text:
Roberts v. Louisiana, 431 U.S. 633 (1977)
March 28, 1977
June 6, 1977
U.S. Supreme Court
Roberts v. Louisiana, 431 U.S. 633 (1977)Roberts v. Louisiana
No. 76-5206
Argued March 28, 1977
Decided June 6, 1977
The mandatory death sentence imposed upon petitioner pursuant to a Louisiana statute for the first-degree murder of a police officer engaged in the performance of his lawful duties held to violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, since the statute allows for no consideration of particularized mitigating factors in deciding whether the death sentence should be imposed.
331 So. 2d 11, reversed and remanded.
U.S. Supreme Court
Roberts v. Louisiana, 431 U.S. 633 (1977) Roberts v. Louisiana No. 76-5206 Argued March 28, 1977 Decided June 6, 1977 431 U.S. 633 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA Syllabus The mandatory death sentence imposed upon petitioner pursuant to a Louisiana statute for the first-degree murder of a police officer engaged in the performance of his lawful duties held to violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, since the statute allows for no consideration of particularized mitigating factors in deciding whether the death sentence should be imposed. 331 So. 2d 11, reversed and remanded. PER CURIAM. Petitioner Harry Roberts was indicted, tried, and convicted of the first-degree murder of Police Officer Dennis McInerney, who at the time of his death was engaged in the performance Page 431 U. S. 634 of his lawful duties. As required by a Louisiana statute, petitioner was sentenced to death. La.Rev.Stat. Ann § 14:30(2) (1974). [Footnote 1] On appeal, the Supreme Court of Louisiana affirmed his conviction and sentence. 331 So. 2d 11 (1976). Roberts then filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in this Court. The petition presented the question whether Louisiana's mandatory death penalty could be imposed pursuant to his conviction of first-degree murder as defined in subparagraph (2) of § 14:30. Shortly before that petition was filed, we held in another case (involving a different petitioner named Roberts) that Louisiana could not enforce its mandatory death penalty for a Page 431 U. S. 635 conviction of first-degree murder as defined in subparagraph (1) of § 14:30 of La.Rev.Stat.Ann. (1974). Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U. S. 325 (1976) (hereafter cited as Stanislaus Roberts for purposes of clarity). In the plurality opinion in that case, the precise question presented in this case was explicitly answered. [Footnote 2] This precise question was again answered by the Court in Washington v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 906 (1976). The petitioner in the Washington case had killed a policeman and was tried and sentenced to death under the same provision of the Louisiana statute as was the petitioner in the present case. We vacated the death sentence, holding: "Imposition and carrying out of the death penalty [in this case] constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Roberts v. Louisiana. . . ." Ibid. See also Sparks v. North Carolina, 428 U.S. 905 (1976); Green v. Oklahoma, 428 U.S. 907 (1976). Page 431 U. S. 636 Recognizing that this Court had already decided that a mandatory death sentence could not be imposed for the crime that Harry Roberts committed, the Attorney General of Louisiana initially conceded that, "under this Court's decision in Stanislaus Roberts v. Louisiana, No. 75-5844, [the sentence of death in the present case] cannot be carried out unless, of course, this Court grants Louisiana's Application for Rehearing and modifies its former holding." Brief in Opposition 2-3. The Court nevertheless granted certiorari on November 8, 1976, 429 U.S. 938, and, on November 29, limited the grant to the question "[w]hether the imposition and carrying out of the sentence of death for the crime of first-degree murder of a police officer under the law of Louisiana violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States." 429 U.S. 975. In Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U. S. 280, 428 U. S. 304 (1976), this Court held that "the fundamental respect for humanity underlying the Eighth Amendment . . . requires consideration of the character and record of the individual offender and the circumstances of the particular offense as a constitutionally indispensable part of the process of inflicting the penalty of death." In Stanislaus Roberts, supra, we made clear that this principle applies even where the crime of first-degree murder is narrowly defined. See n 2, supra. To be sure, the fact that the murder victim was a peace officer performing his regular duties may be regarded as an aggravating circumstance. There is a special interest in affording protection to these public servants who regularly must risk their lives in order to guard the safety of other persons and property. [Footnote 3] But it is incorrect to suppose that no mitigating Page 431 U. S. 637 circumstances can exist when the victim is a police officer. Circumstances such as the youth of the offender, the absence of any prior conviction, the influence of drugs, alcohol, or extreme emotional disturbance, and even the existence of circumstances which the offender reasonably believed provided a moral justification for his conduct are all examples of mitigating facts which might attend the killing of a peace officer and which are considered relevant in other jurisdictions. [Footnote 4] As we emphasized repeatedly in Stanislaus Roberts and its companion cases decided last Term, it is essential that the capital sentencing decision allow for consideration of whatever mitigating circumstances may be relevant to either the particular offender or the particular offense. [Footnote 5] Because the Louisiana statute does not allow for consideration of particularized mitigating factors, it is unconstitutional. [Footnote 6] Page 431 U. S. 638 Accordingly, we hold that the death sentence imposed upon this petitioner violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and must be set aside. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Louisiana is reversed insofar as it upholds the death sentence upon petitioner. The case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. [Footnote 7] It is so ordered. [Footnote 1] That section provides in part: "First degree murder" "First degree murder is the killing of a human being:" "(1) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated kidnapping, aggravated rape or armed robbery; or" "(2) When the offender has a specific intent to kill, or to inflict great bodily harm upon, a fireman or a peace officer who was engaged in the performance of his lawful duties; or" "(3) Where the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great. bodily harm and has previously been convicted of an unrelated murder or is serving a life sentence; or" "(4) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon more than one person; [or]" "(5) When the offender has specific intent to commit murder and has been offered or has received anything of value for committing the murder." "For the purposes of Paragraph (2) herein, the term peace officer shall be defined [as] and include any constable, sheriff, deputy sheriff, local or state policeman, game warden, federal law enforcement officer, jail or prison guard, parole officer, probation officer, judge, district attorney, assistant district attorney or district attorneys' investigator." "Whoever commits the crime of first degree murder shall be punished by death." In 1975, § 14:30(1) was amended to add the crime of aggravated burglary as a predicate felony for first-degree murder. 1975 La.Acts, No. 327. [Footnote 2] "The diversity of circumstances presented in cases falling within the single category of killings during the commission of a specified felony, as well as the variety of possible offenders involved in such crimes, underscores the rigidity of Louisiana's enactment and its similarity to the North Carolina statute. Even the other more narrowly drawn categories of first-degree murder in the Louisiana law [one of these being the willful, deliberate, and premeditated homicide of a fireman or a police officer engaged in the performance of his lawful duties] afford no meaningful opportunity for consideration of mitigating factors presented by the circumstances of the particular crime or by the attributes of the individual offender." 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 333-334. "Only the third category of the Louisiana first-degree murder statute, covering intentional killing by a person serving a life sentence or by a person previously convicted of an unrelated murder, defines the capital crime at least in significant part in terms of the character or record of the individual offender. Although even this narrow category does not permit the jury to consider possible mitigating factors, a prisoner serving a life sentence presents a unique problem that may justify such a law. See Gregg v. Georgia, [428 U.S. 153, 428 U. S. 186 (1976)]; Woodson v. North Carolina, [428 U.S. 280, 428 U. S. 287 n. 7, 428 U. S. 292-293, n. 25 (1976)]." Id. at 428 U. S. 334 n. 9 (emphasis added). [Footnote 3] We recognize that the life of a police officer is a dangerous one. Statistics show that the number of police officers killed in the line of duty has more than doubled in the last 10 years. In 1966, 57 law enforcement officers were killed in the line of duty; in 1975, 129 were killed. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States 1975, Uniform Crime Reports 223 (1976). [Footnote 4] See, e.g., the portion of the proposed standards of the Model Penal Code quoted in Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 428 U. S. 193-194, n. 44 (1976). [Footnote 5] We reserve again the question whether or in what circumstances mandatory death sentence statutes may be constitutionally applied to prisoners serving life sentences. See n 2, supra, quoting 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 334 n. 9. [Footnote 6] Indeed, our holding in Jurek v. Texas, 428 U. S. 262 (1976), that the Texas sentencing procedure was constitutionally adequate rested squarely on the fact that mitigating circumstances could be considered by the jury. In that case, the joint opinion of JUSTICES STEWART POWELL, and STEVENS stated: "But a sentencing system that allowed the jury to consider only aggravating circumstances would almost certainly fall short of providing the individualized sentencing determination that we today have held in Woodson v. North Carolina, [428 U.S.] at 428 U. S. 303-305, to be required by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. For such a system would approach the mandatory laws that we today hold unconstitutional in Woodson and Roberts v. Louisiana [428 U.S. 325 (1976)]. A jury must be allowed to consider on the basis of all relevant evidence not only why a death sentence should be imposed, but also why it should not be imposed." "Thus, in order to meet the requirement of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, a capital sentencing system must allow the sentencing authority to consider mitigating circumstances. In Gregg v. Georgia, we today hold constitutionally valid a capital sentencing system that directs the jury to consider any mitigating factors, and in Proffitt v. Florida we likewise hold constitutional a system that directs the judge and advisory jury to consider certain enumerated mitigating circumstances. The Texas statute does not explicitly speak of mitigating circumstances; it directs only that the jury answer three questions. Thus, the constitutionality of the Texas procedures turns on whether the enumerated questions allow consideration of particularized mitigating factors." Id. at 428 U. S. 271-272 (footnote omitted). [Footnote 7] In joining this opinion for the Court, MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN and MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL agree that the plurality opinion in Stanislaus Roberts, supra, controls this case, but adhere to their view that capital punishment is in all circumstances prohibited as cruel and unusual punishment by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER, dissenting. I would sustain the Louisiana statute ,and I therefore dissent on the basis of my dissenting statement in Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U. S. 325, 428 U. S. 337 (1976), and that of MR. JUSTICE WHITE in Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U. S. 280, 428 U. S. 306 (1976). MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom MR. JUSTICE WHITE and MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST join, dissenting. The Court, feeling itself bound by the plurality opinion in Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U. S. 325 (1976) (hereafter Stanislaus Roberts), has painted itself into a corner. I did not join that plurality opinion, and I decline to be so confined. I therefore dissent from the Court's disposition of the present Page 431 U. S. 639 case and from its holding that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty for killing a peace officer, engaged in the performance of his lawful duties, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. I would uphold the State's power to impose such a punishment under La.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 14:30(2) (1974), and I would reject any statements or intimations to the contrary in the Court's prior cases. The per curiam opinion asserts that "the precise question presented in this case was explicitly answered" in Stanislaus Roberts. Ante at 431 U. S. 635. It also relies on the summary disposition of Washington v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 906 (1976), where a death sentence that had been imposed under § 14:30(2) was vacated and where it was stated that the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty constituted cruel and unusual punishment. Ante at 431 U. S. 635. Finally, the per curiam states that "it is essential that the capital sentencing decision allow for consideration of whatever mitigating circumstances may be relevant to either the particular offender or the particular offense." Ante at 431 U. S. 637. Since § 14:30(2) does not allow for consideration of mitigating factors, the per curiam strikes down the death sentence imposed on petitioner. In my view, the question of the constitutionality of Louisiana's mandatory death penalty for killing a peace officer was not answered in Stanislaus Roberts. Washington may be said to be a summary ruling on the merits, but that case was decided without the benefit of plenary consideration, and without focusing on the identity and activity of the victim. I believe its result to be incorrect as a constitutional matter, and I would disapprove and withhold its further application. Stanislaus Roberts was charged and convicted under a different subsection, that is, § 14:30(1), of the Louisiana first-degree murder statute. See 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 327. See also ante at 431 U. S. 634-635. Subsection (1) provided a mandatory death penalty in the case where the killer had a specific intent to kill or Page 431 U. S. 640 to inflict great bodily harm and was engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated kidnaping, aggravated rape, or armed robbery. See ante at 431 U. S. 634 n. 1. Subsection (2), in contrast, provides that first-degree murder is committed when the killer has a specific intent to kill, or to inflict great bodily harm upon, a fireman or a peace officer who is engaged in the performance of his lawful duties. Ibid. The two subsections obviously should involve quite different considerations with regard to the lawfulness of a mandatory death penalty, even accepting the analysis set forth in the joint opinions of last Term. * Thus, to the extent that the plurality in Stanislaus Roberts alluded to subsections of the Louisiana law that were not before the Court, those statements are nonbinding dicta. It is indisputable that carefully focused consideration was not given to the special problem of a mandatory death sentence for one who has intentionally killed a police officer engaged in the performance of his lawful duties. I therefore approach this case as a new one, not predetermined and governed by the plurality in Stanislaus Roberts. Washington may present a different problem. It did decide the issue now before the Court, but it did so without the benefit of full briefing and argument, and it was one of three pending Louisiana cases treated as a cluster and routinely remanded at the Term's end in the immediate wake of Stanislaus Roberts. Because an explicit finding was made that the death penalty constituted cruel and unusual punishment, perhaps Washington is not to be treated in the same way as summary affirmances were treated in Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U. S. 651, 415 U. S. 670-671 (1974). I would simply inquire, as to Washington, whether its holding should not be overruled Page 431 U. S. 641 now that the Court has had the benefit of more careful and complete consideration of the issue. On the merits, for reasons I have expressed before, I would not find § 14:30(2) constitutionally defective. See Furman v. Georgia, 408 U. S. 238, 408 U. S. 405-414 (1972) (dissenting opinion). See also Stanislaus Roberts, 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 337-363 (WHITE, J., dissenting). Furthermore, even under the opinions of last Term, I would conclude that § 14:30(2) falls within that narrow category of homicide for which a mandatory death sentence is constitutional. See Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 428 U. S. 186 (1976); Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U. S. 280, 428 U. S. 287 n. 7, 428 U. S. 292-293, n. 25 (1976); Stanislaus Roberts, 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 334 n. 9. Since the decision in Washington is inconsistent with this view, I would overrule it. I should note that I do not read the per curiam opinion today as one deciding the issue of the constitutionality of a mandatory death sentence for a killer of a peace officer for all cases and all times. Reference to the plurality opinion in Stanislaus Roberts reveals that the Louisiana statute contained what that opinion regarded as two fatal defects: lack of an opportunity to consider mitigating factors and standardless jury discretion inherent in the Louisiana responsive verdict system. Without the latter, as