text:
(One Defense Department "senior Defense official" and one State Department "senior State official" provided a backgrounder on the subject report, which is posted at http://www.defense.gov/pubs/November_1230_Report_FINAL.pdf )
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I promise you I only have a few prepared remarks. I'll go through them quickly, and I see several people who were here six months ago when we released the last 1230 ["Report on Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan," a report to Congress in accordance with section 1230 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) as amended]. So thanks for being here again today. I think, as you know, this is a report required by Congress. This is sixth one; Congress requires them to be reported semi-annually. It is -- we're supposed to provide a description of the comprehensive strategy of the United States for security and stability in Afghanistan.
I want to highlight that this -- the time frame for the report is April to -- through September. So that's -- the data in the report, the conclusions in the report, the comments in the report are all of as of September 30th. And so then it takes -- I guess we spend about six weeks, as we write it, clear it, coordinate it with our colleagues in the State Department, out in the field, everywhere else as part of the bureaucratic process.
It does not reflect developments over November and December, and I'd note that particularly in the area of Kandahar, there have been, as I think all of you know, some pretty significant developments in Kandahar after that. Those are not included in this report. And when you make your evaluations of the situation today, it's really important that you factor that in.
I'm very pleased to have with me [name deleted], who just introduced himself. And as I mentioned -- and this came up in the last briefing -- this is a Department of Defense report. It's cleared completely through the United States government, and this is a unified U.S. government view on the issues that are involved.
The 1230 report concludes that the deliberate application of this strategy is beginning to have cumulative effects, and security is slowly beginning to expand, although significant challenges remain or exist. Progress, which is slow and uneven, continues with modest -- with gains -- modest gains in security, governance and development, particularly in our operational priority areas.
There's -- even as of -- or not -- as of September 30th, there was visible progress in Southern Afghanistan. Comprehensive civil-military efforts were the key to that progress, bolstered by operational successes, and particularly focused on the heart of the Taliban insurgency in Helmand and Kandahar.
Marjah, a year ago, was an insurgent command and control center, a base for IED assembly, and a nexus for illegal narcotics activities. Marjah is now controlled by the Afghan government. It is continuing to show signs of progress, such as increased voter registration in the presidential elections a year ago. I believe 22 Afghans voted in Marjah. This year, I think it was in the neighborhood of 600. That's a huge increase, even though it's nowhere near where you want to be.
And I think that's somewhat of a paradigm for the kind of progress. A lot of progress, but still a long way to go.
In -- the report also highlights the key factor of the increase in the size and capability of the Afghan National Security Forces. This is perhaps the most promising area of forces, and is key to the transition that we are working forward that will begin in July of 2011. And, as you've all heard, the objective is to have Afghanistan be in a security lead by 2014.
The Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police since July have been ahead of their recruiting goals. They're growing faster than anyone anticipated a year ago, and that growth continues. Improvements in quality also continue. However, challenges remain.
In the report, we talk about challenges with trainers. In the NATO meeting that was just concluded, in many ways those challenges were met, our NATO allies stepped forward with trainers. So that's an area where there's a difference in what the report says and the reality today.
Another area that I'd highlight is the emergence of the Afghan local police program that was approved by President Karzai this summer, and which are we are beginning to work with the Afghans. It's an Afghan-lead effort, and it has the potential for enabling progress in areas where the -- beyond the reach of the Afghan security forces.
Another thing that we -- I would highlight from the report is reduced civilian casualties, that an emphasis on best-practice counterinsurgency fundamentals has resulted in that decrease. And this has occurred despite the increase in total violence and much wider operations, kinetic operations by ISAF [International Security Assistance Forces] and Afghan forces.
Corruption continues to be a problem. We mentioned -- we talk about corruption in the report. This is an area where progress depends upon cooperation between the international community and the Afghan government and people. The Afghan government is -- and ISAF and the international community are working effectively in this area, and our focus is particularly on efforts to address the most predatory forms of corruption that fuel the insurgency.
In contracting, we are moving forward with -- on multiple efforts to ensure that our contracting efforts do not contribute to -- and they have in the past sometimes -- contribute to the insurgency by the way that they're carried out. General Petraeus' recent counterinsurgency contracting guidance and our task force's Shafafiyat [Combined Joint Interagency Task Force-Shafafiyat ("Transparency")] 2010 spotlight, all of which I think you've had the opportunity to be briefed on.
Pakistan is critical to success in Afghanistan. Although Pakistani leaders and the Pakistani military have made significant efforts to address security problems across the border, further progress is necessary to dismantle the extremist networks and deny terrorists safe haven. One initiative towards this end is increasing the cooperation among Afghanistan military -- the ISAF coalition forces in Pakistan.
In counternarcotics, we continue to, in partnership with our interagency colleagues, to prioritize efforts to combat the nexus of narcotics and insurgency in order to achieve objectives in support of our civil-military campaign. Just as RC South and Southwest are the -- have been the focus of efforts on the military side, they've also been the focus of efforts on the counternarcotics side, particularly Combined Joint Interagency Task Force-Nexus, which is -- operates out of Kandahar, which has conducted important law enforcement operations resulting in the seizures of large amounts of opium, morphine, heroin, hashish, precursor -- and precursor chemicals.
And it's an area where we continue to see increasing cooperation among all the actors involved both on the military side, the international civilian side and the Afghan side.
So with that, I'll finish my prepared remarks, and we're going to take questions along with my colleague [name deleted].
Q Sir, you seem a little more positive than what I read in this report. I mean, I particularly turn our attention to page 41 to 44, which is the --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Okay. I'll do that.
Q -- security section. On page 43, the second paragraph there, it says organizationally the insurgency's capabilities and operational reach have been qualitatively and geographically expanding, as evidenced by a greater frequency and wider dispersion of insurgent-initiated attacks.
So is -- I mean, is that true? Is the insurgency expanding its territorial control? Or have things changed since this report was --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: The insurgency has expanded in areas in the north and the west. And that's been, I think, extensively reported. The focus of our efforts has been and remains on the Taliban heartland, the real nexus of the insurgency in Kandahar and Helmand. That was -- and I know we've discussed this a number of times in the past. It was a deliberate strategic effort to go after the heartland.
The Taliban have clearly reacted to that by going to more peripheral areas. So while they've expanded in those areas, the importance of those areas is not key -- is not central to their success, or to our ability to defeat them. The areas that are key are the heartland areas that they have controlled since the rise -- the original rise of the Taliban. And I mentioned Kandahar, the Zhari and Panjway areas have essentially been under Taliban control since about 1996 in an -- almost in an uninterrupted fashion.
So going after their heartland is important. Of course, they're going to react. They're reacting in areas that, as you know, we have defined as economy of force efforts in RC North. That means that we continue to put effort into those areas, but the focus is elsewhere. There will be of course further steps in the campaign that will address some of these other more peripheral areas.
Q Could I follow up on that?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: The second question was right here, and then we'll go here, there and there. Everybody -- I'll answer all the – [name deleted] and I will answer all the questions. But I just want to do it in the order I saw them.
Q (Inaudible) -- you were mentioning about the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Earlier, Lashkar-e-Taiba was more focused on India, mostly Kashmir.
Do you see inside of Lashkar-e-Taiba focusing -- moving towards Afghanistan, your operations there?
And there's one more question that -- on --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Okay, let me answer that one and I'll move to somebody else, and then come back for your second question. On Lashkar-e-Taiba, what this talks about is the groups in Pakistan's FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas] and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa where there's a broad syndicate of extremist groups, which you've all heard Secretary Gates speak about that includes the groups including Lashkar-e-Taiba. I don't believe that this report gets into the issue of Lashkar-e-Taiba operations, our presence in Afghanistan. This is talking about a syndicate in Pakistan, that sentence there.
And I want to go here next, and then we'll come back for a second question. Once we have, do a second round -- everybody gets a first question in.
Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Back here. Then there. Then there. Yes.
Q Oh, okay.
Q If, as the report suggests, there hasn't been progress against the sanctuaries in Pakistan, why should we be -- have any confidence that the insurgency won't -- to any extent that it's been -- it's been -- it's been defeated or degraded, won't regenerate next spring and continue to do so year after year?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: You've raised a very important question, and the issue of the ability of the insurgents to go back across the border to rest, refit, plan, rearm, all those things is a very -- is a vital one. As we say in the report, Pakistan -- and as you've heard elsewhere -- Pakistan has done a very impressive job about -- of going after insurgent networks in Pakistan, Taliban and other extremist groups that threaten Pakistan. Some of those operations have had a beneficial effect on reducing violence and reducing the ability of those that operate in Afghanistan, but it's still area where we are working together with the Pakistanis to see more progress.
Sorry --
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: We have called on the governor of Pakistan to take specific actions in regards to the Afghan sanctuaries.
Q What are the specific actions?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I think we'll leave the -- those specifics to our discussions with the Pakistani government.
Right here, please.
Q I want to ask [name deleted] to talk a little bit more about the effort to build up the civilian capacity that seems to be the key component in the U.S. exit strategy. And in the summer, it seemed like there was a little bit of the U.S. was just kind of running in place. While the military could do its job, the effort to build up the civilian capacity was really stalled. How did it -- how has it progressed throughout this period and then since then?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Let me just push back against one word you used -- no, two words you used -- was "exit strategy." We don't have an exit strategy. We have a transition strategy. The U.S. commitment to Afghanistan is continuing, enduring and long-lasting. There is no exit strategy.
Q How about the exit of combat troops?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: How about the --
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: How about the transition to Afghan control?
Q Right. Okay.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: There are two key points, actually. First you have to transition the security situation, so you have to build up enough Afghan national security forces to transition the security situation. And then concurrently -- actually, not concurrently, probably a little bit later -- you have to have enough Afghan governance capacity that allows them to work with the ANSF to transition the overall district or provincial level control.
