Next Generation of mobile commerce from Google latest version of Android Kitkat


Next Generation of mobile commerce from Google latest version of Android Kitkat

This feature, called deep-linking, will change the way users interact with their mobile phones. To date, mobile app content has been siloed behind rectangular chiclets.

In the next few months, users will be able to type in a few keywords in Google search, discover the document you’re looking for is in Google mail and with one simple click, takes its audience to that email in the Gmail application. In addition to creating a much better user experience, deep-linking enables five important secular trends in mobile:

First, mobile application developers will use mobile search engine optimization to re-engage users. With search deep-linking, content within applications will be surfaced in search results driving users back with greater frequency. This is critical because today the only tools available to mobile application developers to draw users back to their applications are push life cycle marketing tools email and push notifications. Search is a user action, a pull, laden with intent.

Second, mobile commerce will boom. Google‘s technology will send users deep within mobile applications, instead of the degraded mobile web experiences whose high friction payment experiences cause users to abandon their carts. Because applications store identity and payment credentials, these apps enable 1-click payments and will user conversion rates substantially.

Third, new advertising opportunities will be created for developers. I suspect Google will enable bidding for premium position in the search results. Imagine a user with two different travel booking applications, eg. Kayak and Orbitz. When the user initiates a search on Google for flight, each of these mobile applications would likely be willing to bid on premium placement to capture the transaction.

Fourth, search deep-linking solidifies Google search as the default first action for every user on android. Like on the web, search will provide the fastest means of accessing content on a mobile phone.

Fifth, search deep-linking will reinforce native application dominance. The better UX afforded by native apps and the easier payment flows will finally be accessible to the billion Android users and their tens of billions of monthly search queries.

Given the volume of Google searches on mobile phones, and the fountain of traffic Google mobile searches present, I expect developers will go to great lengths to integrate with Google’s search deep-linking and for them to be handsomely rewarded. Deep-linking, despite its small and unnoticed entry, heralds a new era for mobile apps

More Articles

Like this:

A Moroccan in Israel

Jewish colonies and settlements. Tel Aviv. Car...

Jewish colonies and settlements. Tel Aviv. Carrying bricks. Digitized from 1 negative : glass, stereograph, dry plate ; 5 x 7 in. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Tel Aviv Stock Exchange in Ehad Haam Street

Tel Aviv Stock Exchange in Ehad Haam Street (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Great synagogue of Tel Aviv- View from the air

Great synagogue of Tel Aviv- View from the air (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Pagoda house, Tel-Aviv, Israel. Franç...

English: Pagoda house, Tel-Aviv, Israel. Français : Pagoda house (Trad. : La Maison pagode). Photo prise à Tel-Aviv, en Israël. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

"When it's Jeroen, you can always Tel"

“When it’s Jeroen, you can always Tel” (Photo credit: docpi)

Israel News
World News
Israel Opinion
Israel Business
Israel Culture
Israel Travel
Casablanca – Tel Aviv
Fayce 'I feel completely Tel Avivian' Photo: Yaakov Lappin
Fayce ‘I feel completely Tel Avivian’ Photo: Yaakov Lappin
Get Breaking News Alerts to Your Desktop
Red email - send us news tips

A Moroccan in Israel

How did a Muslim Moroccan come to live in Tel Aviv? The remarkable story of Fayce

Yaakov Lappin

Published: 02.21.07, 14:19 / Israel News

At first glance, Fayce (not his real name), looks like a normal, young Tel Aviv resident. His native sounding unaccented Hebrew – complete with all of the Israeli slang – and his mannerisms bear all the hallmarks of someone who has lived in Israel for a long time.

But Fayce is actually a Muslim Moroccan from a poor Casablanca district, who arrived in Israel in1997 on a student visa, to study at Tel Aviv University.

His remarkable story has been turned into a book in French, which he authored, and which is being published by Beni Issembert, an Israeli journalist who made aliyah from France.

Since arriving in Israel, Fayce has quickly adopted what he calls “the hutzpa here,” which he has come to admire.

Fayce says ‘Israel is centrally important to me’ (Photo: Yaakov Lappin)

He has fallen out with Israeli Arabs after defending Israel in political arguments, and come close to being a victim of a Palestinian suicide bomb attack on the Tel Aviv Dolphinarium club, which killed 21 Israelis, mostly teenagers. He met his girlfriend while she was serving as an IDF soldier, and fell in love for the first time in Israel.

Fayce has also formed a close knit group of Israeli friends. “I feel completely Tel Avivian,” he declares proudly. “Tel Aviv and Casablanca are two sides of one large Mediterranean culture, and I have both of them in me. I’m neither here nor there,” he adds.

Now, an employee for a Tel Aviv hi-tech company, two years after his student visa has run out, he is facing an uphill struggle against the Ministry of Interior to have his visa extended, so that he can pay off his student debts and leave “with my head proudly held up,” he says.

“My story began when I went to a Jewish school in Casablanca,” Fayce explains. “My mother worked for a lawyer who was the president of the Casablanca Jewish community, and she arranged for me to go to that school as it gave me a real edge and a potential to succeed in the future,” he adds.

That already marked him out as different in Morocco, Fayce says. As he grew up, Fayce became interested in medicine, but was rejected from a Paris institute. He heard about Tel Aviv University’s medical course, and decided to give it a shot.

‘Never coming back’

“When they accepted me, my mother immediately arranged my air ticket and packed all of my cloths. She knew I would not return, but she wanted me to have an opportunity to make it in life,” Fayce says. “Next thing I knew, I was flying, for the first time in my life, out of Morocco.

After a stop over in London, I landed at Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv.” During his first night in Israel – hungry, scared, and completely disoriented – Fayce was checked by security guards at the airport several times, as he was wearing a jacket in the summer.

After realizing he was not a terrorist, each guard told Fayce, Baruch Haba (Hebrew for: Welcome). “I thought it was a curse,” Fayce recalls. “I didn’t understand why the security guards in Israel cursed after examining me, so I cursed back in Moroccan Arabic, which they didn’t understand. They nodded me through.”

Fayce received a helping hand to manage his degree financially from the Institute for Higher Education, and also took on a job to help pay for his education.

