text:
You are hereBlogs / davidswanson's blog / Humanitarian War vs. Humanity
Humanitarian War vs. Humanity
The idea that wars are waged out of humanitarian concern may not at first appear even worthy of response. Wars kill humans. What can be humanitarian about that? But look at the sort of rhetoric that successfully sells new wars:
"This conflict started Aug. 2, when the dictator of Iraq invaded a small and helpless neighbor. Kuwait, a member of the Arab League and a member of the United Nations, was crushed, its people brutalized. Five months ago, Saddam Hussein started this cruel war against Kuwait; tonight, the battle has been joined."
Thus spoke President Bush the Elder upon launching the Gulf War in 1991. He didn't say he wanted to kill people. He said he wanted to liberate helpless victims from their oppressors, an idea that would be considered leftist in domestic politics, but an idea that seems to create genuine support for wars. And here's President Clinton speaking about Yugoslavia eight years later:
"When I ordered our armed forces into combat, we had three clear goals: to enable the Kosovar people, the victims of some of the most vicious atrocities in Europe since the Second World War, to return to their homes with safety and self-government; to require Serbian forces responsible for those atrocities to leave Kosovo; and to deploy an international security force, with NATO at its core, to protect all the people of that troubled land, Serbs and Albanians alike." Look also at the rhetoric that is used to successfully keep wars going for years:
"We will not abandon the Iraqi people."
Secretary of State Colin Powell, August 13, 2003.
"The United States will not abandon Iraq."
President George W. Bush, March, 21, 2006.
If I break into your house, smash the windows, bust up the furniture, and kill half your family, do I have a moral obligation to stay and spend the night? Would it be cruel and irresponsible for me to "abandon" you, even when you encourage me to leave? Or is it my duty, on the contrary, to depart immediately and turn myself in at the nearest police station? Once the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had begun, a debate began that resembled this one. As you can see, these two approaches are many miles apart, despite both being framed as humanitarian. One says that we have to stay out of generosity, the other that we have to leave out of shame and respect. Which is right?
Prior to the invasion of Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell reportedly told President Bush "You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million people. You will own all their hopes, aspirations, and problems. You'll own it all." According to Bob Woodward, "Powell and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage called this the Pottery Barn rule: You break it, you own it." Senator John Kerry cited the rule when running for president, and it was and is widely accepted as legitimate by Republican and Democratic politicians in Washington, D.C.
The Pottery Barn is a store that has no such rule, at least not for accidents. It's illegal in many states in our country to have such a rule, except for cases of gross negligence and willful destruction. That description, of course, fits the invasion of Iraq to a T. The doctrine of "shock and awe," of imposing such massive destruction that the enemy is paralyzed with fear and helplessness had long since been proven as hopeless and nonsensical as it sounds. It hadn't worked in World War II or since. Americans parachuting into Japan following the nuclear bombs were not bowed down to; they were lynched. People have always fought back and always will, just as you probably would. But shock and awe is designed to include the complete destruction of infrastructure, communication, transportation, food production and supply, water supply, and so forth. In other words: the illegal imposition of great suffering on an entire population. If that's not willful destruction, I don't know what is.
The invasion of Iraq was also intended as a "decapitation," a "regime change." The dictator was removed from the scene, eventually captured, and later executed following a deeply flawed trial that avoided evidence of U.S. complicity in his crimes. Many Iraqis were delighted with the removal of Saddam Hussein, but quickly began to demand the withdrawal of the United States military from their country. Was this ingratitude? "Thank you for deposing our tyrant. Don't let the doorknob hit you in the ass on your way out!" Hmm. That makes it sound as if the United States wanted to stay, and as if the Iraqis owed us the favor of letting us stay. That's quite different from staying reluctantly to fulfill our moral duty of ownership. Which is it?
How does one manage to own people? It's striking that Powell, an African American, some of whose ancestors were owned as slaves in Jamaica, told the president he would own people, dark skinned people against whom many Americans held some degree of prejudice. Powell was arguing against the invasion, or at least warning of what would be involved. But did owning people necessarily have to be involved? If the United States and its fig-leaf "coalition" of minor contingents from other nations had pulled out of Iraq when George W. Bush declared "mission accomplished" in a flight suit on an aircraft carrier in San Diego Harbor on May 1, 2003, and not disbanded the Iraqi military, and not laid siege to towns and neighborhoods, not inflamed ethnic tensions, not prevented Iraqis from working to repair the damage, and not driven millions of Iraqis out of their homes, then the result might not have been ideal, but it almost certainly would have involved less misery than what was actually done, following the pottery barn rule.
Or what if the United States had congratulated Iraq on its disarmament, of which the U.S. government was fully apprised? What if we had removed our military from the area, eliminated the no-fly zones, and ended the economic sanctions, the sanctions Secretary of State Madeleine Albright had been discussing in 1996 in this exchange on the television program 60 Minutes:
"LESLEY STAHL: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?
ALBRIGHT: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it."
Was it? So much was accomplished that a war was still needed in 2003? Those children couldn't have been spared for seven more years and identical political results? What if the United States had worked with the demilitarized Iraq to encourage a demilitarized Middle East, including all its nations in a nuclear-free zone, encouraging Israel to dismantle its nuclear stockpile instead of encouraging Iran to try to acquire one? George W. Bush had lumped Iran, Iraq, and North Korea into "an axis of evil," attacked unarmed Iraq, ignored nuclear-armed North Korea, and begun threatening Iran. If you were Iran, what would you have wanted?
What if the United States had provided economic aid to Iraq, Iran, and other nations in the region, and led an effort to provide them with (or at least lifted sanctions that are preventing the construction of) windmills, solar panels, and a sustainable energy infrastructure, thus bringing electricity to more rather than fewer people? Such a project could not possibly have cost anything like the trillions of dollars wasted on war between 2003 and 2010. For an additional relatively tiny expense, we could have created a major program of student exchange between Iraqi, Iranian, and U.S. schools. Nothing discourages war like bonds of friendship and family. Why wouldn't such an approach have been at least as responsible and serious and moral as announcing our ownership of somebody else's country just because we'd bombed it?
Part of the disagreement, I think, arises over a failure to imagine what the bombing looked like. If we think of it as a clean and harmless series of blips on a video game, during which "smart bombs" improve Baghdad by "surgically" removing its evildoers, then moving on to the next step of fulfilling our duties as the new landlords is easier. If, instead, we imagine the actual and horrific mass-murder and maiming of children and adults that went on when Baghdad was bombed, then our thoughts turn to apologies and reparations as our first priority, and we begin to question whether we have the right or the standing to behave as owners of what remains. In fact, smashing a pot at the Pottery Barn would result in our paying for the damage and apologizing, not overseeing the smashing of more pots.
Another major source of the disagreement between pro- and anti-potterybarners, I think, comes down to a powerful and insidious force known as racism. Remember President McKinley's proposing to govern the Philippines because the poor Filipinos couldn't possibly do it themselves? William Howard Taft, the first American Governor-General of the Philippines, called the Filipinos "our little brown brothers." In Vietnam, when the Vietcong appeared willing to sacrifice a great many of their lives without surrendering, that became evidence that they placed little value on life, which became evidence of their evil nature, which became grounds for killing even more of them.
If we set aside the pottery barn rule for a moment and think, instead, of the golden rule, we get a very different sort of guidance. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." If another nation invaded our country, and the result was immediately chaos; if it was unclear what form of government, if any, would emerge; if the nation was in danger of breaking into pieces; if there might be civil war or anarchy; and if nothing was certain, what is the very first thing we would want the invading military to do? That's right: get the hell out of our country! And in fact that's what the majority of Iraqis in numerous polls have told the United States to do for years. George McGovern and William Polk wrote in 2006:
"Not surprisingly, most Iraqis think that the United States will never withdraw unless forced to do so. This feeling perhaps explains why a USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll showed that eight out of every ten Iraqis regarded America not as a 'liberator' but as an occupier, and 88 percent of the Sunni Muslim Arabs favored violent attacks on American troops."
Of course, those puppets and politicians benefitting from an occupation prefer to see it continue. But even within the puppet government, the Iraqi Parliament refused to approve the treaty that Presidents Bush and Maliki drew up in 2008 to extend the occupation for three years, unless the people were given a chance to vote it up or down in a referendum. That vote was later repeatedly denied precisely because everyone knew what the outcome would have been. Owning people out of the kindness of our hearts is one thing, I believe, but doing it against their will is quite another. And who has ever willfully chosen to be owned?
Is generosity really a motivator behind our wars, whether the launching of them or the prolonging of them? If a nation is generous toward other nations, it seems likely it would be so in more than one way. Yet, if you examine a list of nations ranked by the charity they give to others and a list of nations ranked by their military expenditures, there's no correlation. In a list of the wealthiest two-dozen countries, ranked in terms of foreign giving, the United States is near the bottom, and a significant chunk of the "aid" we give to other countries is actually weaponry. If private giving is factored in with public giving, the United States moves only slightly higher in the list. If the money that recent immigrants send to their own families were included, the United States might move up a bit more, although that seems like a very different kind of giving.
When you look at the top nations in terms of military spending per- capita, none of the wealthy nations from Europe, Asia, or North America make it anywhere near the top of the list, with the single exception of the United States. Our country comes in eleventh, with the 10 nations above it in military spending per capita all from the Middle East, North Africa, or central Asia. Greece comes in 23rd, South Korea 36th, and the United Kingdom 42nd, with all other European and Asian nations further down the list. In addition, the United States is the top exporter of private arms sales, with Russia the only other country in the world that comes even remotely close to it.
More importantly, of the 22 major wealthy countries, most of which give more to foreign charity than do we in the United States, 20 haven't started any wars in generations, if ever, and at most have taken small roles in U.S.-dominated war coalitions; one of the other two countries, South Korea, only engages in hostilities with North Korea with U.S. approval; and the last country, the United Kingdom, primarily follows the U.S. lead.
Civilizing the heathen was always viewed as a generous mission (except by the heathen). Manifest destiny was believed to be an expression of God's love. According to anthropologist Clark Wissler, "when a group comes into a new solution to one of its important cultural problems, it becomes zealous to spread that idea abroad, and is moved to embark upon an era of conquest to force the recognition of its merits." Spread? Spread? Where have we heard something about spreading an important solution? Oh, yes, I remember:
"And the second way to defeat the terrorists is to spread freedom. You see, the best way to defeat a society that is — doesn't have hope, a society where people become so angry they're willing to become suiciders, is to spread freedom, is to spread democracy." — President George W. Bush, June 8, 2005.
This isn't a stupid idea because Bush speaks hesitantly and invents the word "suiciders." It's a stupid idea because freedom and democracy cannot be imposed at gunpoint by a foreign force that thinks so little of the newly free people that it is willing to recklessly murder them. A democracy that is required beforehand to remain loyal to the United States is not a representative government, but rather some sort of strange hybrid with dictatorship. A democracy imposed in order to demonstrate to the world that our way is the best way is unlikely to create a government of, by, and for the people.
U.S. commander Stanley McChrystal described a planned but failed attempt to create a government in Marja, Afghanistan, in 2010; he said he would bring in a hand-picked puppet and a set of foreign handlers as "a government in a box." Wouldn't you want a foreign army to bring one of those to your town?
With 86 percent of Americans in a February 2010 CNN poll saying our own government is broken, do we have the know-how, never mind the authority, to impose a model of government on someone else? And if we did, would the military be the tool with which to do it?
Judging from past experience, creating a new nation by force usually fails. We generally call this activity "nation-building" even though it usually does not build a nation. In May 2003, two scholars at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace released a study of past U.S. attempts at nation building, examining — in chronological order — Cuba, Panama, Cuba again, Nicaragua, Haiti, Cuba yet again, the Dominican Republic, West Germany, Japan, the Dominican Republic again, South Vietnam, Cambodia, Grenada, Panama again, Haiti again, and Afghanistan. Of these 16 attempts at nation building, in only four, the authors concluded, was a democracy sustained as long as 10 years after the departure of U.S. forces.
By "departure" of U.S. forces, the authors of the above study clearly meant reduction, since U.S. forces have never actually departed. Two of the four countries were the completely destroyed and defeated Japan and Germany. The other two were U.S. neighbors — tiny Grenada and Panama. The so-called nation building in Panama is considered to have taken 23 years. That same length of time would carry the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq to 2024 and 2026 respectively.
Never, the authors found, has a surrogate regime supported by the United States, such as those in Afghanistan and Iraq, made the transition to democracy. The authors of this study, Minxin Pei and Sara Kasper, also found that creating lasting democracies had never been the primary goal:
"The primary goal of early U.S. nation-building efforts was in most cases strategic. In its first efforts, Washington decided to replace or support a regime in a foreign land to defend its core security and economic interests, not to build a democracy. Only later did America's political ideals and its need to sustain domestic support for nation building impel it to try to establish democratic rule in target nations."
Do you think an endowment for peace might be biased against war? Surely the Pentagon-created RAND Corporation must be biased in favor of war. And yet a RAND study of occupations and insurgencies in 2010, a study produced for the U.S. Marine Corps, found that 90 percent of insurgencies against weak governments, like Afghanistan's, succeed. In other words, the nation-building, whether or not imposed from abroad, fails.
In fact, even as war supporters were telling us to escalate and "stay the course" in Afghanistan in 2009 and 2010, experts from across the political spectrum were in agreement that doing so couldn't accomplish anything, much less bestow generous benefits on Afghans. Our ambassador, Karl Eikenberry, opposed an escalation in leaked cables. Numerous former officials in the military and the CIA favored withdrawal. Matthew Hoh, a senior U.S. civilian diplomat in Zabul Province and former marine captain, resigned and backed withdrawal. So did former diplomat Ann Wright who had helped reopen the embassy in Afghanistan in 2001. The National Security Advisor thought more troops would "just be swallowed up." A majority of the U.S. public opposed the war, and the opposition was even stronger among the Afghan people, especially in Kandahar, where a U.S. Army-funded survey found that 94 percent of Kandaharis wanted negotiations, not assault, and 85 percent said they viewed the Taliban as "our Afghan brothers."
Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and funder of the escalation, John Kerry noted that an assault on Marja that had been a test run for a larger assault on Kandahar had failed miserably. Kerry also noted that Taliban assassinations in Kandahar had begun when the United States announced a coming assault there. How then, he asked, could the assault stop the killings? Kerry and his colleagues, just before dumping another $33.5 billion into the Afghanistan escalation in 2010, pointed out that terrorism had been increasing globally during the "Global War on Terror." The 2009 escalation in Afghanistan had been followed by an 87 percent increase in violence, according to the Pentagon.
The military had developed, or rather revived from Vietnam days, a strategy for Iraq four years into that war that was also applied to Afghanistan, a kind-hearted strategy known as Counter-Insurgency. On paper, this required an 80 percent investment in civilian efforts at "winning hearts and minds" and 20 percent in military operations. But in both countries, this strategy was only applied to rhetoric, not reality. Actual investment in non-military operations in Afghanistan never topped 5 percent, and the man in charge of it, Richard Holbrooke, described the civilian mission as "supporting the military."
Rather than "spreading freedom" with bombs and guns, what would have been wrong with spreading knowledge? If learning leads to the development of democracy, why not spread education? Why not provide funding for children's health and schools, instead of melting the skin off children with white phosphorous? Nobel Peace Laureate Shirin Ebadi proposed, following the September 11, 2001, terrorism, that instead of bombing Afghanistan, the United States could build schools in Afghanistan, each named for and honoring someone killed in the World Trade Center, thus building appreciation for generous aid and understanding of the damage done by violence. Whatever you think of such an approach, it's hard to argue it wouldn't have been generous and perhaps even in line with the principle of loving one's enemies.
The hypocrisy of generously imposed occupations is perhaps most apparent when done in the name of uprooting previous occupations. When Japan kicked European colonialists out of Asian nations only to occupy them itself, or when the United States liberated Cuba or the Philippines in order to dominate those countries itself, the contrast between word and deed jumped out at you. In both of these examples, Japan and the United States offered civilization, culture, modernization, leadership, and mentoring, but they offered them at the barrel of a gun whether anyone wanted them or not. And if anyone did, well, their story got top play back home. When Americans were hearing tales of German barbarity in Belgium and France during World War I, Germans were reading accounts of how dearly the occupied French loved their benevolent German occupiers. And when can you not count on the New York Times to locate an Iraqi or an Afghan who's worried that the Americans might leave too soon?
Any occupation must work with some elite group of natives, who in turn will of course support the occupation. But the occupier should not mistake such support for majority opinion, as the United States has been in the habit of doing since at least 1899. Nor should a "native face" on a foreign occupation be expected to fool people:
"The British, like the Americans,…believed that native troops would be less unpopular than foreigners. That proposition is…dubious: if native troops are perceived to be puppets of foreigners, they may be even more violently opposed than the foreigners themselves." Native troops may also be less loyal to the occupier's mission and less trained in the ways of the occupying army. This soon leads to blaming the same deserving people on whose behalf we've attacked their country for our inability to leave it. They are now "violent, incompetent, and untrustworthy," as the McKinley White House portrayed the Filipinos, and as the Bush and Obama White Houses portrayed Iraqis and Afghans.
In an occupied nation with its own internal divisions, minority groups may truly fear mistreatment at the hands of the majority should the foreign occupation end. That problem is a reason for future Bushes to heed the advice of future Powells and not invade in the first place. It's a reason not to inflame internal divisions, as occupiers tend to do, much preferring that the people kill each other than that they unite against foreign forces. And it's a reason to encourage international diplomacy and positive influence on the nation while withdrawing and paying reparations.
The feared post-occupation violence is not, however, usually a persuasive argument for extending the occupation. For one thing, it's an argument for permanent occupation. For another, the bulk of the violence that is depicted back in the imperial nation as a civil war is still usually violence directed against the occupiers and their collaborators. When the occupation ends, so does much of the violence. This has been demonstrated in Iraq as troops have reduced their presence; the violence has decreased accordingly.
Most of the violence in Basra ended when the British troops there ceased patrolling to control the violence. The plan for withdrawal from Iraq that George McGovern and William Polk (the former senator and a descendant of former President Polk, respectively) published in 2006 proposed a temporary bridge to complete independence, advice that went unheeded:
"The Iraqi government would be wise to request the short-term services of an international force to police the country during and immediately after the period of American withdrawal. Such a force should be on only temporary duty, with a firm date fixed in advance for withdrawal. Our estimate is that Iraq would need it for about two years after the American withdrawal is complete. During this period, the force probably could be slowly but steadily cut back, both in personnel and in deployment. Its activities would be limited to enhancing public security.…It would have no need for tanks or artillery or offensive aircraft .…It would not attempt…to battle the insurgents. Indeed, after the withdrawal of American and British regular troops and the roughly 25,000 foreign mercenaries, the insurgency, which was aimed at achieving that objective, would lose public support.…Then gunmen would either put down their weapons or become publicly identified as outlaws. This outcome has been the experience of insurgencies in Algeria, Kenya, Ireland (Eire), and elsewhere."
It's not just the continuation of wars that is justified as generosity. Initiating fights with evil forces in defense of justice, even while it inspires less than angelic sentiments in some war supporters, is generally also presented as pure selflessness and benevolence. "He is keeping the World safe for Democracy. Enlist and Help Him," read a U.S. World War I poster, fulfilling President Wilson's directive that the Committee on Public Information present the "absolute justice of America's cause," and the "absolute selflessness of America's aims." When President Franklin Roosevelt persuaded Congress to create a military draft and to allow the "lending" of weaponry to Britain before the United States entered World War II, he compared his Lend-Lease program to loaning a hose to a neighbor whose house was on fire.
Then, in the summer of 1941, Roosevelt pretended to go fishing and actually met with Prime Minister Churchill off the coast of Newfoundland. FDR came back to Washington, D.C., describing a moving ceremony during which he and Churchill had sung "Onward Christian Soldiers." FDR and Churchill released a joint statement created without the peoples or legislatures of either country that laid out the principles by which the two leaders' nations would fight the war and shape the world afterwards, despite the fact that the United States was still not in the war. This statement, which came to be called the Atlantic Charter, made clear that Britain and the United States favored peace, freedom, justice, and harmony and had no interest whatsoever in building empires. These were noble sentiments on behalf of which millions could engage in horrible violence.
Until it entered World War II, the United States generously provided the machinery of death to Britain. Following this model, both weapons and soldiers sent to Korea and subsequent actions have for decades been described as "military aid." Thus the idea that war is doing someone a favor was built into the very language used to name it. The Korean War, as a U.N.-sanctioned "police action," was described not only as charity, but also as the world community's hiring a sheriff to enforce the peace, just as good Americans would have done in a Western town. But being the world's policeman never won over those who believed it was well intentioned but didn't think the world deserved the favor. Nor did it win over those who saw it as just the latest excuse for war. A generation after the Korean War, Phil Ochs was singing:
Come, get out of the way, boys
Quick, get out of the way