On the civilian side, the State Department and USAID, the Department of Agriculture in a very good, cooperative civ-mil campaign plan, put a number of U.S. civilians into the field in Southern Afghanistan and Eastern Afghanistan. I think we went from 300 U.S. civilians in Afghanistan to about 1,200 now. There's been a significant increase.
We have worked with the government of Afghanistan to try to enhance the capacity of Afghan local governance. It has been -- in areas where there's an increased sense of security, I think we've had good progress. So if you looked at some districts in Helmand, for example, if you go to Marjah or to Nawa, you'll see, you know, the beginnings of local Afghan governance. So specifically in Marjah, if you went now, you'd see about 10, 15 Afghan government officials that work in the district center. Some of them are from Kabul. Some of them are from Lashkar Gah. But it's a real challenge.
I mean, doing Afghan governance capacity after 30 years of war is very difficult. In Kandahar, the military has made progress in terms of clearing out Taliban strongholds in both the city and in the surrounding districts. The Taliban is -- you know, they are an organization that is adaptive. So they've seen that a -- one part of the strategy they can go after are government officials. So there is an active assassination campaign of government officials in the Kandahar region. So that has certainly impacted the ability or the capacity of the Afghan government to create local governance.
Right there.
Q I have just one. I was just looking at the sort of the detail on regional -- RC South and Southwest that there's no overall description of security in Kandahar and Helmand.
Are you going to do better? The same? I mean, could you assess that? You said it's getting worse in the north, northern parts of Afghanistan, but how is security overall right now in Helmand and Kandahar where all the efforts are?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, fortunately, we were discussing that question with our colleagues in the -- in Afghanistan, and they actually wanted me to make sure that I did comment on that. They even sent me some background material this morning --
(Cross talk.)
Q I just want to know how you're putting it.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Oh, I'll put it that -- over the past two months, not only have we seen a slow and steady progress in many of the district centers in central Helmand, we have also seen important progress in reversing the Taliban control of areas in the Kandahar area of Afghanistan, and that this offers the prospect for the transition to the enduring governance efforts that will show that this is an enduring long-term change.
So we think there's been important progress made since the end of this report, particularly in the area surrounding Kandahar, but -- and steady progress continues to be made in Helmand and other areas in Kandahar that are covered by this report.
One reason why we don't make sort of startling, you know, broad judgments in our report is because this is a dynamic theater. Things change. We know that as soon as we close our data, the story change -- changes. And by the time we publish this it's going to be different. So we don't want to have today's headlines or the stories that you all write reflect the past.
But at the same time, this is -- this is the nature of writing a report on a government that can never be up to date -- as up to date as we'd like it.
But, yes, in response to your question, important progress has been made in Kandahar, and it's occurring on a day-to-day basis over the last two months.
Q You mean -- (off mike) -- you don't mean the entire province, you mean parts of Kandahar and parts of Helmand right?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: In -- well, important provinces in Kandahar, yes, and I wouldn't -- I wouldn't be limiting, saying just parts; in key important parts. And the Zhari and Panjway areas are so important that I'm saying --
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Yeah, the campaign was -- the campaign was aimed at -- the way we designed the campaign, it was aimed at Kandahar City and then the immediate districts around it; so Arghandab, Zhari, Panjway and Dand. So those are the key areas that you've seen U.S. military forces go in in great numbers this past summer and the fall. Spin Boldak is doing relatively well, as well.
Q Can I just ask you about the Taliban imposter?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Now I'm going to have to ask -- give everybody a second question, and I already -- actually, you're really forcing me -- you're forcing me to be inconsistent across reporters. Why don't I come back to you for the second question.
Okay, right there is next, and then next to you.
Q Thank you. There is a figure cited in the report that about 80 percent of Afghans feel like their lives are personally touched by corruption. You also mentioned the role that contracting plays in all of this, and that's been kind of a common theme and that considerable role it plays. So how do you -- how do you begin to kind of get at addressing that? And obviously, it's been a point of contention with Karzai, as well. And what are you doing now to try to tamp that down?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, as you've heard Secretary Gates say -- and a lot of what we're doing is, when we talk about the issue of corruption and enabling people, we need to look in the mirror first and look at what we're doing. But you raise a great question. It's how do you do that?
A lot of our contracting practices and regulations are based on simply price and performance: I need 10 pencils, you provide 10 pencils at the lowest cost and the quickest response, and I give you the contract. What I don't look at right now is, if I buy the -- if I buy those pencils from you, whether you will then use the profits you make from that to fund your own private army, who then attacks some of your colleagues over here, that then causes me problems.
And so what we're doing is, we're looking at -- we're expanding the look at the totality of not just the contracting process but the impacts of the contracting process in local areas. That's really hard to do. It requires, first of all, the collection of a lot of information. We have to increase our knowledge about who we're contracting with, what the impacts of those contracts are. And that's what we're doing now, and actually taking the steps, because we don't want to take steps that will make things worse. So this has been a very large and careful effort. It's ongoing. And I'm not the person to brief you on the content of what's going on or what they're doing, but I have been briefed recently on that, and I think they have some really good ideas about how to move forward, and those -- I expect to see those being put into place in the coming months.
Q Sir, if I could ask you about reconciliation, the report on page 66, 67 talks very briefly about that. It mentions the peace jirga and the High Peace Council this summer but really doesn't give any assessment on whether reconciliation efforts have borne any fruit. And as you know, there have been headlines today on that subject. But even over the period of this report, would you say that there has been any progress at all in terms of reconciliation?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: In terms of reconciliation and reintegration, the report actually lays out progress in developing the reintegration program.
In terms of reconciliation, you mentioned a story in the press today. Obviously, that story is based upon anonymous leaks that are put into various newspapers. Those of you who've talked me before know that I'm -- that I have strong views about that. There's -- I'm --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: You can find out. Actually, I'm not anonymous.
I'm a senior -- I'm a senior Defense official, and this is an officially organized thing that's different than people who say things who are speaking without the sanction of our press people and the U.S. government. And so, yeah, I'll draw a real strong distinction between stuff that people tell you in individual conversations, and -- that go beyond what they're supposed to say.
Yes, we have discipline, or we're supposed to have discipline in the U.S. government, and too often we don't.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: I think that --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Sorry.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: -- the quotes in the story cited, though, are Afghan officials.
Q Well, beyond all the -- (off mike) --
Q Yeah, I'm actually on the -- on the record today. Second of all, my original question, if you could please answer was, what's your assessment of reconciliation efforts? Have the -- you know, there's nothing in the report that says they've borne any fruit.
Have you seen any signs that there's been progress along these lines?
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: I can give you -- I mean, I can repeat to you our position on reconciliation, that we support an Afghan-led process which you've all -- that you've heard before. But I'm not going to talk about anything beyond that in this forum.
Then, there.
Q (Off mike.)
Actually, beyond you first, because he was up first. And then you. Sorry. I apologize.
Q You have been mentioning that -- first, I will say that President Obama has promised transparency. And you said that you're not going to talk about the steps taken or to be taken, and they will be dealt -- with the dealings with Pakistan, and on page 88, 89.
And also for Iran, you have given four paragraphs. Is the State Department -- (inaudible)
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: But we have commented publicly before on what we've asked Pakistan to do. We've asked the Pakistani government to take steps in North Waziristan, and we think that those are places where they should take greater actions against the sanctuaries for the Afghan insurgency.
Q Yet you say that there's a lot that has happened. Can you give us some concrete results that has -- have happened?
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Sure, I think what [name deleted] was referring to was the Pakistani military since 2008 has taken significant actions against insurgent groups in Northwest Frontier Provinces and in the -- and in the Federally -- the FATA.
I think that's beyond dispute. They've taken action that -- you know, they've taken over vast majorities of that territory that was controlled by various Taliban entities.
What they have not done to as a -- as great a degree is to go after more directly the areas that are sanctuaries for the Afghan Taliban. And that's where we have asked them to take more significant action.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I'll follow up with another specific -- the area of Swat in -- over the last several years, there have been people who are supporters of not only the Pakistan Taliban but who also want to participate in violent activities in Afghanistan. And that was happening to a much greater degree before the Pakistani military went in in the summer of 2009 to Swat. Now that the Pakistani government has control of Swat, that kind of export of fighters into Afghanistan from that area is sharply down.
So I'd say there's positive impacts in Afghanistan from the actions of the Pakistani government and military. That's a concrete example, and there are many others of that. So that's why we -- even though they haven't gone into every area, they've gone into a number of areas. And we have -- and similarly, Pakistan has suffered from -- both its military and civilian populations, with over 30,000 casualties in the last two years, I believe, if I have that right in terms of time. I think it's since 2008, the last two years.
That is -- and so the activities of the Pakistani military and security forces going after those who are targeting them is something that's been very successful, is something that we understand.
At the same time, as [name deleted] said, we believe it's important for Pakistan to go after insurgents and extremists and those who threaten their neighbors as well, and we're working with them to that end.
Okay, I think here, sir, in the blue shirt.
Q I'd like to go back to the reconciliation issue, hope you put a little more meat on the bare bones. The number of insurgents who have so far reintegrated is limited, but many groups have come forward to begin discussing. Any more specific details you can give?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Not right now, and that's because this whole area is dynamic. It's just happening this week. It will be happening next week. And one of the reasons we don't highlight the individual efforts is because when people come forward for reintegration, they're putting their lives and those of their families at risk. So you're not going to get a whole lot of detail that these people in this town in this village at this time have come across. You might get that later in the process, but right now we're going to be very sparse in what details that we give you.
Q Just some rough numbers?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: The numbers continue to increase, but what I'll do is I'll take that question and see if we can get numbers that we're comfortable that both they're accurate and it's appropriate to use them with you. But we'll take that question.