Encountering Israeli Arabs

On Tel Aviv University’s campus, Fayce said, he encountered Israeli Arabs who found it difficult to understand what he was doing in Israel. “One of them asked me, ‘why did you choose to study here? Why not go to Egypt?’ I replied: Why should I go to Egypt, the education here is much better. He was very insulted, and called me a ‘traitor.’ I asked him who I was betraying, and he said, ‘us,'” Fayce recounted.

“I told him, ‘let me say something that you don’t know. You are the only the Arabs in the world who know what democracy is. There is no other place that can you criticize so openly like this. If you did it in Morocco, you’d find yourself in jail. If you don’t like it here, why don’t you go study in Egypt,” he added.

“Only people who live here have a right to make comments about the situation,” Fayce said, recalling how close he came to being killed in the 2001 Dolphonarium bombing. Fayce was on his way to the club when the suicide bomber attacked, and was saved because he was a few minutes late. “I saw the horrific after-effect of that,” Fayce said, moving uncomfortably.

“Before I came to Israel, I saw the Arab TV coverage. In the Arab world, they are taught to think that it’s all armed Israelis against rock throwing Palestinians. Of course, it’s not like that at all,” he said.

As he quickly learned Hebrew, Fayce became acquainted with the Sabbath in Israel. “I once asked shopkeepers why they were closing the stores early on Friday afternoons. Was there a war or something? They would say, ‘Did you fall on your head? It’s Shabbat!’ I was embarrassed, so I’d say, I know, just kidding,” Fayce recalls with a smile.

“During the first Yom Kippur I experienced, I had no idea where everyone went. The campus suddenly became empty. I was mystified,” he adds.

Backing by Shimon Peres

Fayce’s book has an introduction by Vice Premier Shimon Peres. “For him, Fayce represents the true meaning of peace – someone who goes out to look for an education, and finds it irrespective of race or religion,” Beni Issembert, the book’s publisher says. “This story is outstanding, literally, it completely stands out among stories,” he adds.

“I was attracted to the book because it represents real peace – between people – and I hope its message is absorbed in France, where there are tensions between Muslims and non-Muslims,” he says.

“Fayce’s story also has all the elements of struggles represented by immigrants, irrespective of any country,” Issembert adds.

“Israel is centrally important to me,” Fayce says. He is now planning a trip to India and Nepal with his girlfriend, “to relax a little.”

“Wherever I go from here, I’ll thrive and survive, because I made it here in Israel,” he says.

Fayce, written by Faycal G. and published by Ram Editions, will shortly be released in France

comment comment Print Print Send to friend Send to friend
Tag with  Bookmark to

Not the Time to Squeeze Iran ( Reblogged)

English: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the current S...

English: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader of Iran. فارسی: تصویری از آیت الله العظمی سید علی خامنه‌ای (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the current S...

English: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader of Iran. فارسی: تصویری از آیت الله العظمی سید علی خامنه‌ای (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Deutsch: Seyyed Ali Chamenei an der Front. Auf...

Deutsch: Seyyed Ali Chamenei an der Front. Aufnahme vor dem Juni 1981 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


<nyt_headline version=”1.0″ type=” “>


Published: November 15, 2013 124 Comments
  • SAVE
  • E-MAIL


A rare opportunity for a diplomatic resolution to the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program is at risk because many lawmakers, urged on by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, are insisting that Congress impose tougher economic sanctions, perhaps next week as an amendment to the defense bill.

Today’s Editorials

Opinion Twitter Logo.

Connect With Us on Twitter

For Op-Ed, follow@nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow@andyrNYT.

Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

Sanctions have been crucial in keeping the pressure on Iran. But doubling down on them at this delicate moment, when Iran and six major powers, including the United States, have made progress toward an interim agreement, could cause negotiations between the two sides to collapse and, worse, become a pathway to war.

Layers of sanctions, imposed separately since 2006 by the United Nations Security Council, the United States and Europe, have been largely responsible for moving Iran to the point of serious negotiations. Constrained from selling oil, its main moneymaker, and boxed out of the international financial system, Iran is reeling economically. Oil export earnings have fallen from a range between $110 billion and $120 billion annually to a range of $40 billion to $50 billion, of which about half is available to the government. Hassan Rouhani, elected president earlier this year, believes he has a popular mandate — as well as support from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader — to seek an easing of these sanctions through negotiations.

Even so, Israel, groups like the Washington, D.C.-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies and lawmakers like Senator Mark Kirk, Republican of Illinois, want to ratchet up the pressure. Their stated aim is to force Iran to completely dismantle its nuclear program.

From a Western perspective, that would be an ideal outcome. But new sanctions are unlikely to force Iran to abandon an enterprise in which it has invested billions of dollars and a great deal of national pride. Fresh sanctions would also shred whatever little good will the United States and Iran have begun to rekindle. If Tehran walks away from the talks, Washington will be blamed, the international unity supporting the network of sanctions already in place will unravel, and countries that have reduced imports of oil from Iran will find fewer reasons to continue doing so.

The Iranians could conclude that America is determined to overthrow their entire system, and, as a result, accelerate efforts to build a nuclear bomb. This, in turn, could end up leading to American military action (Mr. Obama has said Iran will not be allowed to acquire a weapon), engaging a war-weary America in yet another costly conflict and further destabilizing the region, while setting Iran’s nuclear program back by only a few years.

Iran has a deeply troubling record of hiding its nuclear program and displaying overt hostility to Israel. America and its allies are right to be skeptical of its promises. But the only rational course is to test Iran’s intentions through negotiations. Further, from what is known so far, the proposal on offer seems reasonable for each side. It would freeze major parts of Iran’s program for six months and allow some relief on sanctions, including access to about $10 billion in Iran’s frozen assets, while a more permanent deal is discussed.

Iran has already taken steps in that direction. On Thursday, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that since Mr. Rouhani took office in June, the country had virtually halted its previously rapid expansion of its uranium enrichment capacity.

President Obama deserves more time to work out a negotiated settlement with Iran and the other major powers. If the deals falls through, or if inspections by the United Nations unearth cheating, Congress can always impose more sanctions then. But if talks fail now, Mr. Netanyahu and the hard-line interest groups will own the failure, and the rest of us will pay the price.




