The lower elements of man are the primary advocates of forced equality. They work to drag down the capable so that they can reside in a world that in their eyes is a more just world, a world where capable man is forced downward and incapable man is lifted up.

They do not place the onus for betterment on the individual but make it a task for those who are effective and thus reduce capable mans place in the world to mere subsidizers of lower man. Stealing from them their freedom and their right to achieve and giving these to lower man like some kind of penance for their success.

Only in a world completely infected with psychosis could such a conception be considered charity and therefore righteous behavior for the modern man.

Virgin Media is set to delve into users’ traffic looking for copyright infringement, in the online equivalent of opening your post and not telling you. It’s the first ISP to try deep packet inspection with the controversial Detica CView technology, which will ascertain levels of illegal music file sharing across the Virgin network.

The trial will see Virgin monitoring 40 per cent of its customers, but none of these customers will be informed whether they are being checked out. Virgin insist that any data accumulated will be anonymous.

The technology used is called CView, created by a company called Detica and based on the same technology that powered the controversial Phorm. CView looks at Web traffic, spots peer-to-peer packets, and takes a look inside. It then collects data if the files being shared are considered to be infringing copyright, based on information from record companies. It’s the equivalent of the Royal Mail opening every parcel to see if there’s a CD inside, and making a note if there isn’t a receipt in there too.

The data is anonymised and totalled up, as the goal is an overall picture of the extent of the problem. Virgin reckons no human will be able to access information on individual users. Individual users will not be penalised during this trial if material is found that CView thinks infringes copyright.

This is the sort of information ISPs could be required to collect in order to satisfy the Digital Economy Bill. Ofcom is reportedly considering CView to measure the 70 per cent reduction in piracy that will count infringement notification as a success. If this nebulous target isn’t met, the government will open the way for rights holders to take users to court and have them disconnected.

The Digital Economy Bill makes this kind of thing seem a sad inevitability.

So, I was reading this boring Catholic newspaper that we get every week. I got really pissed off because the archbishops are trying to defend marriage. The definition of marriage is the union of a man and a woman. On the front cover they can’t even say same-sex marriage in that article, because they probably think it’s some kind of taboo!

Sunday, November 29th, is supposed to be a day of prayer for the vocation and sacrament of marriage. That is horrible… the church is using prayer against something. That is so sacreligious. Pray against gay marriage? Well I hope we don’t have to when I go to mass to sing on Sunday! On November 29th (tomorrow), I am going to pray for the gay community, that the Catholic church will stop rejecting them and that they may be able to have their marriage. It’s all about love not gender! I think Jesus would accept everyone for who they are. These are our short lived years on Earth, so we need to make them last. Life is just a moment, so we should try to spend it accepting and respecting others so we will still be happy after our time on Earth is complete.

So I bet you are all thinking I’m gay now. Well I’m not. I’m just like, the anti-homophobia Nazi. Back to the main topic now. These silly bishops think that people are focused on satisfaction and not the Gospel. WTF!!! It’s love, you can’t mess with that. I am so angry. I feel like sometimes we just need to take out the things we don’t like about our religion and use what works for us.

So… War, poverty, and what is the church so focused on rebelling against? Gay marriage.

It’s about love, not gender.

Gary McKinnon, Asperger Syndrome, obsession with UFOs, and the wounded pride of Empire

by Jim Gordon

Update, November 28, 2009.

The most recent decision by the Home Secretary to allow the extradition of Gary Mackinnon to the United States is not surprising. The absence of ethical content and responsible moral control in the decisions of the current government, its wholesale capitulation to the demands of the United States that US security concerns give carte blanche for political and military pressures, and that country’s now expedient assertions about the importance of international law, come together against the ironic and morally tragic exposure of US and UK complicity that now forces seasoned diplomats, facing public enquiry, to openly question the legality and legitimacy of the war in Iraq.

I have little to add to the reflections I offered in August. Except this. I am ashamed of the failure of the UK government to protect its own citizen. I am ashamed of the lack of moral courage and legal wisdom on the part of the Home Secretary and the Government which, if they are now over a barrel because of a bad law, were the very Government that drove through its approval. Either way, Gary Mackinnon should not be the one to bear the cost of ill conceived legislation enacted by a supine legislature administered by a domesticated administration.

Gary Mackinnon’s mother asks the right question – if her son’s Asperger’s condition and his current distress, which no one denies, do not constitute a fundamental threat to his well-being such that it compromises his human rights, then what in fact does? “How does a British citizen claim asylum in his own country?” is one of those twisted legal questions that exposes the nonsense of the Home Secretary’s position. Rightly, this country does not send people away if they face a credible theat of serious harm abroad. We have had no medical report published by the Home Office indicating Gary Mackinnon’s health will withstand the trauma of extradition. The impact of edxtradition, trial and sentence on a person with autism whose sense of self and the world is so fundamentally different, is so obviously severe that it would rightly be called inhumane. At which point I want to repeat here my post from August 1, and stand by each word of it.

