November 2009

Adult Costumes

The term costume can refer to wardrobe and dress in general, or to the distinctive style of dress of a particular people, class, or period. Costume may also refer to the artistic arrangement of accessories in a picture, statue, poem, or play, appropriate to the time, place, or other circumstances represented or described, or to a particular style of clothing worn to portray the wearer as a character or type of character other than their regular persona at a social event such as a masquerade, a fancy dress party or in an artistic theatrical performance.

Designing a costume differs when creating for either a male or female dancer. Female dancer’s standard costume includes tights that cover the legs and hips and a leotard that covers the hips and trunk (Penrod 13). Leotards are an important basic garment in which most dance costumes are based from (Harrison 8). If the tights have a seam it is worn on the back of the legs. Women can wear underwear under their tights; however, if they do wear underwear, it must never be seen. By showing the line of their underwear on the leotard the long look of the leg is destroyed.

Adult Costumes

Frank disappointed he couldn't get Nets a win

Lawrence Frank knew as the losses piled up — even tying a record — that his job was in jeopardy, and he wanted to hang in long enough to get the New Jersey Nets a win.
He couldn't do it.
Frank was fired with the Nets still winless, and he said Monday that's his only regret.
"I understood with our record that there could be potential consequences and that if we didn't win that it would end in termination," Frank said, "and you just kind of want to fight as long as you can fight to get a win because all this team needs ... this team needs to validate some of their hard work.
"You just wanted to see this group through and have a win, because once they win — not that it solves all problems — but it just does really relieve a great deal of pressure on them. So I guess my only thing was I just wanted to fight to at least get this group a win and see where we can go."
Instead, Frank was dismissed Sunday with an 0-16 record. The Nets lost to the Lakers later that night, tying the NBA record for consecutive losses to start a season.
He said during a conference call it's hard to leave with unfinished business, but has no bitterness toward the organization. Even though he had an injury-depleted roster, he understood why he was fired.
"I knew at a certain time and point we were going to have to win some games regardless of our roster and we just didn't deliver," Frank said.
The Nets were interviewing candidates to replace Frank on Monday and weren't expected to name an interim coach until Tuesday. Their next game is at home Wednesday against the Dallas Mavericks.
Frank is the Nets' NBA leader with 225 victories and was in his sixth full season, making him the longest-tenured coach in the Eastern Conference. But with the Nets' roster weakened in recent years by cost-cutting mode and then injuries leaving them in even worse shape, he knew this season would be difficult.
He said neither the players nor staff ever believed they wouldn't win, and refused to blame the injuries that left him playing with only eight available players for two weeks.
"At the end of the day, those are excuses and other teams have won with them and look, we didn't get the job done," Frank said. "It wasn't from a lack of effort from the players' standpoint, it wasn't for a lack of effort from the staff. As the head coach. I accept responsibility for our inability to win some of the games we had a chance to win. You learn from it, you grow and you move on."
Frank said he wanted to coach again in the NBA, but wasn't ready to think about his future yet. He's from nearby Teaneck, N.J. and said he would still root for the team he spent a decade with.
"I'm in the office right now, so that goes to show you I really don't know where to go," Frank said.

