, leaving one's back turned on the horizons that were once ahead. She told him so clearly, with expressive sincerity in her eyes, which never deceived.

The certificate acts which were made from time to time, to exempt us from ministerial taxes, were often violated by our oppressors, especially where new churches were formed. The Baptist church that was formed at Sturbridge in 1749, gave in certificates according to law, and yet they were all taxed to the parish minister; and in two years five men were imprisoned for it at Worcester, and three oxen and eight cows were taken away, besides a great deal of other property. Several men sued for recompense, and at length judgment was given for them in one case; but then other cases were nonsuited, under the pretense that the actions were not commenced against the right persons. The Baptists judged that their damages in these cases were not less than four hundred dollars. And a representative from Sturbridge prevailed with our legislature to make a new law, in 1752, to exclude all Baptist churches from power to give legal certificates, until they had obtained certificates from three other Baptist churches, that they esteemed said church to be conscientiously Anabaptists; that is, rebaptizers, which they never did believe. Yet, rather than to suffer continually, most of the Baptists conformed in some measure to their laws, until they were convinced that true help could not be had in that way, and therefore they concluded in 1773 to give no more certificates, and published their reasons for so doing.

What are your feelings from Bush to Obama? Besides being responsible for the death of half a million people, I feel like Bush dealt a huge economic and social blow to the USA, one from which we may never fully recover. He directly flushed 3 trillion dollars down the toilet on hopeless, pointlessly destructive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq …and they’re not even over! For years to come, we’ll be paying costs for all the injured veterans (over 50,000) and destabilizing three countries, because you have to look at the impact that the Afghan war has on Pakistan. Bush expanded the use of torture, and created a whole new layer of government bureaucracy (the “Department of Homeland Security”) to spy on Americans. He created Indefinite Detention (at Guantanamo and other US military bases) and expanded the use of executive-ordered assassinations using the new drone technology. On economic issues, his administration allowed corporations to run things and regulate themselves. The agency that was supposed to regulate oil drilling had lobbyist-paid prostitutes sleeping with employees while oil industry lobbyists basically ran the agency. Energy companies like Enron, and the country’s investment banks were deregulated at the end of the Clinton administration and Bush allowed them to run wild. Above all, he was incompetent and appointed some really stupid people to important positions at every level of government. Certainly, Obama has been involved in many of these same activities. A few he’s increased, such as the use of drone assassinations, but most of them he has at least tried to scale back. At the beginning of his first term, he tried to close the Guantanamo prison and have trials for many of the detainees in the United States but conservatives (including many Democrats) stirred up public resistance and blocked this from happening. He tried to get some kind of universal healthcare because over 50 million Americans don’t have health insurance. This is one of the leading causes of personal bankruptcies and foreclosures because someone gets sick in a family, loses their job, loses their health insurance (because American employers are source of most people’s healthcare) and they can’t pay their health bills or their mortgage. Or they use up all their money caring for a sick family member. So many people in the US wanted health insurance reform or single-payer, universal health care similar to what you have in the UK. Members of Obama’s own party (The Democrats) joined with Republicans to narrowly block “The public option” but they managed to pass a half-assed but not-unsubstantial reform of health insurance that would prevent insurers from denying you coverage when you’re sick or have a “preexisting condition.” The minute it was signed into law, Republicans sued in the courts (all the way to the supreme court) and fought, tooth and nail to block its implementation. Same thing with gun control, even as we’re one of the most violent industrial countries in the world. (Among industrial countries, our murder rate is second only to Russia). Obama has managed to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan over Republican opposition but, literally, everything he tries to do, they blast it in the media and fight it in Congress. So, while I have a lot of criticisms of Obama, he is many orders of magnitude less awful than Bush and many of the positive things he’s tried to do have been blocked. That said, the Democratic and Republican parties agree on more things than they disagree. Both signed off on the Afghan and Iraq wars. Both signed off on deregulation of banks, of derivatives, of mortgage regulations and of the energy and telecom business …and we’ve been living with the consequences ever since. I’m guessing it’s the same thing with Labor and Conservatives in the UK. Labor or Democrats will SAY they stand for certain “progressive” things but they end up supporting the same old crap... (2014 interview with iamhiphop)

