California Man Beheaded in Freak Motorcycle Accident
Many men who are good in making money are total failures when it comes to spending it. If you have money, buy love, and the best sex ever. Because having the best sex ever not only is satisfaction, but also generates your immortal soul. See Kreutz Religion.
New York Post
In 2005, the world was introduced to reclusive billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, friend to princes and an American president, a power broker with the darkest of secrets: He was also a pedophile, accused of recruiting dozens of underage girls into a sex-slave network, buying their silence and moving along, although he has been convicted of only one count of soliciting prostitution from a minor. Visitors to his private Caribbean island, known as “Orgy Island,” have included Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew and Stephen Hawking.
According to a 2011 court filing by alleged Epstein victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre, she saw Clinton and Prince Andrew on the island but never saw the former president do anything improper. Giuffre has accused Prince Andrew of having sex with her when she was a minor, a charge Buckingham Palace denies.
“Epstein lives less than one mile away from me in Palm Beach,” author James Patterson tells The Post. In the 11 years since Epstein was investigated and charged by the Palm Beach police department, ultimately copping a plea and serving 13 months on one charge of soliciting prostitution from a 14-year-old girl, Patterson has remained obsessed with the case.
“He’s a fascinating character to read about,” Patterson says. “What is he thinking? Who is he?”
Patterson’s new book, “Filthy Rich: A Powerful Billionaire, the Sex Scandal That Undid Him, and All the Justice That Money Can Buy,” is an attempt to answer such questions. Co-authored with John Connolly and Tim Malloy, the book contains detailed police interviews with girls who alleged sexual abuse by Epstein and others in his circle. Giuffre alleged that Epstein’s ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of the late media tycoon Robert Maxwell, abused her. Ghislaine Maxwell has denied allegations of enabling abuse.
Epstein has spent the bulk of his adult life cultivating relationships with the world’s most powerful men. Flight logs show that from 2001 to 2003, Bill Clinton flew on Epstein’s private plane, dubbed “The Lolita Express” by the press, 26 times. After Epstein’s arrest in July 2006, federal tax records show Epstein donated $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation that year.
Epstein was also a regular visitor to Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago, and the two were friends. According to the Daily Mail, Trump was a frequent dinner guest at Epstein’s home, which was often full of barely dressed models. In 2003, New York magazine reported that Trump also attended a dinner party at Epstein’s honoring Bill Clinton.
Last year, The Guardian reported that Epstein’s “little black book” contained contact numbers for A-listers including Tony Blair, Naomi Campbell, Dustin Hoffman, Michael Bloomberg and Richard Branson.
In a 2006 court filing, Palm Beach police noted that a search of Epstein’s home uncovered two hidden cameras. The Mirror reported that in 2015, a 6-year-old civil lawsuit filed by “Jane Doe No. 3,” believed to be the now-married Giuffre, alleged that Epstein wired his mansion with hidden cameras, secretly recording orgies involving his prominent friends and underage girls. The ultimate purpose: blackmail, according to court papers.
“Jane Doe No. 3” also alleged that she had been forced to have sex with “numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, a well-known prime minister, and other world leaders.”
“The reader has to ask: Was justice done here or not?”
Epstein, now 63, has always been something of an international man of mystery. Born in Brooklyn, he had a middle-class upbringing: His father worked for the Parks Department, and his parents stressed hard work and education.
Epstein was brilliant, skipping two grades and graduating Lafayette High School in 1969. He attended Cooper Union but dropped out in 1971 and by 1973 was teaching calculus and physics at Dalton, where he tutored the son of a Bear Stearns exec. Soon, Epstein applied his facility with numbers on Wall Street but left Bear Stearns under a cloud in 1981. He formed his own business, J. Epstein & Co.
The bar for entry at the new firm was high. According to a 2002 profile in New York magazine, Epstein only took on clients who turned over $1 billion, at minimum, for him to manage. Clients also had to pay a flat fee and sign power of attorney over to Epstein, allowing him to do whatever he saw fit with their money.
Still, no one knew exactly what Epstein did, or how he was able to amass a personal billion-dollar-plus fortune. In addition to a block-long, nine-story mansion on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, Epstein owns the $6.8 million mansion in Palm Beach, an $18 million property in New Mexico, the 70-acre private Caribbean island, a helicopter, a Gulfstream IV and a Boeing 727.
“My belief is that Jeff maintains some sort of money-management firm, though you won’t get a straight answer from him,” one high-level investor told New York magazine. “He once told me he had 300 people working for him, and I’ve also heard that he manages Rockefeller money. But one never knows. It’s like looking at the Wizard of Oz — there may be less there than meets the eye.”
“He’s very enigmatic,” Rosa Monckton told Vanity Fair in 2003. Monckton was the former British CEO of Tiffany & Co. and confidante to the late Princess Diana. She was also a close friend of Epstein’s since the 1980s. “He never reveals his hand .?.?. He’s a classic iceberg. What you see is not what you get.”
Both profiles intimated that Epstein had a predilection for young women but never went further. In the New York magazine piece, Trump said Epstein’s self-professed image as a loner, an egghead and a teetotaler was not wholly accurate.