Clinton daughter, Chelsea, engaged to be married

NEW YORK – Turns out those discredited rumors of a possible Chelsea Clinton wedding last summer were mostly just premature: The 29-year old daughter of former President Bill Clinton and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has become engaged to her longtime boyfriend, 31-year old investment banker Marc Mezvinsky.
The couple sent an e-mail to friends Friday announcing the news, saying they were looking at a possible wedding next summer. Matt McKenna, a spokesman for the former president, confirmed the engagement Monday.
Mezvinsky is a son of former Pennsylvania Rep. Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky and former Iowa Rep. Ed Mezvinsky, longtime friends of the Clintons. Ed Mezvinsky was released from federal prison last year after serving a nearly five-year sentence for wire and bank fraud.
Margolies-Mezvinsky served just one term in Congress before losing her seat in 1994 after voting in favor of President Clinton's 1993 budget, which was controversial at the time.
At the State Department Monday, Hillary Clinton had one brief encounter with reporters but took no questions. Later, her spokesman, Ian C. Kelly, was asked about the reported engagement but said it would be inappropriate for him to comment.
"I have a daughter who's around, she's 22 years old. And the last thing I would want would be for the State Department spokesman to talk about the personal plans of my daughter, so I am going to decline any comment on that," Kelly said.
The former first daughter and her fiance became friends as teenagers in Washington and both attended Stanford University. They now live in New York, where Mezvinsky works at G3 Capital, a Manhattan hedge fund, and Clinton is pursuing a graduate degree at Columbia University's School of Public Health.
Before returning to graduate school, Clinton worked at Avenue Capital, a hedge fund run by prominent Democratic donor Marc Lasry. She also worked at McKinsey and Company, a management consulting firm.
Since her debut on the public stage as a curly haired 12-year-old during her father's 1992 presidential campaign, Clinton has maintained a fairly low public profile. That changed in 2008, when the press-shy Clinton stepped out on the campaign trail to help her mother's bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Before beginning a relationship with Mezvinsky, Clinton dated Ian Klaus, a Rhodes Scholar she met while studying international relations at Oxford in 2002. Klaus dedicated his first book, "Elvis is Titanic," about his experience teaching in the Kurdistan province of Iraq, to Clinton.
Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton was forced to tamp down speculation that her daughter and Mezvinsky were already engaged and would marry in August on Martha's Vineyard. President Barack Obama, who was vacationing on the island at the time, was rumored to be on the guest list.
Aides to Hillary Clinton, citing Chelsea's privacy, declined to disclose whether she has received an engagement ring or any other details about wedding plans. It will be an interfaith marriage; Mezvinsky is Jewish, while Clinton grew up attending Methodist Church with her mother. Bill Clinton is Southern Baptist.
Word of the engagement was first reported by ABC News.
___
Associated Press writer Robert Burns at the State Department contributed to this report.

A guide to who gets whacked (Politico)

Sarah Palin may claim to scorn elites, but her new book will ring familiar to its Beltway readership.
Getting even with those who crossed her, praising her allies and generally putting a self-serving sheen on last year’s presidential campaign, “Going Rogue” is typical of the political memoir genre of recent vintage. It’s the sort of book that will send the political class scurrying to bookstores, eager to see how they fared in what’s known as “the Washington read.”
With no index, though, Palin’s book has made that ritual more difficult.
So POLITICO, having obtained a copy of the book before its Tuesday release, has created a reader’s guide to “Going Rogue,” grouping the many characters into three categories, based upon that familiar question insiders are already whispering to those who managed to snag a copy of the book: How did I come out?
FRIENDS:
The construct Palin uses to describe the 2008 presidential campaign pits most of her advisers, the endearingly-named “B Team,” against the dreaded staffers running John McCain’s campaign back in suburban Washington, often simply derided as “headquarters.”
She has especially kind words for the campaign officials she bonded with during the campaign and, in some cases, remains in contact with.
This “B Team” includes such aides as Jason Recher, Chris Edwards, Tracey Schmitt, Jeannie Etchart, Bexie Nobles, Matthew Scully, Randy Scheunemann, Steve Biegun.
All receive generous treatment.
Biegun is even spared by a key omission in the book. Even though it has been reported that he was responsible for the embarrassing prank call Palin took from a pair of French Canadian DJs posing as the President of France, Palin only identifies the aide as “a campaign adviser.”
“I felt bad for him because he was an absolutely stellar professional, so I knew these radio guys had to be really good to get around him,” she writes.
John and Cindy McCain receive fulsome praise throughout the book from Palin, him as a brave American hero and her as a mix of elegant lady and Every Mom.
But the Arizona senator is also portrayed as the final enforcer of the decision not to let Palin speak on Election Night, something that plainly pained her.
She recounts telling McCain in the campaign’s hotel suite in Phoenix on Election Night that she wanted to use her remarks to thank him:
“’No these guys have it covered,’ he said, nodding in [campaign chief Steve] Schmidt’s direction. ‘They’ve got it handled.’”
Palin then writes: “I knew that was that. I thanked John again for everything and walked out of the room.”
McCain’s close friend Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut senator, also won accolades from Palin for soothing her during a stressful debate prep session.
“God is going to see you through this,” Palin recalls Lieberman telling her, noting that she found it “so heartfelt, so genuine, so sincere.”

FOES:

Much of the portion of the book devoted to Palin’s time as vice presidential nominee and her last year in Alaska is filled with her grievances against a handful of McCain campaign aides and the media.