Sorry, over here. You were next, sir, and then you're next.
Q Is there a danger that the administration and the Pentagon speak with two voices; that you make public declarations that are quite positive and quite optimistic about the course of the war and progress in the war, and then when you have the written document that's sort of legally bound to be delivered to congress, it's a much more cautious kind of time.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I apologize if I've come across as --
Q (Off mike) -- today, I'm talking generally what we are hearing here at the podium. We hear a lot about encouraging signs, very positive signs.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: And that's one of the reasons why I stressed in the beginning the difference between September 30th and what's happened.
We've seen a lot of encouraging signs over the last -- over the last six, seven weeks in terms of the actual progress on the ground in the -- in the Kandahar area, the operations, which reinforces the earlier operations.
I'll -- since you're concerned about the administration taking with two voices, my colleague from the State Department -- I'll ask him for his comments as well.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Yeah. I would just say that -- I just got back from Lisbon, and I think the way we've been characterizing it is that there is progress; we've made progress over the summer. So there's been military progress. There's been some government progress on the governance side.
But this is very fragile; this is a very tough fight. This is -- there's just a range of challenges that are in front of us in order to get to the goals that NATO set out to transition an Afghan security lead by 2014.
So I think what the administration is saying is that there has been progress. We've put in significantly more resources over the past year. So the military surge just came to a conclusion four or five weeks ago with the last brigade combat team going in. The civilian effort has increased dramatically. I think we're seeing an impact from the addition of those resources -- clear military progress on the ground -- but that that progress is fragile and that there are hurdles to get to our core objectives, one of which is to transition to Afghan security lead.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I think if you look at the reports of when -- the last three reports, you'll see beginnings of progress in the one that was due a year ago, a lot of efforts moving towards it, some signs of progress in the last one. And now we're seeing -- we're sort of moving up on the continuing -- some signs of continued progress and serious continued progress in this one, but still a lot of caution. Yes, there's a lot of caution on this, and there should be, because we're very far from declaring victory or anything like that.
So you next, and then --
Q The report says that 20.7 percent of Afghans -- rate their perceptions of their own security is bad, and that's the highest number that's ever been reported. Are there any specifics as to the factors in their decision?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: One of the things is that there are expanded operations. Because of the growth of Afghan security forces and the increased number that we have -- people are able to -- we have been able to go into areas we've never been in before. So if you asked people in Marja a year ago about their security, they weren't happy about being ruled by the Taliban, but they didn't have security problems. In the last year, they've had a number of security problems. There's been a lot of fighting there. The same in Zhari and Panjway -- we just weren't there in a lot of these areas.
So yes, expanding operations does lead to more violence, that's clear. The question, and I know that some of you have written on this, the question of whether that expansion of effort is going to at some point result in a decrease in violence as we start making more progress, and that is, of course, something that's our objective. Our objective is to bring about decreases, sharp decreases in violence, but first you have to go into the areas where the enemy is.
Q You mentioned that the number of trainers has been improved significantly --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Some important commitments were made before and during Lisbon.
Q You said in many ways -- so are you -- do you have all the commitments you need at this point for trainers at the level that you need them?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: We certainly have the numbers. The trainers that we're looking for are, however, not just numbers. Some of them have very specific capabilities: people who can teach repair and maintenance of certain types of machinery. There's going to be a force generation conference at NATO, I think it's the 27th and 28th [sic; November 29th and 30th], where they're going to be matching up -- the requests were made for these specific capabilities.
And matching that all up is going to take place, and so we'll know just how we get on the specifics. But we're certainly very encouraged by the overall numbers. And the countries that are making these pledges are aware of the technical specialties that we're looking for.
So you, and then you.
Q I want to go back to the civ-mil. I've heard all year that the civilian presence has tripled. But as a matter of saying that, they got to the tripling almost a year ago now. They got to about, say, the thousand level back in January; and that as of now, it's only gotten to 1,100 or 1,200. And, you know, reading this latest inspector general report on Afghanistan, it seems to suggest that the civilian surge has stalled. So I want to know do you -- do you agree with that kind of assessment -- (laughter) -- and based on your (inaudible) --
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: (Laughter).
Q Fine. I'll write "laughter" then on my transcript, by "anonymous." (Laughter.)
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, by a "senior official," which is different than "anonymous."
Q Is the civilian surge keeping pace with the military promise of security? Is the military then supposed to hand off a lot of those functions to civilians behind them?
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: The civilian surge has not stalled. I don't think we look at it in terms of overall numbers. We look at it in terms of what are the key districts, what are the key military objectives, what are the key civ-mil objectives we're trying to achieve.
Underneath the campaign plan for '10, the areas we wanted to focus on were in Kandahar and in Helmand, in specific districts. You've seen a tremendous surge of U.S. civilian capacity into those areas. I oversaw it, so I know for a fact. I think you're seeing effects of that surge on the ground. When you go to a place like Nawa or Garmsir or Marjah, you see, you know -- you see U.S. civilians out there in very dangerous situations, continuing dangerous situations, working with their military counterparts to deliver development, stability and governance at a very localized level.
So as the campaign unfolds, you have -- the civilians will continue to go into the areas that are the combined civ-mil priority areas. So I don't think we're lacking in that regard.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Okay. Back here, next.
Q It's more of a process question, but to what extent is it accurate to say that any of this informs the assessment that the NSC [National Security Council] is running next month?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Both [name deleted] and I are very involved in the assessment process here, and I can tell you that -- and it's an assessment of the same area, so a lot of the material that went into here is going directly into the assessment process as well. And we --
Q It'll be more updated, right?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: It'll be more updated, but there's a lot that goes into it. So the efforts are ongoing, but a lot of what's in here that does -- there are a lot of things don't need updating. Some of the things are -- some of the things in the 1230 report were verbatim what we sent over to the NSC in their -- some of their requests for information.
Q Is it fair to say that the kind of tone and the tenor of this is largely what will inform the --
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: I wouldn't prejudge it. I wouldn't --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, you can say -- no, we're -- that's prejudging the outcome. This is -- this gives parts of it, but there are other parts, including what's happened more recently. So I would not draw any -- I mean, both [name deleted] and I were on a recent trip that a -- that someone who gave an interview as a senior White House official gave a few weeks ago, and we made a trip along with other colleagues in the interagency to Afghanistan and Pakistan to help collect information. So a lot of that was our own personal interactions as well, and we're compiling reports and documents, all the things you do in a report-writing process.
But no, you couldn't say that this prejudges any particular -- anything could change. Again, it's dynamic. It's changing every day.
Q This is -- why does -- (off mike)? I guess I can't -- (off mike) --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, as I said, some of the same -- some of the same work that produced these -- papers that were written for this -- a lot of them we'll update and then -- a lot have already been sent over to the NSC as part of the information gathering, collection. The 1230 report itself is part of the information gathering. But you do the information gathering, and then you do the analysis, and that's the process we're in right now.
So -- wait, we're getting to seconds, and I don't think you had asked a question before.
Q I have a question on the overall assessment. It says that security is slowly starting to expand, but at the same time, kinetic activity is at an all-time high. How -- can you address -- I mean, that seems like it would be a contradiction.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, actually – not only is it not a contradiction in terms. It's exactly what we expected; it's what we predicted. We put more forces in. We're building Afghan security forces. There are a lot more forces. We can go a lot more places. So as we expand and go into areas where the Taliban has been in control for a long period of time, there's a lot more kinetic activity, there's a lot more fighting. And that was exactly what we expected, and that's what you all should expect too and should have expected a year ago, when the president sent more forces in. General McChrystal, General Petraeus, Secretary Gates have all said that we're going to be seeing more fighting as we do that.
Now all those new forces are in, but we're continuing to build the size of the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police. So their forces are increasing, so the number of forces and areas we can go continue to expand.
When the -- so the issue in many ways is not so much the overall number of violent incidents or conflicts. The -- it's a question of where they're occurring. And one of the things that we're seeing -- and I believe it's mentioned here, and it's certainly something that we're seeing more and more -- is they're occurring in areas further away from the population centers. So we are pushing the Taliban out of the key population areas, so a lot of the security incidents are happening outside of the population areas.
One area that we're concerned about, however -- even in areas that we do clear, the Taliban often retain some capacity to threaten or intimidate, and that's an issue that is of concern on the civilian side. But I hope I've addressed your question.
Q Does that mean -- I mean, when you say it's beginning to expand, does that mean that we could say the cities and towns are becoming more secure? Is that really what you mean?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Areas where the population centers are becoming more secure, yes.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Well, you've dislodged the Taliban, but sometimes what you have happen is they can retain influence into the cities, and that's when you end up seeing, like, for example, the assassination campaign in Kandahar. You know, they are -- have been driven out, the large -- well, the large groupings of Taliban are dislodged, but they can still retain the ability to influence, and they do that through the various forms of intimidation, including assassination. You know, they often go after our implementing partners, the USAID implementing partners. I think this year has been, you know, a pretty significant year for attacks on them.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: But this process, and it's a process that takes time, so where we've been for a year or more, then we see changes in that as well. And so Nawa in Helmand is an example of an area that's -- first we dislodged, then we pushed -- then we disrupted and reduced to a very small level the ability to intimidate, and then the governance and development efforts are able to follow afterwards. But none of this happens in weeks, it happens in months, and it happens at different pace in different areas depending on how important it is to the enemy, which gets a vote here as well.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Yeah [name deleted] is correct; this is a process that unfolds over time as security increases. So in a place like Nawa and Garmsir, forces have been there longer, there's more security, so you see the last of the intimidation, the residual intimidation.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: In the back.
Q On page 42, you make an interesting observation, that the Taliban strength lies in the Afghan population's perception that coalition forces will soon leave, giving credence to the belief that a Taliban victory is inevitable.
