If you've been pondering over whether a 3D printer is a sound financial decision, here might be your answer: researchers have calculated that they can pay for themselves inside a single year.
     |
percy harvin percy harvin mike wallace mike wallace Paul Bearer Valerie Harper White Smoke
Today, we are witnessing an odd phenomenon: some LGBT activists are jumping on the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement bandwagon (BDS) though its goal is the demise of one of the world?s most progressive LGBT countries, the only gay-friendly country in the Middle East, and the world?s only Jewish nation?Israel. It?s one thing to advocate for Palestinian rights, but what would turn a Jewish, ?hard core? radical lesbian into an anti-Zionist leader?
Meet Sarah Schulman, noted for her?combativeness, lesbian and AIDS activism, 17 books, and for co-founding the ?fire-eating? Lesbian Avengers, which other LGBT organizers?criticized?as ?extremist.? In?2010, Sarah suddenly turned her wrath on Israel though she admits she had never paid any attention to the Jewish state before. The catalyst was an invitation to speak at a Tel Aviv University LGBT conference. When a friend objected to her violating the boycott of Israel, she?responded, ?Never heard of it.??She asked her political cohorts for information and was directed to BDS leaders, and went on a brief trip to Israel and the West Bank. That was her research on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict?information from only one side.
Within a year, she was calling for BDS, indicting Israel, and calling for the end of the Jewish state. She praised the ?one state solution? and glibly?claimed?that?New York City is ?the best place in the world for Jews and I think they should all move here, and forget about Israel.? She attempted to bridge the non-sequitur of her new found cause and gay issues in a convoluted?New York Times?op-ed that accused Israel of ?pinkwashing,? that is, highlighting its progressive gay policies to distract attention from its alleged violation of Palestinian rights.?In?2012, she described her journey to anti-Israel activism in her book ?Israel/Palestine and the Queer International,??and in?2013?she organized an Israel-bashing conference on ?homonationalism.?
New information clearly did not cause Schulman?s transformation. Though she is a professor at City University of New York (despite never earning any post-graduate degrees) her book has no reliable facts and context is systematically distorted. Schulman simply regurgitates anti-Israel propaganda. She frequently admits, in almost giggly tones, how little she knows, and even confesses that she had never looked at a map of Israel until after she had committed to BDS.
For example, Schulman claims that in?2010, Israel still had settlements in Gaza when in fact, all Jewish settlements and even cemeteries had been uprooted in?2005. She argues that Israel?s administration of the territories after 1967 was a ?detriment? to the Palestinian economy when in fact Israel helped modernize the area and turn it into the 4th?fastest growing economy in the world in the 1970?s and 1980?s. She doesn?t understand Zionism, writing that Herzl was right that Jews would never be safe in Europe, but faulting him for ?missing? the fact that ?Muslims would never be safe there either.? The obvious difference is that before the reestablishment of Israel, no Jewish-majority state existed where Jews could seek refuge. In contrast, the Ottoman Empire then ruled over vast Muslim territories, and today there are 22 Arab Muslim states. Schulman writes that ?People never claim that Israel?s action does not violate international law. That?s a given.? The only given is that Schulman did not research the many legal scholars who disagree.
Schulman erases context. She ignores the long history of wars and terrorism against Israel, claiming that its security fears are ?manufactured.? The Palestinian terrorism campaign of suicide bombing known as the 2nd?Intifada which murdered over 1,100 Israelis and wounded over 8,000, and the over 13,000 rockets that Palestinians have fired from Gaza into Israel?s southern communities are not mentioned. Consequently, she can write that Israel ?decided? to build the security barrier for no reason and that the only purpose of the checkpoints is to humiliate Palestinians?not to protect Israelis.
The real ?washing? is by Schulman who consistently whitewashes those most guilty of violating progressive and LGBT principles. She whitewashes Hamas, claiming she can?t judge the group because all she knows ?was fed to me on American television? though she could have looked at Hamas? founding document and leaders? statements which call for the murder of Jews, obliteration of Israel and establishment of an Islamist caliphate, and liberally quote from the anti-Semitic forgery, ?The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.???She justifies participating in demonstrations with Hamas supporters because, she explains, she had also participated in gay parades with Republicans and Orthodox and Hasidic Jews, equating these groups with an internationally designated terrorist organization notorious for its suicide bombing and rocket attacks on innocent civilians. She attributed her concerns about Hamas to her ?prejudice.?
