Here's a look at hacking incidents during the 2016 presidential campaign and Russian meddling in the election. For details about investigations into hacking and efforts to interfere with the election, see 2016 Presidential Election Investigation Fast Facts.
August 12, 2016 - Hackers publish cell phone numbers and personal email addresses for Nancy Pelosi and other members of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
September 1, 2016 - During an interview with Bloomberg News, President Vladimir Putin says that he and the Russian government have no ties to the hackers. He says that the identity of the culprit or culprits is not as important as the content of the leaks, and ultimately the hackers revealed important information for voters.
September 22, 2016 - Democrats Dianne Feinstein and Adam Schiff, ranking members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, issue a joint statement declaring that based on information they received during congressional briefings, they believe that Russian intelligence agencies are carrying out a plan to interfere with the election. They call on Putin to order a halt to the activities.
September 26, 2016 - During a presidential debate with Clinton, Trump questions whether the DNC cyberattack was carried out by a state-sponsored group or a lone hacker. "It could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds."
October-November 2016 - Over the course of a month, WikiLeaks publishes more than 58,000 messages hacked from the account of John Podesta, Clinton's campaign chairman.
October 6, 2016 - DCLeaks, a self-described collective of "hacktivists" seeking to expose the influence of special interests on elected officials, publishes a batch of documents stolen from Clinton ally Capricia Marshall. DCLeaks is later identified as a front for Russian military intelligence.
October 7, 2016 - The Department of Homeland Security and the Office of National Intelligence on Election Security issues a statement declaring that the intelligence community is "confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails from US persons and institutions." According to the statement, document releases on websites WikiLeaks and DCLeaks mirror the methods and motivations of past Russian-directed cyberattacks.
November 29, 2016 - A group of Democratic senators sends a letter to President Barack Obama calling on intelligence agencies to declassify information about "the Russian Government and the US election." Sources later tell CNN that new intelligence has been shared with lawmakers suggesting that Russia's purpose for meddling in the election was to sway voters towards Trump, rather than broadly undermining confidence in the system.
December 9, 2016 - The Washington Post reports the CIA has determined that Russian hacking was conducted to boost Trump and hurt Clinton during the presidential campaign. The Trump transition team dismisses the CIA's findings. President Obama asks intelligence agencies to review the hacking incidents in 2016 and other cyberattacks on political campaigns dating back to 2008. The agencies are asked to deliver their findings before Obama leaves office on January 20. A Russian foreign ministry spokesman expresses skepticism about the review and asks US investigators to share their evidence of government-sponsored cyber espionage. Meanwhile, media critics question the Post's reliance on anonymous sources for the CIA report and advise readers to be wary of claims in the article due to the lack of publicly available evidence to support the spy agency's conclusions.
December 10, 2016 - John McCain, Chuck Schumer, Lindsey Graham and Jack Reed issue a joint statement calling on Congressional Republicans and Democrats to work cooperatively on securing future elections and stopping cyber attacks.
December 11, 2016 - Sources tell CNN that although US intelligence agencies share the belief that Russia played a role in the computer hacks, there is disagreement between the CIA and the FBI about the intent of the meddling. While the CIA assessment shows that the Russians may have sought to damage Clinton and help Trump, the FBI has yet to find proof that the attacks were orchestrated to elect the Republican candidate, according to unnamed officials. Furthermore, some sources say the hackers also infiltrated the Republican National Committee's computers.
December 12, 2016 - CNN reports that Russian hackers accessed computer accounts of Republican lawmakers and GOP organizations. A source with knowledge of the investigation says that even though hackers breached the GOP computers, they opted not to release documents en masse.
December 13, 2016 - The New York Times publishes a detailed account of the DNC's delayed response to initial warnings in September of 2015 that its network had been infiltrated by hackers. The report outlines how phishing emails and communication failures led to a sweeping cyberattack. The story also lays out evidence that Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks were linked to Russia. A second article in the Times chronicles the hacking of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, housed in the same building as the DNC. According to the report, Guccifer 2.0 stole tens of thousands of documents and offered them to reporters in districts where Democratic candidates were engaged in competitive races for House seats.
December 29, 2016 - President Obama issues an executive order with sanctions against Russia. The order names six Russian individuals who allegedly took part in the presidential campaign hacking. Additionally, 35 Russian diplomats are ordered to leave the US within 72 hours.
January 3, 2017 - Julian Assange of WikiLeaks says that the Russian government did not provide him with the hacked DNC emails during an interview with Sean Hannity on the Fox News Channel.
January 3-4, 2017 - In a series of tweets, Trump questions the US intelligence community's claims that the Russian government interfered with the election. He alleges that intelligence officials have delayed a scheduled meeting with him but sources tell CNN that there has been no change to the schedule. Trump also cites Assange's interview to back his assertion that a rogue hacker, not the Russian government, may have meddled in the election.
January 5-6, 2017 - Intelligence officials meet separately with Obama and Trump to present the results of their probe into cyber espionage during the presidential campaign. After the president and the president-elect are briefed, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence releases a declassified version of its classified report on Russian meddling. According to the report, hackers did not breach voting machines or computers that tallied election results but Russians meddled in other ways. Putin ordered a multifaceted influence campaign that included spreading pro-Trump propaganda online and hacking the DNC and Podesta. Bracing for a possible Clinton win, Russian bloggers were prepared to promote a hashtag #DemocracyRIP on election night. Paid social media users, aka "trolls," shared stories about Clinton controversies to create a cloud of scandal around her campaign.
January 6-7, 2017 - Trump issues a statement after his meeting with intelligence officials. In the statement, he acknowledges that the Russian government may have been linked to the DNC hacking but declares that cyberattacks did not impact the outcome of the election because voting machines were not breached. In a series of tweets, he repeats that hacking did not affect election results and says that he wants to improve relations with Russia.
March 10, 2017 - In an interview with the Washington Times, Trump ally Roger Stone says that he had limited interactions via Twitter with Guccifer 2.0 during the campaign. He says the exchanges were "completely innocuous." The following day, the New York Times publishes its own interview with Stone, in which he says that his communication with Guccifer 2.0 took place after the DNC hack, proving there was no collusion with the Trump campaign to arrange the cyber attack.
