Bela Sei Bela Video || Best Record

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads Indiana Jones has been named the greatest movie character of all time ahead of James Bond, Batman and Han Solo in a new poll. Harrison Ford, 72, takes two places (Jones and Solo) in the extensive survey of 10,000 film fans for Empire magazine, but there is only one female character, Alien’s Ellen Ripley, in the top 10. Sigourney Weaver’s battling warrant officer lands in fifth ahead of The Joker, Die Hard’s John McClane, Fight Club’s Tyler Durden, Darth Vader and The Dude from the Coen brothers’ The Big Lebowski. The poll result comes as something of a shock, given that plans for a new Indiana Jones movie seem to be on the back burner at Disney. The studio bought Lucasfilm for $4.05bn in October 2012, but has moved forward with proposals for a new series of Star Wars movies rather than focusing on the swashbuckling archeologist. New Lucasfilm chief Kathleen Kennedy told Vanity Fair in March that a new Indy film would see the light “one day”, but was unable to offer definitive timelines. Could Chris Pratt be the man for another Indiana Jones crusade?Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads Ben Child Read more “When it will happen, I’m not quite sure,” she said. “We haven’t started working on a script yet, but we are talking about it.” Some reports have suggested Guardians of the Galaxy and Jurassic World’s Chris Pratt could be in line to pull on Indie’s battered fedora if and when Disney finally moves forward with a new film. Ford would most likely be in his mid 70s by the time a fifth movie hit cinemas, though advanced age has not stopped him returning as Solo in the upcoming Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Pratt has his pick of projects after sci-fi reboot Jurassic World roared to $1bn in a record 14 days earlier this week. The Empire poll is relatively light on superheroes, with no place for any of Marvel’s cavalcade of box office plundering masked crimefighters in the top 10. Cult figures such as Brad Pitt’s Tyler Durden and Jeff Bridges’ The Dude are in many ways surprising entries, though Durden made the No 1 spot in a similar Empire poll from 2008.Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads Netflix stock touched an all-time high of $706.24 Wednesday, topping its previous high of $692.79 set on June 10. Netflix, which has a market value of $41 billion, is the best performer this year in the Nasdaq 100, an index that tracks the largest nonfinancial Nasdaq companies. The stock has soared nearly 100 percent since January.Icahn's firm Icahn Enterprises held 1.41 million Netflix shares as of March 31, according to regulatory filings, making the latest sale worth about $960 million at current prices, according to Bloomberg data. The firm paid $58 a share for the stock in 2012, booking profits between $700 million and $800 million in the fall of 2013, Reuters reported. Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads "Netflix was a no-brainer when we first went into it," Icahn said in an interview on CNBC’s "Fast Money Halftime Report.” "You couldn't compete with Netflix because they were starting the year with like $2 billion flowing into them, and Reed Hastings [CEO of Netflix] did a great job in building it up." Icahn also says technology giant Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) is undervalued. The iPhone maker also had a 7-for-1 stock split in June 2014 and since then, shares of the world's largest-valued company have rallied 40 percent. The investor holds about 53 million Apple shares, according to regulatory filings, worth about $6.8 billion, according to Bloomberg data. Icahn announced in an open letter to Apple chief executive Tim Cook on May 18 that Apple shares should be trading at $240, trading at more than $100 higher than the iPhone maker’s current stock price, valuing the company at nearly $1.5 trillion. The investor also said he believed the company would enter the television market by 2016 and the automobile market by 2020. "I just don't see how you compete with Apple because of the great ecosystem they've built," Icahn told CNBC on Wednesday. Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads The Queen has warned of the dangers of division in Europe at a state banquet in Berlin, urging Britons and Germans not to take the benefits of a peaceful continent for granted. We know that division in Europe is dangerous and that we must guard against it The Queen in Berlin Her speech, weaving historical events with present crises, was replete with some subtle and other not so subtle hints that she believed Britain belonged in the European Union – her most public stance yet that she wished to avoid Britain voting to leave in a referendum. “The United Kingdom has always been closely involved in its continent. Even when our main focus was elsewhere in the world, our people played a key part in Europe,” she told an audience of 700 dignitaries. David Cameron and foreign minister Philip Hammond, a staunch Eurosceptic, were in attendance. On Thursday, the prime minister will put forward