Kālī is the feminine form of "time" or "the fullness of time" with the masculine noun "kāla"—and by extension, time as "changing aspect of nature that bring things to life or death." Other names include Kālarātri ("the deep blue night"), and Kālikā ("the deep blue one").[8]
The homonymous kāla, "appointed time," which depending on context can mean "death," is distinct from kāla "deep blue," but became associated through popular etymology. The association is seen in a passage from the Mahābhārata, depicting a female figure who carries away the spirits of slain warriors and animals. She is called kālarātri (which Thomas Coburn, a historian of Sanskrit Goddess literature, translates as "night of death") and also kālī (which, as Coburn notes, can be read here either as a proper name or as a description "the dark blue one").[8] Kālī is also the feminine form of Kāla, an epithet of Shiva, and thus the consort of Shiva.[9]
In relation to Shiva, she [Kali] appears to play the opposite role from that of Parvati. Parvati calms Shiva, counterbalancing his antisocial or destructive tendencies; she brings him within the sphere of domesticity and with her soft glances urges him to moderate the destructive aspects of his tandava dance. Kali is Shiva's "other wife," as it were, provoking him and encouraging him in his mad, antisocial, disruptive habits. It is never Kali who tames Shiva, but Shiva who must calm Kali.[11]
Heard someone say "He's a communist!"
I don't know enough about him outside The Lobby by Al Jazeera
https://www.youtube.com/watch_videos?video_ids=ceCOhdgRBoc,Vuk1EhkEctE,L3dn-VV3czc,pddH2sfNKNY
Is the plan to eradicate HIV/AIDS within 10 years?
What if cures already exist?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_battleship_Potemkin#Legacy
The immediate effects of the mutiny are difficult to assess. It may have influenced Tsar Nicholas II's decisions to end the Russo-Japanese War and accept the October Manifesto, as the mutiny demonstrated that his régime no longer had the unquestioning loyalty of the military. The mutiny's failure did not stop other revolutionaries from inciting insurrections later that year, including the Sevastopol Uprising. Vladimir Lenin, leader of the Bolshevik Party, called the 1905 Revolution, including the Potemkin mutiny, a "dress rehearsal" for his successful revolution in 1917.[34] The Communists seized upon it as a propaganda symbol for their party and unduly emphasized their role in the mutiny. In fact, Matushenko explicitly rejected the Bolsheviks because he and the other leaders of the mutiny were Socialists of one type or another and cared nothing for Communism.[35]
The mutiny was memorialized most famously by Sergei Eisenstein in his 1925 silent film Battleship Potemkin, although the French silent film La Révolution en Russe (Mutiny on a Man-of-War in Odessa or Revolution in Odessa, 1905), directed by Ferdinand Zecca or Lucien Nonguet (or both), was the first film to depict the mutiny,[36] preceding Eisenstein's far more famous film by 20 years. Filmed shortly after the Bolshevik victory in the Russian Civil War of 1917–22,[35] with the derelict battleship Dvenadsat Apostolov standing in for the broken-up Potemkin,[37] Eisenstein recast the mutiny into a predecessor of the October Revolution of 1917 that swept the Bolsheviks to power. He emphasized their role, and implied that the mutiny failed because Matushenko and the other leaders were not better Bolsheviks. Eisenstein made other changes to dramatize the story, ignoring the major fire that swept through Odessa's dock area while Potemkin was anchored there, combining the many different incidents of rioters and soldiers fighting into a famous sequence on the steps (today known as Potemkin Stairs), and showing a tarpaulin thrown over the sailors to be executed.[35]
In accordance with the Marxist doctrine that history is made by collective action, not individuals, Eisenstein forbore to single out any person in his film, but rather focused on the "mass protagonist".[38] Soviet film critics hailed this approach, including the dramaturge and critic, Adrian Piotrovsky, writing for the Leningrad newspaper Krasnaia gazeta:
The hero is the sailors' battleship, the Odessa crowd, but characteristic figures are snatched here and there from the crowd. For a moment, like a conjuring trick, they attract all the sympathies of the audience: like the sailor Vakulinchuk, like the young woman and child on the Odessa Steps, but they emerge only to dissolve once more into the mass. This signifies: no film stars but a film of real-life types.[39]