text:
Posted at: 06/27/2013 8:14 PM
Updated at: 06/27/2013 8:18 PM
By: Steve Flamisch
ALBANY -- With many of the Capital Region's waterways already near flood stage from a month of above-average rainfall, and up to two inches of additional rainfall expected in the next 24 hours, the state Canal Corporation on Thursday took steps to prevent flooding along the Mohawk River.
The Canal Corporation postponed Friday's scheduled re-opening of the Erie Canal between Scotia and Fort Plain, and removed the upper gates of movable dams along that stretch in the hope of dropping the water level before the rain begins.
Boater Andre LaChappelle was hoping to leave Waterford in the morning on his way back to Montreal. Instead, he and his wife Sabine are preparing for a longer stay.
"They're really concerned about all the boaters," LaChappelle said. "If it becomes dangerous for the people that are (moored along) the wall, they would open the lower lock so we could be in the upper basin, which is safer for boaters."
The Mohawk River in Utica was already at flood stage, according to the National Weather Service. The Hudson River in Troy was projected to reach flood stage Friday evening. The Schoharie Creek in Gilboa and Prattsville was not projected to reach flood stage.
In Schenectady's Stockade section, Scott Andrus was keeping a close eye on the level of the Mohawk River. Tropical Storm Irene flooded his Washington Ave. basement with six feet of water in 2011.
Since then, the Canal Corporation has done a better job of reducing the water level in anticipation of heavy rainfall, Andrus said.
"The people of the state government are on the ball with this and they are keeping an eye on it," he said. "(They) are doing the best they can to keep the level of the water down, and to make sure that we don't have a repeat of that."
The American Red Cross of Northeastern New York has told its more than 500 volunteers to be on stand-by throughout the weekend in the event of flooding, Emergency Services Director Tim Bachman said.
"(We're) just making sure that everybody has a heightened state of alert in case something happens, that we can respond quickly to meet the needs," Bachman said.
The Red Cross is prepared to open emergency shelters if any areas need to be evacuated, Bachman said. Except for service animals, pets are not permitted in shelters.
People in flood-prone areas were encouraged to arrange for family or friends on higher ground to accommodate pets. The Red Cross also works with local animal shelters to house them, Bachman said.
For the latest water level readings and flood stage updates, go to: http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/forecasts.php?wfo=aly