You'd better watch what you say, boys
Better watch what you say
We've rammed in your harbor and tied to your port
And our pistols are hungry and our tempers are short
So bring your daughters around to the port
'Cause we're the Cops of the World, boys
We're the Cops of the World
By 1961, the cops of the world were in Vietnam, but President Kennedy's representatives there thought a lot more cops were needed and knew the public and the president would be resistant to sending them. For one thing, you couldn't keep up your image as the cops of the world if you sent in a big force to prop up an unpopular regime. What to do? What to do? Ralph Stavins, coauthor of an extensive account of Vietnam War planning, recounts that General Maxwell Taylor and Walt W. Rostow,
". . . wondered how the United States could go to war while appearing to preserve the peace. While they were pondering this question, Vietnam was suddenly struck by a deluge. It was as if God had wrought a miracle. American soldiers, acting on humanitarian impulses, could be dispatched to save Vietnam not from the Viet Cong, but from the floods."
For the same reason that Smedley Butler suggested restricting U.S. military ships to within 200 miles of the United States, one might suggest restricting the U.S. military to fighting wars. Troops sent for disaster relief have a way of creating new disasters. U.S. aid is often suspect, even if well-intended by U.S. citizens, because it comes in the form of a fighting force ill equipped and ill prepared to provide aid. Whenever there's a hurricane in Haiti, nobody can tell whether the United States has provided aid workers or imposed martial law. In many disasters around the world the cops of the world don't come at all, suggesting that where they do arrive the purpose may not be entirely pure.
In 1995 the cops of the world stumbled into Yugoslavia out of the goodness of their hearts. President Clinton explained:
"America's role will not be about fighting a war. It will be about helping the people of Bosnia to secure their own peace agreement.…In fulfilling this mission, we will have the chance to help stop the killing of innocent civilians, especially children…."
Fifteen years later, it's hard to see how Bosnians have secured their own peace. U.S. and other foreign troops have never left, and the place is governed by a European-backed Office of High Representative.
Women gained rights in Afghanistan in the 1970s, before the United States intentionally provoked the Soviet Union to invade and armed the likes of Osama bin Laden to fight back. There has been little good news for women since. The Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) was established in 1977 as an independent political/ social organization of Afghan women in support of human rights and social justice. In 2010, RAWA released a statement commenting on the American pretense of occupying Afghanistan for the sake of its women:
"[The United States and its allies] empowered the most brutal terrorists of the Northern Alliance and the former Russian puppets — the Khalqis and Parchamis — and by relying on them, the US imposed a puppet government on Afghan people. And instead of uprooting its Taliban and Al-Qaeda creations, the United States and NATO continue to kill our innocent and poor civilians, mostly women and children, in their vicious air raids."
In the view of many women leaders in Afghanistan, the invasion and occupation have done no good for women's rights, and have achieved that result at the cost of bombing, shooting, and traumatizing thousands of women. That's not an unfortunate and unexpected side effect. That is the essence of war, and it was perfectly predictable. The Taliban's tiny force succeeds in Afghanistan because people support it. This results in the United States indirectly supporting it as well.
At the time of this writing, for many months and likely for years, at least the second largest and probably the largest source of revenue for the Taliban has been U.S. taxpayers. We lock people away for giving a pair of socks to the enemy, while our own government serves as chief financial sponsor. WARLORD, INC.: Extortion and Corruption Along the U.S. Supply Chain in Afghanistan, is a 2010 report from the Majority Staff of the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs in the U.S. House of Representatives. The report documents payoffs to the Taliban for safe passage of U.S. goods, payoffs very likely greater than the Taliban's profits from opium, its other big money maker. This has long been known by top U.S. officials, who also know that Afghans, including those fighting for the Taliban, often sign up to receive training and pay from the U.S. military and then depart, and in some cases sign up again and again.
This must be unknown to Americans supporting the war. You can't support a war in which you're funding both sides, including the side against which you are supposedly defending Afghanistan's women.
Senator Barack Obama campaigned for the presidency in 2007 and 2008 on a platform that called for escalating the war in Afghanistan. He did just that shortly after taking office, even before devising any plan for what to do in Afghanistan. Just sending more troops was an end in itself. But candidate Obama focused on opposing the other war – the War on Iraq — and promising to end it. He won the Democratic primary largely because he was lucky enough not to have been in Congress in time to vote for the initial authorization of the Iraq war. That he voted over and over again to fund it was never mentioned in the media, as senators are simply expected to fund wars whether they approve of them or not.
Obama did not promise a speedy withdrawal of all troops from Iraq. In fact, there was a period in which he never let a campaign stop go by without declaring "We have to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in." He must have mumbled this phrase even in his sleep. During the same election a group of Democratic candidates for Congress published what they titled "A Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq." The need to be responsible and careful was premised on the idea that ending a war quickly would be irresponsible and careless. This notion had served to keep the Afghanistan and Iraq wars going for years already and would help keep them going for years to come.
But ending wars and occupations is necessary and just, not reckless and cruel. And it need not amount to "abandonment" of the world. Our elected officials find it hard to believe, but there are ways other than war of relating to people and governments. When a petty crime is underway, our top priority is to stop it, after which we look into ways of setting things right, including deterring future crimes of the same sort and repairing the damage. When the largest crime we know of is underway, we do not need to be as slow about ending it as possible. We need to end it immediately. That is the kindest thing we can do for the people of the country we are at war with. We owe them that favor above all others. We know their nation may have problems when our soldiers leave, and that we are to blame for some of those problems. But we also know that they will have no hope of good lives as long as the occupation continues.
RAWA's position on the occupation of Afghanistan is that the post-occupation period will be worse the longer the occupation continues. So, the first priority is to immediately end the war. War kills people, and there is nothing worse. As we will see in chapter eight, war primarily kills civilians, although the value of the military- civilian distinction seems limited. If another nation occupied the United States, surely we would not approve of killing those Americans who fought back and thereby lost their status as civilians. War kills children, above all, and horrifically traumatizes many of the children it does not kill or maim. This is not exactly news, yet it must be constantly relearned as a corrective to frequent claims that wars have been sanitized and bombs made "smart" enough to kill only the people who really need killing.
In 1890 a U.S. veteran told his children about a war he'd been part of in 1838, the forced relocation of Cherokee Indians:
"In another home was a frail Mother, apparently a widow and three small children, one just a baby. When told that she must go, the Mother gathered the children at her feet, prayed a humble prayer in her native tongue, patted the old family dog on the head, told the faithful creature goodbye, with a baby strapped on her back and leading a child with each hand started on her exile. But the task was too great for that frail Mother. A stroke of heart failure relieved her suffering. She sunk and died with her baby on her back, and her other two children clinging to her hands.
"Chief Junaluska who had saved President [Andrew] Jackson's life at the battle of Horse Shoe witnessed this scene, the tears gushing down his cheeks and lifting his cap he turned his face toward the heavens and said, 'Oh my God, if I had known at the battle of the Horse Shoe what I know now, American history would have been differently written."
In a video produced in 2010 by Rethink Afghanistan, Zaitullah Ghiasi Wardak describes a night raid in Afghanistan. Here's the English translation: "I am the son of Abdul Ghani Khan. I am from the Wardak Province, Chak District, Khan Khail Village. At approximately 3:00 a.m. the Americans besieged our home, climbed on top of the roof by ladders.… They took the three youngsters outside, tied their hands, put black bags over their heads. They treated them cruelly and kicked them, told them to sit there and not move.
"At this time, one group knocked on the guest room. My nephew said: 'When I heard the knock I begged the Americans: "My grandfather is old and hard of hearing. I will go with you and get him out for you."' He was kicked and told not to move. Then they broke the door of the guest room. My father was asleep but he was shot 25 times in his bed.…Now I don't know, what was my father's crime? And what was the danger from him? He was 92 years old."
War would be the greatest evil on earth even if it cost no money, used up no resources, left no environmental damage, expanded rather than curtailed the rights of citizens back home, and even if it accomplished something worthwhile. Of course, none of those conditions are possible.
The problem with wars is not that soldiers aren't brave or well intentioned, or that their parents didn't raise them well. Ambrose Bierce, who survived the U.S. Civil War to write about it decades later with a brutal honesty and lack of romanticism that was new to war stories, defined "Generous" as follows: "Originally this word meant noble by birth and was rightly applied to a great multitude of persons. It now means noble by nature and is taking a bit of a rest."
Cynicism is funny, but not accurate. Generosity is very real, which is of course why war propagandists falsely appeal to it on behalf of their wars. Many young Americans actually signed up to risk their lives in the "Global War on Terror" believing they would be defending their nation from a hideous fate. That takes determination, bravery, and generosity. Those badly deceived young people, as well as those less befuddled who nonetheless enlisted for the latest wars, were not sent off as traditional cannon fodder to fight an army in a field. They were sent to occupy countries in which their supposed enemies looked just like everyone else. They were sent into the land of SNAFU, from which many never return in one piece.
SNAFU is, of course, the army acronym for the state of war: Situation Normal: All Fucked Up.
David Swanson is the author of "War Is A Lie" from which this is excerpted: http://warisalie.org
- davidswanson's blog
- Login to post comments
- Email this page
- Printer-friendly version
"Statistics Canada has contracted US armament manufacturer Lockheed Martin "in support" of 2011 Census"
by Terry Burrows, Feb. 23, 2011
That is no minor problem. What does anything of the US or any other country have to do with census-taking in any, except their own country? Census-taking should be conducted in a strictly national way, not internationally. MYOB should be strictly enforced.
"Africa: Global NATO Seeks To Recruit 50 New Military Partners"
by Rick Rozoff, Stop NATO, Feb. 20, 2011
A recent article in Kenya's Africa Review cited sources in the African Union (AU) disclosing that the 28-member North Atlantic Treaty Organization is preparing to sign a military partnership treaty with the 53-nation AU.
"In its 2010 annual summit, Nato set itself a target to be a global 'security guarantor' by the year 2020." [5]
That is, the world's only military bloc can further expand from one that grew from 16 to 28 members in a decade – 1999-2009 – into one that will become truly international in scope with nearly 100 military partners. Partners and members on every inhabited continent. Two-thirds of the nations in the world.
They dwarf the ancient Rome.
Global enslavement! It's unsustainable, but the power elites are short-sighted.
- Login to post comments
I've had this bookmarked since it was first posted, so am nearly two weeks late in making this post, but it's because of not reading the whole article until now; usually looking at what's newly posted each day, before reading bookmarked articles that I want to eventually read. And this is an excellent article by David Swanson, though I'll add a comment or two.
In fact, even as war supporters were telling us to escalate and "stay the course" in Afghanistan in 2009 and 2010, experts from across the political spectrum were in agreement that doing so couldn't accomplish anything, much less bestow generous benefits on Afghans. Our ambassador, Karl Eikenberry, opposed an escalation in leaked cables. Numerous former officials in the military and the CIA favored withdrawal.
That's good. Former military officers and CIA people should have favored and should still favor withdrawal, so when they do and they make this view known, then it's great. The problem is their silence before becoming former military offices and CIA agents or officials. They need to speak up and strongly so before retiring, but those who do are extremely few. It very seldomly occurs. And that makes their speaking out only after retirement much less important than their then-views would be if they had not [chosen] to stay silent before retirement.
Some might stay publicly silent before retiring, while trying to internally try to do whatever they can think of trying to do in order to try to bring good internal influence. That's a lot of trying. If they do that though, then it clearly is futile, not making any difference with respect to influencing proper changes in decisions made for war. When the war elites are determined to war, then it's not people of better or proper, ethical views in the military and CIA who are going to be able to influence the war deciders to change course.
President JFK was C-in-C and a former military officer or soldier, who opposed and stopped war plans and mongering of the Joint Chiefs, but we also know that he wasn't allowed to live for very long after being a "nuisance" to the war elites and mongers. But we clearly don't have any examples of in-service or actively serving military officers and CIA people effectively influencing good changes in hellish courses the elite criminals of the US were determined to follow and order.
John Maxwell quit when he learned what CIA ops was really about and then spoke out greatly about what he had learned of the dark side and reality of the CIA. Phil Agee and Ralph McGehee, as well as a few other former CIA people did the same thing. But they're extremely few compared to the number that we should have who would have done the same thing. MOST stay silent during service, before retiring, and apparently most remain silent after retirement. And those who speak out after retiring rarely are comparable to John Maxwell, Phil Agee and Ralph McGehee. Most CIA people who speak out after retiring reveal little, if anything at all, about the crimes of the CIA's dark side. And we have the same "picture" with former military officers.
Maybe that's just a public impression of someone who hasn't read everything these people have said after retiring. But I don't know of any who've put their lives at risk like the afore-named former CIA officers, Maxwell, Agee and McGehee. There's Michael C. Ruppert, as well as Michael Levine, but they're not former military or CIA; they're former police and DEA officers.
I nevertheless appreciate it when former military and CIA officials speak out in good and reality-grounded ways. It's just that silence during years of service must stop. They need to speak out as soon as they know that the government is being misdirected and badly so, when the internal influence they try to bear fails anyway. Their duty is not to the President and other criminals. Their duty is to abide by the Constitution, defend the country, and, therefore, to alert the country, so population, when they are being wrongly and criminally misdirected. So they should not stay silent during service if their efforts to bear righteous influence fails. When that happens, they have to alert the population. The government belongs to the population!
Kerry and his colleagues, just before dumping another $33.5 billion into the Afghanistan escalation in 2010, pointed out that terrorism had been increasing globally during the "Global War on Terror." The 2009 escalation in Afghanistan had been followed by an 87 percent increase in violence, according to the Pentagon.
The increase in terrorism remains to be proven. There was an increase in terrorism alerts, but many of these were bogus, and some were about so-called planned terrorism that was instigated by undercover FBI agents or officers, f.e. Some cases were very false. And "terrorism" would need to be defined. When Washington uses the word, then it's seldom in the sense of the real definition for terrorism. It's usually more Washington bs.
"Suiciders" are not terrorists. They are sometimes coaxed into doing this through covert "black" ops of the US.
"Who Is Responsible for Suicide-Bomber Academies?"
by Peter Chamberlin, Nov. 8, 2010
Some, perhaps many, people might not want to believe that what Peter Chamberlin explains very well is credible, but these people need to wake up to [reality], because it's often very dark, evil. Learn from John Maxwell, Phil Agee, Ralph McGehee, Michael C. Ruppert, Michael Levine, Michael Springman(n), John Perkins, "psychology" projects of the CIA (forgetting the names of these projects), et cetera. John Maxwell and others have given good information about Operation Phoenix, and that one is relevant for learning that reality has a very, very dark, evil side to it that is usually covert, hidden.
Violence has increased, but for a very different reason and Washington et al are the reason.
Rather than "spreading freedom" with bombs and guns, what would have been wrong with spreading knowledge? If learning leads to the development of democracy, why not spread education? Why not provide funding for children's health and schools, instead of melting the skin off children with white phosphorous? Nobel Peace Laureate Shirin Ebadi proposed, following the September 11, 2001, terrorism, that instead of bombing Afghanistan, the United States could build schools in Afghanistan, each named for and honoring someone killed in the World Trade Center, thus building appreciation for generous aid and understanding of the damage done by violence. Whatever you think of such an approach, it's hard to argue it wouldn't have been generous and perhaps even in line with the principle of loving one's enemies.
Afghans were not enemies of the US and had nothing to do with 9/11, which definitely did not happen as GW Bush et al said it did. Sure, they were right about terrorists flying planes into the WTC Towers and Pentagon, but Bush said it wasn't the Taliban, it certainly wasn't any other Afghans, and the terrorists responsible for these attacks were not the people GW et al claimed they were. Many people still have a considerable amount of very serious learning to do about the 9/11 attacks, and people sincerely wanting to learn from [good], even excellent research that's been performed by very qualified people, need to understand that there are 9/11 "truthers" who have been and are still pushing debunked theories, some of which were or are so ridiculous that they only serve Washington's interests, which are to discredit the serious and competent, mature 9/11 researchers and activists, who include members of Congress, political and former political officials of other countries, former intelligence and military people of the US, and many other people respected by many "liberals" and also "conservatives". They all support the [need] for a new, independent and thorough investigation into 9/11, because, for anyone who's seriously read the [qualitative] research results, 9/11 did not happen according to the "official story", which may be 90% right, but is grotesquely wrong, deceitful for the rest and that or those parts are critically important. It is essential to get the real truth for those parts of the "official story".
It was easy for Washington to tell 90% of the truth while lying about and covering up the rest. This 90% part is elementary knowledge. The rest consists of the most crucial questions needing to be and still waiting for answers.
No one should speak of 9/11 as if the "official story" is 100% true. It is not, never will be. And cover-up, very, clearly deliberate cover-up is what happened and continues. No one should speak or write in any ways that even only leave it inferred that the "official story" is wholly true and that Washington was innocent in the 9/11 attacks. A lot of very strong, irrefutably strong evidence proves that Washington is very guilty in the 9/11 attacks. We also have evidence that shows, proves that 9/11 was or very much was an inside job.
The evidence is available to everyone who has enough courage to learn what it is and own up to it, instead of living in denial, as if this evidence does not exist.
Jim Hoffman's Web sites, www.911review.com, www.911research.wtc7.net and www.wtc7.net are a good starting point, and people should make sure to check his pages for recommended Web sites, one of which is www.visibility911.com.
The following is for a very good (audio) interview posted Feb. 8th and of around an hour and 24 minutes with Dr Legge, who's a PhD in Chemistry. The interviewer is John Bursill, who seems to be British, or maybe Australian.
"Dr Frank Legge on Visibility 9-11: Mounting Evidence Shows Boeing 757-200 Impact with Pentagon Probable"
A lot of "kiddie" 9/11 "truthers" continue to pretend that Flight AA 77 didn't hit the Pentagon and some claim that there weren't witnesses or enough of them. Such people need to wake up.
"9/11 and the Pentagon Attack: What Witnesses Described"
April 7, 2007
"ERROR: 'Aircraft Crashes Always Leave Large Debris'"
"ERROR: 'The Pentagon Attack Left No Aircraft Debris'"
"The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence Shows"
by Jim Hoffman, Version 0.9, March 28, 2006
I don't know if Alex Jones is still saying that AA 77 and no similar plane hit the Pentagon, but James Fetzer, Morgan Reynolds, and others are, and these people have a lot of fans. Alex Jones is not a James Fetzer or Morgan Reynolds, but if he still claims no plane hit the Pentagon or that AA 77 didn't, then it's time to learn from the [qualitative] research that's been done. A lot of "truthers" have been pushing non-credible claims and this hurts the serious people who know it's important, that is, essential, to be very careful while demanding and supporting the demand for a real investigation into 9/11.
Washington is the terrorist. And like a lot of people like to say, "Qui bono?". Certainly not the Taliban and other Afghans, Iraqis, or any other people of countries targeted by Washington and its ruling elites, that's for sure; beyond any doubt. Always ask, "Qui bono?", before believing the people who actually constitute the answer to this question.
Like Dr Legge basically says, paraphrased, the lie about 9/11 is so extremely bad that it had to be enrobed in 90% truth. Tell a lot of recognizable truth when telling a major lie and the lie passes for truth, because the general population isn't studied, alert, vigilant, reality-based, and so on; the general population is naive and gullible and treats the lie part as surely truthful, because of recognizing that the rest of what is said is (obviously) true.
Deception is a game wicked people play; well, evil deception is, anyway. We can deceive people to be funny without causing any harm or injustice. But that definitely is not the kind of deception game that Washington plays. Its deceptions are always malevolant.
So-called "Nobel Peace Laureate" Shirin Ebadi really needs to wake up. Afghans are not to blame for 9/11 and must not be treated as if they or any of them are. Being a Nobel Peace Laureate usually is not worth noting, except when wanting to point out the number of rogue, hellishly criminal people who've been awarded this clownistic peace prize. Nobel has made some worthy awards, but has denied wholly deserving others, including Kathy Kelly, and the award has been given to many extremely criminal people. It definitely is a non-impressive title, and for the people who got it and really merit it, it's definitely not this award that is of value; it's the work those people did that is of value, great value. And their work would be known and loved even if the Nobel Committee or anything like it existed. It's really just a stupid human institution, like many other stupid things humans do and have done. Perhaps many people, in the US anyway, think it's important, but it really is of no real or serious value.
Any occupation must work with some elite group of natives, who in turn will of course support the occupation. But the occupier should not mistake such support for majority opinion, as the United States has been in the habit of doing since at least 1899. Nor should a "native face" on a foreign occupation be expected to fool people:
Washington is not fooled; only the population of the US is fooled, repetitively fooled by Washington's lies, stage ops, etc.
"The British, like the Americans,…believed that native troops would be less unpopular than foreigners. That proposition is…dubious: if native troops are perceived to be puppets of foreigners, they may be even more violently opposed than the foreigners themselves." Native troops may also be less loyal to the occupier's mission and less trained in the ways of the occupying army. This soon leads to blaming the same deserving people on whose behalf we've attacked their country for our inability to leave it. They are now "violent, incompetent, and untrustworthy," as the McKinley White House portrayed the Filipinos, and as the Bush and Obama White Houses portrayed Iraqis and Afghans.
And as Washington et al want us to believe about the Congolese, Palestinians, Haitians, and others, today.
SNAFU is, of course, the army acronym for the state of war: Situation Normal: All Fucked Up.
Definitely "all fucked up", all and extremely fucked up.
Excellent article!
- Login to post comments