A version of this editorial appears in print on November 16, 2013, on page A18 of the New York edition with the headline: Not the Time to Squeeze Iran.
  • SAVE
  • E-MAIL


Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

Comments Closed

    • Shaw J. Dallal
    • New Hartford, N. Y. 13413
    NYT Pick

    Those lawmakers who are being “urged on by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel” to impose “tougher sanctions” against Iran are in fact “urged on” to sabotage “a negotiated settlement with Iran.”

    More ominously, these lawmakers are being used by Israel to recklessly goad the United States into a destructive war against Iran, a war that an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose, not only because it would be costly in treasure and in lives, but also because it would be against the vital national interests of the United States.

    In the long run, the United States will be better off negotiating with a potentially reasonable and amicably willing adversary than trusting a clearly treacherous, and dangerously destructive “ally.”

      • Mehdi
      • Iran
      NYT Pick

      Iranian president is willing to resolve problems with US and west especially on the nuclear issue. He has done some substantial steps, for instance engaging US in negotiations, he also did his best to keep hard-liners at the corner, and most recently, new agreement with IAEA for more control over the disputed nuclear sites; fortunately, the supreme leader of Iran supported the new diplomatic policy under the title of ” heroic flexibility”. In sum, it means that government can deal with west if they respect Iran’s right and dignity. The important fact is that the Iranian president would not be able to keep this atmosphere positive for a long time. It seems that 5 plus-1 are also interested to reach an agreement, but intervention by external powerful sources may ruin all efforts in the last minute.
      Imposing new sanctions at the peak of peace-loving negotiations will send enough message to the extremists that west is not serious to obtain result in talks. Actually, this congregational action would be the last nail in the coffin of talks! Those who pretend that they are going to make a good deal are actually looking eagerly to see the failure in diplomatic works. I wish president Obama does his best to overcome radicals viewpoints.
      This historical chance is not going to be repeated again. The final result of deal can be a safer and better life for many nations. The failure in peaceful talks leads to the spread of radicalism and extremism worldwide.

        • Otto
        • Winter Park, Florida
        NYT Pick

        Yes, a deal with Iran now would be very good thing, and a reasonable deal seems to be in reach. Those hoping to undermine the deal – Netanyahu of Israel, the government of Saudi Arabia and some misguided hardliners in the U.S. Congress – should not be allowed to derail a potential deal. Israel and Saudi Arabia have their own reasons for preferring to see Iran weakened by sanctions, and these reasons are not motivated by fears of a nuclear-armed Iran, which experts say is not in the cards anyway. Iran has not, since 2003 been seeking to develop a nuclear weapon. These rivals simply want to see Iran kept down, period. Our policies should not defer to the selfish, nationalistic interests of Israel or Saudi Arabia. The US, Iran, and the Middle East as a whole will be well served if we begin to normalize our relationship with Tehran.

          • Michael Stavsen
          • Ditmas Park, Brooklyn
          NYT Pick

          Iran agreed to the talks for one reason only, the sanctions were a gun to their head and they can’t live with them anymore. They are not in talks because they decided to rethink their policy towards the west.

          Business conducted by means of a gun to the head is not about either side achieving good will but about one party getting what it wants and the other getting the gun off his head. So lets not forget why Iran is sitting at the table. Remove the gun from its head and they achieve their objective.

            • alan Brown
            • new york, NY
            NYT Pick

            Those of us who favor tightening of sanctions do NOT want war. We want an end to nuclear proliferation. Inadequate sanctions for North Korea did not lead to war but did lead to a nuclear North Korea and ballistic missiles. After the recent round of interminable negotiations the President of Iran said enriching uranium is non-negotiable. Tightening sanctions will make that negotiable. President Obama may say everything is still on the table, including war. I say take that off the table and tighten sanctions. Another war in the Middle East is insane.

              • NoWay
              • Maine
              NYT Pick

              Exactly. This is Iran’s game to lose and it’s a win-win for the US. Should Iran renege on its promises, it will be exposed as untrustworthy globally and the US and its partners can ratchet up sanctions once again. The US will at least be viewed as giving diplomacy a chance and been savvy enough to show good faith until the end.

              If on the other hand, sanctions are increased at this very delicate juncture, as this editorial points out, it really places Iran in a difficult position especially at home to continue down this path. There is that thing called national pride.

              I hope our lawmakers continue to negotiate in good faith and with care and ignore the belligerent Israeli PM, Bibi and his supporters in Congress.

              With all due respect to the Jewish people & Israel, I’m highly offended by Mr. Netanyahu’s overt assault on our president and our foreign policy. Every American, no matter their political stripe, should feel insulted and exploited. Poll after poll shows that Americans don’t want another conflict and want to give diplomacy a chance. “52% of Likely Voters still favor a U.S. deal with Iran if Iran’s cooperation can be verified.” -Rasmussen Reports
              Clearly, Mr.Netanyahu doesn’t care what the American public thinks despite the fact it gives Israel billions every year in aid. By sabotaging these negotiations with such vengeance and so publicly reminds me a spoiled bully-brat who needs a long time out, disciplined and his privileges withdrawn.

                • Howard
                • Arlington VA
                NYT Pick

                Well said. The “Bomb Iran” hawks have started singing their song again.

                For what it’s worth, I think every discussion of the Iranian nuclear program should mention what happened to Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1954, just to show we understand why Iranians believe the United States wants to overthrow their government. (We did it then, and although we’ve forgotten about it, they haven’t.)

                It is also worth stating that no sovereign industrial nation can be prevented from building nuclear weapons. Period. Denying sovereignty is the only way to forcibly stop a national nuclear bomb program, and that means military invasion, conquest, and occupation – forever. No amount of bombing will do the trick, short of nuclear Armageddon.

                Finally, Iran has shared borders with three nuclear-armed nations: Russia, Pakistan, and Turkey (which is armed with U.S. nuclear weapons), and it is constantly being threatened by nuclear-armed Israel. Iran has plenty of incentive to at least appear qualified to join the neighborhood nuclear club. No nation has ever taken more than a few years to make its first nuclear weapon, once it made the decision to do it. Iran is clearly choosing not to apply for formal nuclear club membership, by detonating a bomb. Rewarding that restraint might be worth a try, especially in light of recent hopeful developments.

