Open free email account aol,professional presentation language worksheets,how to do an embedded citation for a website mla,amazon promo code 2013 furniture - Test Out

admin 23.11.2013

This formal letter template is specifically tailored to provide a short notice to the addressee. This template was originally created by Rashadul Islam but has been extensively modified for this website. A Wisconsin Republican congressional hopeful warned Tuesday that a federal court ruling striking down the state's ban on same-sex marriage could lead to the legalization of marriage between siblings. According to the Tomah Journal, Mueller said that the ruling might set a precedent that any two people can marry: "We've got, for instance, two sisters, and these two sisters want to get married. I know it's a radical idea, but I don't think it would be a terrible thing if two sisters were allowed to enter into a legal contract that gave them access to all the same rights that a marriage would.
And I don't even care if that's called a marriage, because, unlike the people who caterwaul about the changing definition of marriage, I am aware of and willing to acknowledge the reality that every relationship called a marriage does not look the same or serve the same purpose. The only reason the word "marriage" indicates a special sort of relationship is because it's a legal right denied to some people. What makes any one relationship really, genuinely special is the people inside of it believing it's special. I suspect, depending on your position regarding undeserved privilege, you will either find that idea incredibly disappointing or incredibly cool. To extend marriage equality to two people of the same sex is not to say their relationship is special. Especially as long as we're still keen to deny some basic human rights, like healthcare, to everyone—while still making marriage a key means of accessing it. I realize that alarmist rhetoric like Karen Mueller's is supposed to bait me into agreeing that a line needs to be drawn somewhere, and lest I disappoint, I'll draw a line. Other than that, I'm pretty much on board with giving everyone access to the rights I enjoy.
Reminder: No Selves to Defend, the proceeds for which go to Marissa Alexander's defense fund, is available for purchase here. As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
Former Vice-President Dick Cheney says "the Obama administration is cutting defense to spend money on food stamps." And that's meant to be a criticism, lol.
There is absolutely no question that this ruling will further undermine abortion access, which state legislatures have been endeavoring to erode in every conceivable fashion. It also seems to violate the Supreme Court's own undue burden standard, unless the nine justices honestly believe it is not an undue burden for an abortion-seeking person to have to run a gauntlet of harassment and threats emanating from members of a domestic terrorist campaign in order to access a legal healthcare procedure. So I have been waiting to hear what our ostensibly pro-choice president has to say about this reprehensible ruling.
Surely he has something to say on behalf of "our mothers, wives, and daughters," and their right to bodily autonomy, safety, and choice. I am angry that this campaign of violence against women and others is allowed to go unchecked. I am angry that North Alabama's only abortion clinic is being forced to close its doors today.
And I'm angry that I don't have the power to do anything meaningful about it, so I am angry that my president is not speaking up, that he's not using his bully pulpit to be an ally to women. Today Show host Matt Lauer on Thursday asked General Motors CEO Mary Barra if she felt she could run a company and be a good mother during an interview about the company's controversial recalls. Lauer on Thursday afternoon defended his question to Barra about balancing her at work and with her family. Which is something about which men are never asked, despite Lauer's specious claim to the contrary.
A man would also never be asked a question like: "Hey, this company that hired you has some PR troubles at the moment. Even the thought of a male CEO being asked a question like that, being obliged to address the idea that he was only or primarily hired because he was a man, is absurd.
Despite the fact that lots of male CEOs probably have been hired in part because they're men. Lauer's question about Barra's ability to balance work and parenthood have been getting a lot of attention, and deservedly so, but, for me, it's the other part I find even more contemptible. There is no way that Lauer would ever even dare to claim he'd ask a male CEO sitting in front of him to account for and justify his hiring on the basis of his gender.
While our Republican Attorney General Greg Zoeller, who is the almighty worst, anxiously awaits to hear whether the court will grant him a stay on the ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in Indiana, MARRIAGES ARE GO.
Virtually every county in the state is now issuing same-sex marriage licenses and performing weddings. Because people are people, there has been some (although a lot less than I expected) hand-wringing in local media and on social media about the decision.
Well, some of the children are pretty goddamn happy that their parents are finally allowed to get married. Aiden Murphy, 11, smiles as his mothers Kimberly Trojan, left, and Jackie Cornell wait in a large crowd for their marriage license inside the City County Building, Wednesday, June 25, 2014. So, in addition to texting each other a steady stream of silly bullshit, Deeky and I also have a habit of tweeting ridiculous pictures at each other. To which I replied that I hated him, and then, "We're besties, like these two," followed by a picture of Statler and Waldorf from The Muppet Show.
Yes, that is the goddamned Guy Fieri skillet Deeky bought me for my birthday photoshopped into Nancy Reagan's hand.