his proposals for EU reform to other European leaders in Brussels. Speaking directly to her host Joachim Gauck, the 75-year-old German president who was once a civil rights activist in communist East Germany, the Queen said: “In our lives, Mr President, we have seen the worst, but also the best of our continent. We have witnessed how quickly things can change for the better. But we know that we must work hard to maintain the benefits of the postwar world. Queen unimpressed by blue horse painting on German state visit Read more “We know that division in Europe is dangerous and that we must guard against it in the west as well as in the east of our continent.” As she spoke, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor who sat at the Queen’s table in Berlin’s Schloss Bellevue along with her husband Joachim Sauer, nodded vigorously, a gesture that did not go unnoticed among observers. AdvertisementClick & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads The Queen’s short, but wide-ranging, speech made references to important events in European history and recalled discussions about the possibility of German neutrality that she had held with German chancellor Konrad Adenauer in 1958. She went back as far as Magna Carta, which she said had marked the “long, slow and interrupted process of our country’s evolution into a democracy,” in the 13th century. She linked it to St Paul’s church in Frankfurt, which she will visit on Thursday, where Germany’s first freely elected legislature, the Frankfurt parliament, met in 1848. Drawing on the biographies of Britons who had emigrated to other parts of Europe and made their mark, she mentioned the Welsh engineer John Hughes, who founded the mining town of Donetsk, now in Ukraine, in the Russian empire of the 19th century, and the 17th-century Scottish publican Richard Cant, who moved his family to Pomerania. “His son moved further east to Memel and his grandson then moved south to Königsberg, where Richard’s great-grandson, Immanuel Kant, was born,” she said. In her repeated emphasis of the strong collaboration between Britain and Germany, which had “achieved so much” since 1945 and would “continue to do so in the years ahead,” the Queen said the most “enduring reminder” of the cultural cooperation between Germany and Britain was the Reichstag dome, designed by British architect Norman Foster. Earlier in the day, she had observed the dome from the terrace of Merkel’s chancellery as the chancellor had shown her the Berlin skyline. On Friday, the Queen visits Bergen-Belsen, the former Nazi concentration camp in northern Germany. In response to the speech, the German president sought to emphasise the important role Britain had played in building democracy in Germany after the war and how grateful Germans were for that. Gauck said that Britain continued to have a vital role to play in Europe and was needed by the EU and that a “constructive dialogue” was necessary to address Britain’s concerns about its membership.Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads “A quarter of a century after the division of our continent ended, the European Union is facing major challenges,” he said. “We know that we need an effective European Union based on a stable foundation of shared values. A constructive dialogue on the reforms Britain wants to see is therefore essential.” Germany would support such discussions, he said. “For Britain is a part of Europe. The European Union needs Britain.” Gauck, who was born in the northern port city of Rostock into a family of sailors, said: “There is a saying in the nautical world: ‘There is but a plank between a sailor and eternity’.” He said that while some planks in the European ship could be improved “to be frank, we in Germany would rather strengthen the planks than tear them out”. The banquet included trout, lamb and asparagus followed by strawberries and elderflower blossoms and accompanied by an assortment of German wines. This article was amended on 24 June to correct the title of Konrad AdenauerClick & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads The Supreme Court today handed the Obama administration a major victory on health care, ruling 6-3 that nationwide subsidies called for in the Affordable Care Act are legal. "Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them," the court's majority said in the opinion, which was written by Chief Justice John Roberts. But they acknowledged that "petitioners' arguments about the plain meaning ... are strong." The majority opinion cited the law's "more than a few examples of inartful drafting," but added, "the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase." Roberts was joined by the court's liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, as well as by Anthony Kennedy. In his dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said: "We should start calling this law SCOTUScare," an apparent reference to the fact the Supreme Court has now saved the Affordable Care Act twice. Scalia called the majority's reading of the text "quite absurd, and the court's 21 pages of explanation make it no