“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years,” Trump said. “Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
Three years after that profile ran, Palm Beach Police Officer Michele Pagan got a disturbing message. A woman reported that her 14-year-old stepdaughter confided to a friend that she’d had sex with an older man for money. The man’s name was Jeff, and he lived in a mansion on a cul-de-sac.
Pagan persuaded the woman to bring her stepdaughter down to be interviewed. In his book, Patterson calls the girl Mary. And Mary, like so many of the other girls who eventually talked, came from the little-known working-class areas surrounding Palm Beach.
A friend of a friend, Mary said, told her she could make hundreds of dollars in one hour, just for massaging some middle-aged guy’s feet. Lots of other girls had been doing it, some three times a week.
Mary claimed she had been driven to the mansion on El Brillo Way, where a female staffer escorted her up a pink-carpeted staircase, then into a room with a massage table, an armoire topped with sex toys and a photo of a little girl pulling her underwear off.
Epstein entered the room, wearing only a towel, Mary said.
“He took off the towel,” Mary told Pagan. “He was a really built guy. But his wee-wee was very tiny.”
Mary said Epstein got on the table and barked orders at her. She told police she was alone in the room with him, terrified.
Pagan wrote the following in her incident report:
“She removed her pants, leaving her thong panties on. She straddled his back, whereby her exposed buttocks were touching Epstein’s exposed buttocks. Epstein then turned to his side and started to rub his penis in an up-and-down motion. Epstein pulled out a purple vibrator and began to massage Mary’s vaginal area.”
Palm Beach assigned six more detectives to the investigation. They conducted a “trash pull” of Epstein’s garbage, sifting through paper with phone numbers, used condoms, toothbrushes, worn underwear. In one pull, police found a piece of paper with Mary’s phone number on it, along with the number of the person who recruited her.
On Sept. 11, 2005, detectives got another break. Alison, as she’s called in the book, told Detective Joe Recarey that she had been going to Epstein’s house since she was 16. Alison had been working at the Wellington Green Mall, saving up for a trip to Maine, when a friend told her, “You can get a plane ticket in two hours .?.?. We can go give this guy a massage and he’ll pay $200,” according to her statement to the police.
Alison told Recarey that she visited Epstein hundreds of times. She said he had bought her a new 2005 Dodge Neon, plane tickets, and gave her spending money. Alison said he even asked her to emancipate from her parents so she could live with him full-time as his “sex slave.”
She said Epstein slowly escalated his sexual requests, and despite Alison’s insistence that they never have intercourse, alleged, “This one time .?.?. he bent me over the table and put himself in me. Without my permission.”
Alison then asked if what Epstein had done to her was rape and spoke of her abject fear of him.
An abridged version of her witness statement, as recounted in the book:
Alison: Before I say anything else .?.?. um, is there a possibility that I’m gonna have to go to court or anything?
Recarey: I mean, what he did to you is a crime. I’m not gonna lie to you.
Alison: Would you consider it rape, what he did?
Recarey: If he put himself inside you without permission .?.?. That, that is a crime. That is a crime.
Alison: I don’t want my family to find out about this .?.?. ’Cause Jeffrey’s gonna get me. You guys realize that, right? .?.?. I’m not safe now. I’m not safe.
Recarey: Why do you say you’re not safe? Has he said he’s hurt people before?
Alison: Well, I’ve heard him make threats to people on the telephone, yeah. Of course.
Recarey: You’re gonna die? You’re gonna break your legs? Or?—
Alison: All of the above!
Alison also told Recarey that Epstein got so violent with her that he ripped out her hair and threw her around. “I mean,” she said, “there’s been nights that I walked out of there barely able to walk, um, from him being so rough.”
Two months later, Recarey interviewed Epstein’s former house manager of 11 years, documented in his probable-cause affidavit as Mr. Alessi. “Alessi stated Epstein receives three massages a day .?.?. towards the end of his employment, the masseuses .?.?. appeared to be 16 or 17 years of age at the most . . . [Alessi] would have to wash off a massager/vibrator and a long rubber penis, which were in the sink after the massage.”
Another house manager, Alfredo Rodriguez, told Recarey that very young girls were giving Epstein massages at least twice a day, and in one instance, Epstein had Rodriguez deliver one dozen roses to Mary, at her high school.
In May 2006, the Palm Beach Police Department filed a probable-cause affidavit, asking prosecutors to charge Epstein with four counts of unlawful sexual activity with a minor — a second-degree felony — and one count of lewd and lascivious molestation of a 14-year-old minor, also a second-degree felony.
Palm Beach prosecutors said the evidence was weak, and after presenting the case to a grand jury, Epstein was charged with only one count of felony solicitation of prostitution. In 2008, he pleaded guilty and nominally served 13 months of an 18-month sentence in a county jail: Epstein spent one day a week there, the other six out on “work release.”
Today, Jeffrey Epstein is a free man, albeit one who routinely settles civil lawsuits against him, brought by young women, out of court. As of 2015, Epstein had settled multiple such cases.