                  • Deryk Houston
                  • Victoria BC Canada
                  NYT Pick

                  Good article. Having said that, I also think it is a mistake to believe that the crippling sanctions have been a good tool for bringing the Iranian’s to the table.
                  The Iranians offered many of the concessions we see being offered now by the west a long time ago. We could have been here years ago if the west and Israel had admitted that Iran has the right to process it’s own fuel. Iran agreed to a much lower level of enrichment years ago also, but the west turned down that offer.
                  The sanctions are hurting the west as much as they are hurting Iran. High Fuel prices have been crippling Europe at a time it can least afford it. Huge business and economic losses are piling up for Europe as well because of these sanctions. The west is urgently trying to make this deal now because the pain of sanctions is ripping a hole in the Europe’s economy and America can see that the sanctions will break down anyway and countries will walk away from supporting them. This happened in Iraq as well. I was in Baghdad just before the last invasion there and it was clear massive trade deals were about to take place with the Russians and China.
                  Sanctions are viewed as a useful tool when in fact all they do is create hate and injuries for everyone concerned. Eventually the pain is too much and everyone crumples under the stress.
                  It is like shooting yourself in the foot.

                    • Applecounty
                    • England
                    NYT Pick

                    These negotiations with Iran are designed to fail, for that is what hawks in the American government want to happen. They do not want these talks to succeed. It is far more useful to American allies and the hawks in Washington for Iran to be a regional basket case. Easier to manipulate and control. Meanwhile the citizens of Iran continue to suffer under punitive sanctions and the effects of militaristic ambitions of their government. The appointment of a diplomat without an embassy to Tehran what is nothing more than a publicity stunt, which is a shame. Hopefully the nuclear issue can be resolved facilitating meaningful negociations to take place. It would also make it harder for the hawks to hide behind their excuses of protecting regional security.

                      • blackmamba
                      • IL
                      NYT Pick

                      America’s national interests and values rests with pushing the virtues of civil secular democracy and the elimination of all nuclear weapons from the Middle East. American values and interest are best served by diplomacy, humanitarian aid and commerce as the preferred option. American values and interests lie in peace except if there is a direct threat to attack or attack on America. And the military response should be just enough to crush and end and deter it from ever happening again.

                      Without provocation or invitation America has been engaged in covert and overt acts of war against Iran for 60 years. Israel has been a theocratic colonial apartheid state sponsor of terrorism with nuclear weapons for decades. Saudi Arabia is a royal theocratic autocracy that foments jihadi terrorists.

                      France is a master at losing battles and wars and in collaboration and proliferation. France gave nuclear weapons technology to Israel. Israel, unlike Iran, is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty nor the Chemical or Biological Weapons Convention.

                      Iran has become a theocracy in response to American, British and Israeli interference and intervention. Iran is a party to the NPT and has no nuclear weapons. Iran should be able to do everything under the NPT that any other member can do. Iran is a Shia Muslim Persian nation in the midst of Sunni Muslim Arabs, Turks and Kurds. Along with Coptic Orthodox Christians and Jews.

                      Iranians are rational. And Iran is not an occupier.

                        • Mr. Moderate
                        • Cleveland, OH
                        NYT Pick

                        Iran should be allowed to continue uranium enrichment to levels necessary for commercial and medical uses, but they must agree to dismantle their heavy water reactor which is currently under construction. In return for this, and the lifting of sanctions, Iran must agree to allow inspections of any duration, any time, any where, for any reason (or no reason at all). Resistance to this unrestricted inspections regime, after it is agreed upon, will be grounds for the re-imposition of sanctions and military action.

                          • Bevan Davies
                          • Maine
                          NYT Pick

                          Putting more pressure on Iran makes no sense. As signatories to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, they have the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. What would be more important is to establish a verifiable nuclear-free zone in the Middle East, thereby preventing other countries such as Saudi Arabia from working on their own nuclear programs.

                        Israeli scientists turn water into oil

                        English: BGU

                        English: BGU (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        English: Student spots עברית: פינות חמד לסטודנ...

                        English: Student spots עברית: פינות חמד לסטודנטים, Original Image Name:אוניברסיטת בן-גוריון, Location:באר-שבע (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        English: Zuker-Goldstein-Goran Building at Ben...

                        English: Zuker-Goldstein-Goran Building at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Water splitting process

                        Water splitting process (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Israeli scientists turn water into oil

                        A researcher at work in BGU’s Blechner Centre, where the process was developed A researcher at work in BGU’s Blechner Centre, where the process was developed

                        Israeli scientists are claiming to have discovered a commercially marketable alternative to crude oil that could revolutionise energy usage within a decade.

                        On Wednesday, a team from Ben Gurion University unveiled a process to make an eco-friendly substance that will perform the same functions as oil.

                        The proto-fuel was created using a greenhouse gas and a chemical element that can be obtained from water.

                        “There is no magic here… this is viable,” said Moti Herskowitz, the chemical engineering professor who headed the research, just before publicising the discovery at the Bloomberg Fuel Choices Summit in Tel Aviv.

                        Dr Herskowitz’s process — which is yet to be patented — involves mixing carbon dioxide with water and synthetic gas, and passing it through a special reactor to create a “green feed” made up of liquid and gas. This feed will be used as the raw material for the refineries of the future instead of oil, he claimed. He added that it will be used to produce petrol, jet fuel and diesel.

                        And while the scarcity of oil is a constant concern for world leaders, the ingredients for Dr Herskowitz’s “green feed” are in plentiful supply. Hydrogen can be obtained from water — comprised of two hydrogen atoms for every oxygen atom — by “splitting” the chemical compound. And carbon dioxide can be “captured” from places where it is generated — an eco-friendly process as it means less of the gas is released into the environment. “This is a truly renewable fuel in terms of the environment,” said Dr Herskowitz.

                        While Dr Herskowitz has established the scientific basis for his process, he says that its true commercial potential will be realised in a few years. This is because various groups of scientists across the world are working on cheaper and more energy-efficient ways of dividing the elements within water, which is expected to bring down significantly the price of hydrogen derived from water.

                        “It’s all economics at the end of the day, because you’ve got to be competitive,” said Dr Herskowitz, who is in the process of establishing a start-up to bring the process to market.

                        “I believe that in five to ten years we’ll be able to be very competitive because of advances with water-splitting technologies.”