here, a different case surely is presented. Furthermore, it is evident, despite the per curiam's general statement to the contrary, that mitigating factors need not be considered in every case; even the per curiam continues to reserve the issue of a mandatory death sentence for murder by a prisoner already serving a life sentence. Ante at 431 U. S. 637 n. 5. Finally, it is possible that a state statute that required the jury to consider, during the guilt phase of the trial, both the aggravating circumstance of killing a peace officer and relevant mitigating circumstances would pass the plurality's test. Cf. Jurek v. Texas, 428 U. S. 262, 428 U. S. 270-271 (1976). For me, therefore, today's decision must be viewed in the context of the Court's previous criticism of the Louisiana system; Page 431 U. S. 642 it need not freeze the Court into a position that condemns every statute with a mandatory death penalty for the intentional killing of a peace officer. * Gregg v Georgia, 428 U. S. 153 (1976); Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U. S. 242 (1976); Jurek v. Texas, 428 U. S. 262 (1976); Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U. S. 280 (1976); and Stanislaus Roberts, 428 U. S. 325 (1976). MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, with whom MR. JUSTICE WHITE joins, dissenting. The Court today holds that the State of Louisiana is not entitled to vindicate its substantial interests in protecting the foot soldiers of an ordered society by mandatorily sentencing their murderers to death. This is so even though the State has demonstrated to a jury in a fair trial, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a particular defendant was the murderer, and that he committed the act while possessing "a specific intent to kill, or to inflict great bodily harm upon, . . . a peace officer who was engaged in the performance of his lawful duties. . . ." La.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 14:30(2) (1974). That holding would have shocked those who drafted the Bill of Rights on which it purports to rest, and would commend itself only to the most imaginative observer as being required by today's "evolving standards of decency." I am unable to agree that a mandatory death sentence under such circumstances violates the Eighth Amendment's proscription against "cruel and unusual punishments." I am equally unable to see how this limited application of the mandatory death statute violates even the scope of the Eighth Amendment as seen through the eyes of last Term's plurality in Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U. S. 325 (1976) (hereafter Stanislaus Roberts). Nor does the brief per curiam opinion issued today demonstrate why the application of a mandatory death sentence to the criminal who intentionally murders a peace officer performing his official duties should be considered "cruel and unusual punishment" in light of either the view of society when the Eighth Amendment was passed, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 428 U. S. 176-177 (1976); the "objective indicia that reflect the public attitude" today, id. at 428 U. S. 173; or even the more Page 431 U. S. 643 generalized "basic concept of human dignity" test relied upon last Term in striking down several more general mandatory statutes. While the arguments weighing in favor of individualized consideration for the convicted defendant are much the same here as they are for one accused of any homicide, the arguments weighing in favor of society's determination to impose a mandatory sentence for the murder of a police officer in the line of duty are far stronger than in the case of an ordinary homicide. Thus, the Court's intimation that this particular issue was considered and decided last Term in Stanislaus Roberts, supra, simply does not wash. A footnoted dictum in Stanislaus Roberts discussing a different section of the Louisiana law from the one now before us scarcely rises to the level of plenary, deliberate consideration which has traditionally preceded a declaration of unconstitutionality. Such a meager basis for stare decisis would be less offensive were we not dealing with large questions of how men shall be governed, and how liberty and order should be balanced in a civilized society. But authority which might suffice to determine whether the rule against perpetuities applies to a particular devise in a will does not suffice when making a constitutional adjudication that a punishment imposed by properly enacted state law is "cruel and unusual." Mr. Justice Frankfurter wisely noted that a "footnote hardly seems to be an appropriate way of announcing a new constitutional doctrine," Kovacs v. Cooper, 336 U. S. 77, 336 U. S. 90-91 (1949); it is hardly a more appropriate device by which to anticipate a constitutional issue not presented by the case in which it appears. This seemingly heedless wielding of our power is least acceptable when we engage in what Mr. Justice Holmes described as "the gravest and most delicate duty that this Court is called upon to perform." Blodgett v. Holden, 275 U. S. 142, 275 U. S. 147-148 (1927) (separate opinion). Page 431 U. S. 644 Five Terms ago, in Furman v. Georgia, 408 U. S. 238 (1972), this Court invalidated the then-current system of capital punishments, condemning jury discretion as resulting in "freakish" punishment. The Louisiana Legislature has conscientiously determined, in an effort to respond to that holding, that the death sentence would be made mandatory upon the conviction of particular types of offenses, including, as in the case before us, the intentional killing of a peace officer while in the performance of his duties. For the reasons stated by MR. JUSTICE WHITE for himself, THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, and me in his dissent in Stanislaus Roberts, supra, and by me in my dissent in Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U. S. 280, 428 U. S. 308 (1976), I am no more persuaded now than I was then that a mandatory death sentence for all, let alone for a limited class of, persons who commit premeditated murder constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. But even were I now persuaded otherwise by the plurality's analysis last Term, and were I able to conclude that the mandatory death penalty constituted "cruel and unusual punishment" when applied generally to all those convicted of first-degree murder, I would nonetheless disagree with today's opinion. Louisiana's decision to impose a mandatory death sentence upon one convicted of the particular offense of premeditated murder of a peace officer engaged in the performance of his lawful duties is clearly not governed by the holding of Stanislaus Roberts, and I do not believe that it is controlled by the reasoning of the plurality's opinion in that case. Today's opinion assumes, without analysis, that the faults of the generalized mandatory death sentence under review in Stanislaus Roberts must necessarily inhere in such a sentence imposed on those who commit this much more carefully limited and far more serious crime. [Footnote 2/1] In words that would be Page 431 U. S. 645 equally appropriate today, MR. JUSTICE WHITE noted last Term, 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 358: "Even if the character of the accused mus be considered under the Eighth Amendment, surely a State is not constitutionally forbidden to provide that the commission of certain crimes conclusively establishes that the criminal's character is such that he deserves death. Moreover, quite apart from the character of a criminal, a State should constitutionally be able to conclude that the need to deter some crimes and that the likelihood that the death penalty will succeed in deterring these crimes is such that the death penalty may be made mandatory for all people who commit them. Nothing resembling a reasoned basis for the rejection of these propositions is to be found in the plurality opinion. " Page 431 U. S. 646 Under the analysis of last Term's plurality opinion, a State, before it is constitutionally entitled to put a murderer to death, must consider aggravating and mitigating circumstances. It is possible to agree with the plurality in the general case without at all conceding that it follows that a mandatory death sentence is impermissible in the specific case we have before us: the deliberate killing of a peace officer. The opinion today is willing to concede that "the fact that the murder victim was a peace officer performing his regular duties may be regarded as an aggravating circumstance." Ante at 431 U. S. 636. But it seems to me that the factors which entitle a State to consider it as an aggravating circumstance also entitle the State to consider it so grave an aggravating circumstance that no permutation of mitigating factors exists which would disable it from constitutionally sentencing the murderer to death. If the State would be constitutionally entitled, due to the nature of the offense, to sentence the murderer to death after going through such a limited version of the plurality's "balancing" approach, I see no constitutional reason why the "Cruel and Unusual Punishments" Clause precludes the State from doing so without engaging in that process. The elements that differentiate this