Thiel’s doomsday predictions also prompted an unusual request. In preparation for a summer 2000 board meeting, Thiel had asked Musk if he could present a proposal. Musk agreed. “Uh, Peter’s got an agenda item he’d like to talk about,” Musk said, handing the reins to Thiel. Thiel began. The markets, he said, weren’t done driving into the red. He prophesied just how dire things would get—for both the company and for the world. Many had seen the bust as a mere short-term correction, but Thiel was convinced the optimists were wrong. In his view, the bubble was bigger than anyone had thought and hadn’t even begun to really burst yet. From X.com’s perspective, the implications of Thiel’s prediction were dire. Its high burn rate meant that it would need to continue fundraising. But if—no, when—the bubble truly burst, the markets would tighten further, and funding would dry up—even for X.com. The company balance sheet could drop to zero with no options left to raise money. Thiel presented a solution: the company should take the $100 million closed in March and transfer it to his hedge fund, Thiel Capital. He would then use that money to short the public markets. “It was beautiful logic,” board member Tim Hurd of MDP remembered. “One of the elements of PayPal was that they were untethered from how people did stuff in the real world.” The board was uniformly aghast. Members Moritz, Malloy, and Hurd all pushed back. “Peter, I totally get it,” Hurd replied. “But we raised money from investors on a business plan. And they have that in their files. And it said, ‘use of proceeds would be for general corporate purposes.’ And to grow the business and so forth. It wasn’t to go speculate on indices. History may prove that you’re right, and it will have been brilliant, but if you’re wrong, we’ll all be sued.” Mike Moritz’s reaction proved particularly memorable. With his theatricality on full display, Moritz “just lost his mind,” a board member remembered, berating Thiel: “Peter, this is really simple: If this board approves that idea, I’m resigning!

How to Safely Buy Verified PayPal Accounts Online Pvasmmpro is the most reputed site to provide 100% verified PayPal accounts in USA, UK, CA, and other countries. Let’s place an order for a PayPal account for your business or personal use at Pvasmmpro. We provide 100% best quality PayPal accounts for USA, UK, CA, and other countries at affordable prices. So, buy verified PayPal accounts and enjoy it. If you want to more information just contact now. 24 Hours Reply/Contact ➤Email: pvasmmpro@gmail.com ➤Skype: pvasmmpro ➤Telegram: @pvasmmpro ➤WhatsApp: +1 (614) 708-6231 ---------------------------------- Buy Verified PayPal Accounts: Advantages for Businesses When businesses opt to buy verified PayPal accounts, they often seek the efficiency and readiness these accounts offer for immediate transactions. Deciding to buy verified accounts can streamline operations and bypass the lengthy verification processes typically required for new account setups. By choosing to buy verified PayPal accounts, companies can instantly integrate a trusted payment method into their services, which is particularly beneficial for startups needing to establish quick credibility and operational agility. Furthermore, when businesses buy verified PayPal accounts, they gain access to PayPal’s extensive user network and enhanced payment features, which can significantly boost transaction security and customer trust. Lastly, the choice to buy verified accounts allows companies to manage their finances more fluidly, leveraging PayPal’s global reach to accept payments from overseas clients without the typical delays in fund clearances associated with unverified accounts. Features of PayPal Accounts ✅» Real Phone Number Verified ✅» Old PVA Gmail Account Associated With PayPal ✅» Personal and Business Accounts Are Available ✅» Photo ID Verified ✅» EIN Verified ✅» Address Verified ✅» High Profile SSN Details Confirmed ✅» Bank Verified ✅» Visa Card Verified What Will We Give You ✅» Email Login Access ✅» PayPal Login Access ✅» Phone Number Access ✅» Personal/Business Details ✅» Photo ID ✅» Address Verification Documents ✅» SSN Photo ID ✅» Bank Account Login Access ✅» Card Details Introduction To PayPal Verification PayPal verification is an essential process that enhances security and trust for users. It involves confirming your identity to unlock full features of a PayPal account. When you verify your account, you prove to PayPal that you are who you say you are. This step helps protect against fraud and unauthorized transactions, ensuring a safer online experience. The verification process typically requires specific documents such as identification cards or proof of address. Buy Verified PayPal Accounts. Once approved, the benefits extend beyond just secure transactions; verified accounts often enjoy higher transaction limits and access to additional features. In today’s digital economy, having a verified PayPal account can significantly boost your credibility with customers and partners alike. Whether you’re running an e-commerce store or managing freelance projects, this small step can lead to more significant opportunities in financial dealings. Why We Are the Best for Buy Verified PayPal Accounts? When it comes to purchasing verified PayPal accounts, our service stands out for several reasons. We prioritize customer satisfaction and ensure a seamless experience from start to finish. Our team meticulously verifies each account using reliable documentation. This guarantees that you receive an authentic, fully functional PayPal account ready for your transactions. We also understand the importance of privacy and security in online dealings. Our process is designed to protect your information while providing you with peace of mind. Affordability sets us apart as well. We offer competitive pricing tailored for various needs without compromising quality. Additionally, our dedicated su