June 1, 2017 - In public remarks, Putin says that hacking during the presidential election campaign may have been carried out by patriotic Russian citizens who felt compelled to respond to perceived slights against Russia from America. Putin says, however, that the Russian government played no role in the cyber attacks. During an interview days later, Putin says that a child could have easily hacked the American presidential campaign.
June 5, 2017 - An investigative website, the Intercept posts a report that the Russian government coordinated a spear-phishing attack on computers at an American voting machine company and compromised at least one email account. The article is based on an NSA memo that was leaked to the Intercept. Hours after the story is published, the source of the leak is identified as a government contractor named Reality Leigh Winner, 25. She is charged with transmitting classified information.
June 21, 2017 - During a Senate hearing, a Department of Homeland Security official says that hackers linked to the Russian government targeted voting systems in up to 21 states.
July 25, 2017- A bipartisan bill limiting Trump's power to ease sanctions against Russia passes in the House by a 419-3 vote. The measure also imposes new sanctions on North Korea and Iran.
July 27, 2017 - The Russia sanctions bill passes in the Senate 98-2. White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci tells CNN that the president may veto the bill and negotiate a tougher deal.
July 28, 2017 - In a reversal, the White House announces that Trump intends to sign the sanctions bill into law.
July 30, 2017 - Putin announces that 755 employees at US diplomatic missions in Russia will be ousted from their posts in response to sanctions.
August 2, 2017 - Trump says the Russia sanctions bill is "seriously flawed" but he signs it anyway.
September 6, 2017 - In a blog post, Facebook announces that more than 3,000 advertisements posted on the social network between June 2015 and May 2017 were linked to Russia. The Washington Post reports that the ads came from a Russian company called the Internet Research Agency.
September 22, 2017 - The DHS notifies select states that hackers targeted their election infrastructure before the vote on November 8, 2016. Although vote-counting systems were not impacted, computer networks containing voter info may have been scanned by Russian hackers. Some states reported attempts to infiltrate their computer systems.
October 3, 2017 - CNN reports that a number of the Russia-linked Facebook ads were geographically targeted to reach residents of Michigan and Wisconsin. Trump defeated Clinton by a narrow margin in both battleground states.
October 12, 2017 - CNN publishes an investigation of Russian trolls who posed as a group of Black Lives Matter activists during the presidential campaign. They used a variety of platforms including Tumblr and Pokemon Go to reach voters.
July 13, 2018 - The Justice Department announces indictments against 12 members of the Russian intelligence agency, GRU, as part of special counsel Robert Mueller's ongoing investigation. The indictment alleges that the Russians of engaging in a sustained effort to hack emails and computer networks associated with the Democratic party during the 2016 presidential campaign. Guccifer 2.0 was linked to Russian military intelligence, according to the indictments.
July 16, 2018 - During a joint press conference with Putin in Helsinki, Trump says that the Russian president was "extremely strong and powerful" in his denial that his country interfered with the 2016 election. Trump says, "I don't see any reason why it would be Russia." One day later, he clarifies his remark. "The sentence should have been, 'I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be Russia,'" Trump says. "Sort of a double negative."


Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to address gaps in the knowledge about human resource (HR) professional involvement in strategic decision-making in China compared with that in Australia. Design/methodology/approach: First, the authors compare the strategic involvement of Chinese and Australian HR professionals. Second, based on the upper echelon theory, the authors compare the impact of chief executive officer (CEO) and top management team (TMT) between both countries on HR involvement in strategic decision-making. Data were collected from matched pairs of HR and TMT executives in China (n = 168) and in Australia (n = 102). Findings: Results indicate a difference, despite of no statistical significance, in HR involvement in strategic decision-making between Chinese and Australian samples. TMT behavioural integration was positively related to HR involvement in strategic decision-making in a collectivistic culture (i.e. in China), but not in an individualistic culture (i.e. in Australia). However, CEO support for HRM was positively related to HR involvement in strategic decision-making in Australia, whereas it is not related in China. Originality/value: The paper conducts a comparative study and practical, and research implications are discussed at the end.
هدف: هدف این مقاله، بررسی شکاف های موجود در دانش مربوط به مشارکت حرفه ای منابع انسانی (HR) در تصمیم گیری استراتژیک چین در مقایسه با استرالیا می باشد. طرح/ روش تحقیق/ رویکرد: اولا، محققین به مقایسه مشارکت استراتژیکی متخصصین HR چین و استرالیا می پردازند. دوما، براساس نظریه پلکان بالاتر، محققین به مقایسه تاثیر مدیرعامل (CEO) و تیم مدیریت عالی (TMT) بین دو کشور در زمینه مشارکت در تصمیم گیری استراتژیکی می پردازند. داده ها از مجریان TMT, HR سازگار در چین (n = 168) و استرالیا (n = 102) جمع آوری شدند. یافته ها: نتایج مربوط به مشارکت HR در تصمیم گیری نمونه های چین و استرالیا تفاوتی را نشان می دهند که البته معنی دار نیست. یکپارچه سازی رفتاری TMT رابطه مثبتی با مشارکت HR در تصمیم گیری استراتژیکی یک فرهنگ همگانی (یعنی چین) دارد، ولی در فرهنگ فردگرا اینگونه نیست (یعنی استرالیا). با این حال، حمایت CEO از HRM رابطه مثبتی با مشارکت HR در تصمیم گیری استراتژیکی استرالیا دارد، درحالیکه در مورد چین این ارتباط وجودندارد. اصالت / ارزش: مقاله به اجرای مطالعه قیاسی و عملی می پردازد و پیامدهای تحقیق در پایان مورد بحث قرار می گیرند.


The following is a true story from the past of brother A and his older sister L who are among us today.
One day, sister L said: "Hey, I have an idea. Why don't we make our rooms into libraries? You can borrow my books, and I can borrow your books."
Hiding his initial excitement, brother A looked at his older sister suspiciously and asked, "Do I have to pay?"
"No silly, you can borrow library books for free!"
"Oh yeah! Let's do that, then!"
Brother A then proceeded to go over to his sister's room and borrowed a big stack of books. Sister L played the good librarian and jotted down which books were being borrowed and marked the date.