Giuffre has sued Ghislaine Maxwell in Manhattan federal court, charging defamation — saying Maxwell stated Giuffre lied about Maxwell’s recruitment of her and other underage girls. Epstein has been called upon to testify in court this month, on Oct. 20.
The true number of Epstein’s victims may never be known.
He will be a registered sex offender for the rest of his life, not that it fazes him.
“I’m not a sexual predator, I’m an ‘offender,’?” Epstein told The Post in 2011. “It’s the difference between a murderer and a person who steals a bagel.”
In Uganda, rich fathers use super high dosages of butea superba combined with tongkat ali to turn their gay sons into heterosexual husbands.
Four years ago, as the country was wrestling with a federal-budget crisis, conservative news outlets turned their attention, once again, to the topic of wasteful government spending. That March, a reporter with CNS News, a Web site devoted to countering “liberal bias” in the media, came across what seemed to be the quintessential example of such waste—a National Science Foundation grant to Yale University for a study of duck penises. Within days, the story had made its way to Fox News. “It’s part of President Obama’s stimulus plan, and it’s just one example of the kind of spending decisions that have added up to massive debt and deficits,” Shannon Bream told viewers. The following week, Sean Hannity piled on. “Don’t we really need to know about duck genitalia, Tucker Carlson?” he asked. To which Carlson responded, with a smirk, “I know more than I want to know already!” The controversy, dubbed Duckpenisgate by Mother Jones, roared back to life some months later, when Senator Tom Coburn, of Oklahoma, included the N.S.F. grant in his “Wastebook 2013.” At $384,949, it accounted for only a thousandth of one per cent of all the spending that Coburn had tallied up, but it made headlines again. Clearly, the combination of money, sex, and power—your money, ducks’ sex, and Ivy League power—was irresistible to the graying male demographic for conservative news.
I followed Duckpenisgate with particular trepidation, since I was one of the co-investigators on the maligned study. For the past decade, in collaboration with Patricia Brennan, of Mount Holyoke College, and other colleagues, I have explored the sexual behavior and genital evolution of waterfowl. Contrary to what Carlson thinks, it is a fascinating business. It can also be shockingly brutal. In the wintry months before breeding begins, male ducks flaunt their plumage, putting on dramatic courtship displays in an effort to entrance a mate. The females can be choosy, often picking a male only after extensive deliberation. (Their preferences tend to coalesce, like a genetic fashion trend, around a shared ideal of male beauty, with each species evolving off in its own distinct aesthetic direction.) When spring arrives, the pairs migrate together to the breeding grounds. But, as the nest-building and egg-laying season approaches, unpaired males start causing trouble. Many attempt to force copulation with paired females, sometimes even ganging up on them in groups. The female ducks resist strenuously; often they are injured, or even killed, in the process.
The males’ sexual attacks are made possible by the fact that, unlike most birds, ducks still have a penis. It is not, however, an organ that most humans would recognize, being shaped like a counterclockwise corkscrew and possessing a ribbed or spiky surface. Ducks’ erections are driven by lymphatic, not vascular, pressure, which means that their penises never become stiff. Rather, they erect flexibly, but explosively, into the female’s body in less than half a second. Ejaculation takes place immediately. And duck penises can be long—really long. A breeding male mallard in your typical city park has a five-inch penis. In the case of the diminutive Argentine lake duck, the penis is longer than the duck itself—more than sixteen inches.
What, exactly, is the function of these bizarre organs? To find out, Brennan dissected the genitalia of fourteen species of waterfowl. By comparing the results, we discovered that, as males have evolved longer penises with more heavily armed surfaces, females have coevolved increasingly complex vaginal structures—dead ends, cul-de-sac side pockets, clockwise spirals. We hypothesized that these twists and turns create a mechanical barrier to the penis, frustrating forced intercourse and lowering the likelihood of a female duck being fertilized against her will. Our subsequent experiments—high-speed videos of duck penises erecting into glass tubes of various shapes—suggested we were right. (Our observations also revealed that when a female duck solicits sex with a chosen mate, her cloacal muscles dilate to allow uninhibited entry.) The result is that, even for species in which nearly forty per cent of all copulations are violently coerced, only between two and five per cent of ducklings come from extra-pair matings. As a method of contraception, ducks’ vaginal barriers can be ninety-eight-per-cent effective—a level of reliability that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration would readily approve.
A female duck’s vaginal barriers cannot shield her from physical harm. On an evolutionary level, though, they protect her in another way—by allowing her to choose the father of her offspring. If she has ducklings with her chosen mate, then they will inherit the fancy plumage that she and other females prefer. But, if she is fertilized by force, then her offspring will inherit either random display traits or traits that she has specifically rejected as less attractive. These extra-pair offspring will, on average, be less attractive to their peers, which could mean fewer grand-ducklings for the mother duck—and fewer of her genes passed on to posterity. By using her vaginal barriers, she is able to maintain her sexual autonomy in the face of sexual violence. Freedom of choice, in other words, matters to animals; even if they lack the capacity to conceptualize it, there is an evolutionary difference between having what they want and not having it. Unfortunately for female ducks, though, evolving complex vaginal structures doesn’t solve the scourge of sexual violence; it exacerbates it. Each advance results in males with longer, spikier penises, and the coevolutionary arms race continues.