text:
Partnering with clients to provide on-demand contract lawyers, giving in-house legal teams the confidence to be agile.
David Poulton (Partner, Victoria) is a highly regarded advisory and litigation lawyer who advises on insurance and corporate risk and media litigation. David regularly acts for insurers, related entities and corporations in a wide range of insurance and liability matters and has particular expertise in public and product liability claims and class actions.
David has extensive government experience that includes many years' experience in advising the Victorian State Government in relation to risk management and litigation issues. He also works extensively in the Insurance and Media and Communications industries.
David has drafted insurance policies and advised on existing policies. He has managed a substantial portfolio of personal injury claims including product liability, workers'compensation, WorkCover, toxic torts, asbestos litigation and medical negligence. His strong media litigation credentials include providing advice in defamation and contempt cases, as well as providing pre-publication advice to various publishers. David's significant administrative law experience includes acting in disciplinary matters on behalf of various sporting bodies, primarily in the racing industry. His diverse and far reaching experience extends to maritime law and litigation, as well as advising educational bodies in relation to legal issues in schools and other educational institutions.
David is experienced in handling matters in courts throughout Australia, including appeals to the Court of Appeal and High Court on behalf of Worksafe Victoria. His impressive track record in class actions and mass tort litigation includes the Kraft Peanut Butter class action, which resulted in the first ever settlement of a Federal Court class action under the product liability provisions of the Trade Practices Act. David also acted as Independent Claims Administrator in connection with the efficient adjudication of over 3000 claims arising from the Dow Corning Breast Implant Australian Settlement Scheme, a long running class action. The handling of the settlement received public commendation from the Supreme Court Judge in charge of the proceeding.
David provides strategic advice to Victorian WorkCover Authority in relation to all aspects of its business and is an advisor to WorkSafe Victoria on administrative law matters. His other longstanding clients include: The Age Company Ltd, Racing Victoria Ltd, and The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
He regularly speaks at seminars and conferences held by industry associations such as NIBA, the Australian and New Zealand Institute of Insurance and Finance and the Australian Insurance Law Association National Conference.
Disclaimer: Some of the information on this page refers to our experience in Australian States and Territories other than New South Wales. Due to advertising restrictions in New South Wales, we are prohibited from publishing information about some of the legal services which we provide in that State.
Areas of expertise include:
David advises government clients on, for example, probity issues arising from tenders, issues concerning legislative delegations, and issues arising under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. David has also provided advice in WorkSafe Victoria in relation to administrative decisions, delegations, inquiries and inquiries involving the Ombudsman. He has had a long term involvement in administrative law in the context of private disciplinary tribunals, in particular in the racing industry, having been the principal legal adviser to the Racing Victoria Limited Stewards since 1982.
David is experienced in handling class actions and mass tort litigation, including matters such as the Kraft Peanut Butter class action, which resulted in the first ever settlement of a Federal Court class action under the product liability provisions of the Trade Practices Act.
David has, since 1994, worked closely with the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. He has advised on claims involving schools, including many sensitive cases involving injuries to children, sexual assault and asbestos injury claims. He has also advised numerous other departments and agencies on litigation and risk issues, including DSE, Director of Housing, WorkSafe and Victoria Police.
Insurance and corporate risk forms a significant part of David's highly regarded advisory and litigation services. He has extensive experience acting for insurers, related entities and corporations in a wide range of insurance and liability matters. David has led litigation teams in many large and complex litigated general and products liability, professional indemnity and other insurance and corporate risk claims. He has drafted insurance policies and advised on existing policies, as well as having managed numerous personal injury matters including public and products liability, workers' compensation, WorkCover, toxic torts, and asbestos claims.
David has extensive experience in Maritime law having acted in all areas of maritime litigation, principally on behalf of marine insurers, freight forwarders and cargo interests. He is an expert in handling arrest, collision, and salvage matters, and all types of cargo-related claims and has frequently advised on and drafted maritime and transport-related documentation including bills of lading, terms and conditions of carriage, and similar documents.
David is a highly experienced media litigator. He has frequently provided advice in defamation and contempt cases as well as providing pre-publication advice to various publishers.
David is experienced in all aspects of WorkCover personal injury litigation. He has been the Worksafe Victoria client service partner on its personal injury claims panel since 2005 and in this time has handled a substantial portfolio of claims.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Order or view our beautiful guide with lodging, attractions, dining, events and more!
Receive monthly insider travel tips and news from Holland Michigan!
Enjoy Peachwave's finest fresh fruit, dry fruit, and other healthy & fun toppings. Mix, match, and swirl together your own creation!
Holland Convention & Visitors Bureau
78 E. 8th Street Holland
Holland, MI 49423
TollFree: (800) 506-1299
Phone: (616) 394-0000
Fax: (616) 394-0122