                        Professor Christopher Hardacre, a chemist at Queen’s University Belfast, said: “The efficient conversion of CO2 into fuel via reaction with H2 is very valuable and has the potential to be a significant development in the replacement of fossil fuels,” adding that the process developed by the BGU team was an “exciting prospect”.

                        Water-splitting has hitherto not been seen as sufficiently efficient to drive a viable fuel production process.

                        If You Want To Work For Twitter, You’d Better Be Able To Answer These Questions

                        Image representing Glassdoor as depicted in Cr...

                        Image by None via CrunchBase

                        Image representing Twitter as depicted in Crun...

                        Image via CrunchBase

                        If You Want To Work For Twitter, You’d Better Be Able To Answer These Questions

                        kid thinking


                        Wouldn’t it be great to work at Twitter?

                        It’s the way many of us get news, and its simple design allows users to each utilize the platform the way they see fit for their lives.

                        The interview process for Twitter involves some challenging questions.

                        We looked through Glassdoor’s massive index of user-submitted interview questions for prospective employees to find the most thought-provoking ones asked at Twitter.

                        See how many you can answer!

                        “Pick any topic you want: a hobby you have, a book you’ve read, a project you worked on–anything. You have five minutes to explain it.”

                        “Discuss a brand that you feel does good marketing vs. a brand that does bad marketing.”

                        “What excites you about Twitter: the brand?”

                        “What would you do if a teammate insisted on going against your advice?”

                        "What would you do if a teammate insisted on going against your advice?"


                        “What do you bring to the table?”

                        "What do you bring to the table?"


                        “How many golf balls can fit in a school bus?”

                        “Why SHOULDN’T we hire you?”

                        "Why SHOULDN'T we hire you?"

                        Business Insider

                        “What is your favorite meme?”

                        "What is your favorite meme?"

                        AP/Nestle Purina PetCare

                        “What do you like to do in your free time?”

                        “What do you like to do in your free time?”


                        “Do you feel this is a step back in your career?”

                        “Would you ever relocate for this job?”

                        “What is the last movie you saw in theaters?”

                        “What is your five year plan?”

                        "What is your five year plan?"

                        Reuters/Djordje Kojadinovic

                        “What is something you are afraid of?”

                        "What is something you are afraid of?"

                        REUTERS/Chor Sokunthea

                        “How does Twitter need to adapt in order to stay relevant?”

                        "How does Twitter need to adapt in order to stay relevant?”

                        Business Insider Video

                        Read more:

                        One Chart Shows The Magnitude Of US Naval Dominance

                        Imperial Japanese Navy aircraft carriers Hōshō...

                        Imperial Japanese Navy aircraft carriers Hōshō (foreground) and Kaga (background) at an unknown location during the China Incident in 1937. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        The Royal Navy Invincible-class aircraft carri...

                        The Royal Navy Invincible-class aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious (R06) and United States Navy Nimitz-class aircraft carriers USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) transit in formation during a multi-ship maneuvering exercise in the Atlantic Ocean. The three carriers are currently participating in Operation Bold Step where more than 15,000 service members from three countries partake in the Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFX). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Enterprise underway in the Atlantic Ocean duri...

                        Enterprise underway in the Atlantic Ocean during Summer Pulse 2004. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Artist's impression of the US Gerald R. Ford-c...

                        Artist’s impression of the US Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        One Chart Shows The Magnitude Of US Naval Dominance

                        The single most important factor in U.S. military dominance is the country’s powerful navy, which gives the ability to project power anywhere in the world.

                        Most importantly, it is the Navy’s unparalleled fleet of aircraft carriers.

                        The U.S. has 19 aircraft carriers, compared to the rest of the world’s 12 aircraft carriers combined. The U.S. carriers are also larger and more technically advanced than any others.

                        China’s sole carrier, for instance, is a retrofitted Ukrainian carrier from the Soviet Union that was originally supposed to be an off-shore casino.

                        Our friends at created a chart that captures not just the scope, but the size of the U.S. aircraft carriers in comparison to the rest of the world. It’s pretty stark:

                        Read more:

                        11 Racist And Offensive Phrases That People Still Use All The Time


                        11 Racist And Offensive Phrases That People Still Use All The Time

                        Birmingham dogs racism AP Photo/Bill Hudson

                        A 17-year-old African American civil rights activist is attacked by police dogs during a demonstration in Birmingham, Ala., May 3, 1963.

                        As language evolves, we sometimes forget the offensive origins of certain words and phrases.

                        Or we never knew them in the first place.

                        Many of them began in racist, sexist, or generally distasteful situations.

                        Let’s abolish these 12 examples in everyday conversation.

                        1. “The itis”

                        More commonly known now as a “food coma,” this phrase directly alludes to the stereotype of laziness associated with African-Americans. It stems from a longer (and incredibly offensive) version — ni****itis.

                        Modern vernacular dropped the racial slur, leaving a faux-scientific diagnosis for the tired feeling you get after eating way too much food.

                        We recommend using the technical term instead: postprandial somnolence.

                        2. “Uppity”

                        A couple years ago, Rush Limbaugh pontificated that a NASCAR audience booed Michelle Obama because she exhibited “uppity-ism.” Glenn Beck even defended him, citing the First Lady’s love of arugula.

                        During segregation, Southerners used “uppity” to describe blacks who didn’t know their socioeconomic place. Originally, the term started within the black community, but the racists adopted it pretty quickly.

                        3.”Peanut gallery”

                        This phrase intends to reference hecklers or critics, usually ill-informed ones. In reality, the “peanut gallery” names a section in theaters, usually the cheapest and worst, where many black people sat during the era of Vaudeville.

                        4. “Gyp”

                        “Gyp” or “gip” most likely evolved as a shortened version of “gypsy” — more correctly known as the Romani, an ethnic group now mostly in Europe and America. The Romani typically traveled a lot and made their money by selling goods. Business disputes naturally arose, and the masses started thinking of Romani as swindlers.

                        Today, “gyp” has become synonymous with cheating someone.

                        5. “Paddy wagons”

                        In modern slang, “paddy wagon” means a police car.

                        “Paddy” originated in the late 1700s as a shortened form of “Patrick,” and then later a pejorative term for any Irishman. “Wagon” naturally refers to a vehicle. “Paddy wagon” either stemmed from the large number of Irish police officers or the perception that rowdy, drunken Irishmen constantly ended up in the back of police cars.