…………………………………………………..

Disquiet. Unease.
A persistent mood of ethical anxiety.
Discomfort like toothache of the conscience.
Awakening suspicion that something is wrong.
Hard to place and hard to ignore anger.
An inner resistance to saying nothing.

1. No one denies that Gary McKinnon hacked into US computerised defence systems.
2. Computer hacking is bad enough. But to compromise high level national security systems is by any standards a matter of serious concern. In most cases it is also a matter of criminal intent and is rightly treated as such by the relevant legal and judicial systems. (Perhaps the vulnerability of such high level computer systems to attack from an amateur UFO researcher in the UK raises questions of incompetence or negligence which are themselves definable as criminal).
3. Extradition is an important legal process of national co-operation and of reciprocal help between nations in ensuring that it isn’t possible for people to escape justice by virtue of living in another country. But for a nation to give up its citizens to another such laws need to be secure, fair, reciprocal and reviewable to avoid anomalies and injustice.
4. National security is the top of the agenda concern for the Unitred States for reasons that are obvious; the 9/11 attack and the determination to secure again the safety of the homeland, and as its inevitable corollary, the widespread hostility to the US and the UK amongst many Muslim countries and communities, many of the radicalised, following the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions by US and UK troops backed by other non Muslim nations.

So for Gary McKinnon to breach the supposedly elaborate security hardware and software of the Pentagon and other defence facilities, with their lauded military standard fail-safe systems, at such a sensitive time, raises questions that are both worrying and embarrassing for the United States and its global reputation. Somebody needs to pay.

Add now to these observations the equally undisputed fact that Gary McKinnon is a person with Asperger syndrome, obsessive about UFOs, and that his patterns of behaviour are classic expressions of a condition that essentially defines his way of relating to the world. Then ask what questions this raises about the legal and moral implications of a decision to extradite him to the United States, to stand trial for actions he does not deny, but which are explained by a pre-existing condition that is by definition related to compulsive behavioural patterns, and when the likeliest outcome is an inevitable and long jail sentence.

And this because the UK has a treaty with the United States intended to ensure co-operation in dealing with serious crime and terrorist threats, but which was intended for people with ambitions to kill, not persons with an autistic spectrum disorder. Add to this that UK Judges, charged with upholding the law, while acknowledging the severe impact of extradition on this man’s mental health, which they themselves admit may be life-threatening, suggest nevertheless it would not be a breach of his human rights to extradite him to the United States. I find it profoundly ironic that Judges appointed to uphold law, including international and human rights law, take at face value “assurances of appropriate care”, on the very same day it is reported that evidence about whether or not the CIA and british Intelligence knew of or were involved, directly or indirectly, in the mistreatment and alleged torture of a British citizen, could not be heard in a UK court, on the direct intervention of Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State. Human rights indeed! I am not reassured by the cynical ambiguity of the term “appropriate care” for someone who has so embarrassed the might of the United States, and whom the US sees as a continuing security threat.

I’m not arguing that Gary McKinnon should not face up to the consequences of what he did. He himself recognises that. But given his condition, there are issues of justice here that are deeper than the desire to put on trial, convict, sentence and make the public power statement that seems to be so important to the US authorities pursuing this extradition. The law is not there to serve the political interests of Empire, as instruments of power at the disposal of the state. Justice fundamentally involves using just laws justly, and for the purposes they were intended. Justice, and therefore moral and legal accountability, takes into consideration a person’s capacities, intentions and ability to recognise how personal acts have social consequences. The proper administration of justice requires the law to take into account the reality of a person’s medical condition and the impact of that condition, in this case autism, on a person’s recognition of boundaries and the overall context of their actions – or why not arrest and try persons with Tourette syndrome for using obscene language in public space? As David Cameron said yesterday, in the application of law, justice is not incompatible with compassion in our ways of dealing with people. That is particularly important in a world where compassion now seems to be massively discounted, and hard edged “justice” understood as legal retribution is considered a high value virtue. Mercy does not undermine law, it enhances its authority, demonstrates its value to the community, and quality assures its expression for the public good.

What I miss in the judgement of the judges, and in the reiterated refusal of the Home Secretary to allow a trial in the UK, is the moral courage to discern more deeply, the mature wisdom to decide more humanely, and thus to raise our respect for the law as that which serves us fairly and well. Under this present Government, for all its hyped up claims about making our country more secure, our own citizens are considerably less safe. In the political and cultural background, can be heard the remorseless grind of the machinery of Empire, armoured and determined that those who threaten it will feel the full force of the law. Even when a particular law is badly framed, inadequately qualified and increasingly recognised as open to political manipulation.

That’s why I’m suffering from

Disquiet. Unease.
A persistent mood of ethical anxiety.
Discomfort like toothache of the conscience.
Awakening suspicion that something is wrong.
Hard to place and hard to ignore anger.
An inner resistance to saying nothing.