less so." As NPR's Nina Totenberg reported in March, opponents of the law contended "that the text of the law does not authorize subsidies to make mandated insurance affordable in 34 states." At issue were six words in one section of the law. As Nina pointed out: "Those words stipulate that for people who cannot afford health coverage, subsidies are available through 'an exchange established by the state.' " She added: Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads "The government [contended] that those words refer to any exchange, whether it is set up by the state itself or an exchange run for the state by the federal government in accordance with individual state insurance laws and regulations. The challengers [said] the statute means what it says and no more." The court agreed today with the government's position. Today's decision comes three years after a bitterly divided high court upheld the Affordable Care Act as constitutional by a 5-to-4 vote. President Obama is expected to make a statement on the ruling at 11:30 a.m. ET. Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads DEER ISLAND — The remains of a girl believed to be a toddler were found on the shoreline of Deer Island on Thursday afternoon by a woman walking her dog, a chilling discovery that stunned neighbors and prompted police to call for the public’s help in identifying the child. During a news conference at the scene, State Police Lieutenant Colonel Frank Matthews said the woman found the remains around 1 p.m. Matthews and Suffolk Assistant District Attorney Mark Lee provided no other details, including the length of time that her remains were on the shoreline and whether there were signs of foul play. A law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation said the remains were found in a plastic trash bag. Another law enforcement official briefed on the case said authorities believe the child’s remains may have washed up on the shore. The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner will conduct an autopsy Friday, officials said. One neighbor, Candis Gillette, said she was walking her dog near Taft Avenue when she came upon the woman who had found the girl’s remains and she saw a plastic bag.All of a sudden, police cruisers pulled in and they were talking to a woman,” Gillette said. “She looked visibly upset and I could see she was crying.’’ Gillette called the discovery “tragic.” “I just hope they find whoever did this,” she said. Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads Like other neighbors, she called for a heavier security presence in the public park on Deer Island, which is also home to a large sewage treatment plant. She said the entrance to Deer Island has no gate and young people frequently gather there for parties and drinking. Gillette said she has found syringes there. Matthews said during the briefing that investigators will seek help from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in identifying the girl. Appealing to the public, Matthews said, “if anyone knows about a child that might be missing . . . please reach out to us.” He said investigators have “plenty of officers that are looking into” security protocols on Deer Island and whether there are any surveillance cameras in the area. Ria Convery, a spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, which operates the sewage treatment plant on Deer Island, said cameras are focused on the main part of the plant, but not in the public access area. Security guards are on duty at all times and conduct “regular rounds around the whole island,” Convery said. Police in nearby communities, including Winthrop, Nahant, Revere, Boston, Saugus, Chelsea, and Lynn, either could not be reached for comment or said they had no missing persons reports for toddlers. Deer Island connects to the town of Winthrop. In addition to State Police, Winthrop police and the Coast Guard are investigating. District Attorney Daniel F. Conley’s office said in a statement that the Coast Guard is helping to analyze “drift pattern of the waterways around Deer Island.” Police canine units arrived on the island shortly after 6 p.m. to help with the investigation. Another neighbor, Kenny Bliton, said this is a close-knit community, but summer can be a raucous time. “In the winter it’s quiet, but during the summer, it’s ridiculous,” Bliton said. “There’s no patrol. No park rangers.” Tina Anzuoni, a longtime resident of Tafts Avenue next to the island, said the shore is supposed to be closed to visitors at dusk, but it is unsupervised. Her concerns were echoed by Mike Herbert, who lives near Anzuoni. Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads “Since they made it a park, it’s been hectic,” Herbert said. “People outside at all hours.” Convery said disturbances sometimes occur, as with any open space, but such incidents “are “infrequent and [have] not been a big problem.” Matthews said at the briefing that he could not report any additional witnesses besides the woman who discovered the remains. Anyone with information about the case is urged to call the Suffolk County State Police Detective Unit at 617-727-8817 or the Winthrop police at 617-539-5806. Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads France—Kim Kardashian West does Instagram her way, and that means no paid promotions and admittedly too many bikini shots. "But it's what I want and what I put out," Kardashian said of how she curates her photo stream. She was speaking in front of an intimate audience today at the Cannes International Festival of Creativity. This was Kardashian's first time at the annual creative gathering in the south of France, and she spoke about her autobiographical mobile game (the focus of our March 2 cover story), social media habits and how to cultivate a brand, about which the self-made celebrity is an expert. Kardashian's talk came on the same day her mobile game scored a sponsorship deal with Karl Lagerfeld, which her gaming partner Glu Mobile announced. But she was openly pitching more fashion and beauty brands to get in on the action. The game, Kim Kardashian: Hollywood, was a surprise hit this year, and now has a million daily players with tie-ins to her reality show and real life. (Adweek selected Kim Kardashian: Hollywood as Hottest Game on our annual Hot List.) Her husband, musical artist Kayne West, nudged her toward the initiative with video game maker Glu Mobile. "I thank Kanye every day for making me do that deal," Kardashian said. The game is an obsession for some, and she envisions more chances for brands to promote to girl gamers, for whom Kardashian is now an unlikely role model and a rare feminist voice in the male-dominated genre. The game, which simulates rising through the ranks of stardom, keeps pushing out updates. Soon, her glam team will make a virtual appearance, opening new branding potential, Kardashian said.Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads "It helps with great opportunities for brands, hair care lines or makeup lines, that want some involvement, because that's something the player really enjoys learning about," she said. Kardashian also talked about her social media obsession and admitted occasionally reaching out to Twitter or Instagram to offer advice. She even pushed Instagram CEO Kevin Systrom to allow editing on posts because she kept making typos. "I'm not saying it's because of me, but it happened," she said, recalling the app change that eventually rolled out. Kardashian also said that these days, "I'm really into Twitter," talking about her evolving tastes. She used to just repurpose Instagram photos for Twitter, but the micro-messaging company approached her with a lesson in best practices. Twitter told her, "People don't really click on your links as much" as they do photos taken directly in Twitter. She said her Instagram feed is off limits, a no-promo zone. If she does take photos with a product it's not because she gets paid, she said. "I know a lot of my brands might get frustrated that I don't promote maybe as much as they would like, but I only do it if it's authentic," she said. Kardashian opened her talk with a personal experience at Cannes. She was awoken in the middle of the night by a naked woman trying to get into her room using a credit card as a key.Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld ObamaCare subsidies nationwide, in the second major court victory for President Obama on his signature health care law. In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that subsidies are valid even in states that did not set up their own insurance exchanges. A ruling against the administration would have threatened subsidies worth millions in nearly three-dozen states and imperiled the program itself. For months, though, the administration said it had no back-up plans, confident the Supreme Court would rule in its favor. With yet another challenge to ObamaCare now cleared away, Obama urged critics to move on. "The Affordable Care Act is here to stay," he declared in the Rose Garden. But Republicans continued to blast the program, and vowed to keep up the fight. "ObamaCare is fundamentally broken, increasing health care costs for millions of Americans. Today's ruling doesn't change that fact," House Speaker John Boehner said. "[W]e will continue our efforts to repeal the law and replace it with patient-centered solutions that meet the needs of seniors, small business owners, and middle-class families." The Supreme Court had previously upheld the law's individual mandate in 2012, in a 5-4 decision. This time, the justices tackled the law's tax credits and ruled that subsidies that 8.7 million people currently receive do not depend on where they live. Chief Justice John Roberts, who was the key vote in 2012, again voted with his liberal colleagues in support of the law. Justice Anthony Kennedy, a dissenter in 2012, was part of the majority on Thursday. "Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them," Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads Conservative-leaning justices, though, issued a scathing dissent to the decision, referencing the several times the high court has had to rule on the health law. "We should just start calling this