text:
Soviet Psychiatry on Trial
The Norwegian psychiatrist said he was worried. He was sure that his Soviet colleagues were abusing their profession in order to suppress dissent. But he was afraid that if the World Psychiatric Association voted to condemn them, as the British were proposing, then all contact might end, and with it any chance for quiet moral suasion.
It was Monday, August 28, 1977, the first day of the WPA's Sixth World Congress of Psychiatry, and the vote would be taken Wednesday. Six years before, at the WPA's Fifth World Congress in Mexico City, attempts to condemn the Soviets had been unsuccessful; the issue had never reached a vote. Since then, reports of Soviet abuse had built up. Appeals had been made that they end the practice of diagnosing political dissidents as mentally ill and of confining them in prison hospitals. The number of known or suspected cases had risen to several hundred. Formerly hospitalized dissidents, such as Leonid Plyushch and Vladimir Bukovsky, were extruded abroad and struck Western psychiatrists who interviewed them as healthy. Groups of psychiatrists around the world began to pressure their national societies to condemn Soviet practices.
After years of uncertainty, a few did. In May of 1977, Britain's Royal College of Psychiatrists, one of the WPA's member societies, voted to ask the world body to condemn "the systematic abuse of psychiatry for political purposes in the USSR" at its upcoming congress. Two weeks later, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists, hoping to make the British resolution more acceptable to other psychiatric societies, proposed that it be amended to condemn political abuses not only in the USSR but also "in all countries in which they occur." Then in August, three weeks before the Sixth World Congress was to consider these proposals, the American Psychiatric Association, the WPA's most powerful member society, added one more. It asked the WPA to set up monitoring machinery—a Committee to Investigate Abuse of Psychiatry. The three proposals became items on the congress agenda. Many vowed that the shame of Mexico City would be wiped away in Honolulu.
In fact, though, opinion at the congress was fractured. Six of the world's continents—sixty countries—were depleted of psychiatrists for the occasion. Of the four thousand who came, many were passionate about the issue. Some, like the Norwegian, felt that the resolutions should be defeated in order to maintain ties that could be used to soften Soviet practices. Others doubted the truth of the accusations, or argued that since psychiatrists everywhere served as agents of social control, it would be hypocritical to single out Soviet abuses that were different only in degree. Still others, primarily from the Eastern bloc, denied the accusations altogether, labeling them the inventions of anti-Soviet slanderers. The remainder, mainly from the U.S. and Western Europe, felt that anything short of condemnation would represent a second betrayal of psychiatry.
Throughout the congress, the Soviets complained that a conspiracy was afoot. In a way, they were right. Some weeks before, Sidney Bloch, an Oxford psychiatrist who had co-authored a book arguing that Soviet psychiatrists were systematically abusing their profession for political ends,1 wrote to colleagues in Europe and North America asking them to work together in Honolulu in the interest of passing the resolutions. About two dozen met in his hotel room on the eve of the congress, and, of these, a core group—about fifteen—continued to meet through the rest of the week to exchange information and offer mutual support. As the vote drew near, others joined, including the British and Australian voting delegates. Most had never met before. About half were from the United States; a third from England, Canada, and Australia; and a few from France and West Germany. Two were Soviet psychiatrists who had emigrated to the West. Izvestia would later refer to this loose caucus as a Zionist clique. In fact, its members shared no particular ideology or religion—not even a unanimous view about the motivations behind the Soviet misdiagnoses. What they did share, besides their profession, was the conviction that the misdiagnoses had occurred and that they had to be condemned.
The giant congress-eve welcome party on the Royal Hawaiian's vast lawn—torches, hulas, and mahimahi—stood in bizarre contrast to the struggle that would follow. It was Sunday evening, the congress would begin the next day, but it was still unclear how many votes there would be in all, how many would be allotted to each psychiatric society, and which delegate would be voting for that society.
The WPA, the caucus eventually discovered, was made up of 76 societies representing psychiatrists in almost as many countries. The exact number varied from year to year. In some countries, the profession is so fragmented along theoretical or ideological lines that several societies coexist. France, for example, has had, during the past seven years, at least seven; three of them quit the WPA between 1972 and 1976. Each society names a delegate to the WPA's General Assembly, and it is that delegate who has the right to cast his society's votes on the items placed on the congress agenda.
The number of votes each delegate may cast depends, first of all, on the number of paid-up members his or her society has. A society is granted one vote for each 100 members, up to a maximum of 30 votes. Most societies have fewer than 200 members, and so are entitled to only one or two votes. The large societies, with several thousand members, have the potential right to cast up to the maximum complement of 30. But if a society fails to pay its full assessment of WPA dues, it$ vote is cut proportionately. This makes little difference to the majority of the societies—those from Asia, Africa, and Latin America—since, in the main, they have only one or two votes to begin with; and, so long as they pay something, they keep at least one. The greatest effect is on the large societies. The American Psychiatric Association, with 18,800 members, had paid enough of a subsidy to the WPA to be accorded the maximum of 30 votes. The USSR's All-Union Society of Psychiatrists had paid much less; and so, although it also could have had 30 votes for its 21,000 members, it had only 23. Britain's Royal College of Psychiatrists, in its years of economic decline, could buy only 5 votes for its 4,450 members, despite its theoretical entitlement to the maximum, while Canada's smaller but richer society had 13.
That first night at the welcome party, the number of votes and the identities of the voting delegates were still not public. But some trends were already evident. It was clear that the Scandinavian delegates were planning to vote against the resolution condemning Soviet abuses. One of the caucus members, who had been active in the British campaign against Soviet psychiatry for half a dozen years, confronted Clarence Blomquist, a Swedish psychiatrist and professor of medical ethics:
We don't like the Swedish position.
We don't have a position.
Your position is to vote against the Royal College resolution.
We're concerned that the Soviets will withdraw. We're concerned about contacts in the long run.
But they've pulled that on us for too long. By now there's just so much proof that they're abusing psychiatry.
I'm not sure it's abuse. I think that those dissidents would have been declared ill in the West.
What? In the West?
Yes, in Sweden.
Well, not in the U.S.A., not in Great Britain, and not in Canada. And I'd certainly be surprised about Sweden.
Soviet lobbying, possibly more subtle, also made itself felt. The Israeli delegate, with one vote, was a candidate for the WPA's new executive committee, on the same slate with a Saudi and a Pakistani. Marat Vartanyan, a Soviet psychiatrist who held the post of associate secretary of the WPA, embraced the Israeli. "I'll vote for you!" he assured him.
It was easy to spot the Soviets. They wore suits. I wondered if it was true that all Soviet delegations traveling abroad were watched by the KGB. All I could see was that they always moved in twos.
Ironically, the Sixth World Congress was devoted to the theme of psychiatric ethics. After a formal opening ceremony—which featured local politicians boosting island attractions, a Hebrew-speaking Christian minister praying for sunshine, and a high-school glee club offering a sacred paean to the Royal Hawaiian Hotel—the congress got down to business. A plenary session on the "Ethical Aspects of Psychiatry" became the first skirmish in the battle of Hawaii.
The centerpiece of the plenary session—in fact, of the congress—was the Declaration of Hawaii. That document, designed to set out the guidelines for the ethical practice of psychiatry, had been ushered through nine drafts by Clarence Blomquist, the same Swedish psychiatrist who had argued the night before that the Soviets should not be condemned. Although some countries, particularly developing and socialist ones, had reservations about it on the ground that it emphasized individual rather than social needs, it was, in the main, widely accepted. Its injunction against the compulsory hospitalization of persons without mental illness, and against the use of the profession for maltreatment of individuals or groups, should have been sufficient to eradicate political abuses. But it was not enforceable: there were no provisions for monitoring and investigation.
The audience seemed impatient with Blomquist's disquisition on the philosophical origins of his declaration. They seemed impatient with the plenary session's other speakers, too. Although the session was not focused on the Soviet issue—a special session would address that issue the following night—the absence of any discussion of it in that environment of watching and waiting seemed odd and annoying. In fact, the only statements that received any applause were elliptical references to the issue by the speakers representing West Germany and the United States.
And then came Eduard Babayan, the chief of the Soviet delegation. He would pull out all the stops at Wednesday's debate, but he used the Monday morning plenary session to map out his delegation's position. Soviet laws and procedures, he insisted, offered the psychiatric patient the greatest possible protection from diagnostic mistakes and arbitrary treatment. He insisted that anti-social behavior could never serve as sufficient grounds for hospitalization. He emphasized that no group of forensic psychiatrists, not even the staff at the Serbsky Institute of Forensic Psychiatry, was more equal in the eyes of a Soviet court than any other group. He denied that the theories of any particular psychiatric school could possibly have any bearing on the finding of legal responsibility.
Each of these statements was an implicit refutation of major Western accusations: that dissidents were systematically misdiagnosed, that their only symptoms were their politically unacceptable views, that it was the Serbsky psychiatrists who would render a diagnosis of illness despite a previous diagnosis of health rendered elsewhere by more honest psychiatrists, and that the theories of the Snezhnevsky school of psychiatry were being used to justify political hospitalizations.
But Babayan did not step beyond implications. He made no mention of the condemnatory resolutions. He made no mention of the accusations themselves. He was only setting up the structure of the Soviet side's position. Soviet psychiatry functioned ethically, he said; reports to the contrary were only anti-Soviet agitation and slander.
Just as Babayan was speaking at Waikiki, his adversaries were agitating across town. The evening before, at the first meeting of the pro-condemnation caucus, Neil Abercrombie, a Hawaii state senator, had offered the state capitol for a press conference. The psychiatrists were afraid that such an extravaganza would rub the voting delegates the wrong way, but Abercrombie was impatient with their timidity. "I'm a politician," he admonished them. "You're holding this meeting to tell the world about the abuses. Who cares about a hundred psychiatrists? Who cares about the meeting if it's not reported?"
It was reported. At least, it got better coverage than Babayan. Leonid Plyushch, one of the formerly hospitalized Soviet dissidents, was there, together with two emigré Soviet psychiatrists and several members of the caucus. Among the press were two Soviet reporters.
Plyushch, a Ukrainian mathematician, had gotten into political trouble for the first time in 1968, when he was thirty, for a letter he wrote to a newspaper complaining about a political trial. He lost his job and eventually became a member of a dissident group. He was arrested in 1972 and accused of "especially dangerous crimes"—possessing copies of the underground Chronicle of Current Events; writing "anti-Soviet" literary criticism and showing it to others; belonging to an illegal organization; and signing open letters to the UN. He was sent for psychiatric examinations. At one, Georgi V. Morozov, the head of the Serbsky Institute, diagnosed him as suffering from "sluggish" schizophrenia. At a second, Andrei V. Snezhnevsky, the head of the Institute of Psychiatry of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences, also considered him schizophrenic. Plyushch's trial was held without him. The psychiatrists recommended compulsory hospitalization in an ordinary psychiatric hospital, but the court insisted on a "special" prison hospital, one in which the lot of patients is much harsher and in which security is much greater. There he was given high doses of medication and suffered severe side effects.
Plyushch was finally released and deported early in 1976, primarily in response to protests by fellow mathematicians in the West. He was seen by a number of French, British, and American psychiatrists, including me; they could find no evidence of schizophrenia. Plyushch told his story at the Honolulu press conference and issued a plea that the WPA condemn Morozov and Snezhnevsky—both of whom were there in Hawaii as members of the Soviet delegation.
More accusations were made by the two emigré Soviet psychiatrists. One, Marina Voikhanskaya, told of her experiences with political "patients." Another, Boris Zoubok, described the mass hospitalizations that would take place during public events, such as Nixon's visit. Western psychiatrists used the occasion to warn that the American, British, Canadian, Australian, and New Zealand psychiatric societies, as well as others in Western Europe, might quit the WPA if Soviet abuses were not condemned.
By Monday night, the close of the congress's first day, it was clear that the demand for condemnation would not be deflected, as it had been in Mexico City. It was also clear that the Soviets would fight.
As it turned out, Tuesday belonged to the West. Indeed, by default. The scheduling of a special open session that night, in which statements could be made from the floor, guaranteed that. Set up in response to Western pressures, the session would feature a talk by an American psychiatrist who would air the accusations for the first time in an official meeting. The Soviets knew that and avoided it.
In fact, they seemed to avoid contact all day. The important ones, at least, were apparently planning strategy. Some voting delegates were afraid that Babayan was gearing up for a filibuster that would prevent them from voting on Item ll—the condemnatory resolution—at the second session on Wednesday. By evening, none of the Soviets could be seen. The special session was packed; except for the Soviets, almost all of the congress participants gave up the delights of Honolulu night life to attend it.
The main speaker was Paul Chodoff, a Washington psychiatrist. He presented the case for condemnation. Retaliation against dissidents, he insisted, should not be concealed behind the psychiatric fig leaf. "It is abhorrent," he said, "that people should be labeled insane solely because it suits the state for various reasons to handle them in this fashion, or because psychiatrists can be found to collaborate in this masquerade." He argued that the documentation of systematic, widespread abuse of Soviet psychiatry for political ends was convincing. If the WPA were to sidestep the issue by not voting condemnation Wednesday night, Chodoff warned, "it may survive, but it will have forfeited its moral vigor."
Following Chodoff, thirty psychiatrists lined up at microphones to add their voices. They overwhelmingly supported the resolution to condemn the Soviets.
Marina Voikhanskaya again told about the four cases of healthy dissidents she had seen in her own hospital in Leningrad. She also described the way colleagues she had known for years began to turn against her as soon as she started to question the diagnoses of hospitalized dissidents. Some of them even suspected her of mental illness. She singled out Snezhnevsky, Vartanyan, Morozov, and Nadzharov—all then in Honolulu—as having corrupted medical ethics, as having "blurred the borderline between police functions and medicine."
She told of an underground book by a Soviet dissident that had just reached the West. It contained a "white list" of some two hundred cases of dissidents in mental hospitals. It also contained a "black list" of the psychiatrists who put them there. "Who knows?" Voikhanskaya asked eerily. "You may well be sitting next to one of them at this moment."
Of course, she was wrong. They were not there. But the psychiatrists who were stood up in tribute as she returned to her seat. If that audience could have voted, it would have condemned the Soviets on the spot. But only the voting delegates could do that, and they would not cast their ballots until the General Assembly session the next night.
The congress participants were mainly from the U.S. and Western Europe, where feeling against the Soviets ran high. The voting delegates, on the other hand, represented societies around the world, and were sensitive to the political meanings of their votes. Many had come to Honolulu with instructions on how to cast them. Those who had not were not about to be overwhelmed by the passions of the Western majority that happened to be there. If on Tuesday they were exposed to the Western prosecution, on Wednesday they were offered the Soviet defense.
It was a defense built of denials, expressions of outrage, and intimations that the push for condemnation was nothing but a political hatchet job. The same strategy had been evident six years before in Mexico City. At the Fifth World Congress in 1971, Andrei Snezhnevsky, the foremost Soviet psychiatrist, had told Mexico City's Excelsior that the charges were "a maneuver of the cold war, carried out at the hands of experts." His message in Hawaii was much the same. Those charges, he told the Honolulu Advertiser, were just "a psychiatric variant of anti-Soviet propaganda." He again denied that abuses were occurring: "In mental hospitals, nobody is being detained for political or religious reasons." He also said that no more than about ten dissidents had ever been psychiatrically hospitalized, and insisted that all of them were ill. Some, he charged, had been re-hospitalized after emigrating to the West. And, in any case, it was better for a dissident to be hospitalized than jailed, since the period of confinement is almost always shorter.
Snezhnevsky is a remarkable figure, a real Soviet man. He is a survivor. Born in 1904, he persevered through every stage of Soviet psychiatry. When it was ideologically necessary to reject genetics, he rejected genetics. When it became possible to resurrect it, he resurrected it. When Stalin demanded an attack on "anti-Pavlovians" in psychiatry, Snezhnevsky attacked them. When, after Stalin's death, Pavlovianism was forgotten, he forgot it. Through all that time, he methodically accumulated professional power. In 1932, at the uncommon age of twenty-eight, he became head of a psychiatric hospital near Moscow. In 1938, he was appointed deputy director of the important Gannushkin Institute. During the war, he ran a military hospital. In 1950, he was named chief of the Serbsky Institute of Forensic Psychiatry. In 1951, possibly because of his participation in the official campaign against the "anti-Pavlovians"—many of whom also happened to be "cosmopolitans," which is to say, Jews—he was appointed to the chair in psychiatry at the prestigious Central Postgraduate Medical Institute. Finally, in 1962, he became a full member of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences—still the only psychiatrist to be so honored—and the head of the Academy's Institute of Psychiatry. On the way he gained some of his country's highest honors, including the Order of the Red Banner of Labor and the Order of Lenin. And, too, he gained control of Soviet psychiatry—its theory, its teaching, its research, its publication, and its professional activities.
Snezhnevsky's system of diagnosing schizophrenia has become the dominant one in the Soviet Union. And it is precisely that system which has been used to hospitalize dissidents, both by Snezhnevsky and by his colleagues. As it happens, I had studied that system for some years. In fact, by the time I arrived in Honolulu, I knew Snezhnevsky well, having spent days talking about him with former colleagues and students who had found their way to the West.
Snezhnevsky had always insisted that only psychiatrists could understand the complex nature of clinical diagnosis. Well, I was a psychiatrist, and one of the few in the West acquainted with his approach to diagnosis. Since the vote would be taken that night, and the opportunity would never come again, I called his room at the Holiday Inn. Yes, he would see me.
The translator, a serious young Russian on his first assignment abroad, apologized for not being acquainted with psychiatric terms. Snezhnevsky cheerfully agreed to my use of a tape recorder. I set it down in the middle of the table, next to his Gideon Bible. He would be happy, he said, to talk about anything, but would have to stop in an hour; his delegation had called a press conference that he was obliged to attend.
I wanted to get away from the realm of simple accusations and simple denials. After a long immersion in Snezhnevsky's system, I had questions I wanted to ask.
Snezhnevsky sees schizophrenia as a lifelong condition. He defines three forms. The first, "continuous," is said to be characterized by a progressive, usually steady development, without any significant remissions. The second, "periodic," can be recognized by its attacks; but each attack is followed by a remission, during which the patient returns to mental health. The third form, "shift-like" or "schub" schizophrenia, is described as a cross between the other two. The shift-like schizophrenic has attacks followed by remissions, but in the remission after each attack, or shift, the patient is not quite as well as he had been before the shift. This third form, then, is characterized by attacks, like periodic schizophrenia; but its course, like that of continuous schizophrenia, leaves the patient progressively worse, even in between the attacks.