My question is this: To what extent does the July 2011 date feed that perception, and has that been a factor in the administration's seemingly pushing back from that date?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I think they -- as you -- as I think everybody here knows, there's been a lot of misperception about the July 2011 date and that it was some kind of a deadline for withdrawal or a signal that we had an exit strategy rather than a transition strategy. And people a lot more senior than I have worked very hard to correct these misperceptions that exist not just in the United States but elsewhere.
But July 2011 is an inflection point where we're going to begin the transition that's going to include the withdrawal of some American forces. But the -- and we expect the transition on the security side to Afghan lead -- not to Afghans doing everything themselves -- we're going to -- we need -- we're going to continue to need some help for a long time to come in training, advising and assisting, as Secretary Gates has said, and so why there's going to be a continuing need for a long time for us to be there.
The importance of that long-term commitment -- long-term enduring commitment that President Obama has been very clear of in his meetings with President Karzai, including the most recent one -- we think it's very important, the NATO-Afghanistan strategic partnership that was agreed to and signed at the NATO meeting in Lisbon. That's a sign that not just the United States but that our NATO allies are committed to a long-term enduring partnership that goes beyond just what we're doing today.
So it's -- you're right, it's difficult to address. In my conversations with people in Afghanistan, in Pakistan and elsewhere, they're actually much less focused on July 2011 and they're focused on 1989. That's the area where people are focused more, because that's where they have seen us leave. So they have -- they see a history of that, and they -- their concerns are rooted in facts.
And a number of you have traveled with Secretary Gates and heard him say that that is a major strategic mistake that we made, that he was personally involved in those decisions and he believes that this is something the -- a mistake the United States will not make again. But when you have that history, to me that's much more important than the date that you're mentioning.
Okay. I'm sorry, over here for the next first question. We're still going to first questions, then we'll get to the second ones. Everybody gets a first question.
Q If your transition plan depends on creating enough competent Afghan officials to solidify the security gains, isn't that nation-building, and can you do that in Afghanistan in four years?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Our objective is to transition Afghanistan's security lead -- lead for security. That's what President Karzai has said at the Kabul conference was his goal, and which the United States, NATO, ISAF and our partners have all endorsed, to Afghan security lead.
The whole issues of security, governance, development, much longer term issues are certainly there to -- are there to be addressed. But in order to have that security lead, in order to build up the Afghan security forces the way we're doing, and to fight and to carry out the fight that we're doing, you don't need to have all the success at once, immediately.
Q Well, what does that mean in terms of -- and I know you can't say specific numbers -- but generally, numbers of U.S. troops four years from now, compared to 98,000 today? Are you talking about 50 percent of those would be enough?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I absolutely could not hazard even the wildest guess on that, and I think that's --
Q So it could be the same number as we have today?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, it's clearly going to be less. We're going to begin a process of withdrawal and transition, and the Afghans are going to become more and more competent, and it's going to be conditions-based. But I'm not going to hazard any guess on the number or the scale, because I think that would be irresponsible of me to do so on that.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: On the governance question, though, it's -- there seems to be a desire to quantify this in numbers, just like we do with troops. And I know that people have pointed to: Well, how many government officials exist at this province or in that district?
You know, in the end, the Afghans will have to decide what is the right type of local governance that they want. And as long as the local governance can work with the Afghan local security forces to solve a security challenge and provide some basic services, I don't think we need to get caught up in a numbers game in terms of how many civilian, you know, ministry of agriculture people are in X, Y, or Z district.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I think we have one more first question, and then we can go to seconds.
Q I haven't heard any question of the economics of all of this. A government usually has to have a tax-revenue base in order to support -- pay for the functions that it takes out. So how -- what is the -- what is the situation and the plan for actually providing an economic base of support for the Afghan security forces?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: In terms of the Afghan security forces, clearly the requirements for the Afghan security forces now and for a number of years -- and I'm using a number -- to not come up with a specific number because we don't have that -- is going to be more than the Afghan economy can support. The growth of the Afghan economy and the potential for it all depend upon security. And that is what we're focused on.
However, clearly I would offer that Afghan forces are much more cost-effective. They're what the Afghans want, they're what we want, and building the Afghan forces are an incredibly good investment. They're an investment for Afghanistan, for the security of Afghanistan, Pakistan and the region, as an investment for us.
And so as we transition from coalition forces, U.S. forces, to Afghan forces, the overall cost will go down and go down pretty fast. But yes, there's a longer-term challenge in terms of bringing together those curves. But that's -- and that's something that we're very aware of, but -- and we're very -- obviously very appreciative of the continuing support of our Congress and the American people for the cost of the Afghan security forces. But I would say that the cost of U.S. forces, British forces, other forces, are much, much greater than those.
Okay. And I think that's all the firsts. So for seconds, I'm just going to start on this side of the room and move over, because I can't remember who raised their hands first. So we'll go to you -- (inaudible).
Q Related to that, are you satisfied with the attrition rate? You've emphasized the growth in the Afghan security forces.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: The attrition rate has gone down, but it's not where we wanted it, so no, we're not satisfied with it. We think we've made some progress, but there's still a long -- but there's still a ways to go. What we found is that one of the key areas that influences attrition is leadership, and leadership is another area where the Afghan security forces need to improve. But building leaders takes time. You don't get senior noncommissioned officers, captains, majors, lieutenant colonels overnight. With partnership, we're shrinking the demand for that. But we need to reduce attrition and build leaders, and the two of them go hand in hand.
Q Attrition is down? Because I thought it actually in some recent months had gone up.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: It's been -- over the last nine -- almost nine years I've been following it, it's up and down month by month, but the trend over the last two years is down. It's not down as much as we would want, and yes, there have been a couple recent months where it's gone up, but it's one of those statistics where, in many ways the more closely you follow it, the less of a picture you have; you really have to look at it over a longer period of time.
Q I wanted to ask you about the reference to $20 million -- I guess it's $20 million counternarcotics advisory teams program has been cancelled. I wanted to ask you --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: If you tell me the page, then I can --
Q Eight-five. And I think those are teams that were advising at the local and provincial level, so if I'm reading it right, the U.S. doesn't have direct advisors on the ground at the local and regional level anymore, but is working more with the ministry. Is that what that means?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yes. And I'm -- I'll -- my colleague [name deleted] who's in charge of this area, I'll refer your question to him, and maybe he can get you more specifics on that.
Q Sir, you said the anti-corruption efforts will focus, to quote you, "on the most predatory forms of corruption that fuel the insurgency." Can you be a little more specific?
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: I think the basic response to that would be that the forms of corruption that cause someone to join the Taliban, that's what we mean by -- local police is generally what we think of -- in terms of predatory behavior by local police officials.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Land.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: That seems to be the historic reason why people join the Taliban.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Land disputes are also a contributory thing.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Yeah. Yeah.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Dispute resolution, where the dispute-resolution processes are corrupt and you've got the decision you pay for rather than a fair decision. Those are all areas that we're looking at.
I'm just going across, as I said, one by one.
Q In your March report, there was a lot of really interesting data on these key terrains and area-of-interest districts that indicated which way these crucial districts are -- if they lean toward the Taliban or they supported the government. I don't see much of that in this report, unless I missed it. There is on page 52, on these districts, these security ratings which indicate that only one or two have seen any improvement in the security ratings since March. One -- why isn't that other information in this report; and two, are you satisfied with the rate of progress in the security assessments over the last six months?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: First of all, we're never satisfied with the rate of progress. We want progress faster. We want faster and more. So it's always easy to answer the question "are we satisfied." And there's -- but there clearly has been some progress.
Your point about the level of detail and the questions about the district assessments is a good one.
We had some discussion on that. And there's always that balance between length and what you put in. I think you raise a good point, and we'll look at including more of those in the next -- in the next round.
Q Is it attainable if you want to make a request?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: You can make a request, and to what degree it's attainable -- I think some of it is attainable. But -- so please go ahead and do that. Okay.
Q So to follow up on that point, though, what are you seeing anecdotally in the past few months about -- in this last report it said that most Afghans were unwilling to back the U.S. forces or they had actively supported the Taliban. Are you seeing that more Afghans are willing to support the local Afghan government or U.S.-coalition forces?
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: I think the surveys that I've seen on a local level and being at -- and really being able to boil it down to discrete local levels are not good enough for us to use right now. The broader national provincial level ones that we use in here -- but on the -- in terms of specific districts and stuff --
Q But you sent in the last report. I'm just wondering. You haven't seen --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: But we didn't -- I'm sorry. I thought you were asking about what -- about specific surveys in districts. We asked people how is -- asking people around the country, around a province how's security in your district is asking -- is different than saying that security in this district, all the people -- because you don't have a big enough --
Q No --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: -- you don't have a big enough sample for a -- data on a district, even though you can get data about how people feel about their districts in general.
Q I'm sorry. I'm asking for an update to the last report that had information in it that -- pertaining to people's opinions toward the U.S.-coalition forces. And the last report said they weren't necessarily on board. A lot of people were on the fence or actively opposed. Where does that stand now?
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: I mean, anecdotally, you can point to several districts where the local population clearly is in greater support of both the Afghan government, certainly the coalition forces.
So there were, you know, a lot of places that -- Uruzgan, and there was a district in northern Uruzgan or southern Daykundi called Gizab, which, you know, through various works that the Special Forces did, basically kicked out the Taliban, called for the Afghan government to come in. So that's more of a remote district.
As you go through central Helmand now and Garmsir, the security situation has improved. You're seeing greater support for the government, more willingness to come out and take part in economic activity that's provided by the coalition or through the Afghan government -- and that's actually always provided through the Afghan government.
