Image

Cialis is a latest medicine for treatment of disturbances of erection at men. Cialis feature is its high-speed take effect (30 minutes) and a long-term effect (up to 36 hours). In this regard you can choose the moment which is most adequate for sexual intercourse, having in style a drug in advance. It is practicable to acknowledge Cialis in the hours of daylight and to be ready even bordering day. responsive ingredient - Tadalafil.

Read More Oct 12 2017 October 12, 2017 Executive Order buy cheap cialis uk Healthcare Choice Undermines States and Hurts Mental Health By Paul Gionfriddo, or larger populations in certain circumstances are subject to the Orphan Drug Act.

"Our government doesn't have all the answers, and it never will. On these pages you should be able to find information you need to take care of your business tax obligations to our state.

Categories: Erection | best place buy cialis

Comments

  • milligram

    milligram

    March 10, 2015, 10:53 pm

    > The point was that if Iran gets nuclear weapons they could arm suicide bombers easily, if there were suicide bombers to give them to. So in case of suicide bombers, keep nuclear bombs away.

    While this might be an effective attack vector, it would still bring massive retaliation and end the Iranian regime. Thus MAD still applies here and the Iranians aren't suicidal (something you seem to suggest but never show any evidence to support.)

    > And in the past the Ayatollah did have huge fanatics, if you recall all the happenings with the Embassy take-over.

    Embassy take over did not involve suicide bombers.

    The Shah's regime was horrible and was propped up by the US. That's what lead to the Embassy take over.

    Reply

  • theCroc

    theCroc

    March 10, 2015, 6:38 pm

    According to Adam Curtis documentary "The power of nightmares" H.W Bush went againt his own cabinet when he decided not to occupy Iraq. It seems he was never completely bought by the Neocon agenda the way his son was. Even Dick Cheney explained in public why they didn't do it. (And lo and behold. All his concerns came true when he and GWB decided to do it anyway.)

    The hardcore Neocons wanted a repeat of Afghanistan. They wanted to show that the US was the great force of good that could fix the world and they got really pissed when H.W Bush didn't go along with it. If he hadn't lost to Clinton I'm sure they would have found a way to force him back into it. The fall of the Soviet Union however left them without a credible scarecrow to keep the voters in line with. By the time GWB came around the Arabic terrorist meme was firmly programmed into peoples heads and could be used as an effective scarecrow.

    Reply

  • p3on

    p3on

    March 10, 2015, 2:18 pm

    lol, "go back to digg" coming from someone who's been here less than a year, cute

    collectivization was about a) increasing productivity and b) creating an agricultural system more in line with communist ideology. obviously it wasn't a success, at least to begin with. and did you even read the articles about holodomor? no one argues that it's about crushing farmers, the argument is that it was meant to crush ukranian nationalism. if the farmers were the 'enemy of the people' then who the fuck were 'the people'?

    Reply

  • SarahC

    SarahC

    March 10, 2015, 11:39 am

    **#6: Creating inadequate self-documentation.**

    Where I work, we document every change, in any system we work on.

    Crazy you might say?

    When a system screws up, it's off to the notes - and a read through of the last few entries in it - often by different members of the department.

    Tom added a downloaded patch Thursday, Sheila configured an Admin option Friday, Peter on Monday morning restarted the server...

    Often reading through the notes gives you a very good handle on what's happening - or if the problems happened in the past, and how it was fixed back then. Even if the staff are on holiday - it works brilliantly.

    I'll be doing it anywhere I work in the future.

    Reply

  • Ieatcerealfordinner

    Ieatcerealfordinner

    March 10, 2015, 6:22 am

    "too expensive" is a relative. They are less expensive then renewables, ergo people are still using fossils. Some people realize that there are other intangible/indirect costs such as costs to the environment and economic cost if global warming occurs from fossil fuels. These people are the ones choosing green energy and passing laws that require renewable energy to be larger % of our energy portfolio.

    There IS currently a very large push for renewables, many utilities are required to get 5- 20% of their energy from renewable sources by a set date. These things take time, and as they are forced to evolve the costs come down making it more competitive.