Not wanting to call out the doldrums of boredom, but I may be speaking from.

Economics are matters most of us rather not contemplate.  We do quick rants, throw down the gauntlets of our disgust in a quiet -or flamed- tirade, and then go on about our lives striving for happiness in varying forms.

After digesting my earlier words, and reading an article where the Supreme Court of Canada voted 6-3 in favour of Wal-Mart being ‘just’ in closing a store in Jonquiere, Quebec after the employees voted in favour of unionizing.  Now, I will admit from a strict stance one would have to assume Wal-Mart closed down as a response to say they denied their employees of their Charter rights of unionizing.  One would be fairly naive to believe it was completely circumstantial that they closed down the same day, after spending millions building the store, that it did not have anything to do with the employee’s voting in favour of their right.

Of course, judge’s are not this naive, and can draw a logical conclusion when demanded.  Not being this naive they cited Quebec labour laws which -if at all they found a direct conclusion of Wal-Mart closing as a response- must be in contradiction with the Charter of Rights in Canada.  If I am right in my readings of this then the ‘top court’ should have still backed the employee’s rights and that ruling would have forced Quebec to revise its section of the labour code.

My personal opinion, slanted with my ideological bias.

***

There has been a radical shift in sentiment towards the merit of unions in the years.

Do they hurt business?

They, obviously, will if we take a stance that a corporation is morally neutral and, only, profit-oriented.   Simple economics dictate this.  Has globalization (trade-agreements) changed the dynamics to where companies operating with a union representing their employees causes them to be unable to compete?  I would suggest if the gap in Canada between the rich-and-poor is widening then executive salaries are, also, hurting their ability to compete.

Of course, my ideological slant, that progress in society is not wealth based on merit, but simply equitable living for all not based entirely on merit.  Somewhere in this speaks of a middle ground.  My logical side would say we are moving away from this if the gap is widening.

One must make an assumption of human nature to say that if someone is protected (in this case protected by their union membership) they will become lazy.  A natural association, of course, but I was also taught a simple moral when I was young that I should not presume guilt of an individual based on the gander.

***

This points to another fascinating question . . . what is progress?

Divisive behaviour, upon my definitions, would not be progress.  Generating wealth for only selected people is not progress.  Ignoring rights is far from progress.  Keeping a system alive only to benefit a handful of people would certainly fall very short of my definition.  Justifying denying rights based off this even further.

Are both sides guilty of divisive behaviour?  How could they not be.

Do human beings look after their own lot?  Yes, and no.  Drawn into divisive patterns – of course they do.  The spirit of charity and helping speaks volumes against this notion.  Then why must we assume only negative human nature when discussing these issues?  The language used always seems to land in the divisive nature of sides.  Us versus them.

Can we find ways to protect rights, live equitably -seemingly requiring an equilibrium- and progress as a whole?  I would actually rather rid of the need of a union than side with one.  Do I see us there yet?  No, the gap seems to indicate far from.  A union keeps a balance of power on employers.  Ultimately, an employer needs an employee as much as employee needs an employer – wishful thinking would think that alone would create an equilibrium.

Lack of equilibrium seemingly stems from us valuing innovation.  What innovative idea is widening the gap?  Sure, I want to inspire people to become doctors and a certain amount of remuneration does provide this.   A doctor does have to spend years studying, and with rising education costs, one could assume remuneration should be considered here as well.  A competing want of mine says that I would hope a doctor also has a genuine want to help outside of economic remuneration.

I do not want to diminish merit.  Merit should be working for equitable living wages for all.

Ahh, arguing myself into circles.  I will allow myself to cut this off with only this thought . . .

The path to happiness seems to be through oneself, and not based off measurement of wealth – but the circumstances allowing one to achieve this is determined outside.

In the United States, many individuals are making money through a process that is known as private label resell rights.  Private label resell rights are a special type of business opportunity.  It is an opportunity that has a lot of potential; however, to be successful, you must first know what you are doing.

Private label resell rights are available on a wide variety of different products. Despite the wide variety of different products, e-books and software programs are the most popular. With private label resell rights, the original product creator either does not have the time or the money needed to market and sell their product. Instead of selling their product to prospective customers, they sell the rights to someone who has knowledge and the time to sell their product. There is a good chance that you can be that person.

The first step in taking part in this opportunity is to find a product with available resell rights. As previously mentioned, this product is often an e-book or a software program. Before agreeing to purchase the resell rights to a private label product, you are advised to know what you are purchasing.  Not only will you want to make sure that the product is a quality one, but you will also need to make sure that it is one that will sell.  Since you will be purchasing the resell rights to this product, you will not want to waste your money on something that you cannot use. 

As soon as you purchase the resell rights to a product you may be able to begin selling it; however, additional steps may need to be taken.  For instance, private label resell rights often require you to change the product, which you just purchased the resell rights to. This change is often minimal, but it is sometimes required. The last thing that you may want to do is alter a perfect product, but in a way it may be able to help you. After this alteration, you may be able to claim the product as your own. This means that you could officially be the author of an e-book or a software developer. 