"These are due in 2 weeks," said sister L with a smile.
"All right!" said brother A excitedly, who immediately forgot about the books and didn't read a single one.
After 3 months, brother A remembered and tried to return the books, with a few missing books of course.
"There is a late fee and a lost book fee," said sister L, "and it'll be $20."
Brother A tried to argue, but sister L simply showed him that this is how libraries work, and that he can't argue against libraries.. So brother A paid, blowing his life savings that he had accrued since the last time he got ripped off.


McDonald's has apologised after a 'smirking' staff member chucked a bucket of water over a homeless teenager while she slept.
Georgia Kenny, 19, awoke in a sopping wet sleeping bag and soaking wet clothes to outside Leicester's Market Street 24-hour branch where she regularly sleeps because she feels safe.
The teenager, who was forced on to the streets when her relationship broke down, branded the worker 'disgusting' and is hoping her belongings dry before she spends another night in the cold.
She said: 'I woke up and could feel wet on the back of my leg. This [worker] was pouring a large bucket of water under me, wetting my sleeping bag and all my clothes', according to Leicestershire Live.
And, speaking of the accused staff member, she added: 'He doesn't like us homeless. He gave no explanation why he hadn't woken me.
But although McDonald's has since apologised to Georgia, they appeared to contradict her story and claimed that she was asked to move.
However, Georgia's allegations are backed up by a passer-by who claims that the fast-food chain worker made no attempts to wake the homeless teen.


MUNICH - There's a hop in the step and a relaxed smile on the face of Mike Keenan these days.
And why not? Less than a week after signing a five-year contract as head coach of the New York Rangers, Keenan finds himself on a two-game winning streak with a charged-up group of Canadian hockey players at the world championships.
It's been a dizzying ride - Toronto to New York to Munich in quick succession last weekend, followed by two emotionally charged victories within 48 hours of his arrival in Germany.
"I think both my feet are firmly planted on the ground," Keenan protested Wednesday after skipping into the sunshine outside Munich's Olympic stadium.
"I've really had a good rest, although I'm dragging a bit right now because of everything over the last three weeks - negotiating a contract and getting ready for this tournament."
Keenan, 44, has had a winter-long break after parting company with the Chicago Blawkhawks, where his job as general manager left him close to burn-out, he said.
That rest came to an end this spring when serious NHL offers started coming his way at the same time that Keenan took the reins of Canada's world championship entry.
"We worked very hard to assemble this team," he said. "Five or six nights a week across North America. It was getting pretty intense."
But if Keenan is dragging here, it doesn't show. He relaxed on the sidelines Wednesday, smiling and joking with his players while assistant coach Roger Neilson ran Canada's practice.
Yes, that's the same Roger Neilson who was fired by the Rangers earlier this season - the same Neilson whose job Keenan ultimately took.
The ghosts of Rangers coaches past and future don't seem to be haunting Team Canada.
"Not at all," Neilson said with a laugh.
"Every once in a while Mike will ask a question about where to live (in New York), what's the media like, which guy would be better on which line."
Keenan, who is an old friend of Neilson, said he's consulted with the former Rangers coach, but "I have no fears about coaching in New York."
One of Keenan's first tasks with the assembled Canadian team was to name Ranger left-winger Adam Graves as captain of this diverse group of talent. Graves, it appears, was a sterling choice given his diplomacy in negotiating the Keenan-Neilson conundrum.
Neilson was fired by the Rangers amid a sub-par team performance and some highly public bickering with star centre Mark Messier - an old Edmonton Oiler buddy of Graves.
"Mr. Keenan's record speaks for itself," said Graves. "He's an excellent coach and I'm sure he'll make (the Rangers) a lot better team than we were last year.
"As far as Roger Neilson's concerned, he's an unbelievable guy and I have a great deal of respect for him. It's a nice opportunity to work with him again after what happened."
Canada plays Austria today, then meets Italy and Russia on the weekend to close out its round-robin schedule.


Q1. What is the name of the lights in the Southern sky?
Q2 How old is the oldest picture of the lights?
Q3. What did Galileo think the lights were caused by?
1. Aurora Austra or Southern Lights.
2. About 23 thousand years.
3. Galileo thought they were created by sunlight reflecting off of Earth's atmosphere.
2. The oldest picture of the lights is about 32,000 years old.
3. Galileo thought the lights were caused by sunlight reflecting off earths atmosphere.
3. Galileo thought it was caused by sunlight reflecting off of earths atmosphere but it is actually caused by the solar winds from the sun that slam on the Earths protective magnetic sphere, the energy causes the magnetic tail to change shape, all the particles trapped in it interact with the Earths atmosphere causing the auroras.
The oldest picture of the lights is about 3200 years old.
Galileo thought that the lights were caused by sun light reflecting off of earths atmosphear.
Q3. The reflection from the sun to earths atmosphere. I understand his thinking because the sun does cause light on earth.
1) The name of the lights in the southern sky is called Aurora Australis or Southern Lights.
2) The oldest picture of the lights is 32,000 years old.
3) Galileo thought that the lights were caused by the sunlight reflection off of the earths atmosphere.


A couple of weeks ago I started taking medicine to lower my blood pressure and another to reduce my cholesterol. This was a controversial move, given my deep distrust of the practice of medicine, when it is practiced on me, and pharmaceuticals in particular.
I know that, as a woman of 55 with an very active and healthy lifestyle, no chronic diseases and most importantly as a nonsmoker, I am at very low risk for any of the conditions that high blood pressure or high cholesterol could cause to happen. I am unlikely to have a stroke or a heart attack, develop narrowing of the arteries to my legs or develop kidney failure. The blood pressure and cholesterol levels have no effect at all on how healthy I feel. But one day, while pointing an ultrasound probe at my own neck, I saw a small plaque (a thickened area) in my left carotid artery. It was very calcified, which meant that it had been there a long while, but my carotid was not pristine. It is undeniable: I have vascular disease.
