Tuesday, January 27, 2015

why does scientology have to reveal itself no one else does ......

I am  not backing up  scientology here ,but why do they have  to become  chicken soup ,what about other  organised religion  or cults ....unless they all open up their  books  why should  scientology .......

Sundance: ‘Going Clear’ Creators Say Tom Cruise and John Travolta Should Speak Out Against Scientology’s Abuses

Sundance: ‘Going Clear’ Creators Say Tom Cruise and John Travolta Should Speak Out Against Scientology’s Abuses
By Brent Lang
No documentary has inspired more controversy at this year’s Sundance Film Festival than Going ClearScientology and the Prison of Belief.”
It’s a devastating portrait of a religion guided by greed, instead of motivated by altruism. The film alleges that Scientology abuses its rank and file, hitting them up constantly for money, while, in some cases, subjecting them to physical and psychological degradation.
It also points the finger of blame squarely at two of Scientology’s most famous practitioners, John Travolta and Tom Cruise, and shames them for turning a blind eye to the alleged mistreatments. 
It’s another hot-button topic for documentary filmmaker Alex Gibney, who took on Wikileaks and Enron in previous films such as The Smartest Guys in the Room and We Steal Secrets.
Variety set down with Gibney and Lawrence Wright, the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who wrote the book that formed the basis for the film, to discuss Scientology’s links to Hollywood, its abuse of its tax exempt status and why Cruise and other stars are vital to its survival. 
Why has Tom Cruise become the symbol of this religion and how important is he to the church?
Alex Gibney: He’s vital to the church, because he is the most famous Scientologist.
He is their key guy and he is a magnet for people. Very often you’ll ask people what’s Scientology and they’ll say, ‘isn’t that the religion with Tom Cruise’? So he’s their poster boy.
Why is Scientology so entwined with the entertainment business?
Lawrence Wright:  This goes back to the founding; when L. Ron Hubbard created the Church of Scientology, he decided to make its headquarters in Hollywood, because he had a very perceptive notion that there is something that all Americans do worship and it’s celebrity and the capital of celebrity is Hollywood. He set out very early to make it a Scientology town.
They always wanted celebrities who could sell Scientology just like the people on the front of the Wheaties box.
Both the book and film are critical of celebrities like Tom Cruise and John Travolta. What culpability do they have in some of the abuses that you allege the church is guilty of?
AG: By now there is a well-documented record of abuses in the Church of Scientology, yet Cruise and Travolta have never spoken out about them. By not speaking out, it’s a kind of an endorsement and I think that’s why we’re right and properly critical.
LW: They’re selling a product and the product they’re selling is oppressing some of the people inside the church, especially the clergy, which is called the Sea Org, and Cruise has spent countless hours out on the Sea Org base where — on that same base where he has a special chateau — there’s these double wide trailers called the hole, which is a kind of re-education camp where people have been incarcerated for years. Sleeping on the floor on bedrolls with ants crawling around, abused physically, made to lick the floor or the toilet with their tongue. It’s just unbelievable degradation.
If he’s ignorant of that then it’s willful on his part.
AG: The other thing about Cruise is that he’s been the beneficiary of this unbelievably low-paid Sea Org labor. These people are being paid forty cents an hour and they’re tricking out Cruise’s cars.

Friday, January 23, 2015

pleading does not work

When are people  going to realise that pleading does not work. ISIS does not give a  flying  fuck about  nothing or no one ,do these  people that these guys are going to have a  pivotal moment ,or a parental twinge for a person.
This is terrorism,pure and simple ,and all the pleading in the world is not going to  do a dam thing ,i know its a  parents thing to plead  but they must know  within their  hearts  unless  there are copious ,and i mean  copious  amounts or  cash  involved these  people are getting fucked ....proper fucked ,there  must be noting worse than a  mother or  father ...which  in  some  cases  is  a rarity  nowadays..( if there is a  father  around  ...seems  to be a rare  occurrence  these  days)....the reality is  when your  son or  daughter  friend or parent decides  to go  to  a  hostile  country ,you are taking a risk and these  people  know they may be  getting fucked ....
i am not sure  why anyone  wants  to  go  to  hostile  land  i  do not i like   home  comforts  too much  ,then i am  not that  much  of  a  humanitarian  as i think  most poeple   suck at  being well  humans ............