Once the additional steps, if any are required, are taken, you can then begin to sell your product.  Unfortunately, this is where many individuals go wrong. The only way that you will make money is if the product sells; therefore, you need to find and use an effective selling method.  There are a number of different methods that you can use; however, you may find your own website to be the most beneficial. This website can not only be used to provide information on your product, but it can also be used to purchase it.

When it comes to developing a website, there are many individuals who are unfamiliar with web design.  If you are one of those individuals, you will have a number of alternatives. One of those alternatives includes the assistance of a professional website developer or designer. For a fee, you should be able to have a professional design your website for you. If you are looking for a low-cost way to develop your own website, you are urged to choose a web hosting plan that includes a free site builder.

When building your website, you will want to add information on the product in which you are selling. If you are selling an e-book, you may not only want to give a description of your book, but a few samples. These samples, also often referred to as inserts, will allow your potential customers to determine whether or not your product is worth the buy. In addition to adding product descriptions, samples, and pictures, you will also want to add a shopping cart. This feature, provided by most web hosting companies, will allow you sell your product right off of your website.

For a small amount of money, you will have a way to not only sell your product, but market it as well. After you have created your website, you will find that customers make their way to you, thanks to search engines.  In time, you should be able to sell your product and make a substantial profit.

Image : http://www.flickr.com

Getting into a car accident can be frustrating.
Normally, in a city, you do not know, a state with laws that you
unfamiliar and take someone else's car. This is a formula
that you can have a big headache. Here is an overview of how rental car
Accidental damage received, handled and settled.

If you rent a vehicle, the owner will ask
your proof ofInsurance. Many of them will ask for your
Declarations page. You want to see what coverages you have. They are
have liability, collision and comprehensive, in your policy.
The liability is because it is a legal requirement, but collision and comprehensive
going to protect the car. 99% of the company from where it is
Reporting on the rental car and the owner knows, dass

RentalCompanies want to be, how much do you know
is deductible. Your deductible is the portion of the losses that you "own
Insurance ". For example, if the damage on the car is $ 5000 and your deductible
is $ 500, then the insurance company paid only $ 4,500 ($ 5000 – $ 500
Deductible), you must pay the $ 500 out of pocket. Many car rental companies
will require that your deductible is less than $ 500 or you need to buy
additional insurance from theTime for the rental of the vehicle.

If you rent the car, then brokers will ask whether
You want additional insurance. Three things can happen: They reject any together, you
buy additional insurance, or you buy a comprehensive cover. Depending on which
Select option, the car accident varies Their
Insurance company.

First, if you decline all together, then you have better
an active policy thatoffer first-party coverage for the rental car. Your
Insurance Company is responsible for paying the rent for the company
Rental cars, but these payments are subject to all conditions of your policy.
This means that your deductible must apply and pay you that
to the landlord at the front. It does not matter that you are not wrong
for the accident, the car rentalis entitled to the vehicle in the amount of the
soon as possible. Your insurance will be on the hunt for the responsible
Responsible

The limitations of your policy may result in multiple
Problems. Mainly it is about the loss of use,

Click here to learn more about the LOU, a car accident. If you
not carry rental coverage on your policy, you owe the rental expenses for
the landlord is as ifThey had to rent a car. If the vehicle in five
Remove tag, then you are guilty of five days hire. Also bear if you
Loss of use coverage (Cars cover) in your policy, but the limit
below what the car for the pension, then the difference would be to thank. For
So cover your rent $ 40 per day, but the car costs $ 50 per
Day, you owe the $ 10Difference between the two.

Secondly, to buy "extra" insurance. This is where things
may be a bit more complicated. The insurance adjuster needs to look at actual policy
That you have purchased (not for you if you sign). The terms of that policy will
to determine how each of the accident. Some rental insurance coverage
full coverage of all car accident, as long as you pay the
Premium. You would the car, theYou make (if you're at fault) and the
Car damage. We could have a deductible. Your insurance company
Step is usually a secondary form of coverage for the rental car
Insurance limits are so low. However, you must read for both insurance
Policies together to see that would be a first and we would pay as a pay
secondary.

Last, you buy life insurance. Many people
You saythat this coverage for your deductible. That is not true. If you
rent a car, you declare that you return the vehicle as it is given you.
You also agree that in case of a car accident, you pay for the car.
A collision damage waiver waives the provision of your
Contract. This means that you are no longer responsible for the car.
However, you must still submit a claimfor your medical bills (in case of
Injuries) and defend you or pay for the car made (if you) for errors.

Recommend : DIY home motorcyclesnetwork.wordpress.com vancarnetwork.blogspot.com beautynetwork.wordpress.com

What do we want? EQUAL RIGHTS
When do we want it? NOW
What are we going to do to get it? FIGHT FOR IT!
Quite a few people turned out for the equal marriage rights rally in Sydney.