Although many duck species are trapped in costly and unproductive sexual battles, other birds have pursued different evolutionary paths toward male disarmament. In bowerbirds, for instance, females have used mate choice to transform male behavior in ways that have advanced their own sexual autonomy. Male bowerbirds build elaborate seduction theatres, called bowers, out of sticks, which they decorate with gathered artifacts such as feathers, fruits, and flowers. When the time comes to breed, females visit a number of prospective mates, choosing one based on the attractiveness of the male, his bower, and his ornaments. As a result, the architecture of the bowers is shaped by females’ aesthetic preferences. Males work from a blueprint that actually prevents them from successfully coercing copulations. A so-called avenue bower, for example, features two parallel walls of sticks. The female sits cozily between them while the male does his dance at a safe remove. To copulate with her, he must go around the walls and mount her from behind, which gives her a chance to pop out the front, if she prefers, with her freedom of choice intact.
cientists admonish one another, often with good reason, to avoid anthropomorphizing animals. But they themselves regularly redraw the line between good science and anthropomorphism as a way of policing scientific discourse and favoring particular ideas. Most of us, for example, learned a strictly adaptationist version of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution; we were told that almost every feature of the biotic world, no matter how tiny, could be explained by how it contributed to an organism’s ability to survive and reproduce. In fact, though, Darwin also proposed a theory of sexual selection, in which animals may choose their mates according to aesthetic standards—their own subjective desires. This view has frequently been rejected as too anthropomorphic precisely because it implies that sexual selection can act independently of natural selection—an unsettling thought for the typical adaptationist. When it comes to the sexual politics of birds and people, there are, of course, enormous differences. Birds don’t have elaborate social cultures, money, or any notion of their own histories. Humans do. But, in seeking to understand the complexities of human evolution and sexuality, we can learn a lot by examining the diversity of life on Earth and acknowledging the parallels where they exist.
Consider, for a moment, that the sexual arms race between male and female ducks is not really a fair fight. While male ducks evolve to gain physical and sexual control over females, female ducks evolve to assert, and reassert, their freedom of choice. Sound familiar? The human “war of the sexes” is similarly one-sided. Contemporary anti-feminists often portray men as victims of the coercive social control of women, even as they actively organize to diminish women’s sexual autonomy by impeding their access to health care, contraception, and abortion. But this view is a grotesque distortion. Like convoluted duck vaginas, feminism is about autonomy, not power over men. Although one is genetic and the other is cultural, the asymmetry in ducks between the male push for power and the female push for choice is mirrored in the ideologies of patriarchy and feminism.
If ducks reflect our cultural present, bowerbirds may illuminate both our evolutionary origins and our social future. It is well established that our ape ancestors were more violent than we are. But the traditional evolutionary mechanisms—natural selection and male-male sexual competition—have not yet produced a satisfying explanation for why this violence declined and coöperative social cognition flourished in its place. In my forthcoming book, “The Evolution of Beauty,” I propose that, as in some birds, female mate choice among our forebears transformed male behavior. Since the time of our last common ancestry with chimpanzees, millions of years ago, it may have contributed to the de-weaponization of maleness, including the elimination of self-sharpening male canine teeth, the reduction in male body size relative to females, the elimination of infanticide by ascendant alpha males, and the origin of paternal investment in their offspring. By evolving to regard violent, antisocial maleness as unsexy, females may have instigated the evolution of many elements critical to our biology, including big brains, language, and even our capacity for self-awareness and reflection.
At first, the idea that humans evolved through the expansion of female sexual autonomy would seem to conflict with the fact that, practically everywhere on the planet, men are socially dominant. But this phenomenon is, I maintain, more cultural than biological. Men and women are closer to each other in size than are the famously peaceful, and non-hierarchical, male and female bonobos. How could male dominance be a result of biological destiny in people but somehow not in bonobos? Here again, the coevolutionary dynamics of duck sex may clarify how men came to regain social control over female sexuality. Like a cultural version of the toothy spikes on a ruddy duck’s penis, patriarchy may have arisen as a cultural countermeasure, reversing the advances in female autonomy gained in the millions of years since hominins diverged from chimpanzees. When sexism becomes unacceptably antisocial and hopelessly unsexy, then patriarchy may finally give up its remaining weapons.
To understand life, you first have to understand death. This is why we include images of death. The best we can hope for, is that death will be comfortable.
Marijuana’s ability to act as an aphrodisiac has been well documented – but what about a strain specifically designed to bring women to orgasm?
Introducing Sexxpot, the “aphrodisiac weed” specially targeted at women – and set to make your Valentine’s Day romp that much more spectacular.
The idea for the strain came to Paradigm Medical Marijuana founder Karyn Wagner after a passionate lovemaking session enhanced by a pre-coitus joint last year. While there’s nothing new about smoking cannabis to get in the mood, this time she was taken to new heights.