The only safer alternative to smoking ....is not smoking ...proof here

i am not surprised by this,i mean E-cigarettes all the rage,but like cigarettes,there must be a  chemical to  supress the craving.....
i always thought that  e-cigs much like most stuff inhaled is bad  for you ,but then i have  never  smoked ,never  found  an  attraction to  addictions  like  this ,but there is never  a safer  alternative to smoking unless its  quitting ,that's the healthier option of  course.
but i am sure this  article will not  cure  anyone  it  might scare  them ,but only  when one is  faced  with death do they realise  that  smoking has no benefits ,even that deos  not  deter a  hard core smoker...it's a matter of  choice for the individual......

‘Hidden’ High Levels Of Cancer-Causing Formaldehyde Found in E-Cigarettes

‘Hidden’ High Levels Of Cancer-Causing Formaldehyde Found in E-Cigarettes
Formaldehyde is considered a “known human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. (Photo: Getty Images)
E-cigarettes may not be as “safe” an alternative to cigarette smoking as hoped, according to a new study published in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Researchers found “hidden” high levels of the known carcinogen formaldehyde in popular tank-system e-cigarettes, by way of formaldehyde-releasing agents given off during the vaping process.
They discovered that when vaping 3 milligrams of liquid at high voltage, e-cigs can generate around 14 milligrams of formaldehyde, which is then inhaled by a smoker.
By contrast, the scientists suggest that a tobacco smoker would take in roughly .15 milligrams of formaldehyde in a standard cigarette, equating to around 3 milligrams in a 20-pack.
“This estimate is conservative because we did not collect all of the aerosolized liquid, nor did we collect any gas-phase formaldehyde,” the researchers write in their paper.
E-cigarettes are very new, largely untested, and not yet regulated, so it’s impossible to say right now whether they are more or less harmful than smoking regular cigarettes — especially since there are thousands of chemicals in standard cigarettes, and formaldehyde is only one.
However, the effects could be huge, the researchers say. They explain that long-term vaping may up lifetime cancer risk by five to 15 times when compared to long-term smoking in a roughly 150-pound person. And there’s the question of whether formaldehyde in cigarettes is as bad a cancer culprit as some believe it to be, and if the formaldehyde-releasing agents behave similarly — or worse — to gaseous formaldehyde in the respiratory tract.
“Formaldehyde-releasing agents may deposit more efficiently in the respiratory tract than gaseous formaldehyde, and so they could carry a higher slope factor for cancer,” the researchers write.
Formaldehyde is a chemical found in cigarette smoke, pressed-wood products, and fuel-burning appliances, and has been linked with leukemia and nasopharyngeal cancer, according to the National Cancer Institute.  
Again, the scientists stress there’s no way to know conclusively the long-term health effects of e-cigarettes yet, as they are so new to the market. But this new finding just adds to evidence showing their potential health risks.






Wednesday, January 21, 2015

you see giada de ;aurentis could not resist a fling ..the last person i thought she was happily married ...no surpise



One of my favourite  female celbrity chefs  .....also padmi lakshmeer ....nigella.......but  giada  had  that  good  cleaner  than though italian mother  appeal ...apparently not obviously her  husband was not delivering the goods ,if you do not  service  and give them the big O.....off they will go ....there will always  be  somone  willing to  do it .......