Consider the following “hypothetical:”

-how much incentive is there for reporters to investigate “fishy” incidents involving celebrity athletes if the networks they work for are subsidized by companies who sponsor the athletes they cover?

Said differently,

-if company “X” is paying “X” athlete “X” dollars to use their products and that same company pays “X” network “X” advertising dollars, how motivated will that network be to uncover “inconvenient truths” about “X” athlete?

Say what you will about public figures and private lives. There is a price to be paid. And silly questions from an accidental observer.

Joshua Fattal (27) - American Jew hicker in Iran

Sara Shourd   (31) - American Jew hicker in Iran 

Shane Bauer (27)-American Jew  hicker in Iran

Yaghoghil Shaolian   (19) – Local Iranian Jew 

Accused of acting against national security – Espionage

It has been 120 days since three American hikers were detained in Iran.

The trio reportedly crossed over to Iran during a hiking trip near Kurdistan Iraq.

The Iranian government has accused them of espionage.

It has been 166 days since Yaghoghil Shaolian was detained in Iran, a member of Iran’s Jewish community, was not an activist, did not join the protests, but got caught up in the moment and threw some stones at a Tehran bank branch, in central Tehran on June 14, 2009, during unrests after June 12 presidential election in Iran.

Yaghoghil was arrested, accused of acting against national security – Espionage, resulting in his conviction and was sentenced to two and half years in prison.

An international effort is seeking more information about the FOUR defendants, and will raise concerns with the Iranian authorities, since those convicted and sentenced appear to have been denied a fair trial. 

The Iranian government has accused them of espionage.

For more detailed information, photos, videos/audios, and links

click –> HEAR

and –> HEAR

International Affairs blogs & blog posts

Blog search directory

a2a_linkname=”Forgotten convicted ones – 4 Jews “;a2a_linkurl=”http://lionpuppyheart.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/forgotten-convicted-ones-4-jews/”;

digg_id = ‘digg-widget-container’; //make this id unique for each widget you put on a single page.
digg_theme = ‘digg-widget-theme2′;
digg_title = ‘Top 10 list from All Topics’;

Top Stories

we are in Canadae.ca News Blog

we are in Canadae.ca News Blog

if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget(‘a7ee487f-e182-40de-a186-62a2f2699787′);Get the Diamond Taxi Veteran Driver Stories widget and many other great free widgets at Widgetbox! Not seeing a widget? (More info)

if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget(‘32dfbcd0-4423-4f52-bbfa-07071cd4d596′);Get the Diamond Taxi Veteran Driver Stories widget and many other great free widgets at Widgetbox! Not seeing a widget? (More info)

if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget(‘0a9f0a83-14c2-4e5d-8d58-7ee60e5da65b’);Get the IRAN FREEDOM widget and many other great free widgets at Widgetbox! Not seeing a widget? (More info)

if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget(‘7dc38642-b32f-4713-852d-68c60c0c7fe9′);Get the Press TV widget and many other great free widgets at Widgetbox! Not seeing a widget? (More info)

Blog Search Engine

we are in Canadae.ca News Blog

Canadae: Canada’s search engine

Length: 3:23

Related: state; sovereignty; nation; nation-state

Dickerson, Mark et. al. An Introduction to Government and Politics (8th ed.). Canada: Nelson Education, 2010.

pregnancy homeopathic

As a starting point one affair should be fabricated actual clear You cannot be discriminated adjoin pregnancy homeopathic for actuality pregnant You cannot be fired. You cannot be banned employment. You cannot be demoted. You cannot be Pregnancy Remedy docked Cure For Infertility pay.

Unfortunately it seems to be a adequately accepted accident that already a woman becomes abundant her aforetime nice and reasonable employer treats her differently. Treating a woman abnormally – unless it’s to say how alarming it is that she’s abundant – is acceptable to be illegal. In Congress allowable Pregnancy Homeopathic the Abundance Bigotry Act PDA as an alteration to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of . In accomplishing Pregnancy Homeopathic so Congress fabricated bright that women were not to be punished for acceptable mothers.

The PDA prohibits Pregnancy Homeopathic bigotry in areas and ways including

• Hiring/Firing An employer cannot debris to appoint a woman because of her abundance or a accompanying action and cannot blaze a woman for those things either.
• Pregnancy Maternity Leave An employer cannot distinct out abundant women for appropriate procedures to actuate her adeptness to work allegation authority accessible the job while she is on abundance leave allegation amusement her the aforementioned as any briefly disabled artisan if she is clumsy to accomplish her duties for a abbreviate time allegation acquiesce her to assignment if she Cure For Infertility is able.
• Health Insurance Employer provided bloom allowance allegation awning abundance and pregnancy-related altitude on the aforementioned base as added medical issues.
• Fringe Benefits Allowances cannot be accustomed alone to affiliated couples. Allowances cannot be provided abnormally to abundant and non-pregnant employees. Seniority vacation pay acting affliction benefits allegation all be the aforementioned as all added employees.