                        Neither are particularly nice.

                        6. “Bugger”

                        When you call someone a “bugger,” you’re accusing them of being a Bulgarian sodomite. The term stemmed from the Bogomils, who led a religious sect during the Middle Ages called “Bulgarus.” Through various languages, the term morphed into “bugger.”

                        Many considered the Bogomils heretical and thus, said they approached sex in an “inverse way.” In Hungarian, a related word still means a slur for homosexual men.

                        7. “Hooligan”

                        This phrase started appearing in London newspaper around 1898. The Oxford Online Dictionary speculates it evolved from the fictional surname, “Houlihan,” included in a popular pub song about a rowdy Irish family.

                        Other sources, like Clarence Rook’s book, “The Hooligan Nights,” claim that Patrick Houlihan actually existed. He was a bouncer and a thief in Ireland.

                        Whatever the case, somewhere an Irish family landed a bad rap. Most notably, the term evolved into “football hooliganism,” destructive behavior from European football (but really, soccer) fans, many of them Irish.

                        8. “Eskimo”

                        “Eskimo” comes from the same Danish word borrowed from Algonquin “ashkimeq,” which literally means “eaters of raw meat.” Other etymological research suggests it could mean “snowshoe-netter” too.

                        Either way, when we refer to an entire group of people by their perceived behaviors, we trivialize their existence and culture. Let’s start using the proper terms, like Inuit.

                        9. “Sold down the river”

                        Today, if someone “sells you down the river,”  he or she betrays or cheats you. But the phrase has a much darker and more literal meaning.

                        During slavery in the U.S., masters in the North often sold their misbehaving slaves, sending them down the Mississippi river to plantations in Mississippi, where conditions were much harsher.

                        10. “Eenie meenie miney moe”

                        This phrase comes from a  large children’s rhyme:

                        Eenie, meenie, miney, moe / Catch a tiger by the toe / If he hollers let him go / Eenie, meenie miney, moe

                        This modern, unoffensive version comes from a similar, older one, where n***er replaces tiger. Rudyard Kipling mentions it as a “counting-out song” (basically a way for kids to eliminate candidates for being “It” in hide-and-seek) in “Land And Sea Tales For Scouts And Guides.”

                        11. “Hip hip hooray!”

                        Though steeped in controversy, this first part of this phrase might relate to the Hep Hep Riots — anti-Semitic demonstrations started in Germany in the 19th century. Nazis reportedly cheered “hep hep” as they forced Jews from their homes across Europe.

                        “Hep” is likely an acronym for “Hierosolyma est perdita” which means “Jerusalem has fallen” in Latin. The Crusaders may have used this as a battle cry, although little proof exists. Or German shepherds or hunters may have used “hep hep” as a traditional command to rally trained dogs.

                        Just to be safe, avoid the first two words. “Hooray” conveys just as much merriment as the full version and comes from hurrah, a version of huzzah, a “sailor’s shout of exaltation.”

                        Bonus: “Rule of thumb”

                        No, this phrase didn’t originate in some misogynistic judge’s chambers. But the idea has permeated etymological discussions so often, we had to debunk it.

                        For example, The Telegraph reported just this year that Sir Francis Buller ruled in 1886 that a man could beat his wife with a stick no thicker than his thumb, which thus created the popular, and sexist, idiom.

                        But way back in 1998, wordsmith William Safire told a different story in The New York Times. He cites “rule of thumb” as early as 1692 and then again, as an established proverb in 1721.

                        Buller did, however, make a similar comment much later in history. Someone should have knocked some sense into him — preferably with a stick much wider than a thumb.

                        Read more:

                        Google Wins: Court Issues a Ringing Endorsement of Google Books

                        Serenata di Scappinu4

                        Serenata di Scappinu4 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Serenata di Scappinu3

                        Serenata di Scappinu3 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        English: scan from a reprint by google-books

                        English: scan from a reprint by google-books (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        English: Provided by Google Books

                        English: Provided by Google Books (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        English: From Google Books

                        English: From Google Books (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Google Wins: Court Issues a Ringing Endorsement of Google Books

                        After more than eight years of litigation, Judge Denny Chin today dismissed the Authors Guild’s lawsuit over Google’s library book scanning project. In his 30-page decision, Chin not only dismissed the case against Google, he delivered a ringing endorsement of Google’s scanning program, bolstered the concept of fair use, and leveled a rebuke to the Authors Guild.

                        “In my view, Google Books provides significant public benefits,” Chin wrote. “It advances the progress of the arts and sciences, while maintaining respectful consideration for the rights of authors and other creative individuals, and without adversely impacting the rights of copyright holders.”

                        RELATED STORIES:

                        FREE E-NEWSLETTERS

                        PW Daily  Tip Sheet

                        (Click here to read the full decision.)

                        As to the Authors Guild’s claim that the scanning would “negatively impact the market for books” Chin held that assertion did not make sense. “To the contrary, a reasonable factfinder could only find that Google Books enhances the sales of books to the benefit of copyright holders.”

                        Google officials issued a statement saying they were “absolutely delighted” with the judgement. “As we have long said Google Books is in compliance with copyright law and acts like a card catalog for the digital age giving users the ability to find books to buy or borrow.”

                        Authors Guild executive director Paul Aiken told PW that the Authors Guild was “disappointed” by the court’s decision, and plans to appeal. “This case presents a fundamental challenge to copyright that merits review by a higher court,” Aiken said. “Google made unauthorized digital editions of nearly all of the world’s valuable copyright-protected literature and profits from displaying those works. In our view, such mass digitization and exploitation far exceeds the bounds of the fair use defense.”

                        In his final analysis, Chin took a very different view.

                        “[Google Books] has become an invaluable research tool that permits students, teachers, librarians, and others to more efficiently identify and locate books,” he wrote. “It has given scholars the ability, for the first time, to conduct full-text searches of tens of millions of books. It preserves books, in particular out-of-print and old books that have been forgotten in the bowels of libraries, and it gives them new life. It facilitates access to books for print-disabled and remote or underserved populations. It generates new audiences and creates new sources of income for authors and publishers. Indeed, all society benefits.”