Buy GitHub Accounts If you want to get Verified and quality account then right place is SMMVENDORUSA is the best provider for any accounts and they can Provide qualityful Github account to you. We are 100% trusted so you have no chance to lose your money. & universal GitHub Accounts for travel administrations. If you purchase GitHub Account from us, We will attempt our best until you fulfill from your benefit. See Our all the additional features of our GitHub Accounts- 100% Verified Accounts New, Old & PVA Github Accounts Active Personal & Business Account High Quality Services Fast Delivery 24/7 Customer Support Very Cheap Price. One Month Replacement Guarantee If you face any problem you can contact us. we are online 24/7 hours WhatsApp: +1 (512) 540-6503 Telegram: @Smmvendorusa Skype Teams: Smmvendor Usa Email: smmvendorusa@gmail.com

Sometimes reparations is used to justify a feeding frenzy in which minority claimants simply raid the U.S. Treasury en masse while government bureaucrats facilitate a large transfer of wealth from the taxpayer to these so-called historical victims. A scandalous example of this is the Pigford case. Some ninety-one black farmers had sued the U.S. government alleging a legacy of bias against African Americans. Rather than settle the suit and pay the farmers a reasonable compensation, the Obama administration used the lawsuit to make an absurdly expensive settlement. It agreed to pay out $1.33 billion to compensate not only the ninety-one plaintiffs but also thousands of Hispanic and female farmers who had never claimed bias in court. Encouraged

What is the right balance? It’s certainly conceivable that the promise of hitting a financial jackpot is so overwhelming that it more than makes up for the inefficiencies introduced by intellectual property law and closed R&D labs. That has generally been the guiding assumption for most modern discussions of innovation’s roots, an assumption largely based on the free market’s track record for innovation during that period. Because capitalist economies proved to be more innovative than socialist and communist economies, the story went, the deliberate inefficiencies of the market-based approach must have benefits that exceed their costs. But, as we have seen, this is a false comparison. The test is not how the market fares against command economies. The real test is how it fares against the fourth quadrant. As the private corporation evolved over the past two centuries, a mirror image of it grew in parallel in the public sector: the modern research university. Most academic research today is fourth-quadrant in its approach: new ideas are published with the deliberate goal of allowing other participants to refine and build upon them, with no restrictions on their circulation beyond proper acknowledgment of their origin. It is not pure anarchy, to be sure. You can’t simply steal a colleague’s idea without proper citation, but there is a fundamental difference between suing for patent infringement and asking for a footnote.

In 2012, Australia implemented tough anti-tobacco regulations, requiring that all cigarettes be sold in plain, logo-free brown packages dominated by health warnings. Philip Morris Asia filed suit, claiming that this violated its intellectual-property rights and would damage its investments. The company sued Australia in domestic court and lost. But it had another card to play. In 1993, Australia had signed a free-trade agreement with Hong Kong, where Philip Morris Asia is based. That agreement included provisions protecting foreign investors from unfair treatment. So the company sued under that deal, claiming that the new law violated the investor-protection provisions. It asked for the regulations to be discontinued, and for billions in compensation.