Will this lead to a stroke? Does it imply that the arteries around my heart are also affected? I don't know, and I may not find out. But I do know that taking a cholesterol lowering drug helps reduce heart attacks in patients with vascular disease around their hearts and I extrapolate that it may help reduce further changes to my carotid arteries which might lead to a stroke. My blood pressure is a bit high, and bringing blood pressure down does reduce stroke risk. I don't know that it will reduce my stroke risk, however.
So it was not entirely clear that I should take either cholesterol or high blood pressure medication. A little reduction in my very low risk may not be worth taking a medication with potentially profound side effects and associated high costs.
I decided to try the medication in order to assess whether it gave me trouble of any kind. If it did not, I might have nothing to lose. The blood pressure medication, lisinopril, has been on the market for decades. It is strongly associated with reduction in the usual complications of hypertension. Its main side effects are a nasty nagging cough and dizziness. It can also cause life threatening swelling, often of the face, but this is rare. I have had no swelling, no dizziness, and though I can feel just the tiniest bit of increased tickle in my lungs, it is hardly noticeable.
Regarding the cholesterol medication, atorvastatin (formerly known as Lipitor), it, too, has been around for a long time and has been extensively tested and found to be pretty safe and effective. It can cause muscle cramps and weakness, and I have been told by some patients that it makes them less mentally acute. It can cause gastrointestinal upset and may be associated with weight gain and a risk for diabetes. I am having no trouble so far.
As for the cost, I have had to shell out nearly $5 in copays each month, with my insurance footing about $1 of the bill. This is not expensive. This is a superb deal. I get it from my local pharmacist, not even from a mail order or Walmart's $4 plan. It is cheaper than Walmart's $4 plan! In 20 years I will have spent around $1,200, plus there will be the occasional blood tests to monitor my kidney function. I checked my cholesterol after being on it shy of two weeks, and it was dramatically lower. I, once again, am not sure that this will translate into better health, but it is not odious at all.
The moral of this blog is that not everything is terrible in the U.S. health care system. I could, and will, complain about the surrounding process that leads to people like me being on medicine at all, including issues like medicalization of the healthy and blockbuster drugs being widely adopted without adequate scrutiny, but presently I will give generic atorvastatin and lisinopril a big high five.
Labels: cardiovascular risk , guest post , handheld ultrasound , hypertension , Janice Boughton , pharmaceuticals , prevention , statin , stroke , Why is American health care so expensive?


AT this time in Scotland as in England there ruled a Queen. These two Queens were cousins, for Margaret, the sister of Henry VIII., had married James IV., King of Scotland, and this Mary who was now Queen of Scotland was their granddaughter and Elizabeth's cousin.
In spite of the fact that an English Princess had married a Scottish King, the two peoples continued to be enemies as they had always been, and Elizabeth of England did not love her cousin Mary of Scotland. She hated and feared her.
Mary had been brought up in France, which is a Roman Catholic country, and she had married the French King. So she was Queen of France and Scotland.
When Mary of England died, Mary of Scotland thought that she had a better right to the throne of England than Elizabeth, so she called herself Queen of Scotland, France, England and Ireland.
Many people agreed with Mary, among them the Pope, who was angry with Elizabeth because she would not be ruled by him and would no longer punish the Protestants as her sister had done. So it was little wonder that Elizabeth hated and feared her cousin. The Protestants of England hated Mary of Scotland too. They were afraid that if she became Queen of England, she would bring back the dreadful days of the English Mary.
When Mary was only nineteen, her husband, the French king, died, and she left France where she had been living and returned to Scotland. As she sat upon the deck of the ship which took her to Scotland she wept bitterly. "Adieu, France, adieu," she sobbed, "I shall never see you more."
Scotland seemed cold and dark to Mary after sunny France, and the people harsh and rough. Yet the Scots loved their Queen and were eager to show her that they did so, and Mary wanted to be loved. But Mary and her people did not understand each other. Although she was clever and beautiful she was perhaps the most unhappy and most unwise Queen who ever sat upon a throne.
In Scotland, as in England, many dreadful things happened because of the Reformation and change of religion. Mary was a Roman Catholic, while many of her people had turned to the new religion. There were other causes for quarrels, so there was sorrow and war, until at last the Scottish people imprisoned their beautiful Queen in a lonely castle, upon an island, in the middle of a loch.
But although many people hated Mary, many loved her too, and these helped her to escape. One evening, a boy called the Little Douglas, who lived in the castle where she was imprisoned, stole the keys while the Governor was at supper. In the middle of the night he unlocked the door of Mary's room. Fearfully and silently she crept with him through the dark passages till they reached the great gate. Douglas unlocked it, and Mary passed out, holding her little frightened maid by the hand. Douglas locked the gate behind them and led the way to the place where a boat was waiting for them.
They were soon out on the dark water, getting farther and farther away from the castle. Half way to the shore, Little Douglas leaned over the side of the boat and dropped the great castle keys into the water. Mary's gaolers were prisoners in the castle, and she was free.
On land some of Queen Mary's friends were waiting for her with horses, and she rode joyfully away. Soon more friends joined her, and a battle was fought near Glasgow. But Mary's soldiers were defeated, and she was obliged to flee.
She did not know where to go. It would have been safest to go to France, but no ship was ready to take her there. So she crossed the border into England, and went to ask her cousin Elizabeth to take pity on her.
Elizabeth had never seen her beautiful cousin, and she refused to see her now. She gave her a castle to live in, not as a royal guest, but as a prisoner.
Mary had had to run away from Scotland so quickly that she had brought no clothes except those she wore. She wrote to tell Elizabeth this, but although Elizabeth had hundreds of beautiful dresses, she only sent some old clothes quite unfit for a queen to wear. Poor Mary would have been badly off, but her enemies were kinder than her cousin, and sent her dresses and clothes from Scotland.
When Queen Mary found that Elizabeth meant to treat her as a prisoner and not as a friend, she begged to be allowed to go away to some other country. But Elizabeth would not set her free. She feared if she did, Mary would go to the Kings of France or Spain and ask them to make war on England. She felt it was safest to keep her great enemy in prison.
Mary was so beautiful that she had many friends, and they were very angry with Elizabeth. Plot after plot to free Mary was formed. But all plots failed. For nineteen years this poor Queen was kept in prison. She was moved from castle to castle, for it seemed as if no place was strong and safe enough to keep her from her friends. At last she was shut up in a castle called Fotheringay.