    Reply

  • ghibmmm

    ghibmmm

    March 10, 2015, 10:10 pm

    It can be made universally, but not necessarily accurately. I'm not using it to discredit your argument, per se, but to tell you that those errors are there. No, the discrediting is a whole different part.

    I'm not arguing for a reduction of the state. I'm arguing for an abolishment of the state, and of all forms of violent control. It occurs first as a change in ideology, and second as a change in structure. There is nothing nonsensical about it.

    How is this feasible without dismantling capitalism? Well, that's really asking the question backwards. Why would it be necessary to dismantle capitalism, if capitalism without centralized means of control cannot initiate violence against its customers after a certain threshold of competition is reached? It simply isn't. It takes care of itself. Once the state is abolished, it is not only infeasible but unwise to attempt to reinitiate such a system.

    The ideological change itself is accomplished over the internet (and anonymity onion webs like i2p, tor, etc.) - the first truly uninhibited means of informations society has seen. It is not only the best solution, but inevitable.

    Once violence is eradicated, it *is* simply a matter of letting the different systems duke it out. If violence is not an option, you have no other way of deciding which type of organization is best besides providing your support in the marketplace according to your own desires.

    Reply

  • breakneckridge

    breakneckridge

    March 10, 2015, 8:15 am

    Well, the human body is more like a pond with a porous hose that's laying along the pond's surface. The large majority of stuff that goes in one end of the hose winds up coming out the other end of the hose without ever mixing with the pond water. But a small minority of the stuff that enters the tube seeps out of the hose and disperses into the pond water. i.e. The majority of the stuff that you eat travels straight through your digestive system and comes out of your butt, only a small portion of what you eat ever winds up crossing out of the digestive tract. In many respects, the space inside the digestive tract is actually considered to be outside the body.

    Reply

  • bluequail

    bluequail

    March 11, 2015, 5:10 am

    It wasn't one anecdote, there were 3 different examples of people that I have personally known of in the post. Not just heard about, but have seen, spoke to, and one which I had parented.

    People as a rule aren't real nice. It isn't that they mean to be ugly, but something else kicks in when they feel threatened, and it doesn't take much for most people in general situations to feel threatened. In the case of the young man with spina bifida, he would try to talk to a receptionist at a doctors office, just ask her out to a movie, and she would act like a glob of snot had just gotten on to her. He was repulsive looking to them, when approached in a social manner. The nurses who dealt with him in a hospital situation were always kind and sweet, but they knew him at a professional level.

    My husband has a cousin that sounds a lot like your sister does - she is probably about 55 now, has cerebal palsy (something related to when she was actually born), and despite her age, she doesn't have a single wrinkle on her face. Charlotte is very pretty, and she is so very sweet. But when Charlotte's dad left the family (and it wasn't related to her and her issues, it was more due to him just being an in general bastard), her mother wasn't able to go to work to support the kids, and the dad was quite frequently late with the child support. I can't begin to tell you what it was like for their mom, trying to keep that family afloat - but always having to make sure that there was an adult available at all times that she couldn't actually be there with her. But we are at the point right now where Charlotte is mid 50s, their mother is getting close to 80, and who is going to take care of Charlotte when her mother is gone? Much like the regular modern day family, everyone is scattered across the country, living thousands of miles from each other, and so it isn't like they are going to be able to help each other much, in person, with her daily care. But Charlotte is high functioning, and if you tell her what needs to be done step by step (like "go brush your teeth now, then brush your hair), and move her wheelchair to where she can do it - then she can do it. 55 years old, and she needs to be put into a bathtub, and then pulled out again. But she has pretty good people recognition, and for instance, she had the awfullest crush on one of the husband's friends. When we would go over there, if he was with us, she would absolutely light up and brighten up the whole room... and if we went over there without taking him with us, she would ask why he wasn't with us. When he was killed in a car wreck, we didn't have the heart to tell her what had happened, we just told her that he had to go back east, that he'd had a family emergency and couldn't come back.

    I don't hate retarded people. More than that, a great deal of my heart goes out to them. Last year, they had my youngest boy in a life skills class, and a new boy came in mid-year, he was wheelchair bound and didn't have the ability to speak. My son greeted him, and when the little boy didn't respond, my son figured the next best way to greet him was "man-style" and butted heads with him, pretty hard. I can't tell you how mortified I was about that, but at the same time there was a funny aspect to it. Kind of like how drunk frat boys would greet each other at a party.