Over the years, Snezhnevsky and his students have elaborated on these three themes, describing several subtypes within each form and many syndromes within each subtype. Most important for the problem of dissident diagnoses is the fact that each of the three forms, particularly the continuous and the shift-like, is seen as representing a spectrum of clinical states, ranging from very mild to very severe. The mildest are typified by "symptoms" that merge into normality: social withdrawal, confrontations with parental and other authorities, philosophical concerns, and "reformism," which is to say, the wish to change society. These mild states would almost never be considered schizophrenic in the West; they would be called normal, or neurotic, or, if persistent, signs of a character disorder. Western forensic psychiatrists—those psychiatrists called by courts or lawyers to examine individuals accused of crimes in order to determine whether they should be considered responsible for their actions or not responsible on account of mental illness—would rarely declare such persons not responsible.
What the Snezhnevsky system has done has been to corral these mild states into the realm of schizophrenia. The mild states are simply the mild ends of one of the three schizophrenic spectra, with each spectrum, or form, considered a separate genetic illness, with variable degrees of clinical expression. So a person with a mild form of continuous schizophrenia—known as "sluggish" schizophrenia—is, according to the canons of the Snezhnevsky system, just as schizophrenic in the biological sense as is a person at the clinically more severe end of the same form, and is considered to have the illness, in active or inactive form, for the rest of his life. The same holds for persons at the mild end of the shift-like form. And so when Soviet forensic psychiatrists evaluate dissidents without classical schizophrenic symptoms (such as hallucinations and delusions) but with reformist tendencies and other characteristics that are sometimes seen in genuine schizophrenics, they can render a diagnosis of schizophrenia; and, on the theory that schizophrenics should not be held accountable for their actions, they can pronounce them legally non-responsible.
What happens when they do this is that the diagnosed dissident is put on trial, a trial that may be held without him because he is considered too sick to attend; the judges almost always accept the psychiatrists' diagnosis and finding of non-responsibility; and the dissident is sent not to a prison or labor camp but to a psychiatric hospital, usually of a "special," high-security type, one designed to hold the criminally insane.
According to Western critics, what is accomplished by all this is that dissenting views are pronounced the sick products of sick minds; dissidents are deprived of the opportunity to defend themselves at open trials; and, without being given definite sentences that end after, say, three to seven years, they are sent to hospitals until they are pronounced well, a judgment that may not be made until the KGB decides they are well. Finally, should they ever dissent again, that dissent may be considered a sign of the recurrence of their lifelong disease.
Snezhnevsky's system was not designed for dissidents alone. It has been used in hundreds of psychiatric hospitals and clinics on thousands of ordinary patients. It is just that its qualities make it possible for a dissident with mild personality quirks and with an insistent wish to reform society to be diagnosed as belonging within the schizophrenic fold, with all the legal and social liabilities that flow from that diagnosis.
Given the Snezhnevsky system's variations and permutations, it is nearly impossible to question a diagnosis. But I decided to try. I asked Snezhnevsky about Plyushch. I reminded him that, according to his own writings, Plyushch should have residual signs of the illness, even in remission. But neither I nor several other Western psychiatrists, I said, had found any. Snezhnevsky generously forgave my simplicity. He pointed out that while it was usually true that residual signs of illness could be found, Plyushch had a variant of shift-like schizophrenia, in which the first few remissions are characterized by normal functioning. Soviet treatment had been successful; ultimately, however, Plyushch would become ill, and progressively deteriorate. "Being a psychiatrist," he told me, "you must know that there are long remissions and short ones. I don't exclude the possibility that Plyushch will have a very long remission. And then an attack and another attack. Nor do I know when they will come. They might come at any time."
I asked Snezhnevsky to describe Plyushch's symptoms, the ones that had made him render a diagnosis of schizophrenia.
Earlier, Snezhnevsky explained, Plyushch had had an attack, a shift, during which he had given up mathematics and had begun studying psychology and entertaining the idea that he had a mission. His second attack was characterized by ideas of abstract political philosophy which were anti-Soviet in nature and which led to his arrest when he tried to distribute them in written form to others in violation of the criminal code.
I asked if Plyushch had any symptoms that Western psychiatrists would have required for a diagnosis of schizophrenia, such as hearing voices or believing in plots that did not exist.
Snezhnevsky laughed. "Yes, those are the classical teaching cases," he said, the ones in textbooks. Plyushch and other mentally-ill dissidents did not have that kind of schizophrenia. Their symptoms were more subtle.
I told Snezhnevsky about Plyushch's own version of his history. He had explained his interest in psychology by saying that he had just been dismissed from his job as a result of his dissenting activities, and, out of work, spent his time trying to help his wife in research on the psychology of children's games. Both he and his wife felt that games could be devised that would help pre-school children mature in specific directions.
Snezhnevsky remembered the explanation and smiled in a way that suggested that I, too, could see that the notion was not a scientific theory but the preposterous obsession of a sick mind. I continued with Plyushch's explanation. Plyushch had pointed out that the idea was not his alone—that a famous Soviet psychologist by the name of Elkonin had similar notions. "And if I'm crazy," I quoted Plyushch as saying, "then so is Elkonin."
"Well, then, probably Elkonin is crazy!" Snezhnevsky burst into laughter.
I tried to generalize from the Plyushch case. Even if the dissidents were ill, they were obviously only mildly ill. Why were they pronounced in need of hospitalization? Why were they treated with drugs?
Snezhnvesky dismissed the questions. He countered that, really, we were dealing with the same tired list of ten or so cases; and that even those ten fared much better in hospitals than they would have fared in prisons or in labor camps. In the end, he said, despite a theoretical possibility of indefinite hospitalization, in practice their hospital stays were almost always shorter than their sentences would have been had they not been declared legally non-responsible. To my question about the use of special hospitals rather than ordinary ones—special hospitals being much more restrictive and harsh—he answered that under Soviet law, dissent was a serious, dangerous crime and that those who dissented were considered dangerous criminals. A sick murderer had to be kept in strict confinement, since escape would endanger society; the same obtained in the cases of sick political dissidents.
Much of the interview was spent jockeying around subtle psychiatric distinctions. Whenever I thought I had laid out reasonable grounds within his own system for a precise question, Snezhnevsky cited an exception or a complication. When I was able to point to a clear conflict between his assumptions about the validity of his theories and the results of more objective measures and studies, he did not acknowledge that a conflict existed.
Snezhnevsky looked at his watch. The press conference would start in half an hour. He had to get dressed. He seemed sorry that we could not go on. All my thrusts, however pointed and learned, had been parried.
Snezhnevsky has developed his diagnostic system over a period of many years. He has, in addition, taught it to generations of psychiatric students, several of whom have told me that he believes in its validity. He really believes that there are persons with mild symptoms and personality eccentricities who can—and should—be considered schizophrenic. He has fought for that concept, his students have accepted it, and intelligent Soviet psychiatrists accept it too. One, who emigrated from Leningrad after working there as a forensic specialist, told me that, despite his rejection of things Soviet, he thinks the Snezhnevsky approach, at least in non-dissident cases, makes sense—that it is better than the approach that prevailed in Leningrad before Snezhnevsky's supplanted it in the mid-60's, and that it is even better than approaches used in the West. The World Health Organization has given enough credence to the system to allow its use in the recent International Pilot Study of Schizophrenia.
After talking with Snezhnevsky, and after considering what I know about him, I too tend to think that he does indeed believe in the scientific validity of his basic approach to psychiatric diagnosis. While he must have knowingly misdiagnosed some of the dissident cases he has seen—he is just too adept politically not to know what to do when asked by the KGB to examine a prominent case—he may also believe that others have actually met his criteria for schizophrenia and have required that diagnosis. And even if that is not the case with Snezhnevsky himself, it may well be the case in diagnoses of dissidents done by his students or by those influenced by his teachings.
If the Soviet private defense was played out in Snezhnevsky's hotel room, the public one was presented at the well-prepared press conference a short time later. The tone was very different. The big guns were all there. No subtleties were discussed. Dmitri Venediktov, the Deputy Minister of Health, ran it. He introduced Babayan, Snezhnevsky, and the rest of the Soviet psychiatrists, including Nadzharov and Morozov, the two who were, together with Snezhnevsky, most closely associated with the diagnosis of dissidents. Venediktov also introduced a Soviet priest, who happened to be touring Honolulu. (In 1975, during a similar press conference in Copenhagen, the Soviets had not only introduced a Soviet priest who "happened to be touring" Copenhagen, but a Soviet rabbi who was also on tour, equipped with a large yarmulka. Dissident sources later identified the "rabbi" as a Moscow engineer.)
Much of the press conference was devoted to an attack on Psychiatric Terror, the book by Sidney Bloch and Peter Reddaway, which contains a list of some 210 dissidents said to have been wrongly diagnosed. Babayan cited the case of someone he said was on the list who was obviously ill. Grigorenko, one of the famous cases, was, he said, also ill. So were all the others. Bloch, Venediktov added, was a "doubtful" psychiatrist. Reddaway, Snezhnevsky suggested, was just someone who was bitter about having been expelled from Moscow ten years before.
The conference was boring. As with all press conferences, the fact that questions could not be followed up in a substantive way made it a forum for the organizers. Besides, the press had no idea what to ask. The only significant question was a plant. The Izvestia correspondent stood up. Wasn't it curious, he asked, that the voting power of the various delegations was based on the payment of dues? He implied that the West, which had most of the votes, had in that way fixed the decision on the condemnatory resolution. That gave Venediktov the opportunity to agree and to criticize the organization of the congress and its rules on voting. The issue would become a lively one that night.
The hours between the press conference and the vote were dotted with meetings and counter-meetings. A medical student of Ukrainian descent, an active pro-condemnation lobbyist, introduced me to someone he thought would be able to get through to the Brazilian delegate. At a cocktail party, I watched as two Soviet psychiatrists, Nadzharov and Zharikov, weaving through the throng, found themselves face to face with a former colleague, one who had been fired from their institute after applying to emigrate. Wordlessly, they executed a military right turn. In the Sheraton's lobby, Venediktov, who had just told the world that Sidney Bloch was a "doubtful" psychiatrist, brushed by him; neither knew who the other was.
The General Assembly debate began with an objection from Babayan. The official Soviet delegate was bitter. The West had had six years to heap calumnies on Soviet psychiatry. Scurrilous literature had been stacked in the lobby for days. How could the WPA impose a half-hour time limit on the debate? How could the delegates vote without a sufficient chance to hear the Soviet side?
The American delegate argued against Babayan's motion for unlimited debate. So did the WPA's parliamentarian. And so did the WPA's own executive committee. The General Assembly voted 23-21 to limit debate.
Then, Item 10, the Declaration of Hawaii, came up. Babayan, anticipating Item 11, the one calling for condemnation of his society, was testy. He complained that the declaration assumed a confrontation between the doctor and the patient, with society on the side of the doctor. Doctor and patient were, he insisted, in league with each other. There was no need for patient advocacy. There was no need to question the allegiance of the doctor. For years the Soviets had been insisting that their laws did not call for judicial review of psychiatric commitments because the Soviet psychiatrist could not possibly have any reason to misdiagnose or mistreat a patient. But Babayan did not press his complaint. He would save his words for the next two agenda items. He agreed to the declaration, and it was passed unanimously.
The Australian-New Zealand delegate, John Grigor, explained his society's amendment to the British resolution, which, because it added to that resolution, took its place on the agenda. It called for condemnation of psychiatric abuse "in all countries in which they occur" and asked psychiatrists in those countries to "renounce and expunge those practices." It further asked "that the WPA implement this resolution in the first instance in reference to the extensive evidence of the systematic abuse of psychiatry for political purposes in the USSR."
Grigor had begun attending the regular meetings of the pro-condemnation caucus the day before, together with Peter Sainsbury, the British delegate. He was now sitting next to Babayan, who had scrawled JABBERWOCKY across his copy of the Declaration of Hawaii. Grigor told the General Assembly that psychiatrists had to look at themselves without fear. If they don't police themselves, he warned, others will. He urged that they vote for his society's resolution. It was strong and it had to be.
Babayan was sarcastic. "You speak about systematic abuse. I'd like you to present official materials . . . do you have any official data in addition to the materials presented in the lobby?"
Grigor explained that it had been difficult to visit the Soviet Union. Documentation of abuse had been collecting for years. Jack Weinberg, the American delegate, backed up Grigor. The documentation had come from Amnesty International and from psychiatrists who had left the Soviet Union.
Babayan was not satisfied. He referred to the documentation as "allegations." "It's not enough to say, 'we have voluminous materials.'" He wanted to see certificates by Western psychiatrists who had examined formerly hospitalized dissidents. In fact, the Western societies had not prepared well enough. Such signed certificates could have been assembled; several Western psychiatrists had examined dissidents who had been hospitalized and found them to be well. But no formal certificates had been prepared, and Babayan knew it. He continued to press the point. How could the General Assembly approve false and unsupported allegations? Did it know that several of the so-called dissidents had been hospitalized once they reached the West? That at least one had committed suicide? (He was right, in a few cases. Others he cited were not dissidents. The famous ones who had reached the West, however, had remained out of hospitals.)
Babayan pressed on. The charges against Soviet psychiatrists were slanderous. They do not, he insisted, use drugs as punishments. They use the same drugs used in the West. In fact, unlike the West—this, in an apparent allusion to emerging revelations about the CIA—the USSR had outlawed the use of LSD. Read our case histories, he urged. Your information is based on the testimony of sick patients and ignorant people.
Grigor bounced back with equal sarcasm. "If Dr. Babayan had been born in the West, he would have made an excellent Jesuit." He accused Babayan of shifting the issue by introducing the assumption that the dissidents were ill and concentrating on the irrelevant question of drug dosages. Babayan seemed hurt; he was, he complained, "insulted by being called a Jesuit."
The East German delegate warned that "serious consequences" would ensue if the resolution were carried. The Cuban delegate jumped up in a white heat. The accusations, he said, were monstrous, cowardly, and disgusting. Years before, he too had been accused of similar abuses. Now the Soviets were getting the same treatment. The Bulgarian delegate added his voice: "We consider these allegations as totally unfounded, tendentious, and malicious." The Swedish delegate suggested that the WPA was not the right place to air the issue.
The momentum began to turn against the resolution, but time was on its side. The president of the WPA called for a vote. Babayan protested but the president refused to recognize him. The Soviet psychiatrist Vartanyan, present at the meeting in his capacity as associate secretary of the WPA, called for "justice." The president insisted on a vote. The Japanese delegate asked if he could abstain. The secretary-general said he could. One light-yellow ballot was passed to each delegate marked with the number of votes his society was empowered to cast. The ballots were filled in secretly and returned to the tellers. The secretary-general announced the results: total votes cast, 186; invalid (abstaining), 8; yes, 90; no, 88. The resolution was passed by two votes.
The narrowness of the victory was startling. Had the Poles shown up in Honolulu with their three votes, the decision would have gone the other way. Had the Soviet Union been prescient enough to pay its dues—actually, only $280 more—it would have had three more votes to cast.
In fact, the delegates were overwhelmingly against the resolution. Of the 55 casting ballots, 33 had said "no" and only 19 "yes," with three abstaining. Most of the delegates voting against, however, had only one or two votes. Since the balloting was secret, it would never be possible to be sure which countries had gone which way. The U.S., Canada, Britain, Australia, and New Zealand had certainly supported the resolution. They accounted for 57 votes. Two of France's 9 votes were also affirmative. That made 59. Others in the yes column probably included West Germany (9), Israel (1) and, possibly, the Netherlands (8), Belgium (2), and Italy (6). On the negative side were the Eastern-bloc societies, almost surely the Scandinavians, and the vast bulk of Asians and Africans, most of whom had only one vote. Japan presumably abstained.
The next agenda item was the American resolution calling on the WPA to set up a committee to perform on-site investigations in cases of alleged abuse on the part of any WPA member society. Babayan fought on. Such a committee would be too expensive. It would be an illegal infringement on national sovereignty. It Was obviously aimed at the Soviet Union. He again protested the use of weighted ballots. He turned to Grigor and complained, "This is all political." Grigor responded: "No, it's an issue of human rights." Apparently, the delegates agreed with Grigor. This time, given the chance to vote for future purity rather than present blame, they passed the American resolution by a greater margin, 121-66.
Babayan left the room, the press after him. He would not say whether or not his society would quit the WPA.
The midnight victory party overflowed into the hall. Thirteen caucus members were there, three delegates, and, passing through, a half-dozen well-wishers.
Predictions abounded. Snezhnevsky, Nadzharov, and Morozov would be removed, or their future activities curtailed. Those Soviet psychiatrists who had maintained a low profile until then would rise: Kabanov, for example, a party man who had never diagnosed a single dissident. A shift away from Snezhnevsky's theories would take place. The Soviets would have to stop diagnosing dissidents. They would be unable to come to the follow-up conference on the Helsinki agreements in Belgrade claiming, as they had before, that everyone approves of their behavior. The WPA, through its actions in Hawaii, would regain the respect it lost in Mexico City.
A Ukrainian present announced that inmates of Soviet labor camps had been prepared to stage mass hunger strikes if the resolutions had not been passed. He circulated postcards addressed to one of those inmates, Semyon Gluzman, a young Kiev psychiatrist who had been arrested for writing an underground critique of a dissident's misdiagnosis. The celebrants stopped for a moment to pen him the news.
1 Psychiatric Terror, by Sidney Bloch and Peter Redd-away, Basic Books, 510 pp., $12.95.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Care for cats, dogs & other domestic/companion animals
Care for horses & livestock/farm animals
Penn Vet's Continuing Education Series is a bi-monthly continuing education opportunity for primary care veterinarians, technicians and office staff.
This week's lecture is presented by Dr. Giacomo Gianotti.
1.5 credits of CE available.
Pre-registration required. Please register with your practice name and names of participants to the Ryan Hospital Referral Office at the email or phone number listed below.
Registration deadline: Thursday, August 13, 2015
6:00 PM - Complimentary Dinner, Cocktails and Meet & Greet
7:00 PM - Session begins. Q&A follows
This week's lecture is presented by Dr. Deb Silverstein, DVM, DACVECC.
Registration deadline: Thursday, October 22, 2015
This week's lecture is presented by Drs. Magi Casal, Tom Nolan, and Shelley Rankin.
Registration deadline: Wednesday, November 25, 2015