This account is not all inclusive. See an advocate Pregnancy Cures if you feel as if you have or are adversity some array of mistreatment.

Additionally the law prevents backfire for accusatory about bigotry either to your employer or to the EEOC. States and bounded governments may additionally accept laws that are agnate to the PDA.

For example in Illinois the burghal of Chicago Cook County and the accompaniment of Illinois all accept laws advised to anticipate or antidote abundance discrimination. There are additionally authoritative forums at anniversary of these levels adherent to audition claims of bigotry and Pregnancy Remedy accouterment remedies including budgetary damages.

Women who suffer or accept that they may accept suffered bigotry allegation to book a allegation of bigotry with the Pregnancy Cures EEOC aural canicule of the date of the aftermost act of discrimination. Pregnancy Cures The assorted bounded and accompaniment agencies may accept altered filing times but abounding mirror the day filing affirmation set by the federal Cure For Infertility government as able-bodied as the types of bigotry advised illegal. Missing the filing date may annihilate pregnancy homeopathic the women’s appropriate to sue so accurate absorption allegation be paid to the date or dates the act of bigotry took place.

As always it’s best to argue a bounded advocate about a affirmation of bigotry but these forums will acquiesce a woman to book her affirmation after a advocate and some will investigate the claims application accomplished personnel.

Its been a while since I had a play with this script but what I have discovered is the software that I used to find out who has admin rights seems to also detect power users as Administrators. Which I guess is actually a good thing, however I did not suspect to get quite as many hits as I did for power users.

I’ll link all my old posts on the subject below so you can compare notes but the script that I have created now needs to include:

net localgroup “power users” %username% /delete > “%userprofile%\pwrusr.txt”

and

Y:\BLAT\BLAT %userprofile%\pwrusr.TXT -to email@address.com -server <smtp server IP> -f mail@address.com

Of course if you don’t want to be notified when these scripts run then you wont need the blat portion of the script and if you really don’t care about knowing if the initial check script has run then I guess you could just push out a script in the order of:

@echo off

c:

cd “%userprofile%”

If exist delusr1.txt (exit) else goto :Script

:Script

rem for removing admin Privileges

net localgroup administrators %username% /delete > %userprofile%\delusr1.txt

net localgroup “power users” %username% /delete > %userprofile%\pwrusr.txt

exit

This would then run regardless and attempt to remove the locally logged in user from power users and administrators groups. This would need to be assigned to just standard users though as you do not want to assign the script to administrators in your directory (be it AD, ED or maybe OpenLDAP).

Again this script is just the way I have chosen to do it, I am no expert in script writing (I really do need to figure out Vbscript), so I’m sure there are better ways of doing this.

Admin Script pt1

The oil rich Saudi’s have such little confidence in the world markets, they are on a land-grab mission in Africa to grow their own food.  In Ethiopia, the Meles regime is so confident that aid will feed its increasingly food insecure population, it is having a fire sale on the country’s fertile land.

by Nikki S, Transgender Columnist

	The new Ontario Driver’s License – easier to change than a passport.

The line stretches around the corner of the office, and moves predictably slowly; like most government bureaus, efficiency is the least of their concerns. However, I wait patiently in line, trying to contain my excitement.

I glance around at the other people in the Ministry of Transportation office, trying to guess why they’re here. The lady behind me with her obnoxious two-year-old seems like she’s just updating her sticker, and can’t get out of there soon enough. The elderly gentleman in front of me is quietly reciting the letters on the eye chart, in hopes that he can prove his eyesight is clear enough to retain his license. And then there’s the impatient yuppie at the back of the line, complaining about having to smog-test his Porsche.

I smile, because my business is of an entirely different nature. I’m not here for a license renewal, sticker, or smog test – these concerns seem downright trivial by comparison. This is a major rite of passage for me, an experience that every transsexual yearns for; I am preparing to receive my first official, government-issued, female ID.

I’ve read the web page hundreds of times, so I know exactly what to bring with me. I have a letter to the MTO, indicating my request for a permanent change to my gender designation. I have a letter from my doctor, who verifies that the change is appropriate. I have my legal name change form, my vehicle ownership, and my old driver’s license. Finally, I have a printout of the MTO web page, explaining the MTO’s policy on Gender Designation Change — Found herein: LINK

Finally, I reach the front of the line, and approach the girl at the counter. She’s obviously a temp, on summer vacation from high school; she’s disinterested and eagerly awaiting her lunch break. She looks up at me, bored look on her face, and asks me in that bureaucratic monotone where all the words seem to run together, “hi-how-can-I-help-you. ”

Excited, yet relaxed, I hand the pile of papers to the girl, with the MTO page on top. I smile, and say, “I’d like to get this change processed, please.” I watch, slightly amused, as she reads the Gender Designation Change web page, blinks twice, and looks up at me, face filled with surprise. She looks back at the page, back up at me, back at the page, and calls her supervisor over to the desk.