So we borrow from other professions. We call ourselves software “engineers,” or “architects.” But we aren’t, are we? Architects and engineers have a rigor and discipline we could only dream of, and their importance in society is well understood. I remember talking to a friend of mine, the day before he became a qualified architect. “Tomorrow,” he said, “if I give you advice down at the pub about how to build some‐ thing and it’s wrong, I get held to account. I could get sued, as in the eyes of the law I am now a qualified architect and I should be held responsible if I get it wrong.” The importance of these jobs to society means that there are required qualifications people have to meet. In the UK, for example, a minimum of seven years study is required before you can be called an architect. But these jobs are also based on a body of knowledge going back thousands of years. And us? Not quite. Which is also why I view most forms of IT certification as worthless, as we know so little about what good looks like

It was as if the Allies at the end of the Second World War had not demanded the unconditional capitulation of Nazi Germany, but contented themselves with its perestroika, namely a certain liberalization of the regime. Had that been so, what would Europe be like today?” Bukovsky had traveled back and forth to Russia from Cambridge, England, in the early 90s after President Boris Yeltsin’s government invited him as an expert witness in a trial before the Constitutional Court in which the communists were suing the government for outlawing them and taking their property.The West was entirely complicit in the soapy dismissal of the entire Soviet communist death apparatus. Had there been Nuremberg-style trials, many shocks would have emerged, including the vast number of Western media correspondents who were on the Kremlin payroll, and chirping along accordingly.

Seibel: But there is a difference between a denial-of-service attack and an exploit where you get root and can then do whatever you want with the box. Thompson: But there are two ways to get root—one is to overflow a buffer and the other is to talk the program into doing something it shouldn't do. And most of them are the latter, not overflowing a buffer. You can become root without overflowing any buffers. So your argument's just not on. All you've got to do is talk su into giving you a shell—the paths are all there without any run-time errors. Seibel: OK. Leaving aside whether it results in a crash or an exploit or whatever else—there is a class of bugs that happen in C, and C++ for the same reason, that wouldn't happen in, say, Java. So for certain kinds of applications, is the advantage that you get from allowing that class of bugs really worth the pain that it causes? Thompson: I think that class is actually a minority of the problems. Certainly every time I've written one of these non-compare subroutine calls, strcpy and stuff like that, I know that I'm writing a bug. And I somehow take the economic decision of whether the bug is worth the extra arguments. Usually now I routinely write it out. But there's a semantic problem that if you truncate a string and you use the truncated string are you getting into another problem. The bug is still there—it just hasn't overflown the buffer.

For all intents and purposes, Tor is like a cloak of invisibility that shields you from the sight of all onlookers, unless you have accidentally ripped a hole in the cloak (i.e. turned on javascript). If you are thinking, "Wow, it might be cool to run BitTorrent through Tor so I won't get sued". A nice goal, except BitTorrent devs aren't falling over themselves to implement this feature with Tor, and the Tor network can't really handle the bandwidth anyway. You'll just make everyone else miserable by downloading those 720p Blu-Ray rips you can easily get from Usenet (and with SSL, you're not likely to get sued.)

been into Kraftwerk and Bam was into Kraftwerk, and we just had the idea of merging the two songs together,” Baker later recalled.75 “He had been hearing those songs all over the city, seemingly from every boombox and car stereo. John Robie, the studio engineer, only used those songs as a starting point for his own synthesizer compositions on the Micromoog and Prophet 5. . . . When we went in to do ‘Planet Rock,’ we were worried that we'd have problems with Kraftwerk, so we did another melody line,” Baker specified, evoking the way he and Soulsonic Force took to building their studio music out of several interchangeable parts.76 Nonetheless, Kraftwerk sued the label Tommy

When we get out of this damned system someday, I will accompany you to have your eyes checked. It’s okay if you have to have an operation, I will be there waiting for you to open your eyes. After all sorts of accidents along the way, he had missed it and had even forgotten those words……It was something he had always regretted. So this time, no matter what, he didn’t want to break his promise. From now on, he will never break his promise.