In particular, Palin trains her fire at Steve Schmidt, campaign advisers Mark and Nicolle Wallace and CBS news anchor Katie Couric.

Schmidt, especially, receives the brunt of Palin’s blasts.

She describes him as variously quick-tempered, profane, overweight, threatening and incompetent. Plus, she notes, he was a smoker. (Though she does allow at one point that he can inspire loyalty and manage the press).

Complaining about being muzzled, she writes: “I questioned Schmidt about what headquarters would and would not allow me to say. Schmidt was a busy guy; he didn’t have a lot of time to elaborate, no doubt. He replied coolly, ‘Just stick to the script.’”

Taking issue with what she said was Schmidt’s attempt to get her a nutritionist, Palin observes: “As he lectured, I looked at his rotund physique and noted that he used nicotine to keep his own cognitive connections humming along.”

Schmidt also comes in for rough treatment in an anecdote Palin says took place between the campaign aide and Scheunemann after reports in POLITICO and CNN detailed the tensions between the veep candidate and McCain’s staff.

Citing Scheunemann, who remains a Palin adviser, she writes: “Schmidt issued a threat that was veiled enough for deniability but clear as day if you were on the receiving end: if there were are any more leaks critical of anybody in the handling of Sarah Palin, then a lot more negative stuff would be said about Sarah Palin.”

When Palin got prank-called by the two disc jockeys impersonating the president of France, she again paints Schmidt in a negative light.

“One of the first calls was Schmidt, and the force of his screaming blew my hair back. ‘How can anyone be so stupid?! Why would the president of France call a vice presidential candidate a few days out?

“Good question, I thought. Weren’t you the ones who set this up?

“As Schmidt’s rant blazed on, I pictured cell towers between D.C. and Florida bursting into flame. I held the phone slightly away from my head.”

Schmidt is also singled out on election night as the heavy who told Palin she wouldn’t be able to deliver a speech along with McCain’s own concession.

“Absolutely not,” Schmidt said. “I don’t even know why you wrote a speech. Nobody told you to.

“That set me back on my heels. I was surprised that he was surprised.”

Of Nicolle Wallace, a former top Bush administration official, Palin writes, “I had to trust her experience, as she had dealt with national politics more than I had. But something always struck me as peculiar about the way she recalled her days in the White House, when she was speaking on behalf of President George W. Bush. She didn’t have much to say that was positive about her former boss or the job in general.”

Palin also casts Nicolle Wallace as something of an insensitive snob, recalling that the campaign adviser informed her that her clothing was inappropriate for a vice-presidential nominee.

“She flipped through my wardrobe with raised eyebrows,” Palin writes of Wallace from a scene in the candidate’s bedroom after she returned to Alaska for her interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson. “No…no…no,” [Wallace] said as she slid each garment aside on its hangar.”

And so as to make unmistakable her disdain for Mark Wallace, Nicolle’s husband, the former Alaska governor includes a picture of the aide holding up his arms at her during a hotel room debate preparation session during a photograph montage otherwise devoted to upbeat images of Palin, her family and supporters.

“This picture says it all,” Palin writes in the caption. “A dark hotel room in Philadelphia and a frustrated Mark Wallace trying to tell me which of his non-answers I should give during debate prep.”

Palin never flatly accuses any of the top McCain advisers as being responsible for the leaks against her, but she comes close in recounting a scene from the hotel pool in Phoenix on the day after the election when the Wallaces stopped to say their good-byes.

“’I think you should know that for the next few days it’s going to get really nasty,’” Palin recalls Nicolle Wallace saying. “’Negative stories in the press. You should just be ready, that’s always how it goes. Hang on your hats!’

“That made no sense to Todd—why would anything ‘get nasty?’ And how could anyone know what would be coming in the media?

“But the Wallaces waved good-bye, and that was that.”

Often, names weren’t necessary to make the point—criticizing the generic “headquarters” sufficed, as in this lament from the last weeks of the campaign: “We asked whether we could expand the message, but by then it seemed, at least according to reports like the New York Times Magazine piece by Robert Draper, that headquarters might have already given up.”