When Mary had been in prison about nineteen years, a plot to kill Elizabeth and put Mary on the throne was discovered. Then the English Parliament persuaded Elizabeth that Mary must be put to death.
Elizabeth either really felt, or pretended to feel, very unwilling to give her consent to this. But in the end she signed a paper ordering Mary's head to be cut off.
A few days later the beautiful Queen, who had been so unhappy and who had caused so much unhappiness, walked into the great hall at Fotheringay. In one hand she carried a Bible, in the other a crucifix. The hall was hung with black; at one end was a low scaffold, also covered with black.
Nineteen years before Mary had come to England, young and beautiful, and, although she was not yet old, the long years in prison had made her look like an old woman. She could only walk with difficulty, and when she laid her head upon the block, it was seen that her hair was white.
Mary's servants cried bitterly when she said good-by to them, although she comforted them by saying that, to her, death was a happy release out of prison. Her little dog would not leave her even after she was dead, but crept close to her dress, whining sadly, as the Dean of Peterborough cried, "So perish all Elizabeth's enemies."
When Elizabeth was told that Mary was dead she was very angry. She said that although she had signed the death warrant, as the paper was called, she had not meant that Mary should be killed. It is difficult to know what Elizabeth did mean, for she was deceitful as well as clever. But whether she meant it or not, Elizabeth had no right to behead Mary.
Mary's son James, who was now the King of Scotland, was very angry with Elizabeth for the manner in which she had treated his mother, but he had neither money nor soldiers enough with which to fight against England, so he did nothing.


Have a look at the photos below. They're both taken at the same time and location - however, they both present the scene very differently.
The first is your typical location snap - taken hand held at a fairly fast shutter speed because there's plenty of light (f14, ISO100, 1/40) . Motion is frozen (look at the ripples and waves on the surface of the lake). The second was taken with the use of a NDX400 filter (a 9-stop filter) and with the camera on a tripod. Motion is blurred - check out the streaking clouds in the sky, and the silky appearance of water (f14, ISO100, 13 seconds).
An ND (neutral density) filter works to reduce the amount of light entering the lens. It's a piece of tinted glass (or plastic) that can be screwed onto the lens (or slid onto a filter holder in front of the lens) to control the amount of light entering the lens.
You can purchase ND filters that reduce specific amounts of light (called "stops") entering the lens. An ND8 filter, for example, reduces 3 stops of light entering the lens. An ND400 filter, such as the one used to create the second image, reduces 9 stops of light entering the lens.
Let's look at the exposure of the first image, taken at f10, ISO 100. Given the lighting situation of the scene, the camera's light meter suggested a shutter speed of 1/40 of a second in order to obtain a balanced exposure. If we had put a ND8 filter on the lens, thus reducing the amount of light entering by 3 stops (or only 1/8 of the light is entering the lens), then this would mean that we would need to slow the shutter speed to compensate for it.
How do you adjust the shutter speed to compensate for reduced light entering the lens?
It's easy! Most DSLRs have, by default, exposure values set to a third (1/3) of a stop. What this means is that three clicks on the dial = 1 stop. For example, if I went from a shutter speed of 1/40 to 1/30, that would be increasing the exposure by 1/3 of a stop. Dropping it down from 1/40 to 1/25 increases the exposure by 2/3 of a stop. Going from 1/40 to 1/20 increases exposure by a whole stop.
If you're not sure whether your DSLR has been set to 1/3 stops in terms of exposure value steps, refer to your manual as it will show you how to go about checking, and changing, this on your DSLR. Look in your manual's index for the topic "EV steps for exposure control" or similar.
1/40 (normal) -> 1/20 (1 stop) -> 1/10 (2 stops) -> 1/5 (3 stops).
However, a shutter speed of 1/5 isn't going to be slow enough to create that nice, silky motion in the water, or to streak the clouds. What I need, then, is a much stronger ND filter - the NDX400 filter which reduces the amount of light entering by 9 stops!
As you can see from the image of the filter, its glass is very tinted. Put it on your lens, look through the viewfinder and you'll barely be able to see anything!
I use a Hoya NDX400 filter when shooting in daylight. It's a durable filter with great glass (thus ensuring image quality and sharpness). Once I screw the filter onto the lens, I reduce the amount of light entering by 9 stops. Enough for me to go from an exposure of 1/40 of a second without the filter, to 13 seconds with the filter.
How do I use ND filters?
I find it easiest to set everything up first prior to putting the filter on the lens. In shooting landscapes, I always use Manual Exposure as it allows me to fine tune the exposure to get the look I want.
I first make sure my DSLR is set on Manual Exposure Mode.
Then, I work out an exposure for the scene without the filter on.
Finally, I compose and frame the scene in the viewfinder (or if you have a DSLR with liveview, us that as it makes framing much easier).
Once done, remember to switch from Autofocus to Manual focus because you don't want your camera to hunt for focus once you have out the filter on (chances are, there isn't enough light entering the camera for its autofocus to work effectively). So: lock your focus first, flick the autofocus switch to Manual focus, and then put the filter on.
Then, you just need to work out the new shutter speed to compensate for the number of stops of light that the filter reduces. If your camera has its exposure values set to 1/3 of a stop, then it's simply a case of counting downwards with each little click of the dial = 1/3 of a stop. Hence, three clicks = 1 stop.
Once you've set the new shutter speed, take the picture and check the results on playback (remember to use the histogram to confirm that the exposure of your image falls within your expected range).
Enjoy shooting long exposures in daylight!
NOTE: If you're thinking of getting a 9 or 10 stop exposure, there's a range of filters available. Remember, though, that you will get what you pay for and while some cheaper filters may seem appealing, they will not produce images as sharp as those you will get with better quality filters. I use and recommend Hoya filters. Ask your local photography retailer about this filter, or, if you have a bit more in your bank account, ask about the Lee Big Stopper, which reduces the amount of light entering the camera by a whopping 10 stops!