    Another thing to consider (and this is neither bad nor good - just the way things are) is education. The school districts have a responsibility to educate these kids as best they can. Like I said, last year they had my son in life skills, but in downtown Houston, they have a school where the severely disabled are. A friend of mine that was getting her degree for teaching had to go work there a couple of days as a part of an internship, and she bounced around to several different schools and types of school in the process. But she said that there is a school where the kids that are barely even functional are, that there was one young man who was severely autistic (I believe it was autism - we are talking about 11 years ago, and this is second hand info) and was catatonic. He barely seemed conscious of the outside world, and they were paying these teachers with masters and doctorates degrees to take turns rocking him each day, every day. But he wasn't even capable of acknowledging the presence of people.

    Reply

  • darksaphira

    darksaphira

    March 10, 2015, 1:10 pm

    None for me, thanks. And I have plenty of reasons: I love my job, and I could never see myself taking on the role of a mom/housewife. I want to be able to live a reasonably spontaneous life (and no, the "thrill" of wondering how much sleep I'll get tonight doesn't do it for me...). I'm the oldest of 5, so I've already had a good 20+ years spent with kids in some form or another. I already spend enough time worrying about finances without a kid in the mix. And, to be perfectly honest, I'd rather just have a puppy or two running around my house.

    Reply

  • dunskwerk

    dunskwerk

    March 10, 2015, 11:53 pm

    Where is this happening? How can it be so bad?

    I find this so strange, because I don't see it happening at all here in the US. I live in the South, and even with "record water shortages," it's still very wet here. I can't imagine that this place could become a desert; we get single storms with enough rainfall to knock us out of the "desert" category.

    EDIT: I also don't understand how losing forests = becoming a desert. Technically, there are not any "real forests" around the city where I live and the area was deforested about 200 years ago, but there are still giant, centuries-old trees here and there, and green vegetation grows abundantly.

    Reply

  • dr_draik

    dr_draik

    March 10, 2015, 3:36 pm

    1a) Your argument about Israel's existence is a little simplistic, I'm afraid. Israel was created during the process of decolonisation, part of a much larger, worldwide movement of colonial powers to withdraw direct control over colonies. You could argue that any nation created during the decolonisation period is defying sovereignty sicne they were created by 'unlawful' ruling powers - but how far back is one prepared to go? Because historically the state of Israel is well established during the Roman Empire.

    1b) "their own control tower" - that's just conspiracy mongering (yes, I combined fear-mongering and conspiracy-theorising, I know). The British ruled the territory and were effectively driven out by a combination of international pressure and local dissent (to the extent of violent resistance). When the British left a two-state solution was attempted and the Arab nations attacked the Jewish state, which won the ensuing conflict. Hardly a British master plan!

    2) I concede that Israeli retaliation if often very severe - but I don't think either side in this conflict can claim much of a moral higher ground.

    3) Iran's president has made repeated verbal attacks on the state of Israel - if you don't like Bush doing that to Iran, then you're being inconsistent in supporting Ahmadinejad.

    4) Threats have consistently flowed both ways between Israel and Iran...

    5) Nuclear disarmament is a fantastic idea! In fact, my country, South Africa, is the only nation ever to voluntarily disarm entirely. But there's a big difference between my country and Israel in terms of their safety. Israel has been attacked by neighbouring nations three times in the last half a decade or so and would be militarily outnumbered (can't speak to quality though). That is the primary reason Israel has those nukes! I don't claim that it's moral or immoral, but it's a reality. And nuclear proliferation is a bad, bad, BAD idea for everyone in the world. Which is why Iran is being encouraged not to build nukes.

    Reply

  • Dark-Star

    Dark-Star

    March 10, 2015, 10:03 pm

    >The French won theirs for one reason only: they would ruthlessly behead every last member of the parasitic ruling class.

    And a whole lot of other people besides. 8/

    A certain chapter in Eric Flint's novel *The Ram Rebellion* mentioned this very subject. Two guys were observing a peasant's revolt (which they had somewhat started) and one of them observed the ruling family was getting totally slaughtered. One of them was a local and said this was SOP, to make sure there was nobody left to claim inheritance to the land and the serfs thereon. Never thought about that before but it makes perfect sense.