text:
No more waiting, Frankie Edgar and Gray Maynard will settle a longtime coming dispute for the UFC lightweight belt. UFC 136 Edgar Vs. Maynard III is TONIGHT!
Yes, I know I always say the same thing in the introduction for our Live Chat Blogs but, if it was ever true, it is tonight. This is an amazingly stacked card, one where I would hate being the one having to decide which is Fight of the Night.
Top to bottom this card is action packed with several match ups with pontential to enter the Fight of the Year list.
So to not make this any longer than it should be, just scroll down, check out our predictions, then hit the play button at the bottom, type in a name, and join the conversation.
Tonight is a very special night because our very good friend, Strikeforce 135 lbs. Women's World Champion Miesha Tate will be joining us as guest Twitter reporter sharing her views on the fights.
Please follow us @MMATruth and @MieshaTate and show Miesha your love and appreciation. You can also follow @BryanCaraway who is participating in the current season of The Ultimate Fighter.
Remember, UFC 136 Facebook Prelims start at 3pm - 6pm PT/ET. Spike Prelims start at 5pm - 8pm PT/ET. Live Chat actions starts at 9pm ET as soon as the PPV card starts rolling. You can get all the tweets from various MMA personalities on our chat from 6pm ET on. Get Dana White, Ariel Helwani, and many more including tonight's special guest, @MieshaTate. Enjoy!
Main Card Predictions
Melvin Guillard vs. Joe Lauzon - Amazing match up and a candidate for FOTN. Guillard wins by tko in the third round.
Leonard Garcia vs. Nam Phan - Second candidate of the card for FOTN. Phan wins via unanimous decision. And please when we predict that a fighter will win by unanimous decision, don't ask in which round. Yes, you know who you are.
Chael Sonnen vs. Brian Stann - Sonnen's comeback fight after getting his head popped and his heart broken by Anderson Silva and then some. Stann has classically lost against wrestlers but if the hook or the uppercut lands, it's over for Sonnen. Still, Sonnen wins by way of... Well, laying on top and controlling the top. Unanimous decision for Sonnen.
Jose Aldo vs. Kenny Florian - As much as we love and support KenFlo for being an amazing athlete and a proud member of the Latino community, do not expect nothing different than Aldo vs. Faber. Aldo dominates the fight in all aspects and wins by TKO in the third round.
Frankie Edgar vs. Gray Maynard - Finally we get to see this score being settled, well, the title at least. If Frankie wins there is still a tie between them two. Although Dana White already said they would put all this behind them and move on with the division if that is the case, these two warrios will always have a pickle until the score is finally settle.
Read "Rubber Match Leads To a Tied Score If Frankie Edgar Wins"
Gray Maynard takes home the UFC lightweight belt via unanimous decision.
Originally posted at The MMA Truth.
Please come join us on Twitter @MMATruth and on Facebook at The MMA Truth.
The MMA Truth and it's content are sponsored by Fight Soap, Giankarlo Photo Studio, Kimura MMA Apparel & Equipment, FIT - Fight Integrated Training, and the FanVsFan Network