Additionally, Vancouver's city council has unanimously voted "to acknowledge that the city is on unceded Aboriginal territory.
This time, he's taking the bold stance that the achievements of old white guys are talked about and lauded not because of bias, but because they are just the best at everything, all the time. There are about a million things wrong with this bullshit (feel free to tease all of them out in comments), but I'm going to focus on the ones that struck me first. Leaving aside that I can think of lots of examples to counter his shitty rhetorical question, his premise completely ignores institutional barriers (such as lack of funding, active exclusion, and purposeful erasure) to women seeking education and practicing talents in a hell of a lot of countries for a hell of a long time, while simultaneously denying the existence of languages other than English in which non-white dudes are considered some of the greatest poets ever. The fictional Shakespeare's sister and her limited opportunities are of course central to this blog's history.
To keep pretending that old white dudes are the focus of praise to the exclusion of everyone else because they are inherently better than everyone else, is to keep pretending that other people have not been ignored, marginalized, and silenced in order to better support that very narrative. This "Frisky Rant" in which the writer, Sara Benincasa, splutters bile at women who brag about their husbands on Facebook, is one of the most strangely hostile things I've read in awhile.
The first thing that struck me about the article is that is fails to explore why it is that some people do use social media to cultivate the illusion of a perfect life via carefully curated imagery in service to a specific narrative for a variety of reasons.
And not every piece is about every thing, but it certainly feels unfair to read something so aggressively contemptuous of a particular behavior without even the most cursory investigation of the motivations of that behavior.
The second thing that struck me about the article is that the habit of happy sharing about one's partner is not a uniquely female, nor a uniquely straight, thing.
Of course, that doesn't fit into existent misogynist narratives about how women who "brag" about their husbands are just competitive harpies with no individual identities.
Also, at least among my friends, most of the male-partnered women with whom I'm friends tend to happy share about their partners in ways that undermine, rather than reinforce, patriarchal norms. I don't see a lot of "my partner is SO PERFECT" among my friends, although I do see a lot of "I am grateful to have such a terrific partner." And, frankly, I love reading that!
A National Security Letter (NSL) is a form of administrative subpoena used by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation and reportedly by other U.S. The oldest NSL provisions were created in 1978 as a little-used method of circumventing the Right to Financial Privacy Act. In 1986, the Act was amended to compel disclosure, and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act was created with similar provisions in place. A 1993 amendment relaxed the restriction regarding "foreign powers" and allowed the use of an NSL to obtain information on persons not under direct investigation. On March 9, 2006 the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act was signed into law, which allowed for judicial review of an NSL after it was received. Once passed in 2001, section 505 of the USA PATRIOT Act greatly expanded the use of the NSL, allowing their use in scrutiny of US residents, visitors, or US citizens who are not suspects in any criminal investigation. Two of the more contentious aspects of the NSL are non-disclosure provisions and a lack of judicial oversight. Unlike other subpoenas and warrants, no approval from the judicial branch is required to issue an NSL. An internal FBI audit found that the bureau violated the rules more than 1000 times in an audit of 10% of its national investigations between 2002 and 2007.[10] Over 20 of these involved requests by agents for information that US law did not permit them to have.
According to 2,500 pages of documents that the FBI turned over to the Electronic Frontier Foundation in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that the EFF had brought against the government, the FBI used national security letters to obtain data not only on individuals that it saw as targets of an investigation, but also to demand details from telecommunications companies on their “community of interest” — the network of people that the target in turn was in contact with. In April, 2008, the American Civil Liberties Union alleged that the military was using the FBI to skirt legal restrictions on domestic surveillance to obtain private records of Americans' Internet service providers, financial institutions and telephone companies.
In May, 2008, the FBI reached a legal settlement with the Internet Archive, which had challenged a national security letter served on it in November 2007. Compelled by these findings, subsequent revisions to the USA PATRIOT Act have allowed for greater judicial review, as well as clarification and limitation to the non-disclosure clause.[18] There remains no requirement to seek judicial review or approval prior to issuance of an NSL.
The government appealed Judge Marrero's decision in the 2nd circuit court of appeals which heard arguments from both sides and on 24 May 2006 issued a ruling dismissing the case as moot - returning it to the lower court due to subsequent changes in the USA PATRIOT Act enacted by Congress after the case was filed. After having the case returned to his court for reconsideration in light of the revisions made to the USA PATRIOT Act, on September 6, 2007, Judge Victor Marrero struck down the parts of the law that allowed the FBI to compel companies to provide customer records without court authorization and forbade the companies from telling the customers or anyone else what they had done. In 2010 a partial-lift of the gag order was given, and John Doe was revealed as Nicholas Merrill, of Calyx Internet Access. Decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in re: John Doe I et al. Nick Merrill Speaks Out on Landmark Court Struggle Against FBI’s National Security Letters - video report by Democracy Now! History of the United States National Security Council 1961–1963 — This article is about the history of the United States National Security Council during the Kennedy Administration, 1961 1963. Committee for National Security — The Committee for National Security or KNB is an intelligence agency for the government of Turkmenistan. Sorry, we couldn't find any templates that matched your search.Try fewer filters, or you can Design Your Own Invitation. The large heading bar at the top provides a central focus for the letter while the body of the letter is intentionally narrow, centered and in an 11pt font size with increased spacing to restrict the text of the letter to a single sharp message.
Coakley, deciding that buffer zones around abortion clinics violate protestors' free speech rights. That legislators can claim to know what is best for my body and can claim to know my mind better than I do.
Do you think that you were hired because you're a man, and as a man, the company knew you'd present a tough image for the company?
And the real-life Mileva Marie Einstein, who gave up a fucking PhD in physics after becoming pregnant with Albert's child, is another fucking bookend to the story of limiting brilliant women.