Or from campaign’s end: “Since headquarters had micromanaged everything I did and said for weeks…”

Her home state of Alaska, its denizens and trusted aides like Meg Stapleton get much softer and kinder treatment, but Palin does take after some liberal opponents from back home—and a former colleague as well.

Though not mentioned by name, John Bitney is easily identifiable as the former aide whom Palin writes “turned out to be a BlackBerry games addict who couldn't seem to keep his lunch off his tie."

The policy director on Palin’s gubernatorial campaign, Bitney was her first legislative director in Juneau but is now a critic who is frequently interviewed by reporters.

Yet is CBS news anchor Katie Couric who is singled out for special treatment, emerging among media figures as Palin Enemy Number One.

“As for Katie Couric — where do I begin?” Palin writes, recounting what she concedes was an awful interview with the network anchor.

Though she accepts some culpability for the disastrous interview, Palin accuses Couric of having gone easier on Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, and twice claims that the newswoman’s own clothing stylist was actually part of the team hired by the GOP to outfit the vice-presidential candidate for the campaign. Palin even takes a swipe at Couric’s patriotism.

Palin writes of a National Press Club event where Couric addressed journalists about the news media’s behavior immediately following the Sept. 11 attacks.

According to Palin’s account, Couric told her media colleagues: “The whole culture of wearing flags on our lapel and saying ‘we’ when referring to the United States and, even the ‘shock and awe’ of the initial stages, it was just too jubilant and a little uncomfortable.”

Writes Palin of this assessment: “Unbelievable.”

Among journalists, Couric may have come in for the most personal criticism but Palin also devotes considerable space to bemoaning the press corps in general. When, for example, she details her return to Alaska after the campaign, Palin grumbles about unnamed “pundits and reporters” who criticized her for “not attending the celebrity-packed events we were invited to Outside.”

Disputing some of the analysts who said then-Sen. Barack Obama outperformed McCain at the first presidential debate, Palin writes: “Granted, 90 percent of the newspeople covering the debate were liberal.”

At other times, Palin flatly accuses reporters as stalking and harassing her family.

IN BETWEEN:

Palin seems to spare those individuals who, unlike Schmidt, haven’t criticized her since the campaign or who she doesn’t seem to suspect as leakers who disparaged her, like the Wallaces.

So even though senior campaign aides Mark Salter and Rick Davis played a pivotal role in the campaign—and at “headquarters”—they are largely absent from the book.

Of Salter, she does allow that her first impression was that he seemed “friendlier and quieter than Schmidt” and was a loyal and influential adviser to the senator.

As she does with Biegun and the prank call incident, Palin appears to offer Salter anonymity in recounting the scene on election night when she was told she would not be speaking.

Even though Salter has been identified in other reports as one of the heavies who delivered the news, Palin writes only that a “senior staffer” said: “’You know you won’t be giving a speech.’”

Even though he was a Schmidt friend, her traveling chief of staff, Andrew Smith, isn’t bloodied too badly either.

"It seemed odd that we were being put in the hands of a man who had never run a campaign before, but Andrew seemed like a nice guy, and it wasn't my call,” she said of Smith, a Wall Street veteran.

Another of Palin’s top traveling aides, Tucker Eskew, doesn’t receive the praise that her other “B Team” allies do yet he isn’t scorned like other senior officials.

While calling him a “Southern gentleman,” Palin writes that Eskew stuck to her “like gum on a shoe.”

After events, she recalls, “he’d be waiting for me on the campaign bus steps with an indulgent smile that said, ‘Come over here and let me tell you what you did wrong, bless your heart.’”

Read More Stories from POLITICOBishops reprise old abortion fightThe diplomacy of deferenceWhen a hug becomes a kiss of deathPalin: 'So much bull crap out there'Conservative club targets GOP

MUSLIM SUFFERS BRUISED EGO IN FORT HOOD TRAGEDY (Ann Coulter)

The massacre at Fort Hood last week is the perfect apotheosis of the liberal victimology described in my book "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America."

According to witnesses, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan entered a medical facility at Fort Hood, prayed briefly, then shouted "Allahu akbar" before he began gunning down American troops. Now I don't know which to be more afraid of: Muslims or government-run health care systems.

President Obama honored the victims by immediately warning Americans not to "jump to conclusions" -- namely, the obvious conclusion that the attack was an act of Islamic terrorism. As conclusions go, it wasn't much of a jump.