case from the Stanislaus Roberts case are easy to state. In both cases, the factors weighing on the defendant's side of the scale are constant. It is consideration of these factors alone that the opinion today apparently relies on for its holding. But this ignores the significantly different factors which weigh on the State's side of the scale. In all murder cases, and of course this one, the State has an interest in protecting its citizens from such ultimate attacks; this surely is at the core of the Lockean "social contract" idea. But other, and important, state interests exist where the victim was a peace officer performing his lawful duties. Policemen on the beat are exposed, in the service of society, to all the risks which the constant effort to prevent crime and apprehend criminals entails: because these people Page 431 U. S. 647 are literally the foot soldiers of society's defense of ordered liberty, the State has an especial interest in their protection. We are dealing here not merely with the State's determination as to whether particular conduct on the part of an individual should be punished, and in what manner, but also with what sanctions the State is entitled to bring into play to assure that there will be a police force to see that the criminal laws are enforced at all. It is no service to individual rights, or to individual liberty, to undermine what is surely the fundamental right and responsibility of any civilized government: the maintenance of order so that all may enjoy liberty and security. Learned Hand surely had it right when he observed: "And what is this liberty which must lie in the hearts of men and women? It is not the ruthless, the unbridled will; it is not freedom to do as one likes. That is the denial of liberty, and leads straight to its overthrow. A society in which men recognize no check upon their freedom soon becomes a society where freedom is the possession of only a savage few; as we have learned to our sorrow." The Spirit of Liberty 190 (3d ed., 1960). Policemen are both symbols and outriders of our ordered society, and they literally risk their lives in an effort to preserve it. To a degree unequaled in the ordinary first-degree murder presented in the Stanislaus Roberts case, the State therefore has an interest in making unmistakably clear that those who are convicted of deliberately killing police officers acting in the line of duty be forewarned that punishment, in the form of death, will be inexorable. [Footnote 2/2] Page 431 U. S. 648 This interest of the State, I think, entitled the Louisiana Legislature, in its considered judgment, to make the death penalty mandatory for those convicted of the intentional murder of a police officer. I had thought JUSTICES STEWART, POWELL, and STEVENS had conceded that this response -- this need for a mandatory penalty -- could be permissible when, focusing on the crime, not the criminal, they wrote last Term in Gregg, 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 184, that "the decision that capital punishment may be the appropriate sanction in extreme cases is an expression of the community's belief that certain crimes are themselves so grievous an affront to humanity that the only adequate response may be the penalty of death." (Emphasis added.) I am quite unable to decipher why the Court today concludes that the intentional murder of a police officer is not one of these "certain crimes." The Court's answer appears to lie in its observation that "it is incorrect to suppose that no mitigating circumstances can exist when the victim is a police officer." Ante at 431 U. S. 636-637. The Court, however, has asked the wrong question. The question is not whether mitigating Page 431 U. S. 649 factors might exist, but, rather, whether whatever "mitigating" factors that might exist are of sufficient force so as to constitutionally require their consideration as counterweights to the admitted aggravating circumstance. Like MR. JUSTICE WHITE, I am unable to believe that a State is not entitled to determine that the premeditated murder of a peace officer is so heinous and intolerable a crime that no combination of mitigating factors can overcome the demonstration "that the criminal's character is such that he deserves death." 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 358. As an example of a mitigating factor which, presumably, may "overcome" the aggravating factor inherent in the murder of a peace officer, the Court today gives us the astonishing suggestion of "the existence of circumstances which the offender reasonably believed provided a moral justification for his conduct. . . ." Ante at 431 U. S. 637. I cannot believe that States are constitutionally required to allow a defense, even at the sentencing stage, which depends on nothing more than the convict's moral belief that he was entitled to kill a peace officer in cold blood. John Wilkes Booth may well have thought he was morally justified in murdering Abraham Lincoln, whom, while fleeing from the stage of Ford's Theater, he characterized as a "tyrant"; I am appalled to believe that the Constitution would have required the Government to allow him to argue that as a "mitigating factor" before it could sentence him to death if he were found guilty. I am equally appalled that a State should be required to instruct a jury that such individual beliefs must or should be considered as a possible balancing factor against the admittedly proper aggravating factor. The historical and legal content of the "Cruel and Unusual Punishments" Clause was stretched to the breaking point by the plurality's opinion in the Stanislaus Roberts case last Term. Today this judicially created superstructure, designed and erected more than 180 years after the Bill of Rights was Page 431 U. S. 650 adopted, is tortured beyond permissible limits of judicial review. There is nothing in the Constitution's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment which disables a legislature from imposing a mandatory death sentence on a defendant convicted after a fair trial of deliberately murdering a police officer. [Footnote 2/1] In Woodson, the plurality noted that a public opinion poll "revealed that a substantial majority' of persons opposed mandatory capital punishment." 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 298-299, n. 34. It does not follow, even accepting that poll, that a "substantial majority" oppose mandatory capital punishment for the murderers of police officers. What meager statistics there are indicate that public opinion is, at best, pretty evenly divided on the subject. In a June. 1973. Harris Survey, 41% of the people surveyed thought that "all" persons convicted of killing a policeman or a prison guard should get the death penalty, as opposed to 28% for the more general crime of first-degree murder. Vidmar & Ellsworth, Public Opinion and the Death Penalty, 26 Stan.L.Rev. 1245, 1252 (1974). A May, 1973, poll in Minnesota revealed that 49% of the sample favored "automatic" capital punishment for "`murder of a law enforcement officer.'" Id. at 1251. With such substantial public support, one would have thought that the determination as to whether a mandatory death penalty should exist was for the legislature, not for the judiciary through some newfound construction of the term "cruel and unusual punishments." Yet, while the plurality observes that "[c]entral to the application of the Amendment is a determination of contemporary standards regarding the infliction of punishment," 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 288, the opinion today makes absolutely no attempt to discuss "contemporary standards" with respect to the particular category now before us. The reason, of course, is not hard to deduce: the plurality's separation of "standards of decency" from "the dignity of man" indicates that, with respect to the latter, the plurality itself, and not society, is to be the arbiter. [Footnote 2/2] Cf. 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries *82: "To resist the king's forces by defending a castle against them is a levying of war. . . . But a tumult, with a view to pull down a particular house or lay open a particular inclosure, amounts at most to a riot, this being no general defiance of public government." As recently noted by Chief Justice Laskin of the Canadian Supreme Court, Miller and Cockriell v. The Queen, 70 D.L.R.3d 324, 337, [1976] 5 W.W.R. 711, 735 (1976), in discussing whether a mandatory death sentence constituted "cruel and unusual punishment" within the meaning of § 2(b) of the Canadian Bill of Rights: "I do not think, however, that it can be said that Parliament, in limiting the mandatory death penalty to the murder of policemen and prison guards, had only vengeance in view. There was obviously the consideration that persons in such special positions would have a sense of protection by reason of the grave penalty that would follow their murder. . . . It was open to Parliament to act on these additional considerations in limiting the mandatory death penalty as it did, and I am unable to say that they were not acted upon. On this view, I cannot find that there was no social purpose served by the mandatory death penalty so as to make it offensive to § 2(b)." (Concurring opinion.)