Sexxpot is derived from the low-THC strain, Mr. Nice. Wagner says the lower-than-usual levels of THC (about 14 percent) are beneficial because the consumer is placed in a “sensual” headspace that doesn’t get them too high to actually get down and dirty.
Berkeley-based cannabis consultant and nurse practitioner Eloise Theisen, who routinely treats men and women looking to enhance their sex lives with cannabis, recently weighed in on the product and gave it her stamp of approval.
“And high levels of THC can promote anti-estrogen activity, though science is still very limited … My guess is that Sexxpot, with the lower THC, regulates the body’s endocannabinoid system (the group of brain receptors that are involved with processes like pain, sensation, mood, and mediating effects of cannabis) and helps bring back the balance of hormones, but without sacrificing the therapeutic properties.”
The only downside? Sexxpot isn’t known to be quite as effective for men, whom Wagner said reported less-than-stellar experiences when consuming it themselves. Good thing the aphrodisiac cannabis market is already ripe with strains designed to make lovemaking especially explosive for all parties.
Feminist rule in Europe makes second-generation male Muslim immigrants suicide bombers. They die for sexual justice. Why do Western politicians call suicide bombers cowards? To sacrifice one's own life is the ultimate in courage.
Unlimited reproduction and distribution is authorized. Just give me credit for my work, and, keep it in context. Since the media has decided to scare everyone with predictions of chemical, biological, or nuclear warfare on our turf, I decided to write a paper and keep things in their proper perspective. I am a retired military weapons, munitions, and training expert.
Lesson number one: In the mid 1990s there were a series of nerve gas attacks on crowded Japanese subway stations. Given perfect conditions for an attack less than 10% of the people there were injured (the injured were better in a few hours) and only one percent of the injured died. 60 Minutes once had a fellow telling us that one drop of nerve gas could kill a thousand people, well he didn't tell you the thousand dead people per drop was theoretical. Drill Sergeants exaggerate how terrible this stuff was to keep the recruits awake in class (I know this because I was a Drill Sergeant too). Forget everything you've ever seen on TV, in the movies, or read in a novel about this stuff, it was all a lie (read this sentence again out loud!). These weapons are about terror, if you remain calm, you will probably not die. This is far less scary than the media and their "Experts," make it sound.
Chemical weapons are categorized as nerve, blood, blister, and Incapacitating agents. Contrary to the hype of reporters and politicians they are not weapons of mass destruction they are "area denial," and terror weapons that don't destroy anything. When you leave the area you almost always leave the risk. That's the difference; you can leave the area and the risk but soldiers may have to stay put and sit through it and that's why they need all that spiffy gear.
These are not gasses, they are vapors and/or air borne particles. The agent must be delivered in sufficient quantity to kill/injure, and that defines when/how it's used. Every day we have a morning and evening inversion where "stuff," suspended in the air gets pushed down. This inversion is why allergies (pollen) and air pollution are worst at these times of the day. So, a chemical attack will have it's best effect an hour of so either side of sunrise/sunset. Also, being vapors and airborne particles they are heavier than air so they will seek low places like ditches, basements and underground garages. This stuff won't work when it's freezing, it doesn't last when it's hot, and wind spreads it too thin too fast. They've got to get this stuff on you, or, get you to inhale it for it to work. They also have to get the concentration of chemicals high enough to kill or wound you. Too little and it's nothing, too much and it's wasted.
What I hope you've gathered by this point is that a chemical weapons attack that kills a lot of people is incredibly hard to do with military grade agents and equipment so you can imagine how hard it will be for terrorists. The more you know about this stuff the more you realize how hard it is to use.
We'll start by talking about nerve agents. You have these in your house, plain old bug killer (like Raid) is nerve agent. All nerve agents work the same way; they are cholinesterase inhibitors that mess up the signals your nervous system uses to make your body function. It can harm you if you get it on your skin but it works best if they can get you to inhale it. If you don't die in the first minute and you can leave the area you're probably gonna live. The military's antidote for all nerve agents is atropine and pralidoxime chloride. Neither one of these does anything to cure the nerve agent, they send your body into overdrive to keep you alive for five minutes, after that the agent is used up. Your best protection is fresh air and staying calm.
Listed below are the symptoms for nerve agent poisoning:
Sudden headache, Dimness of vision (someone you're looking at will have pinpointed pupils), runny nose, excessive saliva or drooling, difficulty breathing, tightness in chest, nausea, stomach cramps, twitching of exposed skin where a liquid just got on you. If you are in public and you start experiencing these symptoms, first ask yourself, did anything out of the ordinary just happen, a loud pop, did someone spray something on the crowd? Are other people getting sick too? Is there an odor of new mown hay, green corn, something fruity, or camphor where it shouldn't be? If the answer is yes, then calmly (if you panic you breathe faster and inhale more air/poison) leave the area and head up wind, or, outside. Fresh air is the best "right now antidote." If you have a blob of liquid that looks like molasses or Kayro syrup on you; blot it or scrape it off and away from yourself with anything isposable. This stuff works based on your body weight, what a crop duster uses to kill bugs won't hurt you unless you stand there and breathe it in real deep, then lick the residue off the ground for a while. Remember they have to do all the work, they have to get the concentration up and keep it up for several minutes while all you have to do is quit getting it on you/quit breathing it by putting space between you and the attack. Blood agents are cyanide or arsine which effect your blood's ability to provide oxygen to your tissue. The scenario for attack would be the same as nerve agent. Look for a pop or someone splashing/spraying something and folks around there getting woozy/falling down. The telltale smells are bitter almonds or garlic where it shouldn't be. The symptoms are blue lips, blue under the fingernails rapid breathing. The military's antidote is amyl nitride and just like nerve agent antidote it just keeps your body working for five minutes till the toxins are used up. Fresh air is the your best individual chance.