text:
Search for missing Tenn. hiker in Maine continuesAP , Associated Press
Jul. 31, 2013 6:22 PM ET
CARRABASSETT VALLEY, Maine (AP) — The Maine Warden Service is looking for help from searchers affiliated with the Maine Association of Search and Rescue as they continue their search for a hiker missing on a rugged section of the Appalachian Trail.
Geraldine Largay of Brentwood, Tenn., has been missing for more than a week.
The warden service had said the logistical and physical challenges involved in scouring the remote terrain restricted its ability to use untrained volunteers. So they're asking members of the MASAR to call the organization's duty officer.
Officials said they are planning for a more intensified search as more resources become available.
The 66-year-old Largay, an experienced hiker, contacted her husband from the top of Saddleback Mountain on July 21 but failed to meet him as planned the following day.
© The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.


text:
Related Publications
- Related by Publisher
- Related by Topic
Related Links
Inheriting the Planet: Judaism, Ecology and Art - A High School Curriculum
Coalition for the Advancement of Jewish Education (CAJE), Fall 2008
The author describes "eco-Judaism", a course that incorporates Jewish studies, environmental philosophy and the arts. The course intends to motivate students into an active, personal and political praxis of earth-care.
Topic: Curriculum, Youth Engagement, Environment, Education
Name of Publication: Jewish Education News
Editor: Resnick, Judi
Volume/Issue: Vol. 28/No. 2
Genre: Article
Coverage: United States
Language: English
Copyright Holder: Publisher
Copyright Information: Download for personal use, freely distribute link
Bibliographic Information:
Dresser, Karen. Inheriting the Planet: Judaism, Ecology and Art - A High School Curriculum. Jewish Education News. Coalition for the Advancement of Jewish Education (CAJE). Fall 2008: http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=4751
» View Publication
(PDF, 243 Kb)