SIDE NOTE: It's come to my attention that some local retailers will try and sell you variable ND filters. Avoid these like the plague as they can create image banding and unattractive vignetting, especially in cheaper brands.
thanks Seng – while I understood these in principle I do understand it a whole lot more now. I have been considering some ND filters for this kind of thing, and understanding it more will certainly assist!
Awesome example. Ive done a photography but forgot about the use of filters!! Thanks for the excellent instruction on how to use the ND filter.


In addition to the Master of Science in Legal Studies and Master of Science in Compliance Law programs, National Juris University offers a course of study leading to a Master of Science in Taxation. This program is designed for people who wish to work in a setting where they can apply their knowledge of tax law and procedure. NJU graduates will be qualified to work as tax preparers or in advisory roles for organizations that prepare tax returns. They will also be prepared to take examinations to become IRS enrolled agents and/or registered tax return preparers.
The NJU Master of Science in Taxation program is also recommended for paralegals, attorneys and accountants who wish to gain specialized knowledge of tax law, rules and procedures. The skills taught in this program will assist the professional with many types of tax law issues that are likely to arise in a corporate or legal setting. The program focuses not only on tax law, but also on tax procedure and on dealing with federal and state authorities in matters of taxation.
The minimum amount of time required to complete the Master of Science in Taxation program varies with student course load, as illustrated below.
To gain admission to any NJU graduate program, the student must have graduated from a college or university that is accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education or foreign equivalent. In addition, the student must have achieved an undergraduate grade point average of 3.0 or higher (on a 4.0 scale). Students with an undergraduate grade point average below 3.0 may be considered for admission if they can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the dean, that they are likely to succeed at NJU. Students may demonstrate an ability to succeed with work experience, graduate-level education, achievement of a superior score on a recognized graduate school admissions test, or other outstanding achievements. In all determinations under this paragraph, the decision of the dean is final.
Program prerequisites: In addition to having a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university, all incoming students must have completed at least three credits in mathematics or another quantitative area such as finance or statistics and at least three credits in accounting prior to taking his or her first course at NJU.
Research and apply tax laws in a variety of tax-related areas.
Prepare various types of tax returns for individuals and entities.
Become an IRS enrolled agent by taking the Special Enrollment Examination.
Become an IRS Certified Tax Preparer.
Substantially contribute to the tax-related work done by accountants' and attorneys' firms as well as companies and entities .
The MST program does not, on its own, qualify students to sit for any U.S. State bar examination or certified public accountancy examination.


Name one benefit to the world that came out of skepticism?
This is why skeptics are unable to point to a single benefit to the world that came out of skepticism.
Here is an example. Christopher Columbus was, as one could describe, skeptical that the earth was flat. Thus he set out to prove it and discovered not only that the earth was round, but he discovered an entire continent (which lead to the discovery of a subsiquent other continent). Now some people may argue that having America around isn't a "benefit to the world" but you have to agree that his skepticism did discover something quite major. There, that took me 2 seconds to think of and I'm sure we could all come up with many other examples if it was worth spending any more time on.
There you go, you should return that book and remember... whenever you make absolute statements that are close ended claiming, no presupposing, that your statement is absolutely correct, be prepaired to be proven wrong.
Now let me propose a hypothetical to you all. And please don't just discount this because it opens you to a differing view point, but its important to expand your mind and put yourself in someone else's shoes. If a medium or person who talks to the dead turns out to be fake, lying or using trickery to "appear" to talk to the dead, what does that tell us about that individual's character. Now, I mean hypothetically if we had absolute proof! I'm talking through science we learn how to resurrect people and we ask one of these zombie-people if John Edwards (for example) or any other medium who had claimed to actually talked to him and he says "no". So now we have hypothetical proof, and thus we can insinuate that the individual in this story is either dilusional or realizes they themselves are fake. Now that supposed medium was out charging, any amount of money for this practice of which they know is a lie, and they know also how tough and scary it is to go through a recent loss of a loved one and use specifically that type of person as their primary target for this trickery. What kind of terrible, unconscionable act would this person be willingly committing on a weekly basis. Again, in this hypothetical we are saying if the person knowingly uses trickery to gain "something" from a grieving individual, what kind of person would ever do that?
Now lets take the hypothetical back a bit. Lets say the person did not have proof from a revived dead person and questioned them, but say this person is able to do the next thing. To achieve the same exact result (and sometimes better) by applying techniques of which they know are trickery and to gain almost the exact same effect from it. Why would that skeptic be wrong for being so outspoken on it?
The point is this, people like James Randi who are so outspoken against the paranormal, it doesn't matter if they are actually right or wrong, if they believe they are right they're being outspoken and trying to show the world about a farce for a good reason. They are trying to empower people to make up their own mind and don't believe what just one person speaks. How can you blame that person, whom feels they are correct, for trying to expose an injustice or listening to their conscience.
What have skeptics contributed? Logical methods for one. Critical thinking principals as a second. Skeptical thinkers developed and improved on many of these thought processes that are now the basis for reasoning. Though sometimes it's hard to tell.
Look at the helio-centric model... Look at the particle-wave theory, look at ball-lightning. These were discoveries made out of skeptical acts, because someone, or several people doubted current scientific understanding. They traversed significant hurdles often spending decades to try to prove their theories were correct.
You are taking your frustration with the modern scientific skeptic out on skeptics across all time and space. Skeptics were the drivers of logic and reasoning "back in the day." Modern skepticism or "scientific skepticism" is a joke. It is no way similar with classical skeptical practices.
Of coarse there are many but the first that comes to my mind (why?) are those flat Earth believers that were proved wrong by skeptics willing to sail off to the "edge" of the Earth to prove them wrong.
Mr Q wrote: Of coarse there are many but the first that comes to my mind (why?) are those flat Earth believers that were proved wrong by skeptics willing to sail off to the "edge" of the Earth to prove them wrong.
I believed for several years that people thought the earth was flat, but that is actually a myth. The ancient Greeks first new that the Earth was round sometime around 250 b.c. if I remember right. Not that I believe in a deity, mind you, but it's even suggested in the bible that the earth was round in Isiah, 40:22 "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth..."
I was referring to those such as sailors who refused to sail real far out to sea because of this belief. Once these believers were shown that no such thing exists, they learned that their fears were unfounded.