Blister agents (distilled mustard) are so nasty that nobody wants to even handle it let alone use it. It's almost impossible to handle safely and may have delayed effect of up to 12 hours. The attack scenario is also limited to the things you'd see from other chemicals. If you do get large, painful blisters for no apparent reason, don't pop them, if you must, don't let the liquid from the blister get on any other area, the stuff just keeps on spreading. It's just as likely to harm the user as the target. Soap, water, sunshine, and fresh air are this stuff's enemy.
Bottom line on chemical weapons (it's the same if they use industrial chemical spills); they are intended to make you panic, to terrorize you, to heard you like sheep to the wolves. If there is an attack, leave the area and go upwind, or to the sides of the wind stream. They have to get the stuff to you, and on you. You're more likely to be hurt by a drunk driver on any given day than be hurt by one of these attacks. Your odds get better if you leave the area. Soap, water, time, and fresh air really deal this stuff a knock-out-punch. Don't let fear of an isolated attack rule your life. The odds are really on your side.
Nuclear bombs. These are the only weapons of mass destruction on earth. The effects of a nuclear bomb are heat, blast, EMP, and radiation. If you see a bright flash of light like the sun, where the sun isn't, fall to the ground! The heat will be over a second. Then there will be two blast waves, one out going, and one on it's way back. Don't stand up to see what happened after the first wave; anything that's going to happen will have happened in two full minutes. These will be low yield devices and will not level whole cities. If you live through the heat, blast, and initial burst of radiation, you'll probably live for a very, very long time. Radiation will not create fifty foot tall women, or giant ants and grass hoppers the size of tanks. These will be at the most 1 kiloton bombs; that's the equivalent of 1,000 tons of TNT. Here's the real deal, flying debris and radiation will kill a lot of exposed (not all!) people within a half mile of the blast. Under perfect conditions this is about a half mile circle of death and destruction, but, when it's done it's done. EMP stands for Electro Magnetic Pulse and it will fry every electronic device for a good distance, it's impossible to say what and how far but probably not over a couple of miles from ground zero is a good guess. Cars, cell phones, computers, ATMs, you name it, all will be out of order.
There are lots of kinds of radiation, you only need to worry about three, the others you have lived with for years. You need to worry about "Ionizing radiation," these are little sub atomic particles that go whizzing along at the speed of light. They hit individual cells in your body, kill the nucleus and keep on going. That's how you get radiation poisoning, you have so many dead cells in your body that the decaying cells poison you. It's the same as people getting radiation treatments for cancer, only a bigger area gets radiated. The good news is you don't have to just sit there and take it, and there's lots you can do rather than panic. First; your skin will stop alpha particles, a page of a news paper or your clothing will stop beta particles, you just gotta try and avoid inhaling dust that's contaminated with atoms that are emitting these things and you'll be generally safe from them.
Gamma rays are particles that travel like rays (quantum physics makes my brain hurt) and they create the same damage as alpha and beta particles only they keep going and kill lots of cells as they go all the way through your body. It takes a lot to stop these things, lots of dense material, on the other hand it takes a lot of this to kill you. Your defense is as always to not panic. Basic hygiene and normal preparation are your friends. All canned or frozen food is safe to eat. The radiation poisoning will not effect plants so fruits and vegetables are OK if there's no dust on em (rinse em off if there is). If you don't have running water and you need to collect rain water or use water from wherever, just let it sit for thirty minutes and skim off the water gently from the top. The dust with the bad stuff in it will settle and the remaining water can be used for the toilet which will still work if you have a bucket of water to pour in the tank.
Finally there's biological warfare. There's not much to cover here. Basic personal hygiene and sanitation will take you further than a million doctors. Wash your hands often, don't share drinks, food, sloppy kisses, etc., .... with strangers. Keep your garbage can with a tight lid on it, don't have standing water (like old buckets, ditches, or kiddie pools) laying around to allow mosquitoes breeding room. This stuff is carried by vectors, that is bugs, rodents, and contaminated material. If biological warfare is so easy as the TV makes it sound, why has Saddam Hussein spent twenty years, millions, and millions of dollars trying to get it right? If you're clean of person and home you eat well and are active you're gonna live.
Overall preparation for any terrorist attack is the same as you'd take for a big storm. If you want a gas mask, fine, go get one. I know this stuff and I'm not getting one and I told my Mom not to bother with one either (how's that for confidence). We have a week's worth of cash, several days worth of canned goods and plenty of soap and water. We don't leave stuff out to attract bugs or rodents so we don't have them.