text:
DATE: April 28, 2004
CONTACT: Laura Kiernan
Court Public Information Officer
CONCORDSenior Associate Justice John T. Broderick Jr. of the New Hampshire Supreme Court announced today that the Judicial Branch has signed a $1.9 million contract with Tyler Technologies Inc. of Dallas, Texas to provide the states trial courts with a case management system that for the first time will allow judges and staff to share information and documents electronically among the 65 trial courts in 43 locations around the state.
This is a giant step forward in our effort to modernize our court system so that we can provide the most efficient services to New Hampshire citizens, Justice Broderick said.
An up-to-date case management system is an essential tool for the effective administration of justice. It paves the way for enhanced public access to information and electronic filing and it will give us the management information we need to better evaluate our own work and allocation of scarce resources, Broderick added.
Tylers Odyssey Case Manager is a state-of-the-art WEB-based information storage and retrieval system that will replace the court systems long-outdated, DOS-based, information storage system which the states trial courts have used since the late 1980s.
The long-awaited update of the judicial branch computer systems was made possible by a $3.5 million appropriation in 2001 from the New Hampshire legislature. That appropriation allowed the courts to begin conversion to a Windows-based operating system from DOS, which was completed in 2003. It also provided funds for installation of the updated hardware needed to provide the court staff with the computer speed and memory needed to support Windows, and ultimately the modern case management system.
Our lawmakers recognized that we needed to move the court systems information technology system into the 21st century in order to meet the expectations of our constituents who want high quality service and ready access to information, said Donald D. Goodnow, the director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, which conducted the nationwide search for the case management system vendor.
The specifications and requirements for New Hampshires new case management system were first prepared by the National Center for State Courts, based in Williamsburg, Va., which is the nations leading non-profit institution providing guidance to state courts on technology and court operations. The NCSC, which participated in competitive bidding for that $33,400 preliminary contract, has been involved in trial court case management systems around the country.
Once the NCSC consultants prepared the specifications, the AOC solicited proposals from vendors around the country to adapt existing case management software to meet New Hampshires needs.
We carefully researched a number of vendors and we are confident that the Tyler information management product will allow our trial courts to deliver excellent service to the citizens of New Hampshire as our state constitution requires us to do, Goodnow said. Tylers Odyssey Case Manager is currently used in state courts in Minnesota and Florida.
Odyssey will provide the New Hampshire court system with the opportunity to automate all case management functions imaging, accounting, docketing, calendaring, reporting, and others for multiple case types, in a single software package.
Court administrators expect the full installation of the case management system in the Superior, District and Probate Courts will take at least two years. The Supreme Court installed a separate appellate case management system in 2002. At the trial court level, the system will be installed one site at a time, beginning in Concord District Court. The project will be supervised by the courts information technology manager, Thomas Edwards.
In addition to making it possible for electronic sharing of documents among court sites, the Odyssey Case Manager will also allow for enhanced exchange of documents and information with the Department of Safety, the Attorney General and the Department of Corrections.
The new case management system in the trial courts will also allow the court system to obtain management data that will enable court managers to better assess workloads and allocation of resources. The upgrade also means that the courts will be able to provide more complete information to policy making legislative committees.