Schulman?told?one interviewer that she wrote the book ?mostly for Jews? so they would overcome their own prejudices and stop supporting the Jewish state. But to convince audiences that their concerns are ?prejudice,? she consistently distorts reality and becomes an apologist for people, policies and views that are diametrically opposed to the values that have propelled her life?s work. She denies the reality of Arab homophobia, writing that ?I caught myself internalizing ridiculous false stereotypes that depict whites as more pro-gay than Arabs,? ignoring the homophobic government policies and societies that have inflicted so much suffering on gay Arabs. She praises two Palestinian lesbian groups, sliding over the fact that they have had to make their base in Israel, not the West Bank where they could not function. Exquisitely sensitive to anti-Semitism, she writes that her belief that Europeans and Christians were fundamentally anti-Semitic was constantly reaffirmed, but she turns a blind eye to the pervasive anti-Semitism in the Arab world. When questioned about the incompatibility of her feminist values and Palestinian subjugation of women and honor killings, this ardent feminist simply dodged the issue, answering, ?right now, that?s not my job.??She should have answered, don?t bother me with facts that conflict with my propaganda campaign.
Nor is Schulman above peddling her own prejudices against Jews and Israelis. The Israeli cousins she met as a child were ?arrogant? and ?did not identify with other people;? when she visited Israel, a religious Jew tried to help her ?in that awful way I remember from my childhood.?
Despite her progressive values, Schulman does not encourage open debate. She?rejected several papers submitted for her ?homonationalism? conference that challenged her views of Israel , such as one that argued Israel was promoting itself as gay friendly to increase tourism, not to hide its treatment of Palestinians.
What made Sarah turn on Israel? Perhaps, in part, it was a reaction to her own bitter family experiences. Her Jewish family kicked her out when they learned she is a lesbian. Perhaps, too, she realized that advances in gay rights do not mean the progressive agenda has been achieved. Or perhaps the very success of the LGBT movement drove her. As she admitted, LGBT people are increasingly accepted by mainstream society. Indeed, the whole concept of ?homonationalism? is that gays who have been integrated now identify with the ?racial and religious hegemony of their countries.? Sarah, who had devoted her life to LGBT, may have been in search of a new cause, one with the same energy and defiance, and one that would keep her relevant.
BDS and the anti-Israel movement are now the chic radical cause for some. Unfortunately, it is destructive, anti-Semitic, and the antithesis of progressive values. Many prominent LGBT leaders understand this. Perhaps one day Schulman will be among them.
The opinions, facts and any media content here are presented solely by the author, and The Times of Israel assumes no responsibility for them. In case of abuse, report this post.Source: http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lgbt-and-israel-the-anti-israel-lesbian-avenger/
Rita Ora Meteor Russia jay z Oscar Pistorius Carnival Triumph charles barkley valentines
WASHINGTON |
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives easily passed a bill on Wednesday to tighten sanctions on Iran, showing a strong message to Tehran over its disputed nuclear program days before President-elect Hassan Rouhani is sworn in.
The vote also highlighted a growing divide between Congress and the Obama administration on Iran policy ahead of talks on the nuclear program in coming months. Iran insists the nuclear program is purely for civilian purposes.
The bill, which passed 400 to 20, would cut Iran's oil exports by another 1 million barrels per day over a year, in an attempt to reduce the flow of funds to the nuclear program. It is the first sanctions bill to put a number on exactly how much Iran's oil exports would be cut.
Previous U.S. and EU sanctions have reduced Iran's oil exports by more than half. The United States has worked with Iran's top oil consumers including China, Japan and South Korea to push them toward alternative suppliers of crude.
Oil prices have remained relatively steady, which has allowed the efforts to continue, but some analysts say further sanctions risk pushing up prices and damaging the economies of U.S. allies.
The bill still has to be passed in the Senate and signed by President Barack Obama before becoming law. The Senate Banking Committee is expected to introduce a similar measure in September, though it is uncertain whether the language to cut exports by 1 million barrels a day will survive.
Critics of the bill said it shows an aggressive signal to Iran that last month voted in Rouhani, a cleric many see as more moderate. He will be sworn in on Sunday.
Rep. Ed Royce, a California Republican and Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who introduced the bill with Rep. Eliot Engel, a New York Democrat, said the United States has no higher national security priority than preventing a nuclear-armed Iran.
Royce said the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's drive to develop a nuclear arsenal was evident. "New president or not, I am convinced that Iran's Supreme Leader intends to continue on this path," he said.
The vote showed a growing disagreement between the White House and Congress on Iran policy. A senior administration official said on Wednesday the White House is not opposed to new sanctions in principle, but wants to give Rouhani a chance.