Search This Case


text:
The winter sun feels welcome, but not so a summer sunburn. Research over the past 20 years has shown that proteins on the surface of nerve cells enable the body to sense several different temperatures. Now scientists have discovered how just a few of these proteins, called ion channels, distinguish perhaps dozens of discrete temperatures, from mildly warm to very hot.
Researchers showed that the building blocks, or subunits, of heat-sensitive ion channels can assemble in many different combinations, yielding new types of channels, each capable of detecting a different temperature. The discovery, in cell cultures, demonstrates for the first time that only four genes, each encoding one subunit type, can generate dozens of different heat-sensitive channels.
"Researchers in the past have assumed that because there are only four genes, there are only four heat-sensitive channels, but now we have shown that there are many more," said Jie Zheng, leader of the research and an associate professor of physiology and membrane biology at the UC Davis School of Medicine.
The research publishes in the Journal of Biological Chemistry on March 2.
Ion channels are pores in cell membranes. Their ability to open and close controls the flow of charged ions, which turns neuron signalling on or off — in this case to inform the body of the temperature the neuron senses.
The researchers found that when different subunits combine, the resultant hybrid, or heteromeric, channel can detect temperatures about midway between what the "parent" channels detect.
One of the channels they studied, called TRPV1, reacts to hot temperatures — about 100 degrees Fahrenheit. It is also responsible for the ability to sense spicy foods, such as chili peppers. A second channel, TRPV3, responds to temperatures of about 85 degrees. It also senses many food flavors such as those found in rosemary, oregano, vanilla and cinnamon that elicit a warm sensation.
When the TRPV1 and TRPV3 subunits recombine, the heteromeric channel is tuned to about 92 degrees. Surprisingly, the study showed that the hybrid channel has an even higher chemical sensitivity than the channels that made it up.
Zheng and his colleagues also showed that channels made up of TRPV1 and TRPV3 subunits react to heat at a rate about midway between that of the two constituent channel subunits. But repeatedly exposing the hybrid channels to their target temperature boosted their response, a behavior called sensitization, which TRPV3 also exhibits.
"It says 'I remember this temperature. I will make a really loud noise to tell the system that it is coming,'" Zheng said. The process allows the body to be more sensitive to temperature.
By contrast, TRPV1 typically responds the same way when repeatedly exposed to its target temperature — and sometimes even decreases its response, a process called desensitization. It helps the body to adapt to high temperature, Zheng explained.
The research builds on work the team published in 2007 demonstrating that the heat-sensitive subunits can combine to form heteromeric channels. However, at the time, scientists didn't know how these channels respond to heat. The new work shows that the channels are indeed sensitive to different temperatures.
"Knowing that there are many distinct heat-sensing ion channels now opens the way to understand how neurons encode precise temperature information, an important process that allows us to enjoy the rich spectrum of temperature in life — a memorable warm handshake, a soothing shower and a cup of hot latte — and add vanilla flavor, please," Zheng said. "It also may provide insights regarding the causes and potential treatments for temperature-sensitivity disorders, such as Raynaud's syndrome."
Raynaud's syndrome is a condition that causes some areas of the body — such as fingers, toes, the tip of the nose and ears — to feel numb and cool in response to cold temperatures or stress. The cause is unknown.
The scientists introduced the genes for TRPV1 and TRPV3 channel subunits to cultured human kidney cells. They tagged the genes with fluorescent markers to confirm when the resulting proteins had combined to form a new channel complex.
Once functional channels were formed, the researchers used a glass pipette with a very fine tip to record ion channels' responses to temperature changes.
In order to rapidly increase the temperature, they built an apparatus that allowed them to deliver an infrared laser beam to the cell. The method allowed them to heat the channel more than a thousand times faster than commercially available heating devices.
The collaborative research is funded by the National Institutes of Health, the American Heart Association and the Chinese government.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
CNCF projects are the foundation of cloud native computing
As part of the Linux Foundation, we provide support, oversight and direction for fast-growing, cloud native projects, including Kubernetes, Envoy, and Prometheus.
Transforming leading
organizations across the world
Ready to go cloud native?
Join our foundation of doers
Building and selling cloud native tech?
Shape the ecosystem and drive cross-company collaboration with more than 700 members.
Looking to get involved?
From coders to creatives, join our welcoming, global community and advance CNCF cloud native projects.
End Users
Using cloud native technologies?
Accelerate your adoption in close collaboration with peers, project maintainers, and CNCF.
New to CNCF?
Upcoming Events
Together we are #TeamCloudNative
CNCF is deeply committed to the success of our community, from our ambassadors to maintainers to first-time contributors. No matter your goals, we support your cloud native journey.
We're redefining how software gets built
We drive team velocity through cross-industry collaboration, contributions, and guidance from experienced practitioners. Whether your background is technical or creative, everybody is welcome to join us in making cloud native ubiquitous.


text:
The Future of Lasers
You could be forgiven for thinking physicists are obsessed with monumental architecture. Although their investigations often involve objects at the subatomic scale, the machines they use can be enormous. In 2008, for instance, construction work finished on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), straddling the Swiss-French border. Sometimes described as the world's largest machine, the LHC is a 27-kilometer-long circular accelerator that cost several billions. Already there is talk of building even larger particle accelerators. Early in 2019, some of the physicists who helped build the LHC floated the idea of a new circular accelerator 100 kilometers long.