So, yes, anecdotally, you do see that Afghans -- when the security situation improves, we do see them tend to gravitate towards the government.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I think I apologize for being a little slow here. Some of the data that we had in the March -- in the March report was -- were surveys that were not done every six months. And so we had some data available to us that we don't in this one, that we expect to have in our next one. And so I think this -- implicitly, we should be more -- a little more careful in saying, you know, when you -- some surveys are only done on an annual basis. And so that's one of the reasons for that. But we'll look at making sure in the March report that we answer that question.
Q Well, page 88, the second-from-the-bottom paragraph references the Pakistan Army General Headquarters approved an ODRP [Office of the Defense Representative-Pakistan] and coalition presence at the PAKMIL [Pakistan military] 12 Corps HQ [headquarters] in Quetta, Baluchistan. What is that presence, including specifically the coalition presence? And does -- has the -- have there been requests of the Pakistani government to take more actions against sanctuaries, specifically in Quetta and in Baluchistan?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: On the last question, as [name deleted] said, we have had requests about more actions against sanctuaries. So, yes, we have asked for that, and we continue to ask for that. That particular sentence is all we can say on that. We produced both a classified and unclassified report, and I have to say that's all -- what we say there is all we can say on that particular sentence.
Q (Off mike) -- you stepped away from talking about the exit of U.S. combat troops in 2014 --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, I said -- I said we don't have exit strategy, is what I've said.
Q And -- yeah, and well, you were saying, well, the exit of combat troops, and then you said no, how about the transition to Afghan security forces, internal --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: On the question of combat troops, I said I wasn't going to hazard a guess. It's going to be a conditions-based thing, so I didn't -- that's what I said.
Q Do you think there won't be an exit of U.S. combat troops in 2014? And how would you characterize the U.S. role -- or the Afghan role? As being in the lead or -- you know, or being --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: First of all, I've already said that I'm not going to predict what's going to happen in 2014. What I set -- what we set it is a goal. President Karzai set a goal; we're going to work towards that. And how we get there is -- and the pace and the scope of how we get there is going to be based on conditions. But I think it would be hugely irresponsible for me or anybody else to say we know what that pace and scope of operations is going to be and to hazard a guess on what the situation will actually -- will be, in sort of precise numbers, for 2014. Anybody who said they could do that would be wrong. Anybody who relied on that would be wrong, too.
I apologize, but when you're asking for precision about numbers in 2014, what I can say is we've set a goal. We set a goal because we believe it's achievable and President Karzai believes is achievable. And we are putting a huge amount of effort -- we're putting American and Afghan lives on the line every day to achieve that. We're putting a huge amount of resources into doing that. So the fact that we have -- that we are doing that shows that we have confidence we can believe we can achieve that goal.
But in terms of absolute numbers of forces and the composition of forces, again, I -- as I said, it would be irresponsible of me to try and focus on that, especially four years out. Sorry.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: You had the first second question, so I do want to make sure we get to yours.
Q On page 89 about India, you say India's presence in Afghanistan cannot be understood without considering the tense, fragile relationship between Pakistan and India. You don't explain it further. Does it mean that you buy the premise that India is carrying out developmental work in Afghanistan because it has to do something with Pakistan to counteract Pakistan's influence?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, we mean that you have to look at it all in context. Certainly the perceptions of Pakistan are important as well as the perceptions of India. And so that's what we're saying, that it has to be looked at in context, without trying to be judgmental that one side or the other's perceptions are wrong, but it's important to be aware of those perceptions.
We value very highly the developmental work that India's doing in Afghanistan. It's been a key one of the major contributors, and the kind of developmental work that India has done in Afghanistan is really vital to the success of the effort there. At the same time, Pakistani perceptions of that -- and they're regularly voiced, both in formal and informal conversations by a wide range of people in Pakistan -- is an area that is a continuing concern.
Q There's a mention in the report about a decrease in opium cultivation. And I'm wondering, from either of you, how significant is the decrease? There's a mention of government -- Afghan government-led eradication areas, but I don't know if there's other sorts of areas that might factor into that decrease. And has that decrease brought about any sort of measurable impact on the security situation or the insurgency?
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Yeah, I think in Helmand in '09, there was a reduction of 30 percent in the amount of acreage under cultivation for opium production. I think that number also fell in '10, but I don't have the U.N. -- the U.N. puts these numbers out. I think it did fall in '10 in Helmand as well, but not to as great a degree as 30 percent. In Kandahar it actually went up.
And to get to the last part of your question, I do think that when you see the changes in the ability to put, you know, an opium crop in the ground leads to or has an impact or is part of the explanation to the -- why you see the Taliban having a hard time with finances. It sort of impacts their financial -- their ability to raise money.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah, I would -- I've made the same comment before, over the years, on this. I would be very cautious about making too much of a generalization out of any one year, because farmers' decisions on planting writ large --
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: Right.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: -- are a response to what we -- a number of a factors, most -- primarily the market, the ability of -- to get support. The narcotics networks have had actually a very good record of getting support in terms of fertilizers, seeds and loans to farmers, and so they have often, in the past, chosen those because they make economic sense, over the last several years. And -- [name deleted] -- played a role in this. We, working with the Afghan's international partners, have put in place a number of mechanisms that we think are going to be addressing that. So when you're looking at -- the absolute numbers is one thing, but also the reasons why people stop cultivating poppy -- and are they doing it in response -- is it a permanent change of behavior or is it just a response to market conditions.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Okay. Yeah, I guess you're next.
SR. STATE OFFICIAL: I need to go, actually.
Q Yeah, I was just going to ask about the White House officials who say that they're skeptical about these signs of progress and saying -- yeah, how many more Marjahs do we need to do and in what time frame? I mean, do you --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Did you -- which White House official would that be?
Q It was one -- an anonymous White House official.
Q Okay, no, but there are -- okay, I'll leave it aside. There's a lot of skepticism in Washington from people who are informed on this issue, across the board, in various agencies and in think tanks and in people who -- in the military who know this issue. So my question to you is, these are, you know, some positive signs here, but to you what do they mean overall, the long term?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I think these are serious, important signs. And as [name deleted] said, the progress is still fragile. Of course there are skeptics. There are always skeptics, and -- without saying where they might be.
But this is, as I said, an extraordinarily dynamic situation. Even the progress that we've seen in the last seven weeks since this report came out is something that is changing the reality on the ground.
But in no way, shape or form is anybody guaranteeing success, saying it's a hundred percent certain. There are a lot of factors that are still involved here, and we're not -- we're certainly very far from declaring victory.
But for those who are skeptics, what I would say is we have -- and you've all heard this before, but I'll say it again -- we have not, in all the time we've been in Afghanistan, had anywhere near the level of military effort, the level of combined civil-military effort, the level of international support that we have today. Those factors are in place now.
And so to say -- to express skepticism today, when we are in a completely different situation than we were two years ago, four years ago, six years ago, and say that the past is just going to be repeated into the future, as I was saying, was irresponsible to -- it was irresponsible to predict what's going to happen in the future, out into 2014. To be frank, I would say people who have that level of skepticism are irresponsible and that they haven't looked at the full picture in Afghanistan.
And looking at this report, looking at this report over the last three reports and seeing the detail that we go into on this does give you a foundation for, I think, understanding the situation.
Q On page 44 --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Okay, now I think we have to bring this thing to a close. If anybody wants to come up to the table and talk to me, please do, but I want to essentially release everybody.


text:
A Crag Guide gives an extensive view of all sub areas and climbs at a point in the index. It shows a snapshot of the index heirachy, up to 300 climbs (or areas) on a single web page. It shows selected comments climbers have made on a recently submitted ascent.
At a minor crag level this should be suitable for printing and taking with you on a climbing trip as an adjunct to your guidebook.
This guide was generated anonymously. Login to show your logged ascents against each route.
Rock climbing is extremely dangerous and can result in serious injury or death. Users acting on any information directly or indirectly available from this site do so at their own risk.
This guide is compiled from a community of users and is presented without verification that the information is accurate or complete. By using this guide you acknowledge that the material described in this document is extremely dangerous, and that the content may be misleading or wrong. In particular there may be misdescriptions of routes, incorrectly drawn topo lines, incorrect difficulty ratings or incorrect or missing protection ratings.
You should not depend on any information gleaned from this guide for your personal safety.
You must keep this warning with the guide.
For more information refer to our Usage policy
Thanks to the following people who have contributed to this crag guide:
The size of a person's name reflects their Crag Karma, which is their level of contribution. You can help contribute to your local crag by adding descriptions, photos, topos and more.
Table of contents
- 1. Terry Fox Memorial Lookout 0 in Field
- 2. Index by grade
1. Terry Fox Memorial Lookout 0 routes in Field
- Description:
Bouldering on the cliffs (road-cut, dynamited) around the Terry Fox Memorial
Try to be non-obvious... this area can get a lot of non-climber traffic.
- Access Issues: inherited from Thunder Bay
Varies from crag to crag.
2. Index by grade

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|Sign in With Your Burrp Id!
|Register With Burrp!
|Sign in With Your Burrp Id!
|Register With Burrp!