text:
You have Adblock enabled. Adblock has been known to cause issues with site functionality. If you experience any difficulties, please try disabling Adblock. Close
Add to Favorite List:
Create a new folder:
Tristan Jaxx has been seeing Patrick Kennedy
Recognize a pornstar in this video?
Help make pornstars easier to find on Tube8 by telling us who is in this video.
Thanks! The pornstar names will be added to this video when enough users submit the same names.
You must enter a pornstar name that already exists in our database.
- Category: Anal
- Views: 6,740
- Added: 4 years ago
- Description: Tristan Jaxx has been seeing Patrick Kennedy on the side for six months and the younger blonde has a surprise in store for their anniversary. After the big reveal, things take a hot and heavy turn. Patrick sucks Tristan's huge, uncut cock before the Puert
- Tags: gay, jocks, latino, facial, blowjob, anal
- Pornstars: Tristan Jaxx Add Pornstar
- Favorite by: 0
- Report This Video
Video Comments
All Video Comments (0)


text:
036: Rapidfire #7
Another RAPIDFIRE episode of ShopTalk! No guests, no #hotdrama, no news, just all steaming hot question on answer action. We talk about (roughly in order):
- (2:07) How can you minify CSS when you use WordPress? WordPress needs a special block of comments at the top of the CSS file for the theme to work.
- (6:18) What do we need ems for? What is the payoff?
- (15:20) How we can create equal height div with only css?
- (22:42) What internet security software do we use for Mac?
- (26:46) Is there a way to style individual letters of a string with just CSS?
- (29:54) How do you integrate GitHub into a real web publishing workflow?
- (39:13) A client wants to hide page titles in WordPress. Isn't that bad SEO?
- (40:32) Understanding the purpose behind data-* attributes in HTML5.
- (47:44) Are frameworks just not for me, or am I missing the point?
- (20:30) Converge FL – A conference for web people who like to make the web a little happier and friendlier. Tallahassee, Florida on October 4-5, 2012.
- (36:48) Environments for Humans – Conference for web folks. InControl Conference is coming up in Honolulu, Hawaii this December 2-4, 2012. Use coupon code SHOPTALK for $100 off.
036: Rapidfire #7 [ 55:12 ] Download


text:
Alicia Keys opened up about scents while discussing her new campaign as the face of Givenchy's Dahlia Divin fragrance with Hello magazine.
An all-star team of rappers goes in on one of 2014's biggest stories.
When James Patterson wrote that "Eriq
LaSalle's Laws of Wrath is all thriller; no filler – a white-knuckled
treat…" the man wasn't lying.
Last Tuesday, compliments of the Executive Leadership Foundation's
annual Women's Leadership Forum, senior Black women corporate executives
were treated to a lively discussion on success, challenge and artistry
starring a panel of three generations of successful artists: poet Dr. Vivian Ayers-Allen, producer Debbie Allen and
actress Condola Rashad.
The story chronicling the life and times of groundbreaking African
composer Fela Kuti is the
subject of the new documentary, "Finding Fela."
Held at Harlow East in Sag Harbor, N.Y., the 5th Annual Diversity Affluence Brunch inspired conversation about the current state of the technology landscape and the
lack of African Americans in that space.
This year Director Dominga Martin was chosen as the only Brooklyn
filmmaker to participate in CinemadaMare- an annual film festival where
filmmakers from all over the world collaborate on short films while
traveling throughout Italy.
From the gliding, intricate footwork to the hunched shoulders and fluid movements, Boseman had nailed Brown's singular mannerisms and raspy voice.
Arresting street portraits capture spirit of Sudan's capital
Someday there may be a generation of kids who think bookstores are fictional creations found only in novels that come in the mail.


text:
Article Preview
HARRIS ADVOCATES 'OPEN HOSPITALS'; But Coler at Surgeons' Meeting Favors Restricting the Medical Personnel. TWENTY CLINICS ARE HELD Doctors at Sectional Meeting Hear Addresses on Problems of the Profession.
Surgical clinics, round table conferences and a community health meeting open to the public occupied the day and evening yesterday of the 250 doctors who attended the New York sectional meeting of the American College of Surgeons.
January 13, 1928
Thank you for visiting The New York Times archive.
New York Times subscribers* enjoy full access to TimesMachine—view 129 years of New York Times journalism, as it originally appeared. 99¢ for your first 4 weeks.
Or, purchase this article individually for $3.95 and download a high-resolution PDF.
* Does not include NYT Now or Premium Crosswords subscribers.
Already a subscriber? Log in to view this article »