Giada De Laurentiis Divorce Update: Matt Lauer’s ‘Other Woman,’ Hubby Sparring Over Assets

image: http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/gia1-665x385.jpg
Giada De Laurentiis
An update to divorce proceedings with Giada De Laurentiis and Todd Thompson is allegedly getting a bit messy. The Food Network celebrity chef, who was rumored to have cheated on her husband with Matt Lauer, is sparring with her estranged spouse. RadarOnline reports that the divorce court battle is over Giada’s and Todd’s splitting assets because there is no prenuptial agreement on record.
De Laurentiis’ goose may be cooked if her husband has his way in court in their rumored-heated divorce. Reportedly, Giada may be compelled by a judge to ante up a ton of money in alimony and split property, according to an insider following the developments.
“They are going over assets now. But she is worth more than him, so she could lose out.”
Back in 2003, when the couple wed, Giada De Laurentiis’ cooking career had not taken off. But, during the same year she and Todd exchanged wedding vows, the Food Network took an interest, and a television deal emerged from negotiations. And the rest is history, sans a prenup.
Since that pivotal moment in her life, the petite celebrity cook has amassed millions and built a solid brand. Today, she has a successful show, has kitchen products bearing her name in retailers like Target, is a published author, and owns a GIADA restaurant in Las Vegas.
Given that Giada De Laurentiis allegedly had affairs with chef Bobby Flay, musician John Mayer, and most recently, Today co-host, Matt Lauer, it’s ironic some sources are reporting the couple is currently in the midst of an “amicable separation.” Giada denied having ever cheating on her husband; all the relationships were platonic.
TMZ caught up with Lauer earlier this month for a statement on claims that he had a role in causing Giada’s divorce. However, Lauer was emphatic about denying the affair allegations. Matt admitted to being seen in public with De Laurentiis, but said their friendship is benign and is the product of 10 long years. He also expressed his sorrow over the end of the couple’s marriage.
Sources say after Todd filed to divorce Giada, she was quick to respond to the petition, saying all the property they have is not community. Therefore, she “believes she is possessed of separate property, the exact nature of which is unknown at this time.”
Giada De Laurentiis’ divorce is far from over, based on this new update. However, if it’s any consolation, she and her estranged husband intend to raise their 6-year-old daughter together.
[Image via: Wikimedia Commons]

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1774424/giada-de-laurentiis-divorce-update-matt-lauers-other-woman-hubby-sparring-over-assets/#WpIsFsv546TA1SA9.99

let me see that tootsie roll!!!!!!!tootsie roll!!!!!!!!

who does not love  tootsie roll !!!!!!

Melvin Gordon, CEO who built empire from Tootsie Rolls, dies

Melvin Gordon, who turned humble Tootsie Roll's popularity into candy empire, dies at 95

Associated Press 
Melvin Gordon, CEO who built empire from Tootsie Rolls, dies
.
View photo
In this April 8, 2013 photo, Melvin Gordon, the CEO of Chicago-based Tootsie Roll Industries, is seen attending an event with University of Chicago faculty leaders at a hotel in Chicago. A company spokesperson said Gordon died Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2015, in Boston after a brief illness. He was 95. Gordon ran the company for 53 years. It makes 64 million Tootsie Rolls a day and other favorites including Junior Mints, Charleston Chews and Tootsie Pops. (AP Photo/Chicago Tribune, Nuccio DiNuzzo)
CHICAGO (AP) -- Melvin Gordon, who helped turn the enduring popularity of the humble Tootsie Roll into a candy empire, has died. He was 95.
The longtime Tootsie Roll Industries Inc. chairman and CEO died Tuesday in Boston after a brief illness, said Brooke Vane, a spokeswoman for the company's public relations firm. Gordon ran the Chicago-based confectioner for 53 years, overseeing the manufacture of 64 million Tootsie Rolls a day and other sweets including Junior Mints, Charleston Chews and Tootsie Pops.
The penny candy patriarch worked a full schedule until last month, the company said. He was the oldest CEO of a company trading on a major U.S. stock exchange, according to S&P Capital IQ.
Gordon celebrated the Tootsie Roll's 100th anniversary in 1996 by touring the Chicago factory with an Associated Press reporter. He scooped up one of the warm, gooey candies from the assembly line and tasted it, saying: "There's nothing like a hot Tootsie Roll."
He boasted that Tootsie Rolls were almost indestructible.