But there is now a new kind of scientific machine on the horizon: a trimmed down particle accelerator that is small enough to fit on a tabletop. Diminutive they may be, but these table-top accelerators are still bursting with the power and versatility scientists demand to perform cutting-edge research. Already they have helped physicists better understand the 3D-printed metal components that could one day be used in aircraft manufacturing, and experiment with a new and improved way to hunt for cancer tumors. What's more, the table-top devices should be so cheap to build that many universities may ultimately possess one. This means accelerator technology that is currently beyond the reach of many researchers may soon be far more widely available, which has the potential to speed up the pace of scientific investigation.
Developing these new tiny accelerators is a global endeavor, but researchers at U-M have made a particularly significant contribution. Some of the key technological breakthroughs that are paving the way for the new machines involve advances in laser technology that were made by past and present researchers in the College of Engineering – including a 2018 Nobel laureate.
Table-top physics
Over the last century, particle accelerators have become among the most important instruments in the scientific toolkit. It's vast accelerators like the LHC, where subatomic particles are smashed together, that often grab the headlines. But in many accelerators, the idea is to manipulate fast-moving particles without colliding them – a process that can generate beams of intense X-ray radiation. Those X-ray beams have many uses. They have proved their worth in pharmaceutical drug discovery, in semiconductor research, and even in fossil analysis: X-ray beams can help identify the remains of ancient pigment molecules and reveal the original color of long-extinct animals.
"If we could afford it, there would be [X-ray-generating accelerators] in every university," says Zulfikar Najmudin, a Professor of Physics at Imperial College London, UK. "But it's just not possible because they are very expensive."
Typically, an X-ray-generating accelerator costs hundreds of millions of dollars to build and, once complete, occupies an area the size of several football fields. Both factors make investing in an accelerator impractical for most universities.
An unfortunate consequence of this is that the accelerators are also beyond the reach of most scientists. There are just too few of the costly machines worldwide to meet the demands of modern research, meaning many scientists performing important work can wait years to obtain access.
Alexander Thomas gives an example. Thomas is a U-M associate professor of Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences (NERS) in the Center for Ultrafast Optical Science (CUOS), as well as an associate professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) and an associate professor of physics. He says additive manufacturing, also known as 3D printing, is becoming an increasingly important technology. "We're to the point now that you can 3D print metals, and print components for aircraft," he says. But tiny imperfections in the printing process could reduce the strength of those critical components. "You really don't want these pieces to fail."
One way to assess the quality of 3D printed parts is to probe them with the X-ray beams generated by an accelerator. But it's difficult to secure access to those accelerators for this kind of fundamental research. What's needed is a cheaper – and therefore more plentiful and available – form of accelerator. It's this gap in the market that could be plugged by table-top accelerators. Using early versions of the table-top technology at CUOS and in the UK, Thomas is already collaborating with material scientists to investigate the internal structure of 3D-printed parts and identify imperfections that will help the researchers work out how to finesse the printing process.
Given how useful table-top accelerators promise to be, it's perhaps worth asking why they are still in the development stage, while larger accelerators have been operational for decades. The reason is that the smaller versions of the technology operate in a completely different way than their larger counterparts.
A traditional particle accelerator uses powerful magnets to gradually ramp up the speed of subatomic particles – typically negatively charged electrons – as they travel through a ring-shaped vacuum chamber that is often hundreds of meters long. The miniature version effectively replaces this large, circular race track with a drag strip measuring just a few tens of centimeters in length. Over that short distance, electrons are accelerated at a far higher rate. That acceleration process is triggered by astonishingly brief and intense laser pulses. This means it has only become possible to think about table-top accelerators because of advances in laser technology.
Ultrafast science
The first working laser was demonstrated in 1960. Within a few years, physicists had discovered that their lasers could be used to generate exceptionally short pulses of light, each lasting just a few trillionths of a second (or a few picoseconds). "At the time there maybe wasn't a technological reason for making those short pulses," says Karl Krushelnick, director of CUOS and, like Thomas, a professor of NERS, ECE and physics. "There was just an interest in seeing what you could do with lasers."
As the years passed, physicists realized those short laser pulses could prove useful, but only if the researchers could find ways to increase their brightness (or intensity). Light has both electrical and magnetic properties, and so if a very brief flash of laser light is bright enough, it can generate a powerful electric field that will interact with any electrons in its path.
Unfortunately, generating short laser pulses of the required brightness had the potential to damage the laser equipment. In the mid-1980s, Gérard Mourou and Donna Strickland, working at the University of Rochester, developed a solution to this problem. Their method, Chirped Pulse Amplification, involved taking the short laser pulses and stretching them out in time, effectively diluting them so their brightness could be increased without damaging the hardware. Once boosted, the laser pulses were compressed again to give a very short – and now also very bright – laser pulse.
Within a few years, the researchers had refined the technology so it was possible to generate ultrashort pulses with intensities measuring 1018 watts per square centimeter. That's the equivalent of many thousand times the output of all the world's electricity power plants squeezed into an area one-quarter the size of a typical postage stamp. The research was so important it earned Mourou and Strickland a share in the 2018 Nobel Prize in Physics.
"We proved that we could increase laser intensity by orders of magnitude," Strickland explained in a post on the Conversation, describing how she built the laser as Mourou's graduate student. "In fact, CPA led to the most intense laser pulses ever recorded."
Mourou moved to U-M in 1988 – a decision he made because of the university's strong reputation. "U-M was very big in optics even in the 1960s," he says. Mourou then helped secure a prestigious National Science Foundation grant to establish CUOS. During Mourou's time at Michigan, U-M's international reputation for ultrafast optics research grew. Several commercial companies had their roots in CUOS, including Intralase – a firm that used laser pulse technology to develop a virtual scalpel for vision-correction eye surgery.
But arguably, the culmination of Mourou's work at U-M was the construction of the HERCULES laser system in the late 90s and early 2000s. Harnessing Chirped Pulse Amplification, HERCULES was, by 2004, producing 45 terawatt pulses of laser light with a world-record intensity of 1022 watts per square centimeter. It is lasers such as U-M's HERCULES – and a similar UK laser facility called Astra Gemini – that power the table-top accelerator experiments now being conducted by Thomas, Krushelnick and Najmudin.
Taming the table-top beams
Before table-top accelerators became a genuine possibility, though, there was one more hurdle to overcome. By the early 2000s, physicists could use lasers like HERCULES to accelerate electrons to high speeds over very short distances. But those speedy electrons tended to shoot off in all directions. Physicists needed to tame them – corral them into narrow beams in which all of the electrons travelled along the same path at the same energy.
By 2002, researchers including Krushelnick, Najmudin and Stuart Mangles, a Reader in plasma physics at Imperial College London, had worked out how to encourage the electrons to form tight beams, but the electrons within those beams still carried different energies. "They were ugly beams," says Thomas.
Then, in 2004, Mangles, Krushelnick, Thomas and Najmudin helped overcome this stumbling block. They were members of one of three research teams that independently worked out how to guarantee the electrons in the beams all carried the same energy. The research, which was conducted using the Astra Gemini laser in the UK, was such a significant step in the development of table-top accelerators that it made the cover of the prestigious Nature scientific journal.