law SCOTUScare," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. The challenge devised by opponents of the law centered on four words -- established by the state -- in the more than 900-page law. The passage technically said subsidies were for those exchanges established by the state. The law's opponents argued that the vast majority of people who now get help paying for their insurance premiums are, therefore, ineligible for their federal tax credits. That is because roughly three dozen states opted against creating their own health insurance marketplaces, or exchanges, and instead rely on the federal Healthcare.gov to help people find coverage if they don't get insurance through their jobs or the government. In the challengers' view, the phrase "established by the state" demonstrated that subsidies were to be available only to people in states that set up their own exchanges. Those words cannot refer to exchanges established by the Health and Human Services Department, which oversees Healthcare.gov, the opponents argued. But the majority opinion effectively said Congress intended the subsidies to be available for all. "Had Congress meant to limit tax credits to State Exchanges, it likely would have done so in the definition of 'applicable taxpayer' or in some other prominent manner," Roberts wrote. "In this instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase." He added: "Those credits are necessary for the Federal Exchanges to function like their State Exchange counterparts, and to avoid the type of calamitous result that Congress plainly meant to avoid." Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads Scalia wrote that if that's the case, "words no longer have meaning." Nationally, 10.2 million people have signed up for health insurance under the Obama health overhaul. That includes the 8.7 million people who are receiving an average subsidy of $272 a month to help pay their insurance premiums. Of those receiving subsidies, 6.4 million people were at risk of losing that aid because they live in states that did not set up their own health insurance exchanges.Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads What if your life depended on a drug that cost half a million dollars a year, every year, for the foreseeable future? That's the price of Soliris, one of the world's most expensive drugs. It is the only medicine available for people suffering from two ultra-rare diseases: paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) and atypical haemolytic uremic syndrome (AHUS). In both cases, the body attacks and destroys red blood cells, causing anemia, organ failure and ultimately death. And for both diseases, Soliris is not a cure, but it can stop the attack on the body's tissue and organs, and patients can go back to living normal lives. But only if they can get the drug, and many can't, because it is priced beyond the reach of almost everyone. So how can one drug cost more than the annual income of all but a tiny percentage of households? The reason is locked in the so-called "black box" of orphan drug pricing, where actual research and development costs are carefully guarded secrets known only to drug company executives. Orphan drugsClick & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads "Orphan" in this context refers to rare diseases that languished untreated for decades because the patient population was too small to attract the interest of drug companies. But now medications to treat these ultra-rare diseases are becoming more profitable than traditional drugs, because of government incentives, increased patent protection and a business model based on extreme pricing. Most people assume the drug companies are charging sky-high prices to recover their research, development and manufacturing costs, because the patient population for rare diseases is so small. But in reality, the extreme prices of these new orphan drugs are largely arbitrary, and have very little to do with the development and manufacturing costs, according to industry analysts and academic researchers who have studied the issue.In case of Soliris, most of the research and development was done by university researchers working in academic laboratories supported by public funds. "I think the public science is well over 80 or 90 per cent of the work," said Sachdev Sidhu, a University of Toronto scientist who is also in the business of drug development. "Public resources went into understanding the molecular basis of the disease, public resources went into the technology to make antibodies and finally, Alexion, to their credit, kind of picked up the pieces." Misconception Sidhu spent years researching monoclonal antibodies, the underlying elements in Soliris, for a U.S. biotech company. Now he's started his own company, developing drugs that are similar to Soliris. He says it's time to correct the impression that without high drug costs there would be no new drugs.I think that's a major misconception," he said. Most drugs are based on scientific discoveries made in publicly funded research labs, by academic scientists. "The real story is it's