Home > Bangalore Bars & Pubs > Central Bangalore > Church Street Bars & Pubs > Ruby's Bar & Grill
Church Street, Central Bangalore
23 Reviews / 23 Ratings
Your rating
Write a Review
* You will not receive leaderboard points if word count is less than 60. Word Count : 0
January 19,2013
Pricey Indeed
A friend and I visited Ruby's Bar and Grill, formerly known as Ruby Tuesday, the American restaurant chain. I had been wanting to go here for ages but people's remarks about the price had always deterred me. However, around three weeks ago, I had cash in my pocket, an interested and enthusiastic Vietnamese friend who was staying a few days at my home and decided that this was a great opportunity to check the place out. We walked up the stairs to the restaurant and stopped all along the way to admire the pictures which lined the stairwell. They were really nice and interesting. Inside the restaurant, which was empty we walked towards a table overlooking Church Street and sat down. The waiter brought us the menus and we gazed at the items on offer. After a little debate, I chose an Orange Juice and a Thai Green Curry with Chicken and Rice. My friend decided against a drink and ordered a main course for herself. Our food took a while to arrive and while we waited, I sipped my iced drink and looked around the restaurant. The ambience is great and the place is beautifully furnished. A nice bar added to the pleasant interior and the restaurant was a very spacious one. Our food, when it came tasted delicious and the quantity was good. Then came the bill. My friend insisted on treating me but I took a close look at the bill anyway. Gosh was I horrified at the amount we were charged. An even closer look revealed the huge amount of taxes we were paying. My friend too was surprised at the taxes and after we paid, we walked out grumbling quietly to each other that really the price had been too much considering we barely ordered anything. The service was faultless but for the price alone, I will probably never return, even if someone offers to treat me and I will certainly never recommend this place as a reasonable dining option. If price doesnt matter though, by all means try this place out. Nothing else can be faulted.
Gaurav Shenoy, Projects Engineer
July 03,2012
4 of us walked in to this place last weekend. Ordered for some soup and starters. Service, ambiance was good. Food was rubbish for the price. When we decided to place an order for the main course, a friend of mine happened to see one cockroach which popped out from no where and ended up on his plate. Disgusted, we just walked out of the place! Bad experience. Will never visit this place anymore.
June 07,2012
We liked it
Had been here on Sunday afternoon recently to meet a close friend.
They had happy hours ofcourse, which worked out good for us.
Ordered a mug of beer and a martini, and got one-on-one offer.
The staff was quite friendly and even agreed to give us a different flavoured martini as free.
The quisedellas and nachos were nice and the burger was large and filling.
Tasty stuff except the pizza which i wouldn't recommend.
A bit pricey this place, but in happy hours it works out well.
February 20,2012
Totally not worth it!
Went as a couple there, thought it would be great. The ambiance wasn't that bad.
Though the price was fine, their food and service was below average. I ordered salad and mini burgers. the salad had stale lettuce leaves. what they called as burgers merely seemed to be them. I told the waiter about sald. He just seemed to take it lightly.
In short, for the money ,it was totally not worth it.
Guess they charge by the minute...
I had the unfortunate experience of going to this restaurant. The ambiance is admittedly decent but the food spread was average if not frugal. I still thought I'd give it a try. The starters were cold to begin with and being a continental restaurant I got the usual fare of biryanis and curries juxtaposed with pasta and stuffed chicken in pepper sauce. The continental flavors are the saving grace. And forget about desserts; they are as few as to be non-existent.
Now for the final nail in the coffin. The price is clearly marked on the outside of the restaurant but I fell to the usual folly of applicable taxes. 160 bucks on taxes alone for a single guy is outrageous. They impose service charge on a buffet course that you serve to yourself. You're effectively charging yourself to serve your own food. Hehe.
Don't fall for this charade. I suggest you spend your money wisely elsewhere. This is a place only for the gullible and the uninformed.
Great Hang out place wid plas
We always use to hang out at Ruby Tuesday whenever we gt time.. n even wen i keep on hopping between Bangalore & delhi , we all frens make sure dat once in a while we do meet at Ruby's to enjoy the same time..
The service is quick, mouth watering dishes.. and drinks.. awesum....
Too costly..not really worth :(
we were a group of 15 friends who went there on a friday night. Starters were really nice but food was pathetic. they serve all brands of alcohol but its highly overpriced. we ordered almost everything shooters, beer, scotch, cocktails, mocktails etc. service was too slow.
finally when the bill came we all were left jaw dropped.. it was staggering INR. 84000/- inclusive of all stupid taxes which they charge...
luckily out of this 84k 72k was alone for booze. we somehow convinced the manager to charge everything under happy hours....thus we got a 50% discount on alcohol.
our total bill came around 12k food and 36k for alcohol....we ended up paying 48k(tip extra :( )
it was definitely not worth the money...we could have done wonders with a budget of 50K
Ruby tuesday is such a place where people can go just 2waste money.Food is yuccccccckkkkkk here.
Oh my god, coming to prices, they are so much expensive.I feel the food they provide is not even worth some
100 bugs.. People running this restaurant are such a big cheaters, they display some price in the menu card
and other amount in the bill.The food and drink here is so much adulterated.The food inspection people
should visit this place in disguise and check the quality of food they provide.
2of us had been 4dinner last nite.V ordered a drink i.e., pint beer and a takila shot along with 2 non veg
starters and 1biryani.The bill we got was 4774/- ..
the amount displayed in menu card is :
Pint beer - 260/-
takila shot - 650/-
2 starters (i.e., 1 is shrimps and other was toasted chicken with pepper sauce) - 495/- each.Hence 495*2=990/-
1 chicken biryani - 350/-
Therefore total(ur estimation) is:2250/-
Oh sorry forgot to mention:
mineral water : 85/-
Service charge : 550/-
So, total(ur estimation) is : 2250+85+550 = 2885/-
the amount displayed in bill is :
Pint beer - 500/-
takila shot - 1700/-
2 starters (i.e., 1 is shrimps and other was toasted chicken with pepper sauce) - 720/- each.Hence 720*2=1440/-
1 chicken biryani - 500/-
Bloody i dont knw y d hell dey cost 550/- for service.Service they provide is shitttt... U order 4somethin,dey vil just put on ur table n go.
Wat is d service dey givin in it..
They are such a CHEATERS, v billed for 2885/- and they told tat v had 2pay 4774/-
The chicken which dey delivered was so hard.They cook tat meat which is cut n freezed/stored for a long time.
Using both knife n fork i wasnt able 2take the single bite..
Drinks dey provide is also adulterated. Guys pls pls do nt visit dis place even in worse situation.
Its worth eating something available street side but not at all worth eatin anythin in RUBY TUESDAY
Cheat on final bill.. Stay away
Man, this was my first visit and I was clearly shown out by charging for even the free drink which was part of 1+1 offer. And the service, gurrr! ... The girl who was serving didn't know what she was talking about and behaved as if she owns us. damn!
Finally I ended coughing up 1k just for a pint of beer and chips.
Beware and stay away.
February 19,2010
Mediocre food and service, cheat on Service Charge
After experiencing Ruby Tuesday's bad food and service a year ago we had decided not to return- till a colleague convinced us that they have improved a lot.
Sure enough, the chicken quesadillas were good and the guacomole dip was passable. The featured dish "New Orleans Seafood" was mediocre. There was a power failure, and they had no backup- hence the lunch was delayed. However, the biggest shock came when on receiving the bill we discoverd a "mandatory" 15% service charge!
We spoke to the "General Manager" O'Neal Evans Wesley, who told us that this is mandated by the owners of Ruby Tuesdays in India, and he has no control over it. We told him that most Bangalore restaurants have it at 5-10%, and even then it should reward good service- but to no avail.
Save your appetitite and money, and for western food go to one of the better places in Bangalore- Sunny's never disappoints, Olive Beach is good, and Chillis is also turning out well.
Puneet Srivastava, Analytics Consultant
December 29,2009
Terribly Expensive ... Bad food and Music
I have been to Ruby Tuesday Gurgaon several times and did not really regret even once (even though each visit of mine burnt a neat hole in my wallet). One visit here, and I am positive, that is gonna be last.
I do not mind paying extra for good food and good ambience. This place sucks in both of them. The ambience is dark, publike and inappropriate for family outing. What really gets on ones nerves is the music there. Common guys, I don't want RAP and techno while eating my Caeser salad for lunch! And what pissed me off was outright refusal to change the music.
The salad I got was too bland and almost tasteless. They provided an alternative salad (which was passable) when we complained but eventually they charged me for both the salads in the final bill.
Overall, we paid 2K+ for 2 people and ended up highly dissatisfied.
Never again. Especially when there are numerous options all around the city which provide excellent european food at much reasonable price.
December 29,2009
One visit to know you havnt missed anything !!
This is not a place to go for a second visit at all..
Ambiance is neat..Retro style decoration..Music SUCKS..
Went on a weekend and dint expect they would play nothing but RAP music in a restaurant like this.
Food was average..Though the Questillas (i think) which they have was amazing.
Cocktails are pretty expensive though..
You can try this if you are in the mood to burn a slight hole in your wallets..Ambiance 4/5 Food 3/5 Cocktails 3/5
December 07,2009
No where near Ruby Tuesday Mumbai
Tried this last week during my trip to Mumbai. The soup salad option is what we opted for. The quantity of the salads kept were abysmally small. You scoop one serving in a spoon and you are already scratching the bottom. Yes in a way you can rest assured that the salad are fresh but it is embarassing to inaugurate the buffet and yet scrape the bottom immediately. Have been to Ruby Tuesday in Nariman Point, Mumbai as well but the quantities there are surely much more substantial.
October 06,2009
US$ rate for an INR meal!
yes, this is an expensive joint - 1250Rs for two, entree each and a drink!!!
agreed the white wine sangria was done just right and tasted pretty good (but its priced at 350 for less than full glass :)
we had a spicy chicken burger - again it was passable nothing out of the ordinary for the price!!
and a veg enchilada - the rice was old and overdone (to a point where it was crispy!!) and the enchilada was soggy, this was below average.
It is sad because the place has so much potential, they have a great menu - everything looked tempting! except the prices!
May 11,2009
its an ok place
hey guys... Ruby tuesday i quite a good place had benn last week they have this happy hours where u get good offers and the starters r not that gr8 but not that bad also.... Plz donot try the cocktails even if they give it for free it'll put off er mood for sure.... the music is really good they play everythin pop rock techno.... the loo is PATHETIC!
Empty on a tuesday..