                        Four Factors

                        After years of fair use legal wrangling, the case wasn’t even close. Chin found Google easily prevailed on three of the four fair use factors, and lost slightly on one.

                        As to the first factor, “the purpose and character of use,” Chin held that Google’s scanning is “highly transformative.”

                        Google’s digitization “transforms expressive text into a comprehensive word index that helps readers, scholars, researchers, and others find books,” the judge held, with its display of “snippets” akin to thumbnail images. In addition, the scans facilitate text and data mining, “thereby opening up new fields of research.”

                        Further, Google Books does not “supersede or supplant books,” but rather it “adds value to the original, and allows for the creation of new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understandings.”

                        Per the second factor, “the nature of the copyrighted work,” Chin noted that while fiction merits additional copyright considerations, 93% of the scanned works are nonfiction, which augured for fair use.

                        To the third factor, “amount and substantiality of the portion used,” the judge acknowledged that Google made multiple and complete copies. But “copying the entirety of a work may still be fair use,” he noted, and in this case, “full-work reproduction is critical” to offering full text search. Still even though “Google limits the amount of text it displays in response to a search,” Chin held that the third factor, on balance, weighed “slightly against a finding of fair use.”

                        The fourth factor, “effect of use upon the potential market or value,” weighed “strongly” in favor of Google, Chin held. He acknowledged that Google is “a for-profit entity and Google Books is largely a commercial enterprise.” But the mere fact that Google is a commercial entity was not enough to tip the balance.

                        “Google does not sell the scans it has made of books for Google Books; it does not sell the snippets that it displays; and it does not run ads on theAbout the Book pages that contain snippets; it does not engage in the direct commercialization of copyrighted works,” he noted.

                        “Google does, of course, benefit commercially in the sense that users are drawn to the Google websites by the ability to search Google Books,” he conceded. But while that is “a consideration to be acknowledged,” even assuming Google’s “principal motivation is profit,” the project also serves several important educational purposes.”

                        In terms of the library copies, which the Authors Guild had argued were an unlawful distribution, Chin acknowledged that the “partner libraries” do have the ability to download a scan of a book from their collections, but that “they owned the books already.”

                        Next Steps

                        Although the Authors Guild has said it would appeal, that appeal is complicated by the fact that the Second Circuit is now preparing to rule on a parallel case, the Authors Guild vs. HathiTrust. In that case, in which the Authors Guild sued a collective of Google’s library scanning partners, Judge Harold Baer delivered an emphatic summary judgment ruling against the guild—and in a hearing in late October, the Appeals Court seemed likely to affirm that ruling.

                        Chin’s decision comes after a long and winding legal road. The original suit, filed in September of 2005, was the first against Google over its scanning program. And after almost eight years of legal wrangling—including three years spent unsuccessfully stumping together for a controversial settlement—the case, barring an unforeseen reversal, now appears to be nearing the end of the road.

                        In October of 2012, publishers dropped their lawsuit against Google after a settlement.

                        Libraries Praise Ruling

                        Reaction to the decision from the library community was one of complete support. “ALA applauds the decision to dismiss the long running Google Books case,” said Barbara Stripling, president of the American Library Association. “This ruling furthers the purpose of copyright by recognizing that Google’s Book search is a transformative fair use that advances research and learning.”

                        “This decision, along with the decision by Judge Baer in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, makes clear that fair use permits mass digitization of books for purposes that advance the arts and sciences, such as search, preservation and access for the print-disabled,” said Carol Pitts Diedrichs, president of the Association of Research Libraries.

                        Hot mic catches UN interpreter saying anti-Israel votes are ‘a bit much’ (Reblogged)

                        Golan Heights Winery Ltd. - Golan on 2012-03-2...

                        Golan Heights Winery Ltd. – Golan on 2012-03-25 – DSC_7849.jpg (Photo credit: laviddichterman)

                        English: Map of Israel, the Palestinian territ...

                        English: Map of Israel, the Palestinian territories (West Bank and Gaza Strip), the Golan Heights, and portions of neighbouring countries. Also United Nations deployment areas in countries adjoining Israel or Israeli-held territory, as of January 2004.. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Location of Golan Heights

                        Location of Golan Heights (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        English: Map of West Bank and Gaza Strip

                        English: Map of West Bank and Gaza Strip (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        English: Map of Israel, Palestinian Controlled...

                        English: Map of Israel, Palestinian Controlled Territories of (Gaza and the West Bank), the Golan Heights, and neighbouring countries. Also United Nations deployment, as of January 2004, in the area. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Map of Israel, the Palestinian territories (We...

                        Map of Israel, the Palestinian territories (West Bank and Gaza Strip), the Golan Heights, and portions of neighbouring countries. Also United Nations deployment areas in countries adjoining Israel or Israeli-held territory, as of January 2004. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

                        Hot mic catches UN interpreter saying anti-Israel votes are ‘a bit much’

                        By Hillel Neuer

                        Times of Israel | November 14, 2013

                        The truth comes out when we think no one else is listening.

                        On Thursday a United Nations interpreter, unaware that her microphone was on, uttered words of truth in reaction to the General Assembly’s adoption of nine politically-motivated resolutions condemning Israel, and zero resolutions on the rest of the world.

                        Under the mistaken impression that she was speaking only to colleagues, the interpreter uttered the following words into the headphones of every UN delegate, and before a live webcast audience worldwide:

                        “I think when you have… like a total of ten resolutionson Israel and Palestine, there’s gotta be something, c’est un peu trop, non? [It’s a bit much, no?] I mean I know… There’s other really bad shit happening, but no one says anything about the other stuff.”

                        Laughter erupted among the delegates. “The interpreter apologizes,” said the unfortunate truth-teller, moments later, followed by her audible gasp. I sincerely hope she won’t get fired.

                        Because the one who should really apologize today is the UN. Founded on noble ideals, the world body is turning the dream of liberal internationalists into a nightmare.

                        For by the end of its annual legislative session next month, the General Assembly will have adopted a total of 22 resolutions condemning Israel—and only four on the rest of the world combined. The hypocrisy, selectivity, and politicization are staggering.

                        Today’s nine resolutions, adopted by the GA’s 4th committee, which is comprised of all 193 UN member states, condemned Israel for violating the human rights of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, of Palestinian refugees, and even of Syrians in the Golan Heights.