text:
Memphis rappers Three 6 Mafia were trailblazers in the genre of crunk, a largely forgotten species of hip-hop characterized by big and ugly club beats and chanted (or yelled) semi-sensical choruses. Although the group have been around in various incarnations since 1991, their fortunes rose with crunk's in the early part of this decade. They even scored a 2006 Oscar for best original song for "It's Hard Out Here for a Pimp," from Hustle and Flow. (You might remember host Jon Stewart's commentary: "For those of you keeping score at home, Martin Scorsese, zero, Three 6 Mafia, one.")
Three 6's rise has also been tied to another trend in hip-hop: declining CD sales. But they were lucky enough to have MTV tap them for a reality series: Three 6 Mafia: Adventures in Hollyhood. And now the group, along with Sony, have cashed in again by releasing the entire eight-episode series on DVD.
The show chronicles the move by group members Juicy J and DJ Paul to LA and their largely unsuccessful attempts to break into the film industry. The guys are in way over their heads when it comes to acting auditions and pitching scripts, and the fish-out-of-water elements are played up, especially via Juicy J, the more naive of the pair. DJ Paul (who, like Juicy J, raps as well as produces) is the crew's elder statesman, reminiscent of Bernie Mac in his deadpan delivery.
Also living in the bland rented house are Juicy J's brother, rapper Project Pat (who barely speaks the entire season), and their assistants, Computer and Big Triece. Triece, we soon learn, didn't finish high school until he was 21, and his sister is still a virgin at 34. Needless to say, we're rooting for him from the start, and the most compelling episode sees him propose to his girlfriend. Nearly as large as Triece himself, she's called Sugar Foot, and Paul and J buy her a Greyhound ticket from Memphis to surprise her lover.
"Can I touch your booty?" asks Triece when she arrives, glowing with happiness. "Maybe later," she responds. Soon he gets down on bended knee and presents her with a ring (also paid for by the Three 6 guys). Later, we're treated to night-vision shots of the pair in bed, and at one point Sugar Foot raids the refrigerator for love-potion ingredients. "That's the first time in my life I've ever seen somebody mix sugar and ranch dressing together as a aphrodisiac," comments Paul. Against all odds, it's actually moving.
Less endearing is Ashton Kutcher's pimping out of Laguna Beach star Kristin Cavallari, whom he sets up with Juicy J. (Kutcher just happens to serve as one of Hollyhood's executive producers.) On their date, J starts a small fire at the table and then attempts to get Cavallari to come home with him. It's more awkward than Blind Date, Elimidate, and Date My Mom combined.
Table of Contents
Cover Archive
Masthead | Authors | Contact us
See all articles by:
All Slideshows


text:
You became pregnant in 2063, anally, but since there's no uterus the baby kept popping out. Then it died :-(<quoted text>
I told him 2069 is the best year. so he used 2069 and no more 2063. opps I did it again. sorry.
I want to become the first gay to become pregnant (anally conceived).
I want this to stop.("this" what I dont know. Pick something and make a post about it)


text:
Penzion Markus
No prices found through our partners. Please contact the business directly or check some of our recommended alternatives.
Travelers also recommend:
TripAdvisor Reviews Penzion Markus Frymburk
Travel Blogs from Frymburk
Our return to Cesky Krumlov
... remember the Cesky Krumlov photos. When we were her 20 years ago, NO ONE around the square spoke ONE word of English. Now it's a real tourist destination.
Castle tour tomorrow and graphite mine tour on Friday. Rain expected both days for both days.
Thanks for reading this.
Learning and Discovery in Cesky Krumlov
OAT prides themselves on learning and discovery ,experiences and today did not disappoint. Our first stop was a medieval monastery near the town. The Gothic buildings were massive, dating back to the 14th century. While the monks took vows of labor and poverty, their was nothing shabby about their home. Today we got to go into the buildings. Most notable were the library, ...
Exploring Cesky Krumlov
By the time we were ready to start our adventures the morning haze lifted and the sun and bright blue sky greeted us. We walked up the hill to the Castle, a huge complex that dominates the town. The complex was built in stages from the 14th century to the 18th, an we started our tour at the newest section, exploring the castle gardens. the Communists had built a revolving theater on the ...
Three Borders in a Day
... then as we came around a bend a break in the trees allowed us to see a huge wind turbine turning slowly in the breeze. I hit the button on the handlebars that activates the camera, but unfortunately when I reviewed the footage the camera was automatically adjusting the white balance for the road which was darkened by the surrounding trees, so the light streaming through the break in the trees just showed up as white on the recording, the turbine wasn't visible. Oh ...
Fairytale city!
... br> Afterwards it was straight onto Cesky Krumlov (CK).
Now Kristy had talked up CK alot and we were as was she, hoping that it lived up to our expectations and far out did it ever. Kristy described CK as a city that had been pulled from a fairytale and I don't think there is a better way to describe it. Cobble stoned streets with beautiful small buildings, quaint little shops, cafes and bars, a river running through the middle of everything, beautiful ...


text:
Okay folks, you could be changing your smartphone and as well picking up an all expense paid courtesy of Konga and Microsoft's mobile division Lumia.
Konga and Lumia are giving you an opportunity to win your dream holiday. When you buy the Lumia 540 Dual Sim or the Lumia 640 XL Dual Sim or any other Lumia on Konga.com, you'll stand a chance to win an expense paid trip to London, England!
All you have to do is follow these easy steps.
1. Buy the Lumia 540 Dual Sim or the Lumia 640 XL Dual Sim or any other Lumia
2. Submit a few sentences telling us how you intend to achieve more with your Lumia in the form below
3. Winners will be picked based on the most creative entries.
Five (5) tickets of an all-expense paid trip to London, England are waiting to be won! This competition is open for purchases made from June 24th – August 31st 2015. Think of all the fun things you could be doing during an all-expense paid trip to London. Waste no time, click here to start the challenge!


text:
4 STORIES WITH NARRATION BY Claire Danes, Jake Gyllenhaal …and others
You can collect the entire library of Scholastic Storybook Treasures and read along on screen with your favorite classic children's stories, brought vividly to life on DVD.
THE MAN WHO WALKED BETWEEN THE TOWERS (Written and illustrated by Mordicai Gerstein, narrated by Jake Gyllenhaal) Inspired by the true story of Philippe Petit and his daring 1974 high wire walk between the twin towers of the World Trade Center.
CROW BOY (Written and illustrated by Taro Yashima) A small shy mountain boy who is different from the others gains acceptance when he imitates the voices of crows in the school talent show.
THE DINOSAURS OF WAREHOUSE HAWKINS (Written by Barbara Kerley, illustrated by Brian Selznick, narrated by Jonathan Pryce) An awe-inspiring tale of how Waterhouse Hawkins built the first life-sized dinosaur model that stunned the world.
MISS RUMPHIUS (Written and illustrated by Barbara Cooney, narrated by Claire Danes) Alice Rumphius dreams of traveling to faraway places and making the world more beautiful. Inspired by a true story, Miss Rumphius shows us how we can all make the world a more beautiful place.
Supports: Self Esteem; Reading Skills; Creativity
Interview with The Dinosaurs of Warehouse Hawkins Author Barbara Kerley and Illustrator Brian Selznick; Spanish version of Miss Rumphius; Read-Along
Parents' Choice Silver Award 2007; NAPPA Gold Award 2006; Parenting Magazine's Best DVDs of the Year (2006);
Scholastic is not available for institutional or educational sales, including schools and public libraries, through New Video, please visit www.westonwoods.com for purchase.
Century City
1901 Avenue of the Stars, 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90067
+1 424 281 5400
902 Broadway
9th Floor New York, NY 10010
+1 212 206 8600
© Cinedigm