text:
Eder is out for at least 10 days, while Nenad Krsticic accused Francelino Matuzalem of "giggling" after ending his season with a dreadful tackle.
The Genoa Derby ended 1-1, but proved costly for Samp as Eder suffered a right thigh strain that will keep him out of action for at least 10 days.
Krsticic was stretchered off during the same match with three different lesions to his left ankle [12] and is out for the rest of the season.
"I will not forgive Matuzalem," slammed Krsticic in the Secolo XIX newspaper.
"Tackles like that were made to hurt players, just as he did in other occasions during his career. I'll wait for him next year, if he's still in Serie A...
"In the locker room he asked how I was and that was it. He didn't apologise. If anything, he was giggling. I received many messages of support and solidarity, but none from Genoa."
It is a familiar tale, as earlier this season Cristian Brocchi of Lazio also had his campaign ended by a Matuzalem tackle and claimed the midfielder – his former teammate – refused to apologise. In both instances, Matuzalem was only booked.
Think you know your Italian football? Share your knowledge, tips and comments to win cash prizes in OLBG's tipster competition [13] - £11,000 to be won monthly!


text: Prev | Next A wounded American paratrooper, with his right arm in a sling, keeps a tight hold on his carton of cigarettes as he is helped up the ramp of an LCVP waiting to take him to a hospital ship off the invasion beachhead, during Allied landing operations at Normandy, France, June 12, 1944. (AP Photo) Gallery: Historical images of D-Day invasion Jun. 06, 2013 @ 12:01 AM 2012/The Herald-Dispatch The invasion of Normandy, France, known as D-Day, was June 6, 1944. (u'nobuy',)


text:
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — ABC's news anchor Diane Sawyer, two of the network's correspondents and other defendants in a $1.2 billion defamation lawsu...
Read Whole Story
It's the responsibility of both the designer and the engineer to work together to find the smartest way to deliver the desired result. Of course, that's the crux of it--figuring out how to get them working together first.
You can touch someone's life by empowering them, and in turn, you are actually empowering yourself. There couldn't be a more perfect way to define well-being.
Six Sigma, Kaizen, Lean, and other variations on continuous improvement can be hazardous to your organization's health. While it may be heresy to say this, recent evidence suggests that it's time to question these methods.
California will, before the night is over tomorrow, be labeled the "floodwall" that turned back the "Republican wave" this year.
Get top stories and blog posts emailed to me each day..


text:
Well well well, this is a change of pace. We've told you about Rihanna's well-documented fear of pants, but now it looks like she's moved on to a shirt phobia too! The singer is currently filming her music video "We Found Love" in Ireland, and so far we like what we see. These on-set photos show Riri running through an open field with an open shirt and what appears to be underwear made out of bandanas. Frolicking in the grass while wearing homemade clothes…Is this Rihanna's tribute to Fraulein Maria? Check out the gallery below and judge for yourself!
[Photo: Splash News Online]


text:
Murphy Lee, 2011 STL Twitter Champ: His Twenty Best Tweets
It used to be something that I just did while trapped in my car. Waiting to pick up a friend at the airport? Check Murphy Lee's Twitter account. Sitting in stopped traffic on the highway? Check Murphy Lee's Twitter account. Pull up to the crib and see a creeper hanging outside and need to waste some time? Check Murphy Lee's Twitter account.
But now I do it all the time. And I show it to everybody else. Why? Because I love him. And because Murphy Lee's Twitter feed can be all things to all people. It offers funny stories, sage advice, cathartic rants and inspiring suggestions. Here, thug stories are mixed with non-preachy praises of veganism. (Murph has been a vegan for thirteen years.) There are also family stories and lots of advice concerning the ladies in his life. It's equal parts love, wisdom and yo momma.
Still, Murph is a businessman. He also uses twitter to promote his projects (most recently, the Wine, Weed & Women mixtape) and advertise his interests (like his own brand of wine, Freaky Muscato.) He even has his own Twitter catch phrases based off of his ventures. (UCME?)
As a long-time St. Lunatic and St. Louis booster, Murphy Lee often tweets about the city and related news. His Twitter location reads: "STL even when im gone." And his stream-of-consciousness style and adventurous spelling choices call to mind another St. Louis legend: William S. Burroughs. In other words, don't take every word too literally. Sometimes if you just keep reading it will all start to make sense.
(Murph Derrty likes Spin Doctors?)
Anyway, because he's on there so much, I figured I'd use Twitter as the first step to our future romantic relationship. So I tweeted at him early this year, trying to get him to come to my birthday party. I even promised him yummy vegan noms, but I didn't get a response. Bummer. Still, my constant stalking has paid off for you, because I've amassed quite the collection of hilarious and informative Murphy Lee Twitter missives. Here, you can find 20 of my favorites from the past year, and most of them are fairly recent. You're going to love him, but I still love him more.
- Yo if a mufucka got a job at sprint n used to work at at&t ...u would say congrats....dont get mad at PUJOLS for gettin a new n better job [link]
- Niggas wont change til THE QUEENS stop excepting less. if u EXCEPT a man wit brains ONLY then das wut u get. WE DO WUTEVER FOR DA PUSSY [link]
- Fam time..kids been doin good in school..need to reward their errythang n spend time all at once.....i loves mine [link]
- U should treat folks like u like to b treated...its only right holmes [link]
- Wen somebody love yo derrty fuckin draws...u better wake up..cuz aint nobody else gone wash dem shits [link]
- #FunFactAboutMe i like errythang...a lil bit...take me anywwerrr [link]
- #ConfusingThingsGirlsDo like hang wit girls dey dont like [link]
- Wus on yall agenda today my fellow humans...hope its inspirational n motivational n cool [link]
- I told my son he getting big n dis boy say...I KNOW...I SEEN MY SHADOW...IT GOT BIGGER [link]
- #YouWasSexyUntil u farted n lied n said it wasnt u.."its only two of us...farting is cool but lying isnt [link]
Ten through one on the next page...
Sponsor Content


text:
• Female • $700
• Female • $500
Schipperke Puppy
Receive an email alert when additional Schipperke puppies are added. It's easy and free!
BREED: Schipperke Puppy
INCLUDES: puppy papers, health certificate, shot/worming record, 1-yr health guarante, microchip , travel crate if ship
Down Home Country Kennel
Member Since: May 2007
Location: Springfield, Missouri
• Male • $400


text:
The annual event raises over $35,000 for the Xavier tennis programs.
April 29, 2013
Xavier Raffle Tickets | Registration Form
CINCINNATI - The annual Midwest Sports/Xavier Tennis Pro-Am will be held on Saturday, June 8. This annual event helps to bring in over $35,000 each year for the Xavier University Tennis programs. This year's tournament that will feature 32 teams of amateurs and professionals will take place a Lunken Playfield at noon and will conclude with a post event celebration at Schiff Family Conference Center at Cintas Center at 6:00 p.m. A silent auction that includes gift certificates to many of Cincinnati's restaurants, entertainment, items for women as well as sports memorabilia will be held. A live auction featuring trips and unique experiences will also take place. This year will also feature an online auction. More details to follow on the online auction experience.
This year, we will also be honoring long time Xavier Tennis greats Jenny Lopez Verkamp (1993) and Lisa Ennis White (1993). Both played tennis for Xavier from 1989-1993 and made their mark on the record books at Xavier University.
The Xavier tennis team is also selling raffle tickets to help raise money as well. Prizes include tickets to the U.S. Open, Xavier men's basketball season tickets, and a week in a Hilton Head condo. Tickets are $10 each or three for $25. If you are interested in purchasing raffle tickets, please download the raffle ticket form and return with payment to Becky Jackson/Xavier University - 3800 Victory Parkway - Cincinnati, OH 45207-7530. You can also make an online donation to the tennis program by clicking here.
For more information, please contact Becky Jackson at 513-745-3572 or firstname.lastname@example.com. To register, please download the registration form. If you are interested in donating an item to the silent or live auction, please contact Becky Jackson.
ABOUT MIDWEST SPORTS: For more than 20 years, Midwest Sports Tennis Store has served as one of the world's largest tennis suppliers. Midwest Sports Tennis warehouse offers a comprehensive selection of tennis racquets, tennis apparel, tennis shoes, tennis equipment and more. We value innovation and have personally tailored our products to highlight your skills on the court. Our well-trained staff can help you find that perfect tennis racquet, tennis shoe or tennis clothing that is sure to put you ahead of the competition. Our products are consistently first-to-market and we pride ourselves in stocking our tennis warehouse with the newest products at the lowest prices. Be sure to visit us on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube to learn of our latest offers and contests. Midwest Sports - Pure Tennis.