Related Quotes

Tootsie Roll Industries Inc. 
NYSEWed, Jan 21, 2015 4:04 PM EST
"Nothing can happen to a Tootsie Roll. We have some that were made in 1938 that we still eat," Gordon told the AP in 1996. "If you can't bite it when it's that old, you certainly can lick it."
Tootsie Rolls were invented in 1896 by New York City candy maker Leo Hirshfield, who named it for his 5-year-old daughter, Clara, his little Tootsie.
Tootsie Pops, which are lollipops with Tootsie Roll centers, have been around for more than 80 years. A 1970 TV commercial posed the question: "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?" The company says on its website that it's received 20,000 letters from children claiming to have solved the mystery, and the gimmick has migrated to social media, where a bespectacled character named Mr. Owl tweets the question.
Tootsie Roll has been listed on the New York Stock Exchange since 1922. Gordon, a Boston native, married into the business in 1950 when he wed Ellen Rubin, whose father, William Rubin, was president of Sweets Co. Of America. Gordon changed the company's name to Tootsie Roll in 1966.
Gordon's wife of 65 years, Ellen Gordon, has been named chairman and CEO by its board, the company said Wednesday. She had been serving as company president and chief operating officer.
"Melvin's life represented the very highest values in business, wisdom, generosity, and integrity. Tootsie Roll has seen great growth and success during his time as Chairman," Ellen Gordon said in a statement.
___
Carla K. Johnson can be reached at https://twitter.com/CarlaKJohnson

the president has a wife and kids to support.........

President Obama...like everyone is  doing a  job ,that the democrats voted him to do.....he is  doing a  job he is  given free  rein  ...of course he is telling the  masses  what they want to hear ....its his  job to lie to you he does not need  your  vote  anymore.....the only thing a  politician cares about ,is when you are  going to stand in the sun/wind/rain/snow to  vote  like an  idiot...after that they do not care ....its similar  to   a  guy  coming  he likes  you   totally  for  that  second  or  two ...then  he  wants  to roll over  and  go to sleep ,he does not want to  stay awake and talk ,he got what he  wants,...to blow  his  load ,he is  done  ,just like   politics 





U.S. President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington
.