text:
Official Notice
Date: August 5, 2016
Students may make a request to have personal directory information withheld. Forms may be picked up from the Office of The Registrar, 1220 Old Main. Requests must be filled out and signed no later than September 2, 2016, to avoid release of information in some directories and lists that are produced shortly after count day.
Under the Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, Eastern Illinois University is required to give public notice of the categories of student information which it has designated as directory information. Those categories are published below.
To request that any or all of the directory information concerning him/her should not be released without prior approval, a student should appear in person prior to 4:30 p.m. on Friday, September 2, 2016, at the Office of The Registrar, 1220 Old Main, and make the request in writing on forms provided by the University. Student photo identification is required at the time of the request.
Directory Information
Eastern Illinois University
Student Directory Information shall include: name, local and home telephone numbers, local and home addresses, EIU e-mail addresses, dates of attendance, honors and awards received, degrees earned, majors, minors, concentrations, options, E number and photographs for internal University use, including the University Police Department.
Students who obtain a personal electronic mail account through the University should be aware that their name, student status, and e-mail "address" cannot be withheld from internet access.
Link to the complete Act is found here.
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) affords students certain rights with respect to their education records. They are:
(1) The right to inspect and review the student's education records within 45 days of the day the University received a request for access.
Students should submit to the registrar, dean, head of the academic department or other appropriate official, written requests that identify the record(s) they wish to inspect. The University official will make arrangements for access and notify the student of the time and place where the records may be inspected. If the records are not maintained by the University official to whom the request was submitted, that official shall advise the student of the correct official to whom the request should be addressed.
(2) The right to request the amendment of the student's education records that the student believes are inaccurate or misleading.
Students may ask the University to amend a record that they believe is inaccurate or misleading. They should write the University official responsible for the record, clearly identify the part of the record they want changed, and specify why it is inaccurate or misleading. (Grade appeals are administered under separate University policy.)
If the University decides not to amend the record as requested by the student, the University will notify the student of the decision and advise the student of his or her right to a hearing regarding the requests for amendment. Additional information regarding the hearing procedures will be provided to the student when notified of the right to a hearing.
(3) The right to consent to disclosures of personally identifiable information contained in the student's education records, except to the extent that FERPA authorizes disclosure without consent.
One exception which permits disclosure without consent is disclosure to school officials with legitimate educational interest. A school official is a person employed by the University in an administrative, supervisory, academic or research, or support staff position (including law enforcement unit personnel and health staff); a person or company with whom the University has contracted (such as an attorney, auditor, National Student Clearinghouse, Credentials, Inc. or collection agent); a person serving on the Board of Trustees; or a student serving on an official committee, such as a disciplinary or grievance committee, or assisting another school official in performing his or her tasks.
A school official has a legitimate educational interest if the official needs to review an education record in order to fulfill his or her professional responsibility.
Upon request, the University discloses education records without consent to officials of another school in which a student seeks or intends to enroll.
(4) The right to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education concerning alleged failures by Eastern Illinois University to comply with the requirement of FERPA. The name and address of the Office that administers FERPA is:
Family Policy Compliance Office
U. S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20202-4605
Possible Federal and State Data Collection and Use
As of January 3, 2012, the U.S. Department of Education's FERPA regulations expand the circumstances under which your education records and personally identifiable information (PII) contained in such records — including your Social Security Number, grades, or other private information — may be accessed without your consent. First, the U.S. Comptroller General, the U.S. Attorney General, the U.S. Secretary of Education, or state and local education authorities ("Federal and State Authorities") may allow access to your records and PII without your consent to any third party designated by a Federal or State Authority to evaluate a federal- or state-supported education program. The evaluation may relate to any program that is "principally engaged in the provision of education," such as early childhood education and job training, as well as any program that is administered by an education agency or institution. Second, Federal and State Authorities may allow access to your education records and PII without your consent to researchers performing certain types of studies, in certain cases even when we object to or do not request such research. Federal and State Authorities must obtain certain use-restriction and data security promises from the entities that they authorize to receive your PII, but the Authorities need not maintain direct control over such entities. In addition, in connection with Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems, State Authorities may collect, compile, permanently retain, and share without your consent PII from your education records, and they may track your participation in education and other programs by linking such PII to other personal information about you that they obtain from other Federal or State data sources, including workforce development, unemployment insurance, child welfare, juvenile justice, military service, and migrant student records systems.
The following is a list of student records maintained by the University,
including the location and custodian of each:
ACADEMIC, including permanent record, grade changes, and removal of incomplete forms, high school transcripts, transcripts and evaluations from other post-secondary educational institutions, academic waivers, letters of academic dismissal and letters of reinstatement.
---Registrar -- 1220 Old Main
ADVISEMENT, including grade reports and test scores for students assigned to Academic Advising.
----Academic Advising (only students assigned to Academic Advising) Director, Academic Advising, 2100 Ninth Street Hall, Individual Advisors
ALUMNI, including information submitted with application for graduation.
----Director, Alumni Services, Brainard House
----Individual instructors and department heads
BURSAR (Cashiering and Student Accounts), billing, payment and refund information, loans
----Bursar, 1131-1139 Old Main
---Director, Housing, University Union
CAREER SERVICES, including credentials, student teaching evaluations, employer references, and College and University recommendations.
----Director, Career Services, 1301 Human Services Building
CONTINUING EDUCATION, including registration materials for short courses, workshops, non-credit courses, academic conferences, and off-campus courses.
----Dean, School of Continuing Education, 2201 Blair Hall
----Director, Bachelor of General Studies Degree Program, 2138 Blair Hall
----Director, Student Standards, University Union
----College of Sciences, 2116 Old Main
----Lumpkin College of Business and Applied Sciences, 4800 Lumpkin Hall
----College of Education and Professional Studies, 1420 Buzzard Hall
----College of Arts and Humanities, 2210 Doudna Fine Arts Center
----Graduate School, 1201 Blair Hall
FINANCIAL AID, including loans, financial aid, and scholarships
----Director, Financial Aid, East Wing, Student Services Building
----International Student Advisor, 1176 Blair Hall
----Director, Greek Life, 316 University Union
----Dean, Graduate School, 1201 Blair Hall
----Grants-In-Aid Officer – Financial Aid, 4119 Student Services Building
----Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs, 1010 Old Main
REGISTRATION, including schedules, schedule changes and late withdrawal forms.
----Registrar, 1220 Old Main
SCHOLARSHIP DATA (EIU Foundation)
----Executive Officer, EIU Foundation, Neal Welcome Center
-----Director, Health Service, Human Services Building
STUDENT HOUSING, including application material, billing, and assignment information.
----Director, Housing, University Union
VETERANS, including Veterans Administration educational records and educational items relating to use of benefits.
----Director, Financial Aid, Student Services Building
Amy J. Lynch, Registrar


text:
Hmmm... weren't some of us upset about tinkering with nature?
neIN, Zone 5
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Bonnie & Bill Morgan" <email@example.com>
> Marvelous, Cyndi! Your Suffolk may not be the brightest light in the sky,
> but one look at those lambs and their lack of innate knowledge makes you
> think "innocent little darlings." I'm so tickled this ewe did well and that
> you were able to get the lambs to nursing. Thanks so much for the photos,
> Cyndi. You made my morning!
> And if it will make you feel better, should something happen to us humans,
> the bulldog breed will also die out. That is human's doing as they need to
> be born c-section because of that tiny rear end and oversized head and
> shoulder region popularized by cartoonists. Fortunately, there are efforts
> to breed them back to being able to deliver on their own. I hope it works!
> Blessings,
> Bonnie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf
> Of Johnson Cyndi D Civ 95 CG/SCSRT
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:26 PM
> To: 'email@example.com'
> Subject: [CHAT] Lamb pictures
> We went out this morning to find a set of triplets, but this time all is
> well. I did stay home from work just to make sure they all were nursing,
> which they weren't. Two of them couldn't find the faucets. In their defense,
> ewe has a bag as big as a cow's and the faucets are way lower than a lamb's
> instinct tells them to look. After six hours I had to call my husband home
> to help me hold the ewe so we could manually stick the babies onto her
> udder. But it did work.
> Still...if we humans get wiped out by bird flu or some such there will be no
> feral Suffolks. Dumb as a box o' rocks.
> Anyway here are some pix. Hope this URL isn't too long. I apologize again
> for Yahoo, it absolutely will NOT allow me to put in a picture that I
> rotated. It just does not take. Very annoying.
> http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/gardencatalogs/album?.dir=/2023&.src=ph&.tok=p
> hw.JiEB1j5qSqtF
> And it is snowing/raining/hailing here just in time for the weekend!
> Cyndi
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to firstname.lastname@example.com with the message
> text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to firstname.lastname@example.com with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT
To sign-off this list, send email to email@example.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT


text:
Louis Tomlinson Lashes Out at The Mirror Over Story About Father's Wish to Reconcile
Louis Tomlinson is miffed at the British media. The One Direction cutie issued a wake up cup of "eff you" – actually, an angry Tweet — to The Mirror after it published an interview with his estranged father, who is desperately trying to reconcile with his son.
Troy Austin, LT's biological dad, split with his mum Johanna when the boy was just two. Austin is attempting to make amends with Tomlinson, 21, but the 1D hunk is not having any of it, thank you very much.
In the Sunday edition of The Mirror, Austin acknowledged that it might seem as though he is trying to reignite contact with his son because of his newfound fame and fortune, but insists such is not the case. Mmm hmmmmmmmm…
"I know people will think I'm only interested in being part of his life again because he's rich and famous," Austin said." But it's not about that. I'm his dad. We're flesh and blood and nothing can change that. I'm so proud of him I could burst."
Austin also proclaimed, "I would love to see him again and have a proper relationship with him. What dad wouldn't? But it's up to him."
Clearly, Tomlinson doesn't share those feelings, after issuing this tweet. He basically said screw the paper and his dad, but thanks to Directioners for being the glue that keeps him and the band together.
I'd like to start off the day by saying a big fuck you to 'the mirror' on a happier note huge love to all out fans, you keep us going!!
— Louis Tomlinson (@Louis_Tomlinson) March 24, 2013
Way to tell us how you really feel, Louis! Maybe LT and Adele can get together and discuss their deadbeat dad issues.
Watch the One Direction 'Kiss You' Video
Subscribe to PopCrush on


text:
Dozens in Congress Press for Nat'l Bike and Pedestrian Safety Goals, Measurement
(Washington, D.C. -- WAMU) The recent lobbying by bicycling advocates on Capitol Hill seems to have paid off.
A bipartisan group of 68 members of the U.S. House, responding to the advocates' safety concerns, has signed a letter to Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood asking him to order the Department of Transportation to follow through on two aspects of the MAP-21 legislation signed into law last year.
The representatives, including D.C. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, are asking Sec. LaHood to establish a national goal to reduce bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities and to push individual states to set "performance measures" to accomplish the same.
"If we don't set performance goals for states and cities there will be no incentive for them to look at what many don't even recognize," Norton said in an interview with WAMU 88.5. "More people are walking and more people are taking their bikes. Thus, there will be no incentive to try to make the roads easier to navigate."
As overall roadway fatalities have dropped significantly the number of pedestrians and bicyclists killed has increased, according to federal data. Total fatalities have dropped from 37,423 in 2008 to 32,367 in 2011. But roughly 5,000 pedestrians and bicyclists are killed annually, from 12 percent of all roadway deaths in 2008 to almost 16 percent in 2011, according to the federal government's fatality analysis reporting system.
Safety advocates see the establishment of performance measures as an opening for additional federal funding directed to bicycling and walking infrastructure. Currently less than one percent of federal highway safety funds are spent improving bicyclist and pedestrian safety.
"We urge USDOT to set separate performance measures for non-motorized and motorized transportation," says the letter signed by the 68 House members. "This will create an incentive for states to reduce bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities, while giving them flexibility to choose the best methods to do so."
Follow Martin Di Caro on Twitter @MartinDiCaro


text:
Snoop Dogg Performs At The Bud Light Playboy Super Bowl Party
The Super Bowl is right around the corner, and for Snoop Dogg and some other lucky celebrities, that means football, beer, and… playboy models? Yep, that's right people. For only $1000 a ticket, guests were able to have the ultimate 'Playboy Experience' at the Bud Light Playboy Super Bowl Party, and do some serious celeb spotting while they were at it. Attendees included Ryan Kwanten, Landon Donovan, Ryan Cabrera, Aubrey O'Day, Chelsea Handler, Tony Romo, Serena Williams, Mike 'The Situation' Sorrentino, the cast of Glee, and many more.
PHOTOS: Inside the Audi Super Bowl Party!
The party took place at the Aloft Hotel in Dallas, which was temporarily renamed the Bud Light Hotel, and there were performances by Snoop Dogg, Warren G, and Flo Rida. Would you pay $1000 to attend the Bud Light Super Bowl Party?