Della was a planner. Living each day, never knowing if it would be her last? That felt torturous, inhumane. So she decided not to share her prognosis with anyone. She’d just add this to the list of secrets she kept close to her heart. There was no reason for Ricki to grieve her before she was gone. Or Su, or any of her friends. It was her business, and in six months, maybe a year, she would die. Or maybe before then. Who could know? She coughed hard into her elbow and then shut her eyes, allowing the brisk air to sweep across her skin. She had no regrets. From now until her final day, she’d breathe.

How do I escalate a problem with Expedia? To escalate an issue with Expedia, start by contacting customer service at++1-860::812::1804. or++1-860::812::1804. (UK). If your concern isn't resolved, follow up with written communication and consider using social media for better visibility. For additional assistance, call +1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK). How do I get a full refund from Expedia? To get a refund from Expedia, start by logging into your account and navigating to “My Trips”+1-860::812::1804.” or “Request a refund. Absolutely, Expedia provides a 24-hour refund policy+1-860::812::1804. If you need to cancel your flight, you can do so without a fee within 24 hours after your booking. How do I get a human at Expedia Expedia provides travelers with the convenience of canceling their bookings without incurring any penalties+1-860::812::1804. Typically, this allows for a full refund if the cancellation occurs within the specified time frame,the refundable booking option on Expedia makes it easy to secure a hassle-free cancellation and a full refund when necessary +1-860::812::1804. What is the cheapest day to buy tickets on Expedia? Expedia is known for offering its cheapest flights on off-peak days, particularly on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Saturdays +1-860::812::1804.⟩ (OTA) or++1-860::812::1804. The most affordable days to fly on Expedia are typically Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Saturdays +1-860::812::1804.⟩(OTA) or++1-860::812::1804. Is Expedia Free Cancellation Really Free? Yes, Expedia's 24-hour cancellation policy allows you to cancel for a full refund if the booking +1-860::812::1804.was made at least 2 days before departure+1-860::812::1804. (UK). Refundable tickets can be cancelled or changed without fees. What is the best way to complain to Expedia? To complain about Expedia, contact their customer service at +1-860::812::1804.. If the issue is not resolved, you can submit a formal complaint via their website or reach out to consumer protection agencies such as the Better Business Bureau (BBB)++1-860::812::1804. Does Expedia actually give refunds? Absolutely, "Is Expedia really free cancellation"+1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK) Expedia provides a 24-hour cancellation policy. How to Ask a Question on Expedia? To ask a question at Expedia-+1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK), visit their Help Center on the website or app. You can also call +1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK) or +1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK), use the live chat feature, or reach out via social media. Can I get my money back through Expedia? Yes, Expedia has a 24-hour cancellation policy allowing a full refund if you cancel within 24 hours of booking. For assistance or to process a cancellation, contact customer care at +1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK). How do I escalate a complaint with Expedia? To escalate a problem with Expedia, you can contact their customer service at +1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK) and ask to speak with a supervisor or manager for further assistance. How do I avoid Expedia cancellation fees? To avoid Expedia cancellation fees, choose bookings with free cancellation +1-860::812::1804.or++1-860::812::1804. (UK) options and cancel within the allowed time frame. Always check the cancellation policy before booking. For