all connected back to students, post-doctoral fellows, people doing very, very basic research accumulating that knowledge," Sidhu said. The extreme price of Soliris also can't be explained by the manufacturing costs, he went on, because monoclonal antibodies are much less expensive to make than people think. "We know roughly what that costs, and it's far, far, far less than the cost of the drug," he said. "It probably costs less than 1 per cent of the price of the drug to make the drug, so there's a lot of wiggle room on how to price the drug." Unique framework CBC asked Alexion for an interview to talk about why the drug costs so much. But the company refused. In a short statement, it said drug pricing depends on a "unique decision-making framework" that takes into account "the rarity and severity of the disease, the absence of effective alternative treatments, indirect medical and social costs, and clinical data that demonstrate the impact of the drug on patients who desperately need it." In other words, Alexion set the price of Soliris at half a million dollars a year, because that's what it thinks the market will bear, based on the fact that the drug works and patients have no other treatment options. Alexion knows that individual patients can't afford to pay half a million dollars a year for the rest of their lives. The business model depends on public health-care systems and private insurance companies reimbursing the million-dollar drug bills. But how many million dollar drugs can a public health system afford? Not many, according to health economist Michael Law, at the University of British Columbia. "As more and more of these expensive drugs like Soliris come along," he says, "we're going to have a reckoning, in terms of how we make those decisions." Soliris is Alexion's only drug, but it's a blockbuster, earning revenues of more than $6 billion dollars in just eight years, and making Alexion one of the fastest growing companies in the world. Countries pushing back So far, Alexion has refused to justify the high price, even when asked by national health officials in the U.K., who were struggling with the decision about whether to recommend that the British government cover the drug.Despite that refusal, the drug was approved for coverage in Britain last year. But in New Zealand, the drug was denied government coverage, because of "the very high price being demanded by Alexion," according to the decision document. That decision leaves New Zealand patients with no access to a drug that could save their lives. In Canada, there are also patients who can't get access to the drug, although some provinces will cover the cost for some patients based on certain criteria. In the meantime, Canada's watchdog on drug prices is accusing Alexion of charging more for Soliris in Canada than anywhere else in the world: around $700,000 per patient per year. This drug is forcing us to have to rethink how we say yes and how we say no when it comes to prescription drugs - Michael Law, University of British Columbia The Patent Medicine Prices Review Board held a preliminary hearing this week in Ottawa, the first step in a process aimed at forcing Alexion to lower the price, and even repay some money. Alexion is disputing the allegation. "This drug is forcing us to have to rethink how we say yes and how we say no when it comes to prescription drugs," said Law. Soliris is among the first of what will become a wave of new therapies for rare diseases, based on developments in monoclonal antibodies. "We will be getting a lot more drugs like this," said Sidhu. "The basic rule of thumb, if a drug costs more than an average household income, then its unsustainable. Something has to be done about that. Clearly it's not what the system was designed to handle." Governments do not have the power to force drug companies to justify the price of drugs that will be covered by public health-care systems. And industries claim that they need complete confidentiality to protect trade secrets. But Sidhu says there are ways to respect that need and still have greater transparency in drug pricing, including an accounting of how much of the research was done in the public domain. "I think we should decide what drugs cost based on a transparent knowledge of how much effort went into it, and who that effort came from. I'm always surprised how little knowledge there is of that." In the meantime, governments should be bracing themselves for more million dollar drugs that are making their way through the pipeline. It's estimated there are 7,000 orphan diseases that need some kind of drug therapy, and new developments in biotechnology are creating many new opportunities. It's the dawn of an era when it might be the lack of money, rather than the lack of drugs, that will block access to treatment for rare diseases.Click & Close Ads
Click & Close Ads

                         



















































 lol







Click to hide Ads
Click to hide Ads

                         



















































 lol







Click to hide Ads
Click to hide Ads