    Reply

  • orcdork

    orcdork

    March 10, 2015, 9:43 pm

    I take it you are from a country already in the EU. What do you think the alternative is? If the first group of never signed, even if the EEC did ot work out and Europe had progressed as completely separate countries. Hell, introducing the euro here more than tripled the prices in a lot of goods here, and i still feel that it's a good idea.

    Less stable economies are supported, not because of good will, but on the belief that in the long run it will help Europe as a whole by providing stability from more than just a recession, but help with wider and more complex issues, like immigration.

    As far as immigration policies and tax laws go, the guidelines that EU members have to follow are pretty lax altogether, giving enough slack to face local issues.

    Reply

  • adimit

    adimit

    March 10, 2015, 6:47 am

    > As a former employer would say, "programming is just typing".

    Your former employer has no clue. Ever built something large? What about compilation and testing? What about huge amounts of data you have to have avaiable and process? I work in NLP, where one test run can take a week and you only notice it's gone wrong in the end. Paying for better equipment == faster development time, in my field. Definitely. And pretty much in every data-intensive field with a lot of computation going on.

    Reply

  • veterinarygopher

    veterinarygopher

    March 10, 2015, 6:34 am

    My point was that not all women walking into the abortion clinic are there to get an abortion. The sign above the door doesn't say, "Abortions Here!" It might say Women's clinic or something to that effect. In my case, I was there to get care for my unborn child because I didn't have health insurance and that clinic was the only place that would see me. Should I have stopped to explain to the people outside that the same clinic they accuse of murder was in the process of keeping my pregnancy viable? Maybe, but it's not my place to put my day on pause and tell the crazies screaming at me not to kill my baby that the baby killers inside were trying to keep my daughter healthy. Their heads would have exploded.

    Reply

  • IMJGalt

    IMJGalt

    March 10, 2015, 8:52 pm

    From your links

    Suez crisis

    In October 1951, the Egyptian government unilaterally abrogated the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936, the terms of which granted Britain a lease on the Suez base for 20 years.[14] Britain refused to withdraw from Suez relying upon its impinged treaty rights, as well as the sheer presence of the Suez garrison. The price of such a course of action was a steady escalation in increasingly violent hostility towards Britain, and British troops in Egypt, which the Egyptian authorities did little to curb.

    On 25 January 1952, British attempts to disarm a troublesome auxiliary police force barracks in Ismailia resulted in the deaths of 41 Egyptians[15]. This in turn led to anti-Western riots in Cairo resulting in heavy damage to property and the deaths of several foreigners, including 11 British citizens.[15] This proved to be a catalyst for the removal of the Egyptian monarchy. On 23 July 1952 a military coup by the 'Free Officers Movement'—led by Muhammad Neguib and future Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser—overthrew King Farouk and established an Egyptian republic.

    Since the establishment of Israel in 1948, cargo shipments to and from Israel were intercepted, removed or destroyed by the Egyptians while attempting to pass through the Suez Canal. On 1 September 1951, the UN Security Council called upon Egypt: "... to terminate the restrictions on the passage of international commercial ships and goods through the Suez Canal, wherever bound, and to cease all interference with such shipping." This interference, contrary to the laws of the canal (Article 1 of the 1888 Suez Canal Convention), increased following the coup. For example, on 31 October 1952, a cargo of meat was confiscated; on 2 September 1953, 500 tons of asphalt and a number of Israel-assembled cars were detained; on 4 November 1953, two boats destined for Italy were removed; on 28 September 1954 a shipment of 93 tons of meat, 42 tons of plywood and 30 tons of hides was confiscated, and the crew thrown in jail. On 8 July 1955, a Dutch ship was detained en route to Haifa. Part of its cargo was confiscated. On 25 May 1956, a Greek ship en route to Eilat was detained in the Suez Canal with a cargo of 520 tons of cement. The crew was not allowed ashore for three months despite a severe shortage of water and the spread of illness.