                        That’s right: the UN adopted a resolution today that mentions the word “Syria” no less than 10 times—yet said nothing of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s massacre of more than 100,000 of his own people.

                        Entitled “Occupied Syrian Golan,” the resolution condemned Israel for allegedly mistreating Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights. Israel was also condemned for violating the rights of Syrian citizens under international humanitarian law. The UN found no time today, however, to comment on the international legality of President Assad gassing his own citizens to death

                        As it will soon do again by a second, redundant resolution on the Golan, the General Assembly today called on Israel to hand over the Golan Heights, and its citizens, to Syria.

                        Now, whatever one’s view on who rightfully owns the Golan, for the UN at this particular moment to call for anyone to be handed over to Assad’s rule—even as his massacres continue unabated—is both logically absurd and morally obscene. With Israeli hospitals now treating dozens of Syrians who escaped their country’s bloodbath, the resolution is simply surreal.

                        It is well and good to hold Israel to account for its treatment of Arab and other minorities, just like every other nation.

                        Yet something is wrong when not a single word in today’s Palestinian-themed resolutions mentioned the genocidal anti-Semitism expressed regularly by Hamas organs in Gaza, or the dangerous incitement by the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, whose official schools, mosques, newspapers, and TV stations continue to glorify the murderers of Israeli civilians as heroes worthy of emulation.

                        Word is father to deed. Yet none of today’s UN resolutions concerning the West Bank mentioned the outburst of Palestinian terrorist attacks over recent weeks, such as the brutal murder of Shraya Ofer outside his Jordan Valley home, as his wife managed to escape. The murder of Ofer by axes and iron bars was “a gift to the Palestinian people and Hamas prisoners, in honor of Eid al-Adha,” the two suspects said under questioning.

                        By turning a blind eye to Palestinian incitement and terrorism, the UN resolutions promote a one-sided narrative that gives a free pass to Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Palestinian Authority, encouraging intransigence instead of compromise.

                        It is the UN, therefore, who should apologize for misusing the world body’s precious time and resources to produce politicized and polarizing texts that do nothing to advance Arab-Israeli peace, or to further the genuine protection of human rights.

                        On the contrary, the selective and one-sided resolutions undermine the core principle that human rights standards are universal, and they push the parties further away.

                        It is the UN who should apologize for using Israel as a scapegoat, for demonizing and delegitimizing the Jewish state as a meta-criminal to be blamed for all of the world’s ills.

                        And, above all, it is the UN who should apologize for ignoring the cries of the world’s millions of genuine human rights victims—and for mocking them.

                        Last week I was at UN headquarters in New York with courageous human rights dissidents from China, Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia. UN Watch helped organize a press conference to plead for UN member states to oppose those repressive regimes’ cynical candidacies for seats on the UN Human Rights Council. Yet despite having abysmal records, these serial human rights abusers were all elected by the UNGA, to become the world’s newest judges on human rights.

                        Needless to say, this same UN assembly will not be passing any resolutions this year on China’s subjugation of the Tibetan people or its imprisonment of pro-democracy activist Wang Bingzhang, on Cuba’s violent harassment of journalists and bloggers, on Russia’s persecution of gays, or on Saudi Arabia’s laws banning women from driving and non-Muslims from practicing their religion.

                        Nor does the UN plan to say a word on religiously-motivated attacks on civilians in Iraq, Nigeria or Pakistan, or on the persecution of political dissidents in Uganda, Vietnam, or Zimbabwe.

                        As the interpreter noted today, there truly is a great deal of terrible things happening around the globe, but sadly, at the UN, “no one says anything about the other stuff.”

                        So busy targeting Israel, the UN simply cannot find the time.

                        Hillel Neuer is the executive director of UN Watch, a non-governmental human rights organization in Geneva, Switzerland. Originally published inTimes of Israel, Nov. 14, 2013.

                        Rate this article:

                        • 1
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        • 4
                        • 5

                        Average rating:

                          • Currently 5/5 Stars.

                        Subscribe to the UN Watch Briefing and get the latest news and analysis from UN Watch delivered to your email inbox.

                        Read our recent editions:

                        • Issue 465
                        • Going Viral: Hot mic catches UN interpreter saying anti-Israel votes are ‘a bit much’ * Video and Times of Israel Op-Ed by Hillel Neuer
                        • Issue 464
                        • “The Montrealer Who Makes the U.N. Tremble” — Journal de Montréal profile on UN Watch’s executive director
                        • Issue 463
                        • UN Watch Coalition Urges EU & US to Oppose Regimes in Next Week’s UN Human Rights Council Election
                        • Issue 462
                        • What’s wrong with U.N.’s human rights council
                        • Issue 461
                        • Israel to return to UNHRC after 18-month walk-out
                        • Issue 460
                        • Saudi Human Rights Record Praised in UN Review
                        • Issue 459
                        • Saudi Arabia Wins Security Council Seat for First Time
                        • Issue 458
                        • Kowtowing to Iran: UN Covers Historic Carving to Avoid Offending Mullahs


                        Copyright 2013 by United Nations W

                        ALERT: TYRANNY COMES TO AMERICA. CHINESE TROOPS ON U.S. Soil. Dissent Against Obama Inc “Purged” Via Gestapo-Like DHS Tactics. Commentary By Adina Kutnicki


                        Adina Kutnicki

                        ALERT: video included – The Communist People’s Republic of China was invited to take part in a massive drill dubbed GridExII that took place on November 12-14, 2013. The drill simulated the detonation of a massive nuclear warhead high above the skies of the United States, creating a giant EMP—Electro Magnetic Pulse—that took out the U.S. electrical grid, communications, banking services, and all computers, simulating a helpless America completely dependent on its all-wise government.

                        Why would the Radical-in-Chief agree to such a drill, other than the fact that he is a crypto Marxist? The fact that he is an Islamist does not obviate his leftist revolutionary designs. The red/green alliance.  Moreover, why did DHS OVERSEE this “exercise”? Hint: the outgrowth of Obama’s promised “civilian force”, of which DHS is its overseer. A promise kept.

                        Undeniably, freedoms, once taken away, can only be regained after the spilling of much blood and the…

                        View original post 2,177 more words