"Those studies were truly enabling," says Gianluca Sarri, a Reader in the School of Mathematics and Physics at Queen's University Belfast, UK, who now collaborates with Krushelnick, Thomas and Najmudin.
Back in 2004, Krushelnick and Thomas were based at Imperial College London, but a few years later they both moved to U-M. The HERCULES laser was a major factor in that decision, says Thomas. "It's not just that it has such a high intensity," he says. "It's having a laser of that scale in a university setting – that's quite unique."
Over the last decade, the researchers have begun putting their laser-powered table-top accelerators to work, addressing fundamental questions at the cutting edge of science. It's research that has taken them on a virtual voyage into the core of violent explosions occurring in galaxies far, far away.
Signals from space
During the Cold War, suspicions were high that parties who had signed up to the 1963 Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty might attempt to break the agreement and conduct clandestine nuclear weapons tests in space, perhaps on the far side of the moon where they would be out of sight of Earth-based observers. United States authorities launched satellites in the 1960s and 70s to monitor for the gamma rays that the explosions would generate. In the late 1960s, the satellites began detecting such signals. They were not coming from behind the moon, however: they originated from deep space.
The earliest media reports speculated that these "gamma ray bursts" might be evidence of battles being fought between powerful alien civilizations in distant galaxies. As recently as the 1990s, some astronomers were suggesting that gamma ray bursts might be some sort of alien communication system.
"It's actually not something to be taken too lightly," says Sarri. "We do constantly receive a lot of signals from outer space. You have to try to catalogue them all and find a natural reason for them, so you can rule out that they are not alien transmissions."
The consensus view today is that gamma ray bursts are nothing to do with extraterrestrials. But to really confirm the idea, astrophysicists need to know that their theoretical models for how the bursts form match with reality. This is where the table-top accelerators in Michigan and the UK enter the story. Using them, a team including Sarri, Krushelnick, Mangles, Najmudin and Thomas essentially generated mini-gamma ray bursts in the laboratory. Their research strongly suggests that at least some of the gamma-ray bursts that have been puzzling scientists since the 1960s stem ultimately from the behavior of black holes. "We now have other experiments lined up to probe the physics in more detail," says Sarri.
The gamma ray burst experiments are an example of how the high-speed electrons from a table-top accelerator can be put to work. But in conventional accelerators it's the X-rays these electron beams can produce that are arguably even more useful. It turns out that table-top accelerators can generate X-ray beams too, and they could transform healthcare.
'Free' X-ray beams
When electrons are moving at high speed, any sudden changing in their direction of travel generates a bright beam of X-rays. Often, physicists use a special piece of hardware – a device they call a "wiggler" – to induce this direction change. With a table-top accelerator, however, the wiggler comes already included. Najmudin, Krushelnick, Thomas, Mangles and their colleagues discovered that when their laser pulses accelerate electrons, the particles are violently shaken at the same time. In other words, the electrons suddenly changes their direction of travel, which means they fire out an X-ray beam. "And the X-ray beam is actually really high quality," says Najmudin.
It's these X-ray beams that Thomas is now using to probe the internal structure of 3D printed materials that might eventually be used in aircraft manufacture. But the X-ray beams have other applications too. "We're very interested in imaging tumors," says Najmudin.
Already, doctors use low-energy X-ray beams to produce mammograms and search for breast cancers. But mammogram images are relatively fuzzy and poor quality. "It's a real skill to be able to identify tumors, and there is a problem of false diagnosis," says Najmudin. The higher quality X-rays generated by laser systems can generate sharper, better images.
This is because, using those higher quality X-rays, it's possible to focus on phase contrast – the subtle but detectable way that X-rays change direction as they move through body tissues of slightly different compositions. In 2018, Najmudin and Mangles and their colleagues showed how this "phase-contrast imaging" could produce exquisite images of the different tissue types in a 1-centimeter-long mouse embryo. The same technique could one day make it easier to detect breast cancer tumors when they are still just a few millimeters wide rather than having to wait for them to grow to centimeter-widths. "That is probably one of the most exciting things we can now apply our research to," says Najmudin.
The future of lasers
Already, table-top accelerators are beginning to transform science. By boosting the power and intensity of the HERCULES-style lasers that drive the machines, even more will be possible. For instance, Najmudin points out that more energetic laser systems will be able to produce X-ray beams with enough energy to scan for tumors inside living people instead of just within tiny tissue samples.
As such, many eyes are now focused on the Extreme Light Infrastructure (ELI), a European project initiated by Mourou in 2006. Earlier this year, the ELI-NP laser facility in Romania began producing 10-petawatt (10 million billion watt) laser pulses that will ultimately be capable of intensities of 1023 watts per square centimeter – some ten times more intense even than HERCULES can presently muster.
Mourou – now a Professor and Member of the High College at Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, France – expects ELI-NP's laser pulses will prove to be a powerful new tool for exploring the subatomic world. He also anticipates exciting future laser applications beyond the table-top. For instance, laser pulses could help change the trajectory of pieces of space junk in Earth's orbit, sending them into the atmosphere to burn up. Mourou also thinks that laser pulses could help "transmute" nuclear waste – literally changing the chemical elements it contains into different elements so that instead of remaining dangerously radioactive for thousands of years the waste becomes safe in a matter of minutes.
Exciting though these European-led projects and proposals are, they also highlight that North America has lost ground at the cutting edge of laser research. "At one point all the highest intensity lasers were based in the U.S., but the past 10 or 15 years have seen a shift to Europe and to Asia," says Krushelnick.
But there are promising signs that U.S. authorities want to reverse that trend. A 2018 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine recommended the Department of Energy consider building new laser facilities to rival those now being constructed in Europe and Asia. "Hopefully we might even leapfrog those facilities," says Krushelnick.
There are reasons for near-term optimism too. In September 2019, the university announced an upgrade: with $16 million from the National Science Foundation, the work will soon begin on a major overhaul of the HERCULES laser system that will see it capable of producing 3-petawatt laser pulses. "That's a factor of 30 increase in laser power and intensity over what we've had before, which puts us in the regime where we are able to produce antimatter from the laser beam interaction," says Thomas. (See "Boiling the vacuum.")
In this new upgraded form, HERCULES will be renamed ZEUS, and it should have a big impact on the continued development of table-top accelerator research at U-M. Mourou – who was instrumental in the initial construction of HERCULES – welcomes the developments. "I still keep in touch with [the CUOS researchers] and I'm extremely interested in seeing their progress," he says.
As significantly, 2018 saw the establishment of LaserNetUS, a network that will help optics researchers across the U.S. form stronger collaborations and improve access to the HERCULES laser and the table-top particle accelerator experiments it allows. "It supports the running of these lasers to get the most out of them, and it's also about building a community," says Thomas. With LaserNetUS, and the NSF investment in the HERCULES/ZEUS laser, there is now a bright future for laser technology – and table-top accelerator research – across the U.S.