Does Expedia actually refund money?((FAQ-suPport®) Yes, Expedia offers full refunds around the clock. To obtain a refund from Expedia, contact their customer support immediately at +1(802)-551-8160 . You can contact them at +1(802)-551-8160 . Is Expedia actually fully refundable? Expedia allows cancellations with full refunds within 24 hours of booking, provided your departure is at least two days away at +1(802)-551-8160]. For non-refundable tickets, you can make changes or cancel without a fee+1(802)-551-8160 , but you will receive a travel credit instead of a refund. What is the refundable option on Expedia? The refundable option on Expedia refers to bookings that allow for cancellations without penalty, +1(802)-551-8160 ,+1(802)-551-8160 typically offering a full refund if you cancel within the specified timeframe. What is Expedia's return policy? Yes, Expedia offers a 24-hour risk-free cancellation policy. You can cancel any flight at+1(802)-551-8160 within 24 hours of booking for a full refund, as long as the flight was booked at least 7 days before departure at +1(802)-551-8160 Is Expedia really non refundable? [[FAQ-help]]Is Expedia really non-refundable? Absolutely, "Is Expedia really free cancellation+1(802)-551-8160 Expedia provides a 24-hour cancellation policy. If you need to cancel your flight, you can do so without a fee within 24 hours after your booking.1 How to get a full refund from Expedia? To get a refund from Expedia, start by logging into your account and navigating to "My Trips +1(802)-551-8160 or "Request a refund. Absolutely, Expedia provides a 24-hour refund policy+1(802)-551-8160. If you need to cancel your flight, you can do so without a fee within 24 hours after your booking. What is Expedia's cancellation plan? FAQs-Plans--- What is Expedia's cancellation plan? Expedia's 24-hour cancellation rule allows customers to cancel certain bookings within 24 hours of booking +1(802)-551-8160 Or +1(802)-551-8160 for a full refund. Check your reservation for eligibility or call +1(802)-551-8160 for assistance. What is the 24 hour policy Expedia? Expedia 24-Hours cancellation policy allows you to cancel or change your flight booking within 24-Hours of purchase without incurring any fees+1(802)-551-8160 {Expedia-Man}.This applies to all flight bookings made through Expedia, provided the cancellation or change is made at least seven days before the scheduled Absolutely, "What is the 24-hour policy Expedia?+1(802)-551-8160 Expedia provides a 24-hour cancellation policy. If you need to cancel your flight, you can do so without a fee within 24 hours after your booking [[faqs=support]]What is Expedia's cancellation plan? Absolutely, "What is Expedia's cancellation plan?+1(802)-551-8160 Expedia provides a 24-hour cancellation policy. If you need to cancel your flight, you can do so without a fee within 24 hours after your booking. Yes, Expedia offers a 24-hour cancellation policy, giving customers the option to receive a full refund if they cancel within 24 hours of booking. For assistance, call Expedia customer service at +1(802)-551-8160 .

Three times a day, every day, the meal we were given was exactly the same: a handful of rice, half a bowl of soup, and a few shreds of kimchi. And this was shared between two. The relief I felt when I was partnered with Kim Jin-su says something about the state I’d been reduced to at that point, a brute animal with whatever had once been human having been gradually sucked out. Why was I so relieved? Because he looked like he wouldn’t eat much. Because he was pale, with dark shadows around his eyes that made him look like he belonged in a hospital. Because of his empty, lifeless eyes. A month ago, when I saw his obituary, those eyes were the first things I thought of. Those eyes that used to track my every movement as I fished out a bean sprout from the watery soup; that regarded me in silence as I stared with open hatred at any morsel of food that passed his lips, consumed with the fear that he might take it all for himself; those cold, empty eyes, utterly devoid of anything that could be said to resemble humanity. Just like my own.

Tata had married Amma in a civil ceremony on 6 May 1936 in Mangalore. The news of their inter-caste wedding had caused much social consternation among orthodox Brahmins as well as Bunts. One of Amma's maternal uncles from her Kadenja Guthu clan was so overwrought that he allegedly slapped his forehead in despair and cried out, 'che, che, che, yenna kulaku onji aibu!' ( What a blot on my clan!). There was also a Brahmin journalist in Udupi, aghast at this 'varna sankara' (radical or inter-caste mixing), who wrote defamatory articles in his tabloid. Tata, feisty as ever, successfully sued the journalist for libel. That aggressive champion of orthodoxy also struck to his principles and chose to go to jail rather than plead guilty and pay a fine.