But the mainstream media waited for no information -- indeed actively avoided learning any information -- before leaping to the far less obvious conclusion that the suspect's mass murder was set off by "stress."

The day after the slaughter, The New York Times ran one editorial and two of three op-eds asserting as much -- which was at least one more than the Times usually runs about psycho-killer soldiers going on rampages.

Two days after the mass shooting, the Times' laughably predictable headlines about the Fort Hood bloodbath were:

"Preliminary Inquiry Finds No Link to Terror Plot"

"Painful Stories Take a Toll on Military Therapists"

"When Soldiers' Minds Snap"

The Los Angeles Times jumped to the exact same conclusion, running an article on the massacre titled: "Fort Hood Tragedy Rocks Military as It Grapples With Mental Health Issues." Time magazine followed suit, posting an article titled: "Stresses at Fort Hood Were Likely Intense for Hasan."

Inasmuch as Maj. Hasan had never been deployed overseas, much less seen combat, liberals seem to have discovered the first recorded case of "pre-traumatic stress syndrome."

Their point was: The real victim of Fort Hood was Maj. Hasan. Indeed, all Muslims were the victims that day.

The media quickly set to work assembling lachrymose accounts of taunts Hasan had been subjected to in the military for being a Muslim, the most harrowing of which seems to have been his car being keyed at his off-base apartment complex.

I suppose we should be relieved that liberals weren't claiming Hasan snapped because of the dimming prospects for a health care bill by the end of the year.

The evidence for the manifestly obvious conclusion we were supposed to avoid jumping to is rather more extensive.

According to numerous eyewitness accounts, Hasan denounced the "war on terror" as a war against Islam, said Muslims should attack Americans in retaliation for the war in Iraq, defended suicide bombers and said he was "happy" when a Muslim murdered a soldier at a military recruiting center in Arkansas earlier this year.

Stranger still, he wasn't auditioning for his own show on MSNBC when he made these statements.

Hasan shared a "spiritual adviser" with two of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, whose unseemly enthusiasm for jihad got him banned from speaking in Britain, even by video link.

A few years ago, Hasan delivered an hour-long PowerPoint lecture to an audience of doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, arguing that non-Muslims should be beheaded and have burning oil poured down their throats.

He had tried to contact al-Qaida, and at least one U.S. intelligence official says the Army knew it.

Despite being well aware of Hasan's disturbing views and conduct, the Army did nothing.

Far less offensive speech has been grounds for discipline or even removal from duties in the military. In the aftermath of the Tailhook scandal, for example, two Navy officers were reprimanded and reassigned after putting up a sign with the words of a nursery rhyme altered to include a vulgar sexual reference to liberal congresswoman Patricia Schroeder.

But a Muslim Army doctor can go around a military installation somberly advocating the beheading of infidels, and the girls running the military treat him like he's Nicole Kidman and they're press junket reporters.

The Army's top brass, Gen. George Casey, responded to the military's shocking decision to keep a terrorist-sympathizing Muslim in the Army by announcing: "Our diversity ... is a strength." And I thought gays couldn't openly serve in the military.

On Sept. 11, 2001, Muslims moved to the top of liberals' victim pantheon on the basis of having slaughtered 3,000 Americans. Muslims were "victims" of Americans' displeasure with them for the biggest terrorist attack in world history. The only American deserving of more coddling than a Muslim is the first African-American president.

So, now any dyspeptic expression toward a Muslim is grounds for calling in a diversity coordinator. And when the "victim" attacks, as at Fort Hood, the rest of us are supposed to feel guilty because Hasan's car got keyed once. As with all liberal "victims," it is the victim who is massively guilty.

TSX ends lower on profit-taking, RIM retreat

TORONTO (Reuters) –
Toronto's main stock index finished lower on Monday, hurt by profit-taking and a selloff in shares of BlackBerry maker Research In Motion following an analyst downgrade.

RIM was the day's second biggest net loser after Citi Investment Research analyst Jim Suva cut the company's rating to "sell" from "buy," citing competitive threats.

RIM shares fell C$3.67, or 5.75 percent, to end at C$60.15.

Of the benchmark's 10 main groups, five moved lower. Among them, energy fell 0.94 percent despite higher oil prices that moved past $78 a barrel.