The recent outbreak of the Ebola virus has captured headlines, culminating in a potentially infected person in New York being placed under quarantine at Mt. Sinai hospital. Just what is Ebola? Is it really something we should be concerned about, or is it just a lot of media-induced panic? We sat down with Dr. Robert Garry, a microbiology professor at Tulane University who has been at the forefront of the Viral Hemorrhagic Fever Consortium's program in Sierra Leone, to find out. Garry just returned to the United States in order to raise support for the situation in Africa, which he says is desperately lacking in people and resources.
ESQUIRE: Should we be worried about Ebola here in the United States?
DR. ROBERT GARRY: We should be worried on a couple of different levels. I don't think we need to be worried about a widespread outbreak like in West Africa, that's not going to happen here. What we do need to be worried about is cases being introduced through air travel, into a city a large populated area – that's where most of our airports are – and then spreading. That would cause very serious concern. And then we have to do the same thing that Nigeria did, find all those contacts, try to wall them off, basically try to get the patients circled around and see where they came in contact with it. It would create quiet a big mess.
ESQ: So if that happened in New York City, what happens then? Does the CDC come in?
DR. GARRY: They would get involved, the local health organizations would get their advice from the CDC, they would send in teams. There are local laws, and national and state laws, and things that would…. They would put you away if they had to. It would definitely be managed. It just depends on when the person came in, at the stage of their illness. If they were not that sick yet, and then started to develop symptoms, they could actually come in contact with a lot of people. Then it would be a big effort to trace where all those contacts were, and you'd never really quite be sure. The symptoms are vomiting and diarrhea and fevers; all it would take is for a person to go into a public bathroom, and you wouldn't know. You wouldn't know who was exposed to whatever happened in there.
ESQ: You were just overseas, what's it like there?
The situation is very dire. There are a lot of cases, they're becoming much more geographically dispersed, and the people in West Africa don't have the same kind of resources – vehicles, police force, health care facilities – that are available here. These are areas that look like the villages in National Geographic, because that's what they are. People live a very simple life. There aren't televisions, very few radios, people don't get newspapers delivered every day, and they don't have access to the Internet. All those things go into the difficulty of trying to contain an outbreak.
ESQ: What's the worst-case scenario?
DR. GARRY: We're living the worst-case scenario. A widely-dispersed outbreak of a very serious infectious disease. They have pretty good roads, people travel around. And the virus is highly lethal, though not as lethal as some of the ones that have occurred in Central Africa, so people are infectious longer and are ambulatory longer. The doctor that got off the plane in Atlanta was in a pretty advanced state, and he walked right off. That's happening all over West Africa. People are able to walk around with this virus and spread it, and that's a reason why we have as many cases as we do.
ESQ: There's no official cure? Didn't they give an untested vaccine to some of the infected Americans over there that worked really well?
DR. GARRY: We don't know if it worked or not, but there's some experimental therapies, a lot of them, and drugs as well. Some of them have been very successful in primates. It's a big step from working in an experimental situation like that to humans, but it's an important step.
ESQ: How long does it take to get sick?
DR. GARRY: The incubation period is really broad, from two to twenty-one days. It depends on your genetics, how much of the virus you've been exposed to, probably other factors we don't understand.
ESQ: How long are you contagious?
DR. GARRY: The common assumption, based on some observation, is that you're not infectious until you start to show the symptoms of the disease. But what does that mean between the different strains? I think this strain is showing us that it's transmissible fairly early on. That's just anecdotal, but a person doesn't have to be prostrate and lying on the floor in a coma, they can transmit it probably at an earlier state. That's one thing that makes this outbreak bigger.
ESQ: Is this a strain that we've seen before? Has it changed?
DR. GARRY: Well, it's related to the most potent strains that came out of Central Africa, the Zaire strains. But it's a little different. It apparently has been in Central Africa for at least a decade in the rainforest. This is the first time that we've caught it in terms of people, but it's been there in the animals. That whole area in Guinea where it first broke out is undergoing a lot of deforestation, so people are going deeper and deeper into the forest… Apparently somebody took out one of the animals that is carrying the virus, and now we're looking at human-to-human spread.
ESQ: So people get it from eating the bush meat?
DR. GARRY: The initial thought is that that's one way that you could get it. Their bush meat is… You know, people in the U.S. go out and shoot deer and rabbits and stuff like that, down in Louisiana here we go out and shoot the things that are in our backyard; alligators and nutria and things like that. And we eat them, some of them are quite tasty. They're just doing the same thing that all humans do, trapping the animals in their own backyard.
ESQ: What are the chances of it passing to an animal in the food chain here?
DR. GARRY: Well, everything is possible. The virus will replicate in dogs, in pigs, other things. I think it's much more likely we'll see the human-to-human transmission, but you can't discount anything, either.
ESQ: How long has it been going on?
DR. GARRY: The outbreak is the longest in history, about six months that we know of. It probably started sometime in December in Guinea.
ESQ: Is it near over?
DR. GARRY: No. This could go on for months or longer.
ESQ: Could it mutate and spread faster?
DR. GARRY: You can be assured that the virus is mutating. That's what viruses do. And this is the first time in history that the virus has had a chance to spread as much as it has from human to human. It's adapting.
ESQ: So is Contagion potentially becoming a reality?
DR. GARRY: Well it's probably not going to happen with this particular virus, just because – as far as we know – it's not spread by the aerosol route. That would make it much more difficult to contain, even in the United States. But we'll be looking for that.


Are claims Swedish 'köttbullar' come from Turkey total balls?
Not so fast Turkey! One of Sweden's leading food historians has denounced viral claims that Swedish meatballs were brought back from the Ottoman Empire by the king as "fake news".
"We have no source for it," complained Richard Tellström, a lecturer at Stockholm University's Institute for Ethnology. "It's a sort of fake news definitely. You make something up for a political or a commercial purpose, and you spread the news without doing proper research."
As The Local reported earlier this week, media across the world went absolutely wild after the Swedish Institute sent out a tweet saying the Ikea staple came from Turkey.
According to the story, King Charles XII brought back a recipe for the succulent meaty globes from Bender, a city in Moldova where he was exiled for five years between 1709 and 1714.