text:
Latest Articles
Weekly PollLoading ...
Video: Ariel Atom Turbo vs SAAB-Powered Westfield Seiw
If you'd never heard of the Westfield Seiw before or Westfield Sportscars in general, then we wouldn't blame you as the tiny British sports car maker has remained a dark house in the kit car arena since the brand's launch way back in 1982.
All cars created by Westfield are based around the iconic Lotus Seven and due to their light curb weight's, are some of the fastest accelerating cars on the planet as demonstrated by the following drag race against the equally impressive Ariel Atom Turbo.
The Ariel Atom Turbo is also one of the fastest cars on the planet and even in base spec, it can hit 100km/h from a standstill in just 2.8 seconds. As a result, pitting these two cars together in a rolling drag race sounds like an interesting prospect, doesn't it?
Well, m5boarddotcom recently did just that and the race is certainly very intense!
Published: January 4, 2013 12:01 am
Published by Brad Anderson
Post Tags :


text:
Day 1 – I got a haircut today. It's a lot shorter now but not working class short, not army short. Back at home, Sarah said that she liked it, that she could see herself playfully gripping tufts of my hair during sex. I said, "Why don't we test that hypothesis?" and she obliged. God, I love her so much. If anything were to happen to her, I swear…
Day 2 - Sarah's dead. And just one day after our scene of mildly erotic domestic bliss, too. To mark my loss, I refused to shave today. Shaving would somehow cheapen her passing. And besides, revenge is a dish best served scruffy.
Day 3 - I know who did it and they're going to pay. Before they took Sarah, my rage was just barely contained, like the infinitely dense point of matter that gave birth to this whole goddamn universe. It's not that I didn't have access to a wellspring of manly anger before her death, it's just that there was no need to unleash it on an unprepared world. But now that she's gone, there's nothing standing in my way. Get ready for my big bang.
Day 4 - Killed my first enemy today. Afterward, I looked down at the blood on my hands and thought some deep thoughts about the consequences of my actions, about the effects that this act of violence might have on my character. Would I become just like them? Would revenge fill the void of Sarah's absence or would it leave me feeling hollow? I didn't have answers to these questions but I felt in my gut that the only way to resolve them was to pick up a gun and press onward.
Day 5 - My enemies speak with an accent I can't identify. I've been puzzling over it since the start of this whole affair. It's really starting to bother me. Where are they from? Central America? Eastern Europe? South Asia? Should I ask one of them? I mean, I can't exactly engage in conversation during the middle of a gunfight but maybe if I carefully incapacitate one of them with a non-mortal wound, I can ask him about his ethnic background before delivering the death blow.
Day 6 - Thought a lot about Sarah's death today. It was snowing when I found her. I stared in horror at the ground where her body lay, at the painful contrast of blood red and snow white. Something about it made me think about the purity of femininity, about that ineffable, unattainable, effortless quality that Sarah had about her, an aura that seemed irrevocably tied to her downy white breasts and her long, flowing hair. Sarah was my redemption, my one chance to soften the rough edges of my life with something soft, sweet, aromatic. And now she's gone forever, the most precious woman in the world unceremoniously slain by a group of vaguely ethnic mercenaries.
Day 7 - It's getting easier to kill people. The first person I killed presented a staggering moral and physical challenge; the most recent person I killed was like an ant beneath my boot. The more people I kill, the better I get at killing people. The quantity of people I have killed and my skill at killing them are positively correlated variables. Killing people is like riding a bike: once you learn how to do it, you'll never unlearn it. Killing people? It's like having sex: you never forget your first time and, once you've tried it, you'll want to do it over and over.
Day 8 - Thought about giving up today. Sarah's dead. I've killed six dozen people which seems like a lot, come to think of it. And I haven't changed my clothes all week. But then I looked at the folded picture of Sarah that I store in my wallet. She would want me to keep going. She wouldn't want me to stop until they're all dead. I can hear her whispering to me now from beyond the veil: "If I have to be in heaven without you, I want you to send them all to hell."
Day 9 - I lost track of how many people I've killed. Sobering. But I also got my first headshot today! Excuse my exuberance. Killing is wrong, of course, and it's only justified in my case because of Sarah's death. Sure, the explosion of viscera that accompanies a perfectly precise pistol shot has a certain aesthetic appeal. The way in which that single perfunctory bullet triggers such a sudden display of grotesque bodily excess is, I'll admit, nothing short of remarkable. If I have to shoulder the unpleasant burden of vengeance, is it really so bad if I take a little pride in my necessary labor?
Day 10 - Food is starting to get caught in my scruff. Sometimes it's gross, other times it's tasty. I've been thinking that even after I avenge Sarah, I might keep the beard. More on that later.
Day 11 - I remember reading some Walt Whitman in high school. I had to memorize one of his poems once, the really famous one: "I too am not a bit tamed, I too am untranslatable, I sound my barbaric YAWP over the roofs of the world." I think I'm starting to understand how Whitman felt when he wrote that. Sarah's death has defined me or, rather, it's unrefined me, putting me in touch with a part of myself that is wild, independent, even triumphant. In a funny way, this quest for revenge might be the best thing that's ever happened to me.
Day 12 - Passed the fifty headshot mark today and rewarded myself with a stiff drink. I have the strangest notion that something good will happen when I reach one hundred. I don't know why, I don't know what, but somehow I just know that when I pass one hundred headshots, I'll be able to feel like I've achieved something concrete and real.
Day 13 - Finally avenged Sarah's death today. As the leader of my enemies lay dying, sputtering bright red blood with each syllable of accented English, he assured me that I was just like him, that I too had murdered hundreds of people without remorse and without purpose. Whatever.
Day 14 - Wasn't expecting this. My victory didn't bring Sarah back. What's more is that I'm starting to feel a little guilty about what I've done. Now that I've had some time to catch my breath, I'm beginning to think that I should not have spent the last two weeks systematically eliminating hundreds of people to no practical effect. I just got so carried away when they killed her, you know? I've got to be honest, diary. I'm pretty down. I even thought about shaving once, going so far as to lather up my face. But I had used my last razor to stealth kill someone last week so I just sat down and cried, my tears softly rinsing away the shaving cream.
Day 15 - Feeling a lot better today. Sure, Sarah's gone. But I've learned a lot about myself these past couple of weeks. I've learned a lot about the futility of revenge, the hollowness of violence, the depth of loss. There was no other way for me to learn these lessons, was there? It had to happen just like this.
Day 16 - Yup. Keeping the beard. It looks awesome.