The supervisor walks over, with the same bored look on her face. She reads over the top page, and gives me a double-take of her own; then, she flips through the rest of the paperwork, trying to balance her surprise and confusion with her desire to maintain a professional demeanour. When they finally see the picture on my now-ancient license, both their jaws drop to the floor, and the temp nearly falls out of her chair.

Moments like these used to feel awkward and uncomfortable; I’ve never met any transsexual who enjoys “outing” themselves, particularly in a government office or public place. However, I’ve found that, no matter how awkward it feels for me, it’s usually much harder for the person I’m dealing with. Most people are good-natured and decent, generally tolerant and accepting, but when they’re caught by surprise, they don’t know how to react. They get flustered easily, and they’re afraid of saying or doing the wrong thing. But a little bit of understanding – in both directions – goes a long way.

So, I lean in towards the counter, and say softly, “look, I’m sure this isn’t the type of request you process every day, so take your time, make sure everything’s there, and we’ll get through this, ok?” I smile warmly, and both the supervisor and temp relax. The supervisor takes one more look through my documents, and says, “Ok, everything looks good, so let’s get this taken care of.” She smiles, meeting my eyes for the first time, and walks away.

After that, the temp flies through the paperwork with a big smile, and a twinkle in her eye. She takes a new picture, gets me to sign the forms authorizing the name and gender change, and prints out a new vehicle ownership form. Finally, she prints out a new Temporary Driver’s License – slightly different name, slightly different Driver’s License number, and very different sex designation – an “F” where there was once an “M.” She tells me that I should expect the picture card within 3-6 weeks, and wishes me a wonderful afternoon.

I thank her for her patience and understanding, and wish her a nice day as well. I gather my papers, smile at her once more, and leave the MTO. My heels click loudly on the linoleum, but I feel as if I’m walking on air. It’s hard to contain the elation I feel, but I find myself making one last, frivolous wish as I walk through the door. .

Oh, how I wish I could be a fly on the wall of the lunchroom when she goes on break!

It’s funny how our society regulates gender so rigidly. Some pieces, like a Driver’s License or passport, make it very difficult to change. Other pieces, like a SIN card or the old red-and-white Health Card, don’t even bother to display gender at all. When someone asks for ID, most people barely even glance at “sex” because they’re focused on the name, date of birth, and picture. But when your legally-assigned sex doesn’t match your presentation, every request for ID holds the potential for embarrassment or humiliation, and feels like a gross invasion of privacy.

So why do we even ask for sex in the first place? Is it because we’re so used to putting ourselves (and others) into easily-understood boxes, and we never stop to think why these boxes exist? Is this to limit what men and women are allowed to do, and where they’re allowed to go? Does gender exist to dictate exactly what men and women are allowed to do with each other? Or is it simply a way of perpetuating the myth that there are only two biological sexes?

I don’t really have the answer to this question, but one thing is certain – most people are completely clueless as to what gender really means. It’s not simply about being “male” or “female,” nor is it a question of “masculine” or “feminine.” We’re all simply trying to perform our best imitation of what a “man” or “woman” is expected to be. However, the great tragedy is that nobody knows exactly what these terms really mean.

As Kate Bornstein says:

There’s no such thing as a typical man, or a typical woman – these terms change over time, and differ between cultures. There’s no perfect definition, no exact formula to “make” someone a man or woman – we’re just taking our best guess, and trying to copy the imperfect examples we see all around us.

What differentiates women from men in our society? Size? Shape? Other physical factors? Men, on average, are slightly larger than women, but there are plenty of small men and large women – there’s more variation amongst each group than there are differences between them. Long hair? Breasts? Clothes? Plenty of men grow their hair, and many develop breasts (called gynecomastia) during puberty due to hormonal overload. And fashion changes like the weather; look at clothing styles from the Renaissance, and try to picture someone dressing like that today.

Genitalia? What about the 1-4% of the population estimated to be intersex, with some combination of male and female genitalia? And what about someone who’s genitalia is altered by other factors? Does a man, who has an accident that destroys his penis, stop being a man? Does a woman, forced to have an emergency hysterectomy, stop being a woman? Obviously not, but these scenarios prove that genitals alone cannot determine one’s gender.

What about chromosomes? This might seem like the best way to tell the sexes apart, but any doctor will tell you that we’re much more diverse than simply XX or XY. There are countless variations, including XXY, XYY, XO, XXX, XXYY, and a whole range of others. One’s karyotype (genetic makeup) doesn’t always determine their gender either.

So, without anything that defines, beyond a shadow of a doubt, exactly what a “man” or “woman” actually means, how can we determine which box we have to fit ourselves into? Or what if neither box fits?

