ABC

If Grey's Anatomy fans didn't like Eliza Minnick before tonight, they probably hate her now.

The brash doctor (played by Marika Dominczyk) brought in to overhaul Grey-Sloan Memorial's teaching program went full throttle with her plans by placing particular surgeries in the unprepared hands of attendings, leaving the residents to simply observe and guide. Because this is Shondaland, the results were calamitous, resulting in Edwards (Jerrika Hinton) accidentally killing one of Arizona's (Jessica Capshaw) pediatric patients when she misses the fact that the kid's bleeding internally. Making matters even worse, when a distraught Edwards looked to her budding mentor for guidance, Eliza just abandoned her in the hallway to go have a meltdown of her own.

In short, it was not her finest moment.

But it just might be the thing needed to change her aloof and abrasive ways, Dominczyk told E! News."It was such a big event for her to reflect on herself and think about, you know, maybe her approach isn't the best," she admitted. "And I think it makes her take a moment to reflect on who she is, what she really wants, the good that she wants to do and how to do that without making things bad. It knocks her down. It definitely knocks her down a lot of pegs and she has to build herself up again and push through it and, in a way, still be confident and not let it ruin her. Because it's such a huge thing that happened that she didn't foreshadow. She didn't see it coming at all."

Another thing she didn't see coming? Just how much her failure to react properly would push Edwardsone of Minnick's biggest supporters among the attendings up until that momentback into Webber's (James Pickens Jr.) arms (literally) as she was looking for guidance.

"I think that after Eliza deals with how it makes her feel as a doctor and how it affects her, so she can get over that huge hurdle, then she can look around at the damage that it's caused around. And I think that sheit's not like she was building momentum in a good way, anyway," Dominczyk added. "It's kind of like maybe starting from ground zero and doing it over, but maybe with kinder hands, maybe gentler. Being more socially aware of how she comes off when she does stuff like that, you know? I think that initially when she blows off Edwards, it doesn't have anything to do with Edwards, which is the main mistake, right? She's supposed to be the teacher and help, but she's so consumed with what happened that she can't even see. She can't even see it yet. I think it hits her when Richard gives her that look. It crushes her because she looks up to Richard and she respects him so much and she wants to be accepted, but still hold her ground and come off as strong. So, it's a balancing act."

ABC

So, could a kinder, gentler Minnick be just the thing to stop this civil war before it consumes the hospital? It couldn't hurt, Dominczyk admitted, but don't expect a miracle."I would say that it makes people take a long hard look at what they're doing and the repercussions of certain actions," she said about how Grey-Sloan moves forward from here. "To slow down a bit and try to do what's best for everybody and not just best for one person. Because at the end of the day, they all want the same thing. They all want the hospital to be the best hospital it could be, and they all want all the attendings to learn everything the proper way and be good doctors. So, it might bring everything together, but not like a 'Kumbaya, we all love Minnick now.' That definitely, unfortunately, doesn't happennot overnight. But it's a step in the right direction."

Despite the disaster of a day, Minnick did find herself in the arms of a sympathetic Arizona out in the parking lot, who reinforces the notion that Eliza could make things easier on herself with everyone if only she'd try. Is romance on the horizon for these two? And how will the other docs respond to Arizona's flirting with the enemy?I think they are drawn to each other and they are cautious, for the right reasons, with how much they let people know because I don't think they know themselves where this is going or what's going to happen," Dominczyk teased."You're just going to have to watch and see this cautious circling. They're only human, so people do slip up sometimes."

This being Grey's Anatomy, expect the slip up sooner rather than later.

Where do you stand on Minnick after her big screw-up? Let us know in the comments below.

Grey's Anatomy airs Thursdays at 8 p.m. on ABC.

E! Online - Your source for entertainment news, celebrities, celeb news, and celebrity gossip. Check out the hottest fashion, photos, movies and TV shows!

Read the original here:
Grey's Anatomy's Civil War Just Took on Collateral Damage & Eliza Will Never Be the Same - E! Online

Islamic State (Isis) has ordered its followers to kill three Sydney imams: the Grand Mufti of Australia, Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohammed (pictured); Sheikh Shady Alsuleiman; and Sheikh Ahmed Abdo. Photograph: Dean Lewins/AAP

Ive been called many things in my time working for the Muslim community in Sydney, but there is a recurring name that has stuck: sell out. Although often associated with musical acts that move from indie niche to mainstream success, abandoning their fans and values in the meantime, it has come to mean something slightly different to Muslims.

To Muslims, selling out refers to making a compromise on your beliefs and is often associated with engagement with power structures. On the surface, this logic is based on the idea that engagement with these structures, especially in the west, can never be genuine and can never be on Muslim terms.

It is upon this logic that Islamic State (Isis) has ordered its followers to kill three Sydney imams: the Grand Mufti of Australia, Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohammed; Sheikh Shady Alsuleiman; and Sheikh Ahmed Abdo. All three are known for their work in engaging different communities and working with government, policing agencies or with other faith groups.