text:
Glenn Reynolds is right: this is totally outrageous. How can it be "wiretapping" to record a traffic stop from inside one's own car? The police officer has no reasonable expectation of privacy when pulling you over on a public street.
What an absolutely ridiculous law. Supposedly, it "bars the intentional interception or recording of anyone's oral conversation without their consent." Umm, ever heard of overbreadth? What if I record two people having a loud "conversation" in a public place, which is easily overheard by anyone nearby? For example, a public shouting match between quarreling lovers? Is it "wiretapping" to capture a recording of that? No? Well, how about a police officer making a traffic stop on a public street? Yeah, that's what I thought.
I do love how there's an exception for the police taping citizens, but not for citizens taping the police. That doesn't seem backwards at all! I mean, why should the police be subject to scrutiny anyway? It's not like they ever do anything wrong! (Rodney King, anyone?)
Remind me, what country do we live in again?
Frankly, this kind of thing scares me much more than a lot of the political civil-liberties debates that people get all exercised about. The idea that someone could face a potential seven-year prison sentence for… making a video and audio recording of himself being pulled over in a traffic stop… in America… is beyond terrifying.
UPDATE: Roger Krueger, commenting on the linked news article, points to this guide to the Pennsylvania law in question:
18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 5703, 5704: It is a felony to intercept any wire, oral or electronic communication without the consent of all participants. It also is a felony to disclose or use the contents of a communication when there is reason to know those contents were obtained through an illegal interception.
Under the statute, consent is not required for the taping of a non-electronic communication uttered by a person who does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that communication.
Krueger writes, "a DA who'd file charges in a case like this is reprehensible. All he's doing wasting taxpayer money harassing Mr. Kelly by making him pay to defend a case the state hasn't a prayer of winning. You know the drill–you can spend $20k winning the case, or you can plead out to something you didn't do and pay a $500 fine." Ah, legalized extortion.
P.S. Here's one potentially helpful case for Mr. Kelly:
A police chief in his patrol car talking to dispatchers did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy and may be sued by a man arrested for filming him, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco (9th Cir.) has ruled. The full court declined to rehear the case last week.
On Jan. 28, 2000, Anthony Johnson filmed Byron Nelson, then-police chief of Sequim, Wash., as he talked with dispatchers from his patrol car. … After twice telling Johnson that it was illegal to record conversations without consent, Nelson and another officer physically struggled with Johnson, seized the camera and arrested him. Johnson spent three days in jail.
Johnson was charged with violating the Washington Privacy Act, which bars intercepting or recording a private conversation without the consent of all participants. The trial court dismissed the charges after finding that Nelson had no expectation of privacy because he parked his patrol car with the windows rolled down in a public place.
Johnson sued Nelson, the city, and others in U.S. District Court in Tacoma for violating his First Amendment rights and Fourth Amendment prohibitions against unreasonable search and seizure. The district court dismissed the suit, but the Court of Appeals reversed after Johnson appealed.
"It is undisputed that Johnson recorded Chief Nelson while he was on duty performing an official function in a public place," Judge Kim M. Wardlaw wrote for the 2-1 majority. "Johnson did not violate the Privacy Act when he recorded this official, public activity."
Hey, sometimes the Ninth Circuit is right. :)
Categories: The Law & The Courts
I believe Maryland has the same law. I'm so thrilled I could puke.
All charges against the young man should be dropped along with a public apology from the police dept. and the district attorney's office. At a minimum the police office and the assistant D.A. involved in this case should both receive official reprimands. If they can be shown to have a history of this kind of abusive behavior they should be suspended or fired.
Glenn Reynolds is right.
Even a stopped watch… [sorry, couldn't resist ;)]
Seriously though, he is right, and so are you. Just to add one thing, my impression is that while cases like this one are rare, it's quite common for police to tell people that they have to stop recording in situations where in fact they have no authority to give such an order. You might remember the tasering incident at (I think) UCLA. If I remember correctly, one of the officers there actually threatened to taser one of the bystanders if he didn't stop recording.
Read Radley Balko if you want to be upset by police outrages on a regular basis.
So this means that I can object on the grounds of an illegal wire tap to the tape recorder in the police officer's car right? And that that police officer should then be charged with a felony?
and the cop who got a bj from the porn star only gets a slap on the wrist….
f tha police.
Hey, you're starting to Lean Left again, there, old Pinkoe :) Yes it's Listing to Larboard ye are, Arrrr :> Wuttsa madduh fuh yoo, don'tchya Support yer Local PO-leece? ;> Surely you must understand that Everything Changed after Nine-One-One. :|
marty west, what, was that Paris Hilton's latest, um, Maneuver? And here I thought she'd had a jailhouse Epiphany. Dear me. :)
it's quite common for police to tell people that they have to stop recording in situations where in fact they have no authority to give such an order
Indeed. I can think of at least three occasions offhand where it's happened to me.
After Rodney King, I'd tell people to stop recording as well, even if I had no authority.
man the paris hilton thing is the best story ever…the picture of that trashy whore crying in the back of the police car is priceless
Is it just me or should the DA be personally liable for wrongful prosecutions. In other-words, A defendant in his trial could plead not guilty and also request a secondary judgment on weather charges should have been brought at all. If at any time the Judge kicks the case for something that is not a technicality–dismissed with prejudice perhaps being the measure–or if it goes to jury if the jury finds the defendant not guilty the jury would then be permitted to enter a judgment on weather the case had merit to be brought in the first place (a a defendant's request). If the DA is found guilty of bringing a stupid case he owes the court all court costs and the defendant all legal costs–personally.
Nail's head? Meet Brendan's hammer. Brendan's hammer, nail's head.
If I can suggest something practical, if a bit of trouble for the (very real) problem that Aaron Lee points to: a covert, or second, digital tape recorder. And a poker face.
In my state, it's perfectly lawful to record a conversation that you are a party to, and it's not necessary to inform the other party that the conversation is being recorded. In one case I'm familiar with (not directly; I wasn't involved), the existence of voluminous recordings were quite successful in correcting a perhaps not utterly corrupt public official's memory of what he had, in fact, said.
And, yeah: nail, head, bingo.
So, let me get this straight. It's bad for me to record you, because that's a violation of your privacy rights — but it's okay for me to record you if you work for the government, because it's my duty as a citizen to document the government's activities — as long as those activities aren't related to any kind of international intelligence or armed-forces work, because OPSEC must be maintained. Have I got the right interpretation of the doublethink?
Yes, that's it exactly. The extreme power differential between government and citizens explains why spying by the people upon the government is admirable but spying by the government upon the people is contemptible. So our Founding Fathers felt, and I think they were right.
Most Americans these days are all too happy to be a good government sheep.
DCL, you are very, very wrong.
While I agree that this case is absolutely AWFUL, in that any right-thinking prosecutor should know not to seek an indictment (if that's PA's process)when, based on current case-law, one has a very diminished expectation of privacy in an automobile—it would set an absolutely HORRID precedent to seek damages from a prosecutor who charges someone for committing a crime, as it would arguably put a chilling effect on prosecutors from bringing close-call cases to trial, for fear of losing the trial and getting their asses hauled to court as civil defendants.
Which, is why, I'm very happy to say: prosecutors are privileged from malicious prosecution suits.
Again, I think this is an absolutely ridiculous charge…but other than the 9th Circuit case that Brendan cites (which, by the way, is not controlling on a PA State Court), I don't know if there's any precedent regarding the privacy expectations of an individual having a conversation on a public road near or in an automobile.
What a horrible precedent it would be if an American citizen could not make an audio recording of a traffic stop while the government not only can make an audio recording, but a visual recording as well. Absolutely disgusting.
here is a local cop who was trying to bang 13 year old girls…
thin blue line
Beef… I think you are half right. I'm a big fan of the looser pays concept in civil litigation–it opens the courts to plaintiffs that have a seriously legitimate claim and no money and it keeps people with lots of money and a frivolous claim from being stupid. So in an effort to stem frivolous, and stupid, prosecutions, that miss apply the spirt of the law I have no problem with the prosecutor being held liable for his actions. Likewise, a malicious prosecution in which an innocent person is railroaded into court and forced to spend a fortune to defend himself against the justice system run amuck should have recourse against those responsible–a prosecutor should take responsibility for their actions and if their actions are dumb, they should pay for it. There is of course a limit to such things–but they shouldn't get off scott free for being stupid ass holes.
What I think is that DAs who prosecute cases that they shouldn't ought to be removed from their positions. I think that the profession should become much more accustomed to enforcing the standards of conduct that are already in place.
And, to whoever posted in a fit of angst above, here's what I think ought to be able to happen: people, public officials and private citizens, should be able to tape other people so long as they are in a situation where noone has any expectation of privacy. I fully support cop cars having cameras in them: those have been used in trials against people behaving badly on both sides of the badge. People on the street filming a protest? Fine. Third party filming actions of police? Fine as well, though I imagine also available for subpeona, if needed. People revealing classified information? Not cool at all.
I even think that most people agree with those principles. Which is why you'll get traction from both Free-Speech liberals and Limited Government conservatives when you denounce this.
Can I just say "ick" in general over this one? Thanks.
This sounds a lot like the Michael Hyde case from 1998-2001, which made it all the way to the Mass. Supreme Judicial Court, which found for the police. Jeff Jacoby article: (http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1179) Privacy for Government, But Not For Private Citizens. And from a (http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=14446) Freedom Forum article:
"We conclude that the Legislature intended (the law) strictly to prohibit all secret recordings by members of the public, including recordings of police officers or other public officials interacting with members of the public, when made without their permission or knowledge," Justice John M. Greaney wrote in the majority opinion.
Preview says links are not working, so this odd format rather than garble everything.
Prosecutors should be vulnerable in extreme cases. One word: Nifong.
In my state, it's perfectly lawful to record a conversation that you are a party to, and it's not necessary to inform the other party that the conversation is being recorded."
Different states are different. Pennsylvania, where this particular outrage occurred, is a two-party-consent state — every involved in the conversation has to consent to its recording.
Supposedly, this rule protects privacy, but I think that's bull. If you are talking to me, I already know what you said; all the recording does is allow me to prove it. The two-party-consent rule makes it possible for liars to deny what they actually said, confident that they cannot be caught out.
My reading of the case is that it will turn on whether Kelly, the defendant, was attempting to surreptitiously tape the policeman. Given that the policeman just saw the camera and did not discover the taping later or through some accident, my money's on an early dismissal.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apparently Cumberland County law enforcement believes that on-duty law enforcement officers have some "reasonable expectation of privacy" when making traffic stops on public streets…More from Brendan Loy.
So, where can we contribute to the young man's legal defense fund?
Malvolio said "Pennsylvania, where this particular outrage occurred, is a two-party-consent state — every (person) involved in the conversation has to consent to its recording." This is for conversations by phone, not for face to face conversations. The law states that for INTERCEPTED conversations all parties must be aware of the recording. Secretly recording a face to face conversation is legal as one of the participants is aware and there is no interception of conversation. These laws started as anti-wire tapping measures, not as a barrier to recording in person conversation.
So let me get this straight: the guy who filmed the Rodney King incident would have gone to prison if it had happened in Maryland or Pennsylvania?
Here is a site for the:
United States Telephone Recording Laws
This is one of those times that people like myself who have been talking for decades about the New World Order and all the nefarious agendas of the secret groups hate to be right and say "I told you so." But we have been all along and we have taken shit from everyone being called "conspiracy theorists," wackos, etc.
This is only the tip of the ice berg. Under the guise of the Patriot Act and the "terrorist" threat we are loosing our autonomy and freedom on every level possible. Later this year it will be the free access to the Internet.
Work for peace friends, we ARE the people, this is OUR country and we have to take it back.
Bob Daniels - and what will cause us to lose the "free access to the Internet" ?
Alasdair Says:
June 18th, 2007 at 6:57:10 pm
Bob Daniels - and what will cause us to lose the "free access to the Internet†?
The fight is about "net neutrality."
"The nation's largest telephone and cable companies — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner — want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won't load at all."
It is never my intention to preach or look for converts when talking about the NWO. Each of us has to decide on their own, however one can't decide if all the options or info isn't presented.
The take-over of the press happened decades ago. As each small, local paper was bought up it lost it's autonomy and connection to it's region. They became rip and read from the AP/UPI/Reuters services.
In the logging area of the Pacific/NW for instance…no longer were reporters probing around and discovering clear-cut lumber practices, etc. Instead pop culture trivialities were being cut and pasted into the papers from the rip and read sources.
By bringing this information to this thread I am only attempting show the inner-connectedness of all the agendas that are unfolding…much like a triage nurse looks at a patient and gives a bigger picture to the doctor. We are in the fight of our life and few know about it because the main stream media controls what is valid "news" and what isn't for the people who still watch that stuff.
If they get control of the Internet, we are up s**t creek. Look what it did for the 9/11 truth movement and Ron Paul's quest for the presidential nomination.
The other part of this that ticks me off is that if this had been a News cameraman recording you can bet that there wouldn't be any charges being pressed and or if they were that there would be very loud howls of outrage from every media corner.