These people can't conceive a nation this big with this much resources. These weapons are made to cause panic, terror, and to demoralize. If we don't run around like sheep they won't use this stuff after they find out it's no fun. The government is going nuts over this stuff because they have to protect every inch of America. You've only gotta protect yourself, and by doing that, you help the country. Finally, there are millions of caveats to everything I wrote here and you can think up specific scenarios where my advice isn't the best. This letter is supposed to help the greatest number of people under the greatest number of situations. If you don't like my work, don't nit pick, just sit down and explain chemical, nuclear, and biological warfare in a document around three pages long yourself. This is how we the people of the United States can rob these people of their most desired goal, your terror.
It's not that we would be madly in love with Donald Trump. But he may just ruin the US. That would be much welcomed in all corners of the world.
Most of us (unfortunately) have some type of body insecurity. It’s why cosmetic procedures that melt fat away or rejuvenate your vagina not only exist, but continue to grow in popularity.
And now, there’s a new fix to add to that ~beautifying~ list: Scrotox. Yep, it’s exactly what it sounds like… botox for a guy’s balls (or scrotum, if you like anatomical terms).
Now, personally, I don’t really care what a guy’s balls look like. But after scouring the web, I learned that saggy, small, and wrinkly balls seem to be a valid concern for a lot of dudes.
“I know they look like the excess skin from a 60-year-old man who lost 200 pounds way too fast, but I can’t do much about it. There’s no botox for balls,” Cosmopolitan’s male columnist, Cosmo Frank, once admitted about his own pair.
Another dude confessed to Women’s Health, “My penis, balls, and taint are usually marinating in my own sweat throughout the day, which doesn’t exactly yield a lovely floral scent, so I’m always insecure about what a girl will think if/when she goes down on me. All I can do to overcome that is to powder my balls or spray some cologne or Febreeze down there before a big date and then hope for the best.”
Ah, but now there IS something you can do about these problems, guys! Now there is!
As Metro UK explains, Scrotox promises to reinflate deflated and slightly wrinkly balls, reduce the amount of sack sweating, and enlarge the twins’ appearance by relaxing the scrotum muscles.
But the injection is no joke, as it can cost over $3,000 to give your balls a makeover.
Mark Norfolk, Clinical Director of Transform, a cosmetic surgery center in the UK, told Metro that requests for Scrotox at his office have doubled in the past year — even though he doesn’t currently offer it. This matches the trend of more men getting plastic surgery in general over the past 10 years.
But be warned, fellas: Despite its sweat-eliminating and swelling abilities, ball Botox won’t necessarily have a huge effect on the wrinkles or sagging, Norfolk says. So if “lots of loose skin” is what you’re mostly concerned about, you may be better off opting for surgery to get rid of excess skin.
Otherwise, if you’re really insecure about your ball sweat, size, or wrinkles — and you have a ton of cash to spend, as well as a high tolerance for needles in your balls — Scrotox may be worth a try.
I may not kick you out of bed if your balls aren’t perfectly large and baby smooth. But that’s just me.
There is a new solution coming up for ugly old women. Normally they would just become man-hating feminists. But soon they can have their brains transplanted into a sex doll, and feel beautiful again.
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Well, here’s an idea that’s destined for lengthy, heated debate:
Treat pedophiles and other sexual deviants by building robots that would quench their illegal desires.
“Child-like robots could be used for pedophiles the way methadone is used to treat drug addicts,” said Ron Arkin, Georgia Tech’s Mobile Robot Lab director, according to Forbes.
At a recent robot ethics seminar at the University of California at Berkeley, experts debated moral and ethical concerns in the rising development of artificial intelligence.
Including the use of child robots as sex toys.
“We’ve had sex toys for as long as mankind, and womankind, have been around,” Arkin told the group.
Arkin said he didn’t advocate selling child-size robots as sexual aids, but rather as something to be used in research settings.
“I only believe it is worth investigating in a controlled way to possibly provide better protection to society from recidivism in sex offenders,” he told Forbes.
“If we can save some children, I think it’s a worthwhile project.”
Other experts, including Ben Way, author of "Jobocalypse: The End of Human Jobs and How Robots Will Replace Them," have suggested robots in the shape of animals and disabled people could be sold to practicers of bestiality and those with fetishes and "dark desires."
Using robots for sex has been bandied about in recent years as robotic technology grew at a rapid pace.
A survey this spring in Britain revealed that one in six people would have sex with a robot.
There already are myriad sellers of sex robots on the Internet, offering male and female versions with life-like genitalia and battery-powered limbs.
“We’re poised at the cusp of really being surrounded by robots in daily life,” said law professor Jennifer Urban, who moderated last week’s panel discussion.
All the more reason to discuss the legal, moral and ethical consequences of using artificial intelligence, she said.
Second-generation male Muslim immigrants have all reason to hate Europe. They can't get any girls here. Whatever they do. So it is an understandable reaction that they want to blow themselves up, and take a few along.