My first visit to Ruby Tuesday ... on a tuesday night and only 2 tables occupied - not what i expected :)
I was in a mood for some burgers and fries. First i ordered a cocktail - ruby relaxer - not very relaxing.. the drink was average and the presenation even worse - not worth Rs 300 at all.
The burger was far better than the drink - The Mini Chicken burgers main course (4 mini chicken burgers and fries). The burgers were just awesome with loads of artery chocking cheese and butter - Truly a taste to die for :)
overall - Ambeince - Lack luster, Service - Good, Atmosphere - Dead, Food - Great, Pricing - needs to be lowered.
Ruby Tuesday on Decline
Ruby Tuesday was my favorite in the whole of MG/Brigade area. Primarily because of the ambience. The food is costly and nothing exceptional. The only reason I used to go there was because of the ambience - well lit, right mix of music of all genres, well mannered people, family friendly etc.
Now they have put blinds, is dark most of the time, and they play exclusively techno/electronica/hip hop.
The last time I went, the place was literally deserted. Maybe the management is thinking it's because of the recession. What do they know? They have destroyed the ambience. No one wants to go there anymore.
I am a "Ruby Regulars" member (cost Rs. 4000), and I voluntarily give it up. And thanks for the headache you gave me with your loud crappy techno music last time, I am never ever coming back.
September 12,2008
Most expensive Desserts...
...I have ever had!!! You will have to let go of any 'Worth the money' attitude that you might have developed over the years. For ones with families, this is the kinda ice cream shop you never tell your kids about and distract them with candy when you walk past it. Trust me when I say If you step into it, the kids will wipe your wallet clean, bank account too with any luck...!
I don't go gaga over chocolates but the chocolate tall cake here is fundo! Its one of the very few chocolatey things that I like. I didn't know I liked strawberries until I had the strawberry tall cake. Order any of these and tell the waiter to add extra strawberry/chocolate syrup and also threaten to return the thing if the cake is stale. This is the only way you can assure you atleast enjoy the ridiculously expensive cake and ice cream combo.
Now for the kicker. Two tall cakes will cost you somewhere around 500-600. If you are going in a big group and someone's treating, well firstly, God help him (you see I know its a 'him' coz only guys will do this kinda stuff) and secondly spare the poor fella and order tall cakes coz they turn out to be more 'economical', which is of course stated in a relative sense.
August 21,2008
Just not worth it!
American food is rather strange to begin with and added to that when its not cooked well, its a huge turn off!You get steaks and burgers here and the portions are too big, the taste is very bland and not cooked well.Service here is not efficient.Actually this review is not at all worth writing simply cause I detest this restaurant(if one can call it that).This place may look nice but it stops at that.
Kaushik Sunku, student / working
August 14,2007
January 19,2007
Cholesterol Alert
The problem with this place is that the pictures in the menu promise far more than what is finally delivered.
Take the ribs for instance, they bear no resemblance to the picture on the menu and I pity the anemic pig that gave it's life for this rubbish.
The second problem is that apparently there are only two ways of cooking food, fried or grilled and two ways of serving it, with or without cheese.
The salad bar's not bad though. Probably the only good thing there and reasonably priced too.
January 07,2007
Awesome food
Ruby Tuesday located on Church street offers a good alternative for American and Mexican food. It was my first time here, but had heard good things about this place and so decided to check it out.
They have an extensive salad bar and primarily serve South American food. They have happy hours from 4 to 8 pm everyday.
The food is a bit pricey, but the service is good.
Kavitha Krishnamoorthy, PR Consultant
November 30,2006
Write a Review
* You will not receive leaderboard points if word count is less than 60. Word Count : 0


text:
1979 Datsun 280ZX, The Datsun 280 ZX 2 + 2 was named the import car of the year by Road and Track magazine. It... More
1974 Datsun 260Z, California/Arizona only. Very original, 6-cylinder, round top carburetors, 4-speed stick. Cold a/c, upgraded sound system. Rebuilt engine/trans. Great paint, good interior.... More
Datsun 240Z 1972 20 years California sun baked project car To much sun is bad for humans but also for cars. This 1972 Datsun 240Z... More
1972 Datsun 240Z, Clean California Z Car! Not been out of the state or exposed to salt. No rust, great driver. Buy it today... More
For sale in our Orlando showroom is a great looking 1970 Datsun 1600. To the uniformed the Datsun roadsters (the collective nick name for... More
To be offered at Lucky Collector Car Auctions for another spectacular Fall Classic Sale... More
For Sale: 1971 Datsun 240Z This 240Z enjoys a unique combination: a completely rebuilt/upgraded drivetrain and suspension along with a body and interior in great... More
Amost perfect example of 280Z , only 45,xxx original miles, no rust, perfect dash and interior. Tastefully upgraded, motivated seller asking 13750.00 or OBO... More
1970 Datsun 240 Z Serial # 1753 98,500 miles Original Owner More information : 503-382-0317 9:00-5:00 PST 503-306-8435 9:00-5:00 PST... More
This 1974 Datsun 260Z has a 156.6 C.I. Inline 6 Cylinder (Numbers Matching), Automatic 3 Speed Transmission, Rare 1 Year Only Production Car, Rare... More
1972 Datsun 240Z, Family owned-have service records and bill of sale. 121,000 original miles. Stored winters. Older restoration using welded steel body panels-then completely repainted with... More
1972 Datsun 240Z MotoeXotica is proud to present our latest addition, a very original 1972 Datsun 240Z Datsun introduced their Z Models in 1969, starting an... More
Just Looking at the pictures describes this car! This one owner car is really nice it's added Features (chrome and turbo, and sterro CD... More
1973 Datsun 240Z, 2.4L 6 Cylinder engine, automatic transmission. Front disc brakes, rack& pinion steering. Burgundy with black interior. The paint is older with... More
1974 Datsun 260Z, in excellant condition. Two family car from California. Purchased new in 1974 by a man in California, who then sold it... More


text:
Temptalia Asks You – How many beauty products do you use per day?
How many beauty products do you use per day? Count up the products that you use nearly everyday and come back and tell us how many you ended up with!
For me, since I don't actually wear full makeup more than two or three days a week, I will go with my off-day total, which is five (morning cream, foundation [sometimes], cleanser, night cream, lip balm).
Discussion and debate are highly encouraged, and we expect community members to participate respectfully. When asking a question, please check the FAQ section (above) for information about purchasing, price, dupes, and the like. If you have general feedback or need technical support, please contact us.
Comments that include advertisements, self-promotion, insults, etc. may be in violation of our comment policy and subject to deletion. Please see our comment policy for more information.


text:
|This is a great value-for-money choice for clients who are prepared to look after some of their own administration.
|This is a comprehensive package, delivering almost every element of accountancy and back-office support. All you have to do is send us your timesheet, tell us about your expenses and show us your bank statements.
|Our full service package is particularly suited to those who want real time access to their company accounts. This is also the package to choose to payroll more than one employee. We'll even handle your personal tax return for you.
Find Out More
Find Out More
Find Out More
|All our service packages include company formation, weekly or monthly payroll, book keeping, management accounts and statutory accounts.
"Setting up a limited company to manage your contractor earnings can give you flexibility, control and efficiency. We are here to advise and guide."
"I used to worry about the bill from my accountant at the end of the year. Now I know how much I pay each month and exactly what service I'm going to get."
Colin Simonds
Colin Simonds
"I like to know what I owe as well as how much is in the bank for me to spend. That's why I love having We are as my accountants."
Ray Green
Ray Green
Free company formation
All our book keeping and accounting packages come with free limited company incorporation through Companies House. You will receive your certificate of incorporation normally within 12 working hours. Avoid postal delays and complete our joining form on line to get the ball rolling straightaway.


text:
I love your arts!Especially the SM/WW moments! Preeeeach ^^ You deserve a follow. :)
Here's another doodle.
@ganon15: I like your lines, very animated aesthetic to your pieces. Here's another one that I scribbled months ago.
Interesting Article
I really liked the concept of the ARGUS title during Forever Evil. I thought that was a nice vehicle for him and a way to get behind the eyelids of government without diluting the Justice League titl...
@foamborn: That would be awesome! I love that idea :D
Thanks for the suggestion. :) This is just something that I do in my spare time these days, it's fun to play around with some ideas but I have no ambition of taking it any further.
Superdoom & Wondercide. 'Been posting this in some other forums, thought that I would bother this one with it too.
This sounds interesting, I wonder if this will have ties to the DC Cinematic Universe?
These are awesome! Great work guys :)
@foamborn: Thank you, I was just having a little fun with the tread there.Here are another couple that that I was working on during the Doomed story line. Superman gets a lot of play, second to Batman...
Here are a couple that I scribbled up recently.@wonderfan409: It's funny that you mention the current artist on Superman / Wonder Woman, his work is very influential on my own style.
See now here's a topic that I can get down with!@foamborn: Your work is brilliant! I love your Wonder Woman's form and stature. So clean too, almost looks like vector art. I also saw some of your oth...


text:
Marching sticks endorsed by a master.
Mike Jackson and Vic Firth proudly present Mike's new signature corpsmaster snare sticks. The sticks have a thick shoulder and long taper that provide quick rebound and produce a strong ping.
A long reverse taper pushes more mass to the front of the stick. Mike is currently the percussion captain for the Bluecoats Drum & Bugle Corps. 17"L, .740"D. shoulder, .710"D at shaft


text:
Nice Skull Session DJ. And 16-Bit Bar is amazing. I really thought going in the first time I'd be more mature and patient than in my original arcade days. Turns out I was still standing in line for X-Men thinking "These guys are hogging the game!" Only real difference was I had a beer in my hand and everyone's shoulders had gotten too wide to play four wide on the machine.