Get a fucking clue.The stories historians tell are not free of bias or agendas, and the people held up as superlative figures in their field and work are not chosen in a vacuum free of prejudice, agenda, and race- and gender-based assumptions (just to name two factors at play). Like: He's so great for being so supportive of my work, or he's such a nurturing parent, etc. Government Agencies including the Central Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense.
Used in terrorism and espionage investigations, it was limited to foreign powers or persons who the FBI had reasonable cause to believe were agents of a foreign power. It could be repealed or modified if it was found that a request for information was "unreasonable, oppressive, or otherwise unlawful". A House bill would tighten the language governing when national security letters could be used, by requiring that they clearly pertain to investigations of a foreign power or an agent instead of just being considered "relevant" to such investigations.
It also granted the privilege to other federal agencies, presumably to allow the department of Homeland Security the same ability to use NSLs. As it has since its creation in 1978, the NSL contains a clause which forbids the recipient from revealing the contents of the NSL, or even its receipt. An NSL may be issued by "the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or his designee in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or a Special Agent in Charge in a Bureau field office designated by the Director"[9] with no checks and balances in place until after the NSL has been delivered. The bureau's NSL community of interest requests, which it recently discontinued, are part of an ongoing investigation by Justice Department inspector general Glenn A.
In his 103-page opinion, Judge Marrero wrote that the law permitting such NSLs was “the legislative equivalent of breaking and entering, with an ominous free pass to the hijacking of constitutional values.” Marrero said the indefinite gag order associated with NSLs violated the First Amendment, the lack of judicial oversight or review was contrary to the separation of powers guarantee, and that the secrecy requirement was so intertwined with the rest of the provision regarding NSLs that the entire provision was unconstitutional. This template would be most suited to a short formal communication of notice between a client and a business, such as for a notice of inspection, resignation letter or a letter stating intent to move out of a property.
I am angry that women are not trusted to make the best decisions for our lives and our bodies.
Compliance was voluntary, and states' consumer privacy laws often allowed institutions to decline these requests. It would also require that the FBI destroy information that had been illegally obtained, which existing rules do not require, and it would allow the recipient of a letter to file a civil lawsuit if the missive is found to be illegal or without sufficient factual justification. In January 2007 the New York Times reported that both the Pentagon and the CIA have been issuing National Security Letters.[6] The USA PATRIOT Act reauthorization statutes passed during the 109th Congress added specific penalties for non-compliance or disclosure. The non-disclosure rules have helped prevent the full extent of the NSL program from becoming known, as the FBI has systematically underreported to Congress the number of letters sent.[7] An NSL recipient (later revealed to be Nicholas Merrill) writing in The Washington Post says "living under the gag order has been stressful and surreal.
Brought forward by an unnamed[15] Internet Service Provider [16] who had been served with NSLs, it challenged the constitutionality of the letters, specifically the non-disclosure provisions.
Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that he suspected "a perpetual gag on citizen speech of the type advocated so strenuously by the government may likely be unconstitutional."[19][20] and that a ban on speech and an unending shroud of secrecy concerning government actions "do not fit comfortably with the fundamental rights guaranteed American citizens"[19] and could serve as a cover for official misconduct.
Judge Marrero delayed enforcing his decision ordering the FBI to desist with further NSLs for 90 days pending an appeal by the government.[21] [22] The government appealed the decision and oral argument was heard on August 27, 2008.
The above mentioned revisions to the PATRIOT Act also included requirements for semi-annual reporting to Congress.
They want to spend the rest of their life together." Lawyers, Mueller explained, would be able to argue "'We can just do away with that state law the same way we did away with sodomy laws,'" noting that "once you do away with that, you reveal what is really going on here."Ooh, what is really going on here, Karen?!
I am angry that I am just supposed to accept as reasonable men (and women) who sit in a government building making decisions about my body without my consent, though it is a crime for a person to use physical force to make decisions about my body without my consent. I want him to leverage his talents, which I admire, and his position, which is unique, to be on our side. An NSL is a demand letter issued to a particular entity or organization to turn over various record and data pertaining to individuals. The judiciary could only repeal the gag order if the court found that it was made in "bad faith".
Such "community of interest" record gathering is part of a data-mining technique intelligence officials call link analysis, believed to have been used by other intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency. Judge Victor Marrero of the Southern District of New York found on 28 September 2004, that NSLs violate the Fourth ("it has the effect of authorizing coercive searches effectively immune from any judicial process") and First Amendments. Although the details are classified, a non-classified count of NSLs issued is also required.
NSLs can only request non-content information, such as transactional records, phone numbers dialed or email addresses mailed to and from.[1] They also contain a gag order, preventing the recipient of the letter from disclosing that the letter was ever issued.
According to the September 9, 2007 New York Times report on the FBI's use of NSLs to obtain broader information for data mining purposes, "In many cases, the target of a national security letter whose records are being sought is not necessarily the actual subject of a terrorism investigation and may not be suspected at all. However, Judge Marrero issued a stay on his ruling pending the outcome of an appeal of his decision by the government. On April 28, 2006, the Department of Justice reported to the House and Senate that in calendar year 2005, "the Government made requests for certain information concerning 3,501 United States persons pursuant to National Security Letters (NSLs).
Or any one of a number of things of which we're all meant to believe every marriage is definitely inclusive. Other amendments included that the recipient of an NSL was allowed to explicitly inform their attorney about the request and the government had to specifically rely on the judiciary for enforcing noncompliance with an NSL.



Make a presentation to someone xbox
Creative business presentation slides
Ts outlaw 2014 dates france


Comments to «What guys look for in a girlfriend physically»

  1. Kacok_Qarishqa writes:
    Them to be evil minded and make a man to commit to a long-term partnership flirt with the woman in the suitable.
  2. SINDIRELLA writes:
    Rather than attempt to discover an individual new much better than any are hunting for.