The Treasury Department last week partially eased sanctions on Iran by expanding a list of medical devices that can be exported there without special permission.
One of the 20 lawmakers to vote against the bill, Jim McDermott, a Washington-state Democrat, said shortly before the vote that the rush to sanction Iran before Rouhani takes office could hurt efforts to deflate the nuclear issue.
"It's a dangerous sign to send and it limits our ability to find a diplomatic solution to nuclear arms in Iran," McDermott said.
The bill also further denies Iran governments access to foreign currency reserves, and targets Iranian efforts to circumvent international sanctions against its shipping business.
(Reporting by Timothy Gardner, additional reporting by Warren Strobel; Editing by Philip Barbara)
kermit gosnell revenge revenge Chris Hadfield golden state warriors Happy Mothers Day survivor
Frank Ocean Gay bill clinton andy roddick Costa Rica Earthquake sandra fluke costa rica Earthquake Costa Rica
If the order has already been shipped; you may return the item to us postmarked within 30 calendar days of delivery. Before that, please contact our Live Support to inform that.
In that case we will refund you the payment excluding actual shipping fees already incurred.
If the item is defective, please contact DinoDirect Live Support and send an email to us at cs-center@dinodirect.com attached an image or video file clearly showing the defect of the product. And we will give you a response within 24 hours whether we will resend the item or refund the payment to you for compensation.
For customization, please consider carefully before ordering.Because we do not accept return and replacement.
chris bosh Chris Andersen Xbox Kawhi Leonard Shailene Woodley Kim Kardashian baby name Erik Spoelstra
What we don?t talk about enough are the basics every recruiter look for in every candidate, regardless of the job, level of experience or even the industry.
So ? keeping in mind that from the research they?ve done so far, the recruiter knows you can do the actual job (or you wouldn?t have been offered a face-to-face interview) ? let?s talk about that now, starting with the top five:
From the moment they meet you, the recruiter is going to be assessing how you project confidence. Several factors go into this assessment?
Do you communicate well (the anxious and unprepared typically exhibit very poor communication skills)? Are you able to engage in conversation? to co-manage the interview? Do you listen ? really listen ? before attempting to answer the recruiter?s questions? Does your ?confidence? ever cross over into arrogance?
Most important: the recruiter wants to know if you?ll earn the respect of your potential colleagues, company managers and the executives. And the best way to do that? is to exude humble confidence.
A few years ago, recruiters didn?t even talk about culture. There were more jobs open than there were candidates, so a person could be a Type A-hole and still get hired ? as long as they could do ?the job?. Those days are gone.
Today, a recruiter is measured (judged, even) by their ability to find talent that will embrace the organization?s mission, understands how the company functions, and has a clear ability to work well with the existing team. The perfect situation? the recruiter?s brass ring: the new hire makes the team significantly better.
The candidate who survives this test takes on a challenging task: they must learn everything they can about the company mission and culture ? and be able to articulate how they are the right fit, complete with solid examples ? well before the interview.
Since the demise of the entry-level position in the workforce, knowledge ? not the theory you learned in school, but the real stuff that makes you employable ? is king.
Knowledge of the industry and competition. Knowledge of the role (well past the job description). Knowledge gained from your internships, job shadows and informational interviews. Knowledge of the recruiter and would-be manager. And, of course, in-depth knowledge of the company mission and culture.
If there is any doubt about what you know ? and exactly how that knowledge and your experience will solve the problem they are trying to fix with this hire ? you will not be the top choice.
Yes, this is a bit old-school; perhaps even clich?. But from how you treat the receptionists and gatekeepers to the eye contact appropriately held; from the handshakes extended to the natural use of ?please? and ?thank you? ? your manners are a big factor in how you are perceived as a candidate.
To many, manners also include appropriate personal space, the volume at which you speak, turning off your cell phone and even your posture. Manners can also include holding doors open when the situation arises and cleaning up after yourself while getting that cup of coffee offered to you as you began the interview.
Because manners are so subjective, we just never know what might be a ?red flag? for the recruiter. So be prepared to go old-school while demonstrating excellent professional manners. If you?re ever in doubt about what are appropriate manners during your first interview, remember this advice: Act as if you are meeting your future mother-in-law for the first time ever? at church.
No matter how high-tech we get in job searches? nothing matters now more than a great attitude and a greater smile. Some of this gets back to the culture issue, yes. To the recruiter, however, attitude is more than that. Much more.