text:
Favorite Office Time Wasters
Richard Marini finds the best and the brightest distractions.
Yearly Archive for 2010
What are you looking at, butthead?
…and more than five minutes of additional put-downs from movies of the '80s. (much of which is NSFW, btw) [Read More]
Commercials we're sold on: Amour — "Adult movies direct to your TV"
When auditioning for a porn film, acting ability isn't the No. 1 concern (The vid's SWF, btw) [Read More]
Tim Duncan, co-star of 'The Jane Austin Book Club'
There are a couple of things wrong with this deleted scene from 2007's "The Jane Austen Book Club" in which Tim Duncan's b-ball skillz are analyzed: First, that's not a Spurs game on the TV above the bar. And second, Tim Duncan not a good defender? Guess they figured this was a "chick flick" and […] [Read More]
Commercials we're sold on: Amstel Bier
Sure it's in Dutch, but you'll understand the message. [Read More]
Find a job for only $6
All it takes is buying the proper Google Ad Words. And by "proper" we mean the names of the several top New York creative directors… Read more here. Tip o' the tam to Scott N. for the link [Read More]
No humming. No, really
Tip o' the tam to LA Lorek for the link [Read More]
We're beginning to suspect that Hurley just doesn't know anyone's name
Tip o' the tam to Deborah M. for the headline [Read More]
The story of Naughty Mommy Hair and the Lost Boys
A surprisingly satirical recap on last night's "Lost" episode "Across the Sea." [Read More]
We Built (fill in the blank) City on Rock 'n Roll
Courtesy the (fill in the blank) City Chamber of Commerce [Read More]
Cat vs chicken and other goofy stuff
(WARNING: Some images and song lyrics may be NSFW) [Read More]
Show More


text:
Do you think Romeo and Juliet were in love?
3 Answers | Add Yours
Yes i thought they were.
I think lust is a better word...
This question has been previously answered. Please see the link below, and thank you for using eNotes.
Join to answer this question
Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.Join eNotes


text:
Melissa Data MatchUp Object API
Melissa Data creates data quality and address management solutions for websites and businesses. Their services standardize, verify, and enhance global contact data, including addresses, phone numbers and email addresses. The Melissa Data MatchUp API allows customer applications to find, merge, and/or eliminate duplicate records across multiple files. The API finds matches in any combination of more than 35 components, plus any specified proprietary data components.
Followers (0)
Sorry, no followers found for this API.
Developers (0)
Sorry, no developers found for this API.
API Mashups (0)
Sorry, no mashups for this API.
Source Code
Sorry, no source code for this API.
Sorry, no resources found for this API.
Developers (0)
Comments (0)
Followers (0)
Sorry, no mashups for this API.


text:
Houston Politics
Blogging City Hall and Harris County government with the Chronicle staff
Posts by Author
Voters hurry up and wait for chance to cast ballots in runoff
By Safiya Ravat As the halfway mark for election day passes, voters are hastily making it out to the polls. "The line is almost out the door," said Jon Strange after peeking into the Metropolitan Multi Service Center on West Gray. She and her daughter Heather decided to postpone their vote for now. "I live in […] [Read More]
Too young to vote
Students too young to vote spent Tuesday casting ballots in mock elections across the Houston Independent School District. Some cited taxes, health care and the war in Iraq as their hot-button issues. "We have to stop the war because it's killing a lot of Americans," said Aaron Cranfield, 10, a student at West University Elementary […] [Read More]


text:
A great way to save for your child's education can be through a 529 plan. A 529 savings plan has tax advantages, flexibility and the money can be used for many qualified higher education expenses.
529 plans are state-sponsored plans, not Federal plans. But you don't have to live in that state to invest in their 529 Plan.
And no matter which state plan you choose, a 529 offers multiple savings and tax incentives including:
- Earnings have the potential to grow tax-deferred, although contributions are not deductible on your federal tax return.
- Withdrawals are Federal income tax-free if used for qualified higher education expenses.1
- Contributions of up to $14,000 (in tax year 2015) are allowed without incurring federal gift tax.
- Compared to a normal "gift," your 529 contribution leaves your estate but does not leave your control. The account owner decides when withdrawals can be made and for what reason and can even change the beneficiary.
Key Features
Regardless of which State may issue it, all 529 plans:
- Can be used to pay for tuition, books, room and board, equipment and many other qualified higher education expenses at eligible institutions.
- Eligible institutions include four-year colleges, two-year colleges, technical and vocational schools and U.S. graduate schools (plus some overseas, too).
- The account owner (called the participant) maintains control of the assets, regardless of the age of the student.
- Thinking of going back to school? You can set up a 529 plan for yourself!
- Anyone can contribute – friends, family, yourself.
- No income restrictions.
- Many states offer additional benefits to their residents for using their state's 529 savings plan.
Some of the specific Federal tax advantages of a 529 plan include:
- Any growth or earnings in your account is tax-exempt if used for higher education.
- The only tax reporting required is upon withdrawals (Form 1099-Q).
- In tax year 2015, you can contribute up to $14,000 a year for single filers, $28,000 for a couple to each beneficiary without gift tax consequences.
- In tax year 2015, you can contribute, as an alternative, a lump sum of up to $70,000 ($140,000 for married couples filing jointly) every five years free from gift taxes.
Suitable For
- Maximizing tax-free growth potential specifically for college or other post-secondary educations including graduate school and technical school.
- Account owners who want flexibility and control of assets.
- Maximizing contributions.
- Students of any age – including career changers.
- Grandparents and other family members to create an educational legacy for a child while removing assets from estate tax.
Any US resident
There are no income restrictions for making a contribution
Must have a Social Security number or tax ID.
Fees & Charges
Fees may vary by each state's plan and the investment options they offer.
Additional Details
This material is provided for general and educational purposes only; and is not intended to provide legal, tax or investment advice. All investments are subject to risk. We recommend that you consult an independent legal or financial advisor for specific advice about your individual situation.
The tax information herein is not intended to be used, and cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties. Taxpayers should seek advice based on their own particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.
You should consider the investment objectives, risks, and charges and expenses associated with municipal fund securities before investing. This information is found in the issuer's prospectus and should be read carefully before investing.
Before investing, the investor should consider whether the investor's or beneficiary's home state offers any state tax or benefits available only from that state's 529 Plan.
1Non-qualified withdrawals may be subject to federal and state taxes and an additional federal 10% tax.
Securities offered through Voya Financial Advisors, Inc. member SIPC.
Neither Voya nor its affiliated companies provide tax or legal advice. Please consult with your tax and legal advisors regarding your individual situation.


text:
Register now for free, or sign in with any of these services:
Want to set your local edition?
Select an edition for more focused local news coverage when you visit AL.com.
Don't worry. You can change this setting at any time to another local edition.
This place is great. Probably the best trio salad plate in town. Great Tuna Fish and Chicken salads. I just wish they would leave their doors open until 7 at night. Working and living downtown, I would love to be able to go get some of their grub after work. Think about it gentleman......
"You are so dumb, You are really dumb" .....genius!!!
"We are looking for you...we gunna find you, we gunna find you. so you can tell that.."
These lyrics really speak the truth. You guys need to look past what was coming out of his mouth and get to the bigger picture. George Weiss couldn't have wrote these words better.
I think every bingo CEO should get a one on one cage match with John Tyson to see if they can still operate. Tyson's a big ole boy so it would take a passionate man to take him down.
I thought Luke wasn't going to get in because of grades. I think you boogers will be waiting a few years until you see Luke. It was still a good get. We would have love to have gotten him.
This is getting absurd. What else can happen to our country? Between the financial crisis, the war over seas, the oil spil and now they are predicting the most amount of hurricanes to hit our gulf in the last 25 years. I wonder if there are any rooms available on Mars.
That is why we need Beu Mckinney for congress. Vote for him today. The guy has served our country for the last 5 years, and comes from a great family with a hard working attitude.
What a great way to entice people to stuff their faces with breakfast. Coffee costs near to nothing. You know us fatties in Alabama can't just pick up a free coffee without sinking our teeth into a egg and cheese biscuit. Good Idea by Hamburger Heaven.
Finally some news around here....
Yeah, go ahead a write a kid off for having a bad A-Day game. No future star player should ever struggle in a practice game. This guy has the potential to be 3 times the player fannin is. I also don't think he would fumble 3 times less than your star tailback.
Go ahead and crucify this guy for making a few mistakes. He has tons of talent, and is a great entertainer. I am sury none of you have ever made mistakes. I am sure this is not his only stop on his tour. People enjoy listening to his music. You don't have to go.
Being a Bama fan, I was really jelous when you guys got Mr. Aycock. I thought he was a special player in high school and I saw a ton of upside to him. He is a terrific athlete that could have helped you all in tons of ways. I hate it when things like this happen to these kids.
Amazing that some of you guys still don't know what happens on message boards like this. Troll-a troll is one that acts like a fan of a school, only to make a mockary of that fan base. He inflates all types of emotions to make himself look like a real die hard fan but is really trying to tear down that particular fan base. Trolls are ussually from a rival school.
What's this guy whinning about? I would love to have a job where it didn't matter if I failed or not I could go get another high paying job in that same field. These coaches have it made, and don't give me..."ooh I have to move my family..ooh its new surroundings." These guys get paid a ton of money to do something they love and once your in their position you can move to and from positions for the rest of your career. If he fails at East Carolina, I am sure some other small school would love to have a guy that has coached two big programs.
who cares? This world is already messed up as it is. So this girl got her priorities in line and went on to better and bigger things. She had to start somewhere. Real leaders in this country are doing a lot worse than this girl. Let her be. She deserves the crown.
I think they should use the Ultimate Warriors intro music. Gene could wear arm bands without a shirt and paint his face.
"Bo knows not giving back to his community"
what a clown....he needs to get back into coaching. He has the rest of his life to be a parent and father. He needs to act fast before life leaves him in the dust. People are already trying to forget Frank Sanders. It won't be long until they will forget this guy. I'm sure B'ham Southern would like to have him as their OC. Then he could not have to work hard, be a father and live in precious Birmingham.
Smoking crack and buying prostitues.......Don't hate Roy for living the dream. What is worse than these two felonies? whats next...is Roy going to steal every childs present christmas morning?
Coolest handle bar mustache I have seen in awhile. Who cares about the story. Good luck to that guy, and his growing of his mustache.