At the end of the day, you alone can make this decision. When you were born, your doctor took a quick peek, and announced, “It’s a ______!” And from that day forth, your whole life has been dictated by those expectations. If they fit for you, and feel comfortable, then the doctor probably guessed right. But if not, then it’s up to you to decide who you are – and how you decide to identify yourself.

About the writer:

Nikki S. is a transsexual scholar and writer, attending U of T for Sexual Diversity Studies and working towards her Master’s in Counselling Psychology. Her goal is to become a psychologist specializing in assisting with gender transition, and plans to continue volunteering in GLBT and Trans organizations.

She appears regularly as a Diamond Girl Dancer at Goodhandy’s in Toronto and The Lounge in Mississauga (see Ladyplus.com for details and schedule) and can be reached via e-mail at agora_nikki@hotmail.com.

Become a member of The Canadian Tgirl Newspaper, with your donation-pledge.  Help support independent, progressive, and not-for-profit journalism.

A very controversial topic in Malta, at this very moment, is freedom of expression. I am all out in favour of people expressing what they believe in, and that includes people with whom I totally disagree on what they have to say. However, quite frequently I’m asked: ‘Does this freedom include hate speech?’ Treating this issue is very delicate. People’s freedoms are extremely important but so is the protection of those to whom the speech is directed. Where should one draw the line?

Let’s start with what in my opinion should not even be considered as controversial – shocking and vulgar language. I find it completely ridiculous to censor something (for example the play ‘Stitching’ and ‘Realta’s newspaper) just because it contains parts or articles considered as vulgar and shocking. Who defines what terms fall into this category? Some board of whatever authority?

More controversial is offensive language. Here we are not talking about ‘nasty’ words, but words deliberately used to offend others on the basis of religion, race, sexual orientation and others. Should a Maltese Imam who compared homosexuals getting married to marrying cats and dogs be censored or face legal sanction? What about right wing extremists who call black people niggers? I know many will disagree with me on this, but I don’t believe these people should be censored or face criminal repercussions. Definitely they should be condemned, and if they aren’t it means we’re in trouble. The offended parties have the right to file libel. However they should have all the right to say it without fearing the authorities.

The next category is however different. I’m talking about what is termed as ‘fighting words’. These are used to overtly or subtly incite violence on the victims. The injured party is not just offended but threatened and put in danger. Had the Imam called for individuals or groups to harass homosexuals, or right if rightwing extremists to make a call to harass ‘niggers’, the story would have been very different.

An email that had been circulating a while ago shows a group of extremist Muslims in the UK calling for violence against a Danish cartoonist. In my opinion it is unacceptable to let these people protest and call for such action, even getting police protection for it. They are not ‘offending back’ the person who offended them. They are instigating violence towards him and his country. Though their demands are futile, intention is clear and in my opinion the protest should not only have been halted, but the ring leaders should have been filed criminal charges.

Right wing extremists sometimes also jump the line when it comes to freedom of speech. An example is the BNP who are not only allowed to voice their words, but two of them have been elected to the European Parliament. They don’t like a multicultural England, they deny the Holocaust, and even minimise what Hitler did: ‘Adolf just went a bit too far’. Disgusting as it is, I believe they have a right to say it. What they don’t have a right to is, for example, making an alliance with the Ku Klux Klan, an organisation responsible for thousands of deaths during the last hundred years, all based on racial prejudice. Asking these people their vote, telling them ‘they have the same objective but will have to use sweeter words’ is legitimising the Klan’s violence. On that basis, yes definitely the BNP should have faced criminal sanctions, even been prohibited from contesting elections.

Something that fascinates me is the comments sent daily to the online version of the Times of Malta. Some people repeatedly voice their opinion on African migrants, not only condemning illegal border crossing, but exposing their hatred towards these people. None of them is censored and as much as I despise (or sometimes laugh at) what they say I agree they should be allowed to voice their opinion. However occasionally they do cross the line. I remember a particular comment going something like this (referring to migrants in Britain and Malta): ‘The BNP will in the end take control because they have the support of the Army. Same should be done here’. The threat here is not so subtle. The author is definitely not talking about just the Army officials’ vote.

This topic is extremely delicate, and the line between what is acceptable or not is extremely thin. Thus I would like to make some things clear:

1) Though one may think in what s/he reads here and in most of the media that the issue of censorship is related mainly to race, religion and political correctness, this is not the case. These cases are the most controversial, thus newsworthy. In reality censorship is more often used in the form of trying to silence people like Mr Joe Falzon, MEPA’s auditor who want to expose serious illegalities at the expense of the Maltese taxpayer.

2) What I wrote here is my personal opinion. It does not necessarily reflect what Maltese or EU legislation states.

3) There are a lot of gray areas. For example what about psychological harassment? A recent case of a homosexual who had his house intruded by someone who sprayed the words ‘No Gays’ is not, in my opinion just a case of vandalism and trespassing but a hate crime. There was a deliberate (and successful) attempt at causing fear in the victim, even if there was no overt reference to violence. Once again, the million dollar question is, ‘Where does one cross the line?’