    Six Day war

    On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), as well as four independent infantry and four independent armored brigades. No less than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.[107] At the same time some Egyptian troops (15,000 - 20,000) were still fighting in Yemen.[108][109][110][111] Nasser's ambivalence about his goals and objectives was reflected in his orders to the military. The general staff changed the operational plan four times in May 1967, each change requiring the redeployment of troops, with the inevitable toll on both men and vehicles. Towards the end of May, Nasser finally forbade the general staff from proceeding with the Qahir ("Victory") plan, which called for a light infantry screen in the forward fortifications with the bulk of the forces held back to conduct a massive counterattack against the main Israeli advance when identified, and ordered a forward defense of the Sinai.[112] In the meantime, he continued to take actions intended to increase the level of mobilization of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, in order to bring pressure on Israel.

    Syria's army had a total strength of 75,000.[113] Jordan's army had 55,000 troops,[114] including 300 tanks, 250 of which were US M48 Patton, sizable amounts of M113 APCs, a new battalion of mechanized infantry, and a paratrooper battalion trained in the new US-built school. They also had 12 battalions of artillery and six batteries of 81 mm and 120 mm mortars.[91]

    Documents captured by the Israelis from various Jordanian command posts record orders from the end of May for the Hashemite Brigade to capture Ramot Burj Bir Mai'in in a night raid, codenamed "Operation Khaled". The aim was to establish a bridgehead together with positions in Latrun for an armored capture of Lod and Ramle. The "go" codeword was Sa'ek and end was Nasser. The Jordanians also planned for the capture of Motza and Sha'alvim in the strategic Jerusalem Corridor. Motza was tasked to Infantry Brigade 27 camped near Ma'ale Adummim: "The reserve brigade will commence a nighttime infiltration onto Motza, will destroy it to the foundation, and won't leave a remnant or refugee from among its 800 residents".[91]

    100 Iraqi tanks and an infantry division were readied near the Jordanian border. Two squadrons of fighter-aircraft, Hawker Hunters and MiG 21 respectively, were rebased adjacent to the Jordanian border.[91]

    82 Lebanon War

    On 10 July 1981, violence erupted in South Lebanon and Northern Israel. Israel renewed its air strikes and after five days, the PLO began shelling northern Israel.[7] On July 17, the Israel Air Force launched a massive attack on PLO buildings in downtown Beirut. "Perhaps as many as three hundred died, and eight hundred were wounded, the great majority of them civilians."[8] The Israeli army also heavily targeted PLO positions in south Lebanon without success in suppressing[weasel words][dubious – discuss] Palestinian rocket launchers and guns. The strategy of the PLO, years later copied by Hezbollah, consisted of widely dispersing artillery and ammunition stockpiles, which largely neutralized the far more powerful Israeli aircraft and artillery. As a result, thousands of Israeli citizens who resided near the Lebanese border headed south. On 24 July 1981, United States envoy Philip Habib brokered a ceasefire badly needed by both parties. Between July 1981 and June 1982, the Lebanese-Israeli border "enjoyed a state of calm unprecedented since 1968."[9]

    Gaza War

    On 27 December Israel began a bombardment of the Gaza Strip with the stated aim of stopping rocket attacks from and arms smuggling into the Gaza Strip. Israeli forces targeted Hamas military infrastructure including bases of operation, arms smuggling tunnels, weapons storge facilities, rocket launchers, para military training camps and headquarters. Hamas intensified its indiscriminate rocket and mortar attacks against civilian targets in Israel throughout the conflict, hitting previously avoided cities such as Beersheba and Ashdod.[22]

    Reply

  • Eat_the_Rich

    Eat_the_Rich

    March 11, 2015, 6:32 am

    To be honest, I'm not sure of the totals. I do know that for corporate money, Obama outdid McCain.

    But does it really matter if smaller, individual donations totaled more than corporate donations? No. The way plutocracy works is that big money gets attention.

    If you and I and 50 million other people all donate $20 to Obama's campaign, we will be ignored. We are not organized and one person's voice who contributed $20 is nothing.

    Compare that to one corporate donor who bundles $500,000 together and has a lobbyist to knock on doors constantly. Who is going to be paid attention to? Who is going to get their phone calls returned? Who can wield *real* political power and influence?

    Reply

Leave a comment