Yes, you can get a refund from Qatar Airways, at number✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 but it depends on how and when you booked your ticket. Let me explain it in a very easy way. Imagine you bought a ticket to go on a plane,✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 but then you changed your mind or something happened and you can't go anymore. Qatar Airways can give your money back, call ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 but only if some rules are followed. First, if you booked your ticket from Qatar Airways directly — like from their website✈️☎ , +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 app, or by calling them — and if you cancel your ticket within 24 hours, calling number ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 you can get all your money back. But your flight must be at least 7 days later. This means if today is Monday and your flight is next Monday or later, and you cancel on Monday itself, you will get a full refund. If you wait more than 24 hours after booking, ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 it might be harder to get your money back,✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 or you might have to pay a fee. Also, if you bought a very cheap ticket called a "Lite Fare," it may not allow a refund at all.✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 So it's always good to check what kind of ticket you bought. Qatar Airways wants to help its passengers, so sometimes even if your ticket is not fully refundable, +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 they will give you a travel credit. That means you don’t get the cash back, but you can use the money later when you book another flight with them. If you are not sure what type of ticket you have,✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 you can call Qatar Airways. Their team will talk to you nicely and help you know if you can get a refund or not. ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 You can also visit their website and check the “Manage Booking” section by putting your ticket number ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 and last name. There, you can see your options like changing your flight or asking for a refund.

Yes, you can get a refund from Qatar Airways, at number✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 but it depends on how and when you booked your ticket. Let me explain it in a very easy way. Imagine you bought a ticket to go on a plane,✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 but then you changed your mind or something happened and you can't go anymore. Qatar Airways can give your money back, call ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 but only if some rules are followed. First, if you booked your ticket from Qatar Airways directly — like from their website✈️☎ , +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 app, or by calling them — and if you cancel your ticket within 24 hours, calling number ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 you can get all your money back. But your flight must be at least 7 days later. This means if today is Monday and your flight is next Monday or later, and you cancel on Monday itself, you will get a full refund. If you wait more than 24 hours after booking, ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 it might be harder to get your money back,✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 or you might have to pay a fee. Also, if you bought a very cheap ticket called a "Lite Fare," it may not allow a refund at all.✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 So it's always good to check what kind of ticket you bought. Qatar Airways wants to help its passengers, so sometimes even if your ticket is not fully refundable, +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 they will give you a travel credit. That means you don’t get the cash back, but you can use the money later when you book another flight with them. If you are not sure what type of ticket you have,✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 you can call Qatar Airways. Their team will talk to you nicely and help you know if you can get a refund or not. ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 You can also visit their website and check the “Manage Booking” section by putting your ticket number ✈️☎ +1 ➤ 888 ➤ 331 ➤ 3976 or + 44-808-159-3279 and last name. There, you can see your options like changing your flight or asking for a refund.

When the PBS news anchor Jim Lehrer asked Nader why he was qualified to be president in 2000, Nader told him, “I don’t know anybody who has sued more ‘agencies and departments].” Nader and his Raiders believed in government. They defended it from conservative assault. When they criticized it –when they fought it, sued it, restrained it–they did so to try to make it better. But those same laws and processes were available for anyone else to use too. You can bog clean energy projects down in environmental reviews. You can use a process meant to stop the government from building a highway through your town to keep a nonprofit developer from building affordable housing down the block. “It was as if liberals took a bicycle apart to fix it but never quite figured out how to get it running properly again,” Sabin writes.

This liberal policy is applicable for ticket purchases made directly through klm 's website, mobile application, or by contacting customer care at +1-855-676-9011or 56800231190 +52-800-461-0492(Mexico) If you have recently booked a klm flight and wish to make changes, corrections, or even a cancellation, you should do so immediately—just call the customer service numbers at +1-855-676-9011or 56800231190 to receive immediate help+52-800-461-0492(Mexico) Provided your booking was made at least seven days in advance of travel, you qualify for this risk-free cancellation period+52-800-461-0492(Mexico) From rescheduling and refunds to name changes or new reservations, klm 's customer support is at passengers' beck and call 24/7 on +1-855-676-9011or 56800231190 , providing peace of mind and solid assistance at any hour of the day or night+52-800-461-0492(Mexico) KLM ofrece a sus pasajeros varias formas de contacto directo para resolver cualquier necesidad con su reserva, ya sea un cambio, corrección o cancelación; si recientemente compraste un boleto, puedes llamar en Estados Unidos al +1-855-676-9011 o 56800231190, y desde México al +52-800-461-0492, donde un agente de atención al cliente te dará asistencia inmediata disponible las 24 horas;