But according to Tellström references to 'frikadeller', a word for meatballs derived from the French 'fricandeau', have been found in Swedish literature as far back as 1650, more than 50 years before the warrior king's stay among the Ottomans.
"It's more likely, considering the linguistic source, that meatballs are French or Italian," Tellström said. "Meatballs is historically a very expensive dish, because you have to have fresh meat. We are talking about the top levels of society."
The word 'köttbullar' only appeared later, he added: "The earliest Swedish source is 1755, and we have no link to Charles XII."
Tellström said he suspected that the dish's origins in Sweden might go back much longer, given that meatballs have essentially the same ingredients as sausages, whose documented history stretches back 3,000 years.
He said he had decided to sound the alarm because he was concerned that the Swedish Institute, an official government agency, was sharing information it was not able to verify.
"The problem here is that the Swedish Institute is an authority, and they have to be careful about what they spread in our time, when we talk about fake news and troll factories," he said. "Why don't you do proper research? Why don't you care what news you're spreading?"
Oliver Grassman, social media editor of the official Swedish Twitter account, said they had shared information they perceived to be true. Indeed, meatballs are often attributed to Charles XII.
"If it is a factual error it is not good because we write 'let's stick to the facts'. What we wanted to convey was that cultures inspire each other and the concept that something is totally Swedish barely exists any more. Especially when it comes to food," he told Expressen.
But what about the much more established story, that Charles XII brought back 'kåldolmar', cabbage leaves stuffed with meat?
As the name suggests, Swedes believe the dish to be an approximation of the Turkish stuffed vine leaves recipe dolma.
"We don't have any source for that either," Tellström said.


Is Lochlyn Munro Gay ?
The former Hockey player Lochlyn Munro is a Canadian film and television actor. He switched his professional hockey to an acting career after his serious sports injury. The talented actor is also featured in numerous guest and lead roles on television and films. He is popular for his ability to do both comedy, drama and featured in the role of being a law enforcement agent.
How Much Is Lochlyn Munro' Net Worth?
Lochlyn Munro has assumed net worth around $800 thousand as of 2019. He bestowed his fortune from his professional hockey and acting career. He receives the payroll around $15 thousand to $25 thousand from his work in television series and $52 thousand per year from his work in the movie.
The 1.8 inches actor left a professional hockey career and turned towards performing arts. He is also a talented musician and adds bucks by playing music in various clubs. Later, he kicked off his acting career landed on American projects, 21 Jump Street (1987) and Wiseguy(1987) which later made him never look back.
Lochlyn Munro has an estimated net worth of $800 thousand as of 2019.
His other notable work in television series includes Wiseguy (1990), The Outer Limits (1995 to 2002), Two (1996 to 1997), Charmed (1990 to 2002) and CSI: Miami (2005) and Beyond (2018) and Riverdale (2016 to 2019).
Lochlyn Munro Interview (Riverdale, Charmed) London Comic Con 2018!
The Charmed actor also established himself on a big screen and featured over three dozens of movies. He featured movie White Chicks (2004) made a gross of $113.1 million on budget of $37 million. By the same token, he generated revenue of $400,000 from his work in a movie.
As of 2019, he is occupied by many upcoming projects. he will appear in Roads of Ithriyah, Peace, Mark, and Steve vs the Woods, Dembanger, Crimson Creek, Spiral and Dweller.
The Aquarius born actor also makes a decent amount of money from his endorsements deals. He summons the dollars bills between $1,576.5 and $2,627.5 from ads post in an Instagram account.
Who Is Lochlyn Munro' Wife?
Lochlyn Munro is a married man who tied the knot to his girlfriend turned wife Sharon Munro. The duo privately walked down an aisle on 14 June 1997 in presence of their closed friends and family members.
The duo is blessed with two children, nonetheless, being a protective father, he kept his details of his children confidential.
Lochlyn Munro happily married with his girlfriend Sharon Munro in 1997.
The Beyond actor is very uptight when comes to his private life, hence, most of the information about his married life still behind the curtain. The duo has never broken any news of a divorce. Therefore, we can believe that the duo is spending the blissful married life.
Lochlyn Munro was born on born on February 12, 1966, in Lac la Hache, Britsih Columbia, Canada under the sun sign of Aquarius. He holds an American nationality and belongs to White ethnicity.
The Canada born actor developed his passion for acting after he broke femur in his 18-year-old season in the year. Later he leaned on playing guitar in pubs and later landed on an acting career.
Lochlyn Munro is a married man who tied the knot to his girlfriend turned wife Sharon Munro. The duo privately walked down in an aisle on 14 June 1997 in presence of friends and family.


Could you please tell me what the average life span of a denture is? The dentist who gave me these unspeakable torturous things said 3 years, yet I have only had them for 2 years. He also gave me less than adequate service and charged me $9000.00 for sub standard work. He issued me with faulty implants as well. I complained to the Dental Board about this and they sided with him I was the bad guy. I have no dentist now and have lost my faith in all dentists.
Unfortunately your question doesn't have a simple answer. A lot depends on how many teeth are on the denture, what it is made out of, how it is held in place, how it is maintained, and the general condition of the rest of the mouth. On average, a denture can be expected to function for around 3 years before maintenance or remaking is needed, but there are a multitude of different things which can drastically change that.
Think of your dentures as being a little bit like the tyres on your car. Sure, there's an average lifespan, but you're going to get more life and better performance out of some top of the range tyres than the cheapest re-treads. Then there's how you drive. Do you only putt around to the corner shop once a week? Or do you leave black marks around every corner on your mission to drive from Sydney to Perth in 48 hours? And if your wheels are out of alignment, it's going to cause excessive and uneven wear on your tyres. Dentures are put under a lot of stress day in and day out, it's amazing they last as long as they do in some people.
I'm sorry to hear you've had a bad experience and feel let down by your dentist. If your case has been investigated by the Dental Board of Australia, you can be assured that your dentist has not been negligent. Sometimes bad things happen to good people and it's nobody's fault. Remember that dentists are people too, there's good ones and less-than-good ones. Don't be afraid to shop around, and ask your friends and family for recommendations. Once you find someone you like and trust, your mouth will thank you for it.