In case you didn’t watch the president’s swaggering speech Tuesday night, because after a month of previews it seemed to lack the drama of “Storage Wars” (which was on A&E at the same time and is actually a reality show about repossessed storage lockers, but let’s not get into it), here’s what you missed.
Remember that wrecked economy from the Bush years that was just kind of limping along, and how we were all living in 1930 with everybody destitute?
Yeah, forget all that. We’ve turned the corner. The economy’s on fire, and now it’s time to get back to building the country of our dreams, where everybody gets a Tesla.
Actually, Barack Obama’s case — slightly more nuanced than I just made it sound — is pretty compelling on the facts; by any traditional measure, the economy really is powering back from the steep recession he inherited. What’s puzzling is why it took so long for Obama to own that progress, and why he’s wasted so much of his presidency trying to figure out how to talk about it.
Obama, as you may have noticed by now, is a pretty cautious guy when it comes to testing the boundaries of political convention. If he’d asked my advice (and that’s never going to happen), I’d have suggested he dispense with the cursory mention of a hundred topics and the anecdotes about people sitting in the balcony, and instead use the entire speech to tell a story — much as Bill Clinton did at the 2012 convention — about why the economy tanked in 2008 and why it’s rebounding now.
I’d have suggested he become the first president to use PowerPoint slides in a national address, so that Americans at home could see the graphs showing job growth (about 246,000 per month last year), falling unemployment (the largest annual drop in 30 years, even if some of that reflects a decline in workforce participation) and shrinking deficits.
Also, it would have been a riot to see last month’s unemployment numbers projected onto John Boehner’s forehead.
But in his more traditional way, Obama offered the rough draft of his own legacy and tried to focus the nation’s attention on exactly the policy choices we ought to be focused on. The president wanted to make clear this wasn’t his “mission accomplished” moment; he acknowledged, for instance, persistent inequality. But he also looked ahead to the next phase of the economic mission, which is to help families meet the nearly insurmountable costs of higher education, child care and saving for retirement.
If Obama’s words Tuesday night didn’t land with the kind of impact they should have, though, it’s because they came so long after most Americans had stopped paying attention. Ironically, given his relative inexperience and his reputation as an orator when he was elected in 2008, Obama has turned out to be a better steward of the economy than he is a champion of it.
This confusion goes all the way back to 2009, when Obama’s genius advisers made some very ill-advised projections about how the economy would magically right itself within plenty of time of the 2010 midterms. That was the calculus that led Obama to steer his administration into a fierce storm over health care, even as the unemployment rate hovered stubbornly near 10 percent.
By the time he ran for re-election in 2012, the economy had cleared imminent danger and was slowly recovering, and he could reasonably have claimed credit. The 2009 auto bailout, for instance, staved off catastrophe in the Midwest and maybe the entire industrial sector.
But Obama’s aides were petrified of pointing to any real progress without first going through an entire monologue on the misery that continued to befall ordinary Americans. They feared that too much boasting would make the president seem out of touch.
And, more than that, the deeper he got into what he characterized as his “one paragraph” presidency, the more fatalistic Obama himself seemed to become. He gave the impression that he didn’t think he could really affect the economy, anyway. The winds of history would blow this way and that, and all a president could do was hope for a gust.
So Obama made taxes and concentrated wealth — rather than the promise of a nascent recovery — the central theme of his re-election campaign.
Ever since, Obama has found himself buffeted by the self-described populists in his party, whose core message relies on the idea that America is always headed backward and that everything is getting worse. This was the subject of an interesting, if little noticed, debate in Washington during the run-up to the State of the Union address. Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts senator and idol of the populist left, took the unusual step of publicly attacking a story in Politico Magazine, because the writer, Michael Grunwald, argued (only a little facetiously) that the real state of the American economy was awesomeness.
As has been the case throughout his presidency, Obama, determined not to be seen as a triangulator, has shied away from disagreement with the populists in his own party, even if it means downplaying his own record. He’s gone on talking mostly about economic suffering and inequality, at a time when the broad base of the country might well have responded to a more hopeful message — especially from the guy who used “hope” as his campaign slogan.
At every one of these junctures, Obama forfeited an opportunity — not simply to trumpet his own growing success, but to help voters understand the crucial distinction between short-term and long-term economic challenges. He missed the chance to say, “Guess what? Things are actually getting a lot better now. You’re welcome. But we still face a serious crisis for your kids not too far down the line, and that’s what I want to focus on next.”
That’s the argument he made Tuesday, and it comes too late for his own presidency. No one seriously believes that Obama can enact any of the major proposals he ticked off in his speech. The public isn’t likely to rally around him now, and absent that, Republicans have written him off.
Obama has now been reduced to suggesting topics for conversation, sort of like a facilitator-in-chief. “Talk amongst yourselves.”
But maybe that role can be useful, too. Because the speech he gave Tuesday, long overdue and soon to be eclipsed by another presidential campaign, raises all the right questions for the country’s future.
What does a modern tax code look like? What about modern infrastructure? Where are the next century’s jobs?           
Trust me, we’re not going to find them in a repossessed storage locker.

COCA -COLA HISTORY

  I had no idea it was a bitter sweet thing with coke .......and today it has been linked to diabetes......... and  i am not sure why it see...