By trying to excommunicate these sheikhs and essentially branding them as sell outs, Isis is seeking to justify its call to violence against them. The use of such inflammatory rhetoric, as a form of propaganda, is neither new nor exclusive to Isis, and has been used time and again by groups from across the political spectrum. However, it is vital to note that what lies beneath the rhetoric from all sides is an important point on engagement.

Its important to state (although it has been said in a variety of ways, ad infinitum), that the violence of Isis is abhorrent and unacceptable. The best way to thumb our collective nose at their desire to be part of a discussion about faith and engagement would be to have that conversation without their input or presence.

The term sell out is used as a counter to a power imbalance, as a means of expressing distrust in the avenues for engagement between Muslim communities and state power structures. And it is here where the conversation must begin when discussing the reasons for branding such individuals in this way.

Engagement in and of itself must be underscored by a power balance between the participating parties. Without this balance, what will result is a skewed conversation, one that is almost theatre in the way it follows a pre-determined script. What is not to be spoken about is ignored, what is focused upon is the symbolism and platitudes that are used to maintain the status quo.

By taking part in these so-called conversations without the ability to frame the discussion or the ability to have it on our terms, Muslims become complicit in our own silence. Moreover, we are also complicit in the injustices eked out under that silence, having been unable to break the cycle of violence and enforced obliviousness.

The wounds and trauma of the Syrian civil war, the Iraq war, the invasion of Afghanistan, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the Lebanese civil war, and the current violence in Yemen all of these conflicts are partly the result of the interference of western powers, both recent and long-standing. Colonisation continues to deeply affect communities, with the trauma lasting generations as the entire region seeks to reconcile its history with its present, and its people with the interests of foreign powers.

These scars, fresh or deep, are at the forefront of any conversation on power and politics, no matter the level or relevance. Conversations at all levels must be framed by these injustices, by a global, historical, political context that would seek to be guided by a need to recognise and right those injustices.

So, when the Muslim community is in conversation with government agencies or police, on any particular issue, whether it be criminality, socio-economic challenges, obstacles to education and so on, the coordinates of that conversation need to be reset.

Unfortunately, when discussing something apparently irrelevant to international politics or history, respectability politics plays a huge role, with nobody wanting to appear rude or inconsiderate. However, it is essential we shelve such considerations in the face of a growing need to reshape the way we think about engagement with government and police.

And its here where the notion of the sell out remerges, because without its global or historical context these conversations will continue to exclude and alienate any group or party seeking to have their scars recognised and healed.

Without it, genuine progress will be hampered by the notion of the sell out, both in conversations with institutions of power, and with a community continuously sidelined and dismissed.

At the end of the day, its not that I dont want people to call me a sell out, its that I want to see the roots of that notion no longer dismissed as just a rhetorical tool used by fringe groups. There are genuine problems with the way we, as a community and as a nation, see engagement, and until we fix that, the issues we face will never be addressed.

View post:
Anatomy of a sell out: why Isis targets scholars for working with the government - The Guardian

These are chaotic times for Americans. The nationwide cheese recall, I mean. (What did you think I was talking about?)

Several well-known cheese brandsincluding Sargento, Meijer, Santino, Amish Classics, Country Fresh, and Guggisberghave issued recalls of Colby, pepper jack, shredded taco, and cheddar cheeses among concerns about listeria contamination at a cheese factory in Indiana. No illnesses have yet been reported.

Listeriosis, the foodborne illness that the Listeria monocytogenes bacteria causes, is a particular danger for those with weakened immune systems. In pregnant women, listeria can cause premature labor, miscarriages, and stillbirth. Listeria is an especially resilient bacteriaunlike many other germs, it can keep growing in a cool fridge.

The danger of an infection is part of why cheese sellers have voluntarily recalled their products in this case. But, as is often the case, the recalls have trickled out over the course of the past week. The timing raises questions about how food safety is handled and discussed among manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, and regulatorsand further questions still about how long it takes for consumers to be notified of possible contamination.

For cheese eaters, the questions are straightforward: Where did the contaminated cheese come from? And how do I know if the cheese I have in my refrigerator is safe to eat?

The answers arent always easy to find.

This recall began with Deutsch Kase Haus, a cheesemaker in Indiana that sells cheese to various companies which then package the cheese under different brand names. Deutsch Kase Haus issued a voluntary recall for products made at its factory between September 1, 2016 and January 27, 2017.

But we are a business-to-business provider, so we do not label anything under our brand, Mark Hubbard, a spokesman for Deutsch Kase Haus told me, which means we have a number of customers that fall under that productand each of those customers are the ones that actually initiate their own recalls that are put up on the FDA website.

In other words, its up to Deutsch Kase to notify its customers, like Sargento, of the possible contaminationthen its up to those brands to communicate next steps to the the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the public. ( The FDA is inspecting the plant as part of a coordinated effort with the Indiana Board of Animal Health on the investigation, Peter Cassell, a spokesman for the FDA, told me.)