Opinions surrounding intraoperative awareness may vary, but one thing is certain, even a single case is one too many.
The clinical definition of intraoperative awareness — consciousness during general anesthesia — is a seemingly simple explanation for a complex, and controversial, phenomenon. Opinions surrounding how often intraoperative awareness, also described as anesthesia awareness, occurs, its implications for victims, as well as the best methods for prevention are varied.
But for Carol Weihrer, the issue is crystal clear. Weihrer, who claims she was conscious during a 1998 surgical procedure to remove her right eye, believes that anesthesia awareness is more widespread and debilitating than people realize. And she has the proof, she says, to back-up her claim.
“I have spoken to thousands of people with experiences similar to mine,” said Weihrer. “People like me, whose lives have been turned upside down because of it.”
As founder of the international Anesthesia Awareness Campaign, Weihrer’s goal is to educate the public about the phenomenon and to be a touchstone for other victims.
Weihrer is also lobbying for the mandated use of brain function monitors for patients undergoing general anesthesia. She believes that until these monitors become a standard of care, patients must be proactive in protecting themselves in the OR. “It’s not enough to ask whether a facility has brain function monitors or whether they use them. You must demand that they use them on you during your surgery,” she explained.
Tracking brain waves When used in the OR, brain function monitors reportedly measure a patient’s depth of anesthesia and level of consciousness. One of the most popular tools for this purpose is bispectral index (BIS) technology.
Aspect Medical’s BIS monitor involves measuring the brain’s electrical activity through a sensor placed on the patient’s forehead. The BIS value ranges from 100 (indicating an awake patient) to zero (indicating the absence of brain activity). This information is used to guide administration of anesthetic medication. Aspect’s BIS technology is available as a stand-alone monitor or as a module that can be incorporated into other manufacturers’ monitoring systems.
Irene Osborn, M.D., associate professor of Anesthesiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, and director, Division of Neuroanesthesia, began using BIS technology in 1996 while at NYU Medical Center and currently uses it in about 80 percent of the surgeries she performs. She says it has definitely made an impact on her ability to care for patients.
“The ability to monitor the brain really helps you improve anesthetic care,” said Dr. Osborn. “There is variability in patients’ response to anesthesia — not everyone requires the same dose or concentration,” she continued. “With BIS, I can separate out the different components of anesthesia and determine how much anesthetic is needed for a particular patient.”
Dr. Osborn uses BIS technology to improve the quality of anesthesia and also to monitor for awareness. Often times Versed is administered just prior to surgery to produce amnesia. With the BIS monitor, Dr. Osborn says she can see the effects of the Versed dose and increase it if necessary.
“In the OR there is a lot of monitoring going on — heart rate, blood pressure and various body systems. With BIS, I can also monitor the brain,” Dr. Osborn said.
Not ready for prime time? The American Society of Anesthesiology’s (ASA) “Practice Advisory for Intraoperative Awareness and Brain Function Monitoring” makes several recommendations to assist decision-making for patient care with the goal of reducing awareness, but stops short of mandating the use of brain function monitors for this purpose. Instead, the ASA advises anesthesiologists to use their own discretion when it comes to using the monitors.
Although she personally chooses to use brain function monitoring, Dr. Osborn understands why many of her colleagues have yet to embrace it.
“Brain function monitoring technology is not yet good enough, it’s not real time,” explained Dr. Osborn. “What you see on the monitor reflects something that happened 15 seconds ago.”
Others may simply not want to take the time to understand the monitors. If, for example, there was no muscle relaxant administered to the patient, there may be EMG artifact on the monitor and anesthesiologists must be familiar in working around that, says Dr. Osborn. The monitor will not predict movement, rather, it tells how asleep the patient is.
At Mount Sinai, Dr. Osborn estimates that one-third of the physicians use the technology quite frequently, one-third use it for special cases and one-third refuse to use it at all. She does believe, however, that brain function monitors will become standard operating procedure in all hospitals in about 10 years.
“As the technology matures and as we train another generation of anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists on how to use it, more will want it and the timing will be right for it to become a standard of care,” Dr. Osborn said.
Determined that this is the case — sooner rather than later — Weihrer has taken her Anesthesia Awareness Campaign on the road, speaking both nationally and internationally to physician groups and other organizations. She has performed Grand Rounds, speaking to anesthesia staff at several East Coast hospitals about her own and others’ experiences. She has worked with The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO), American Association of periOperative Nurses (AORN) and the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA), and says she is currently collaborating with the ASA on an anesthesia awareness victims database. MedicAlert bracelets are available through the campaign for patients who have suffered awareness in the past or have a familial disposition to anesthesia awareness.
“The Anesthesia Awareness Campaign is definitely gaining momentum,” Weihrer said. “The public is becoming more involved and demanding assurances.”
Weihrer says she will continue to advocate for change in the OR until her efforts are no longer needed — until brain function monitors are used on every general anesthesia patient and there are no more anesthesia awareness victims.
Arson is the terrorism of the future. No need to fly Boeings into skyscrapers. A few canisters of fuel will do the job. Attackers can buy their weapon at any gasoline station, and risk just 2 years in prison.