Member since 21 October 2012 | Blog
Helmet Stickers: 9 | Leaderboard
Voting Record: 0 / 0
- COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYER: Current: Braxton Miller. All Time: Bernard Renard
- COLLEGE BASKETBALL PLAYER: Aaron Craft
- NFL TEAM: Browns
- NHL TEAM: Blue Jacket
- NBA TEAM: Cavaliers
- MLB TEAM: Indians
- SOCCER TEAM: The Crew
Recent Activity
Einhorn is Finkle.
Ohio State: 49 - 7
Now I feel like an even slightly bigger tool than I already did for raining on a solid post. Though that may also be due to the flood of memories that has come back as a result of the comment. Most notably that I only knew this because I specifically asked the band director (of the band that I may or may not have been in) what kind of saxaphone Kenny G played because I thought he was the coolest.
In other news, I'm new to the site but your avatar looks oddly familiar. You didn't happen to live in Haverfield circa 2003-2004, did you?
I tried to think of a way to write this without sounding like that guy, but I couldn't, so here goes:
Kenny G plays the soprano saxophone, not the clarinet. The soprano sax looks similar to a clarinet, but, in fact, resides in the much cooler wing of the woodwind family (I may or may not have played the saxophone in the school band).


text:
Scoreboard: No Team Scores, Dick Shea Open, West Point, N.Y., 3/30
22nd of 24, Snowflake Classic, Somerville, Mass., 3/30
Schedule: Friday, April 5 at Duke Invitational, Durham, N.C., 12:00 p.m.
Saturday, April 6 at Duke Invitational, Durham, N.C., 10:00 a.m.
Saturday, April 6 at New Hampshire, Durham, N.H., 11:00 a.m.
- The men's track and field team will split up this weekend with select members traveling to Durham, N.C. for the Duke Invitational on Friday and Saturday, April 5-6, and others traveling to Durham, N.H. for a meet with New Hampshire and Maine on Saturday, April 6.
- Last season, Crusaders traveled to three different meets on the first full weekend in April including the Tiger Classic in Auburn, Ala., the Wagner Invitational and at New Hampshire with Maine. Sophomore Drew McAward (Garden City, N.Y.) led the Crusaders with a second place finish in the 3,000-meter steeplechase at the Wagner Invitational to lead Holy Cross at all three meets.
- Sophomore Brian Wheeler (Malden, Mass.) was one of three Crusaders to record career-best finishes at last weekend's meets. Wheeler threw the javelin 49.16 meters at the Snowflake Classic (3/30). Sophomore Vuong Tran (Worcester, Mass.) also set his career-best mark in the 100-meter dash (11.46 seconds) at the Snowflake Classic and junior Tim Moczula (Edison, N.J.) crossed the finish line in the 110-meter hurdles in a career-best 15.66 seconds.
- Get all the latest news and results on the Holy Cross men's track and field team sent directly to your e-mail. To sign up for e-mail alerts go here: http://www.goholycross.com/list-signup.


text:
After the tragedy in my home town of Hampton, VA., this week on Life Full Circle Radio, we are going to talk about how the men are going to take our kids back. I purposely didn't say "Take our streets back." Why? Because our worlds are so much bigger than the streets. Unfortunately…many of us don't know it.
Obviously this epidemic is bigger than the tragedy in VA. There were over 500 murders in Chicago last year, according to the BlackBoysReport.com under 25% of the black males in Jacksonville, FL are graduating high school, and 3 out of 4 black kids are born out of wedlock.
Where did we go wrong? And the ultimate question is…what are we going to do about it? A group of men in Hampton are taking this issue head on...Read More


text:
Sunscreen 101: Water Resistant SPF 30
SPF30+ and Water Resistant | This is a look at some of the products available with SPF30 or higher that are marketed as water-resistant. Remember that water-resistant doesn't mean you can swim for six hours and not worry about it! Re-application is crucial. If you're in the water for more than 30-45 minutes, you'll likely need to re-apply for maximum protection.
MD Skincare Powerful Sun Protection SPF 45 ($42.00) contains:
- Oxybenzone (s-UVA)
- Octinoxate (UVB)
- Octisalate (UVB)
- Zinc Oxide (UVA)
Korres Watermelon Sunscreen Face Cream SPF 30 ($28.00) contains:
- Octocrylene (UVB)
- Ethylhexyl Methoxycinnamate (UVB)
- Titanium dioxide (s-UVA)
- Zinc Oxide (UVA)
Clinique UV-Response Face SPF 50 ($15.50) contains:
- Homosalate 10% (UVB)
- Octinoxate 7.5% (UVB)
- Oxybenzone 5.0% (s-UVA)
- Octisalate 5% (UVB)
- Avobenzone 3% (UVA)
Shiseido Ultimate Sun Protection Cream for Face SPF 55 PA+++ ($33.00) contains:
- Octinoxate 7.4% (UVB)
- Zinc Oxide 13.9% (UVA)
Dermalogica super sensitive faceblock spf30 ($45.00)
- Titanium dioxide 6.7% (UVB/s-UVA)
- Zinc Oxide 9.2% (UVA)
Make sure you check out our introduction to sunscreen here. These products are typically available at Nordstrom.com or Sephora.com.
Discussion and debate are highly encouraged, and we expect community members to participate respectfully. When asking a question, please check the FAQ section (above) for information about purchasing, price, dupes, and the like. If you have general feedback or need technical support, please contact us.
Comments that include advertisements, self-promotion, insults, etc. may be in violation of our comment policy and subject to deletion. Please see our comment policy for more information.


text:
Register now for free, or sign in with any of these services:
The Honky Tonk Man just tweeted that Randy's brother Lanny Poffo set up an email account so fans can send condolence messages to the family. send a message to firstname.lastname@example.com -Hulk Hogan has also opened up the discussion on his Facebook Page at www.facebook.com/hulkhogan
Truly sad news. I remember watching Macho Man over the years and to this day still have a friend who I leave messages for in Savage's signature raspy voice. From his match against Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat at Wrestlemania 3 to his TV wedding with Miss Elizabeth, from the Mega Powers story line to his place in the NWO in WCW, he was a performer through and through. RIP Randy and sincere condolences to the Poffo family and all of his friends and colleagues that have to bury another friend well before his time.
JJ, as I said in my previous comment, "any scenario is possible." The car could have been stolen minutes before the crash, but it is hard to determine that when the only person who likely knows, (the person who stole the car,) has not been identified. If we were to paint out all the possibilities of what may have happened in a news story it would read more like a "choose your own adventure" book.
"Wondering," an initial description from one of the victims indicated it was a "rather large man," according to police communications at the time. "Razzleses," if it is the middle of the night would you necessarily know if someone stole your car? That being said, any scenario is possible and I think I can see where your suspicions lie.
I agree with Vernon. The Expendables was a huge disappointment. I assume this production company is trying to recoup some of the money lost at the box office and with DVD sales.
I'm working on May 21, so should the zombie apocalypse I've been waiting for occur, I will keep posting pictures, video and updates to MassLive until the end. Or at least until someone "turns off" the Internet. Stay tuned folks!
Anyone who has ever listened to any of Common's albums and the included lyrical content would be hard pressed to label him as a thug or a punk. He is known for being a socially conscious artist who uses his music to promote positive messages. To take one line from a random freestyle and characterize him based on it is as ridiculous as taking a line from any statement you've ever made out of context and making a conclusion about who you are and what you stand for. Think about it...
intheknowo: This was an afternoon story about the Hobart Hoedown, when things were still relatively quiet and no arrests had been made.
KEVSCRACKFACTORY, although the word "dope" is sometimes associated with heroin, back where I'm from, people also call it dope as in "smoking dope." Slang varies from city to city and definitely region to region.
If anyone has pictures or video of the fire they want to share, send them or contact the night desk at MassLive via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.com.
ron01118, similar incidents have been reported in Springfield. At the end of March, police were looking for a guy who was stealing the metal storm grates out of the streets. Then they found him with a Chevy S-10 so overloaded with them the truck bed looked like a low rider. http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/03/grate_work_by_springfield_poli.html
I'm with Lori. The original Cadbury creme Egg is my personal favorite. My Mom loves the Peeps but they don't even rank with my sweet tooth. Sorry Mom...
It was my mistake. Working overnight I sometimes lose track of day and night. I've made the correction and thanks for bringing it to my attention.
If anyone has a picture of the accident, please send it along to firstname.lastname@example.com while we are working to get more info on the incident. And for anyone traveling South this morning, Route 5 may be a better bet until things get cleared up.
I did ask Lt. Sowa if he could elaborate on the medication issue and his simple answer was "negative." Her physical description is more important to tracking her down than that factor anyhow.
Additionally, if anyone wants to send a message to the family, they can click on the blue link to the Puerta Del Cielo funeral home in the story. Anyone who wants to share a picture of Kevin with MassLive and The Republican can e-mail it to firstname.lastname@example.com.
Thanks Liz. It was very sad to see a young man with what looked like a bright self-created future ahead of him have to be mourned instead of congratulated on a latest achievement. A parent shouldn't have to bury one of their children and teenagers shouldn't have to bury one of their friends. My condolences and thoughts are with all of the friends and family of Kevin Gomez.
Just to keep things transparent, I've corrected the mistake where his brothers were referred to as his sons. It was the funeral home's error that was repeated on Mass Live. As an update, the wake and funeral today were very sad. A parent shouldn't have to bury one of their children and teenagers shouldn't have to bury one of their friends. The whole situation is truly a tragedy and my sincere condolences go out to all of Kevin's family and friends.
"GenGeorgeCustard" This is a collection of updates to stories that were all media mainstays for a while but fell out of the spotlight for a number of reasons. The intention of the post is to provide those interested with a simple way to get some more information. If you don't care about the stories, simply move on to the next post.
"lagnaf," it was a typo in the headline and it has been fixed. I wouldn't consider it a fact-related issue, but I appreciate you bringing it to my attention.