The resource-laden materials group eked out a 0.2 percent gain. Financials edged 0.45 percent higher.

"This is indicative of a market that has run ahead of itself and, given the recent renewed pessimism in terms of economic prospects, investors are using this as an excuse to take money off the table," said Elvis Picardo, analyst and strategist at Global Securities in Vancouver.

"I would think profit-taking is playing a huge role."

Among energy issues, Canadian Natural Resources ended down 2.5 percent at C$68.48, while Imperial Oil was also off 2.5 percent at C$39.67.

The day's winners included fertilizer maker Agrium Inc, which advanced 2.3 percent to C$51.50. Gold miner Agnico-Eagle Mines rose 1.9 percent to finish at C$58.70.

In financials, Bank of Nova Scotia picked up 2.1 percent to close at C$46.22. Toronto-Dominion Bank rose 1.7 percent to end at C$62.75.

Insurer Fairfax Financial was the top net loser, shedding C$6.57, or 1.7 percent, to close at C$380.50.

The S&P/TSX composite index fell 32.40 points, or 0.3 percent, to close at 10,878.35.

The S&P/TSX 60 index of bluechip stocks dropped 0.25 percent to finish at 646.09.

Kate Warne, Canadian market strategist at Edward Jones in St. Louis, Missouri, said that profit-taking -- as well as economic uncertainty -- played a role in Monday's session.

"I think investors are over-reacting to every little bit of data because nobody's quite sure whether we'll see the rally continue or whether this is the beginning of a bigger pullback," she said.

($1=$1.08 Canadian)

(Reporting by Wojtek Dabrowski; editing by Rob Wilson)

Flower Girl Dresses

A dress (also frock, gown) is a garment consisting of a skirt with an attached bodice or with a matching bodice giving the effect of a one-piece garment.

Depending on design dresses are classified. Different basic dress shapes are:

Flower Girl Dresses

Cap Cana Villa Rental

Cap Cana is located in the Eastern region of the Dominican Republic known as Juanillo. The site was founded as a new and more ambitious touristic site with contributions from international investors and strategic partners such as Ritz-Carlton, Sotogrande, Donald Trump and many others. The site has a Marina, Large resorts, beaches, and many others. Primarily founded as a site to attract international visitors. The Cap Cana Championship, a Champions Tour golf tournament, is held at Punta Espada Golf Club in Cap Cana, a course designed by Jack Nicklaus.

Cap Cana's area includes more than one-hundred and twenty millon square meters of land, of which twenty-five million will be developed in its first phase. It also includes 8 kilometers of beach and coasts, 5 of which are considered to be among the most spectacular in the Caribbean, locally considered to be neck-in-neck to the beaches of Bahia de Las Aguilas (literally, Bay of the Eagles) located in the southwestern municipality of Perdernales- often referred by past visitors as some of the most beautiful in the world.

Cap Cana Villa Rental

Wind Spinners

One ancient design, the fighter kite, became popular throughout Asia. Most variations, including the fighter kites of India, Thailand and Japan, are small, flat, roughly diamond-shaped kites made of paper, with a tapered bamboo spine and a balanced bow. Flown without tails that would hinder their agility, these highly maneuverable flat kites have a length of cutting line coated with an abrasive attached to the bridle, which is then tied to a light cotton flying line. Although the rules of kite fighting varied from country to country, the basic combat was to maneuver the swift kite in such a way as to cut the opponent's flying line.

Three years after, in June 1752, in what is the most famous of kite experiments, the American inventor and statesman Benjamin Franklin, with the aid of his son, lofted a flat kite fitted with a pointed wire and silk sail on a hemp line during a thunderstorm. Somehow both father and son avoided electrocution as a metal key attached to the flying line became electrified. Franklin proved that lightning was the natural phenomenon called electricity. One immediate and practical outcome of the experiment was Franklin's invention of the lightning rod.

Wind Spinners

UBS posts 564 mln francs loss for third quarter

ZURICH (AFP) –
Swiss banking giant UBS plunged into further losses of 564 million francs (373 million euros, 552 million dollars) for the third quarter, but said it expected the situation to improve in coming months.

"Having stabilized the bank?s financial condition and resized the business, UBS expects to see further progress in restoring the underlying profitability of the business in future quarters, particularly in 2010," said the bank in its quarterly earnings statement.