Do you approach your work with enthusiasm? Are you passionate about what you?ll be doing 40, 50 or 60 hours per week? Do you solve problems with an approach that combines tenacity with poise? Are you too cool to hustle, learn and grow? Are you willing to share what you know? and mentor others?
In the recruiter?s eyes ? assuming you?ve shown humble confidence, that you?re a good fit, that you?re knowledgeable and you?ve displayed manners your momma? would be proud of ? your attitude may be all that is left between you and a job offer.
These are the top five things every recruiter expects from a candidate. There are more, of course? and we?d love your help growing the list so we can help others. Let us know your thoughts, in the comments below!
?
?
?
?
nascar Rolling Stone magazine Chris Davis Twinkies Agnieszka Radwanska Talia metta world peace
Highlights:
Lane Hornung
In May, mortgage rates started to rise from their historical lows and now are hovering around 4.5 percent, more than a full percentage point higher than they were at the absolute bottom. However, they are still low by historical standards.
An analysis by InsideRealEstateNews of more than four decades of interest rate data, found the average 30-year, fixed-rate loan at the end June was 8.56 percent.
What do rising rates mean for today?s homebuyer? A look at options for a prospective homebuyer in today?s market is the subject of this month?s conversation between Lane Hornung, founder and President of 8z Real Estate, and John Rebchook, of InsideRealEstateNews.com.
John: Lane, what is house-hunting like today for someone who has been searching for a home for a few months, but still hasn?t landed one?
Lane: It could be a bit frustrating. Let?s say you were pre-qualified for a $300,000 home earlier this year and you started looking. You may have been out-bid and lost out on a listing or two that you really wanted. Now, your buying power has been eroded because of rising interest rates.
John: What does that mean for the consumer?
Lane: It?s a double whammy. Instead of a $300,000 home, you may now only qualify for a $270,000 home due the increase in rates. The second part of the double whammy is that homes prices have been rising. A home priced at $300,000 at the beginning of the year might now cost $315,000 or $330,000.
John: What are some of the options for this theoretical homebuyer?
Lane: One option, of course, is to take your ball and go home and get out of the market.
John: Is that a good idea?
Lane: Not necessarily, assuming you are buying for the right reasons. That is, you truly want or need a house and plan to stay in the house for a number of years. In some ways, throwing in the towel is an emotional decision borne out of missing the absolute bottom. It may not be the most rational decision, financially speaking, if you really want a home.
John: Can a prospective buyer count on a better time to buy in the future, with the idea that rising rates and more inventory will drive down prices?
Lane: It is very hard to time any market, whether it is the housing market or the stock market. Does the housing market care that you gave up? No, it does not.
John: Do you think we will ever see rates around 3.3 percent again?
Lane: If I were going to place a bet, I think it is more likely that rates will go higher, rather than fall back to their all-time lows. Also, keep in mind that a 4.5 percent rate, historically speaking, is a great rate.
Rising rates always knock some people out of the market and hurt affordability. On the other hand, rising rates can mean that the economy is getting better. If people have more money, and consumer confidence rises, that will increase the demand for housing.
John: So people can?t count on rates and or housing prices being lower a year from now?
Lane: Of course, nobody knows. Typically, real estate markets follow five-to-seven-year cycle and we are a couple of years into that cycle. That could mean that a year from now that $300,000 home is even more expensive than today, and interest rates are higher. If that is the case, you are only hurting yourself by waiting.
John: What are some of the options for someone who is prequalified for a $300,000 home?
Lane: One thing they could do is lower their expectations and buy a $270,000 home. Another option a good broker may suggest is a different neighborhood that is not quite as expensive as where they were previously looking,but close to those expectations.
John: How about an adjustable rate mortgage?
Lane: An ARM can be a very good choice, especially if you only plan to stay for 5 to 7 years. I?ve seen some very attractive ARMs recently. They are already starting to fill the void caused by rising fixed-rates.
John: Thanks, Lane.
8z Real Estate?is a sponsor of InsideRealEstateNews.com along with?Universal Lending?and?Land Title Guarantee, A monthly Q&A with Lane Hornung is a feature of IREN.?
Have a story idea or real estate tip? Contact John Rebchook at? JRCHOOK@gmail.com. To read more articles by John Rebchook, subscribe to the Colorado Real Estate Journal.
?
Source: http://insiderealestatenews.com/2013/07/31/hornung-rates-remain-low/
the bee gees woodward keratosis pilaris the three stooges oklahoma news brandon rios rock and roll hall of fame 2012