In some cases, brand-name companies will expand the recall to other products of theirs, in case the contamination spreads from, say, compromised cheese, to other products processed or packaged in the same facility. Once a food recall is issued, each company that's been affected has to then look at how contamination may have spread through its own plant. So more and more products may be pulled into the recall over time. And since each company has its own protocols to follow, they end up issuing their recalls on different timelines. Thats why its important for consumers to periodically check back to the FDA website to see how recalls change in scope, Hubbard told me.

All of this becomes more complicated still as supply chains grow longer and longer, and as agriculture and food companies consolidate. The globalization of food supply chains makes widespread outbreaks more likely, and in some ways more difficult to track. Already there are nearly 50 million foodborne infections in the United States each yearand they cause about 250,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths, according to a 2012 paper published by the Institute of Medicine. Changes in the globalization of the food trade have important implications for food safety, the papers authors wrote. Mitigating the increased risks associated with a longer, globalized supply-chain will require robust capacity for public-health surveillance.

Such surveillance could involve cheap sensors, smart labels, real-time database sharing, temperature-reading packaging, and other tools to change the way people are notified of spoiled or recalled food.

The current cheese recall was initiated, Hubbard told me, out of an abundance of caution. Its still possible, officials hope, that no illnesses will occur as a result. For now, operations at Deutsch Kase are suspended entirely, while the FDA investigates, Hubbard said.

You have to be very careful, and you have to go beyond what you think could be happening, Hubbard said. Its good that word is getting out. We want people to be cautious.

More:
Anatomy of a Cheese Recall - The Atlantic

Even the Daily Mail is splashing business rates on its front page. What has this most unglamorous of taxes done to deserve that?

For many businesses, rates are a bigger headache than corporation tax. After all, they only have to pay the latter if they are profitable. There is no such escape from rates. The trouble is the way they are levied. To figure out how much it owes, a business first needs to know the theoretical amount that someone would pay to rent the premises it occupies. This rateable value is determined during a periodic exercise by the valuation office agency. The business has to pay roughly half of the rateable value as a tax each year. It doesnt matter if the business is doing well or seriously struggling, it still has to cough up.

At the best of times, the tax is unfair in the way that it hits some kinds of trade harder than others. A bookshop in the High Street of a pretty country town might not make much money. But it has to pay business rates that reflect the gentrified area in which it is located. Conversely, a small office in an out-of-town development might contain a few highly paid executives for whom the business rates are not a significant cost.

In short, business rates are oppressive for a retailer which has to locate close to its customers. One result is that charity shops, that get an automatic 80% rebate, have colonised high streets where regular stores are priced out. The Government periodically promises a review of business rates but the chance of serious reform founders on the need to raise the same amount of money after any changes. Nonetheless, there are plenty of exemptions and reliefs, such as those for village shops and pubs, which mean everyone else has to pay even more.

Make sure you're not missing out on your free, daily Per Diem email & Iain Martin's weekly letter.

The current hullabaloo, reflected in the Daily Mail and other papers, is simply the regular revaluation exercise intended to keep rates fair. Although the total amount to be raised isnt increasing much, there are, inevitably, winners and losers. The winners, which allegedly include Amazons warehouses, are quietly satisfied. The losers, comprising popular brands and small shops, are outraged. Numerically, it also looks like the losers may outnumber the winners, further increasing the volume of their complaints. The Government itself has made matters worse. The revaluation was supposed to happen in 2015 but, since it did not want the resulting controversy to hit just before a general election, it postponed the changes until this year. As a result, many ratepayers are seeing much bigger revaluations than they would have done had the exercise taken place two years ago as scheduled.

In some ways, business rates are the commercial equivalent of council tax. Like with council tax, the revenue raised goes to fund local government. A total of 26 billion a year is collected and, through a complicated formula, it is redistributed to local authorities. Unlike council tax, business rates are not automatically spent in the same area in which they are collected. My local authority of Tunbridge Wells, being quite a wealthy borough, keeps a tiny proportion of the rates it collects. Councils dont even get much say on what the level of rates should be. Since the 1980s that has be set by central government. Going forward, local authorities will get to keep increases in the money raised from business rates in their patch, but conversely they are on the hook if they do not manage to collect enough.

The Government will be very keen to face down the current resistance. Assuaging those seeing increases in their rates will cost money that it does not have. David Gauke, Financial Secretary to the Treasury and a politician who radiates seriousness, has been dispatched to calm things down. Number 10 will be hopeful that when Article 50 is debated by the House of Lords next week, public attention will be distracted from business rates (that most people know nothing about) and the Daily Mail will come back onside.

However, all this could merely be a dress rehearsal for what would happen if there was ever a council tax revaluation. Council tax is calculated from the value of our homes in 1991, which is now hopelessly out of date. But given the regular angst caused by business rates changes, it is no surprise that ministers have repeatedly refused to countenance a revamp of residential property taxes. That would just be asking for trouble.

James Hannam is the author of What Everyone Needs to Know about Tax, to be published by Wiley on Budget day.

Make sure you're not missing out on your free, daily Per Diem email & Iain Martin's weekly letter.

Here is the original post:
Business rates: the anatomy of a tax controversy - Reaction