text:
The prophesied world wide warning has thus far been delayed
April 2013
Beginning with the Marian messages at LaSalette on September 19, 1846 and continuing to this very day, Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary have revealed to numerous visionaries and mystics throughout the world an upcoming "Warning" or "Purification" for all of humanity. During this prophesized worldwide Warning-Purification, it is said that each person on earth will have their souls spiritually illuminated in such a way that they will see themselves as God sees them; it will be a personal, private revelation between each person and God. We will see the damage that we have caused our souls and our relationship with God because of the sins that we have committed (most presumably those that have not yet been forgiven through the Sacrament of Confession). Many believe that this Warning will be similar to the "particular" judgment that each person goes through immediately after dying, when each person is shown all of the events and actions in one's life, as in a detailed biography (shown like a movie) of ones life, with special attention paid to our love for God and how we treated others.
We are living in the time of Mercy. The Warning has been delayed, but it is coming…..
Blessed Virgin Mary, our heavenly Mother |
Since the prophesies of a worldwide Warning (and afterwards a promised Miracle and also a conditional Chastisement or Punishment) have been occurring for well over a century, some have justifiably wondered in this regard why all these prophecies have not already come to pass, as for example in the messages of Our Lady of Good Success which mentions that some of these events will occur in "the twentieth century," and similarly, the Marian messages to Father Gobbi which also seemed to warn that these events were to occur at the end of the twentieth century. [Message #389]
Yet, while this prophetic Warning and the events following it have not yet occurred, the reader should not think that they are not forthcoming. Thanks to the prayers of the Blessed Virgin Mary and also the prayers and sacrifices of the faithful, the time of the Warning-Purification, Miracle and possible Chastisement have been thus far delayed. To St. Faustina, Jesus stated, "I am prolonging the time of mercy for the sake of sinners. But woe to them if they do not recognize this time of My visitation." [Diary of St. Faustina, # 1160]
In the Blessed Mother's messages to Fr. Gobbi, She stated "Many times have I intervened in order to set back further and further in time the beginning of the great trial, for the purification of this poor humanity, now possessed and dominated by the Spirits of Evil" (#553)
And again to Fr. Gobbi She reveals: "... thus I have again succeeded in postponing the time of the chastisement decreed by Divine Justice for a humanity which has become worse than at the time of the flood. (#576).
Concerning the "Warning", what is expected to come will be a natural and/or supernatural event(s) on a worldwide scale, which will affect humanity as a whole, similar in scale for example to Noah and the great flood. And while it can be a natural event, for it to serve a spiritual purpose of converting people and bringing about repentance, it will initially been seen and interpreted by the masses as a event and a sign coming directly from God, and not just an event coming forth from natural causes. However, it had been predicted that soon after the great worldwide Warning, scientists, government agencies and others throughout the world will try to convince the peoples that it was merely a very significant natural event, stemming from natural sources and circumstances.
The prophesised Chastisement-Punishment is conditional
And it must be remembered also that while the prophesied Warning and Miracle are not conditional, the Chastisement that may follow them is, or at least it may be greatly lessened. We see that while for example the Church approved messages of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Akita have spoken of a chastisement, it is important to make note of the conditional form in which the heavenly message is made: "As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity" [3rd message of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Akita, Japan, October 13, 1973, anniversary of the final visions and miracle of Fatima]. Thus it is important to realize that the prophesied Chastisement or "Punishment" can be mitigated, delayed, lessened or perhaps even all together averted through the sincere repentant prayers of those who experience the Warning and Miracle, and will afterwards repent, pray and make sacrifices and reparation to God during the time afterwards.
I believe that the time until the Warning was prolonged up to this point because of the mercy of Jesus, the prayers of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the prayers of all good, sincere people, most especially the victim souls, appointed by God, who are currently living in the world.. Once again at the Church approved apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to Sr. Agnes Sasagawa in Akita, Japan on August 3, 1973 our Blessed Mother said:
"In order that the world might know His anger, the Heavenly Father is preparing to inflict a great chastisement on all mankind. With my Son I have intervened so many times to appease the wrath of the Father. I have prevented the coming of calamities by offering Him the sufferings of the Son on the Cross, His Precious Blood, and beloved souls who console Him forming a cohort of victim souls. Prayer, penance and courageous sacrifices can soften the Father's anger...."
So by this Church approved Message of the Virgin Mary, we can see that Chastisements/Purifications can be mitigated through prayer.
In other words, much of what will happen depends upon us, as the Blessed Virgin Mary indicates through Fr. Stefano Gobbi (1930-2011): "These evils can be avoided by you; the dangers can be evaded. The plan of God's justice always can be changed by the force of His merciful love. Also, when I predict chastisements to you, remember that everything, at any moment, may be changed by the power of your prayer, reparation and penance. [January 21, 1984]
We should recall in the Holy Scriptures how Jonah was sent to Nineveh to preach a warning and a message of repentance to the very sinful people of that city, boldly preaching "Forty days and the great city of Nineveh will be destroyed". To their great credit, together the Ninevites fasted and repented of their sins and "When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God repented of the evil which he had said he would do to them; and he did not carry it out". [Jonah 3: 1-10]
"God is Love" [1 John 4:8] |
"I have been able to hold back the chastisement because of the prayers and sufferings of many of my children." (The Blessed Mother to Fr. Stefano Gobbi, December 31, 1977, #142)
"The times will be shortened, because I am Mother of Mercy, and each day I offer, at the throne of Divine Justice, my prayer united to that of the children who are responding to me with a 'yes', and consecrating themselves to my Immaculate Heart." (The Blessed Mother to Fr. Gobbi, September 29,1995, #553)
-Click here for Part 3 "The Great Storm is Coming Upon Us"


text:
by Paul Craig Roberts
Disinformation succeeds because so many people and interest groups across the political spectrum find that it serves their agendas as well as the agenda of the government. Consider for example the explanation of 9/11 that blamed Muslim terrorists for the attack. This served the interests of the neoconservatives, the private armaments companies, the US military, the private security companies, government security agencies such as the CIA, the left-wing, the right-wing, the Israel Lobby, and the print and TV media.
The official explanation gave the neoconservatives the "new Pearl Harbor" that they needed for their program of invasions of Middle Eastern countries [1]. The private armaments companies could look forward to decades of high profits. Wars always bring the military rapid promotions and higher retirement benefits. Private manufacturers of security equipment and spyware enjoy a rising demand for their products and have grown fat from the products sold to the TSA and NSA. Homeland Security has vastly expanded the federal workforce and administrative positions. The left-wing has proof of "blowback" caused by US interference in the internal affairs of other countries. The right-wing has proof that America has enemies against whom defense at all costs is necessary. The Israel Lobby has the US to overthrow the regimes in the way of Israel's territorial expansion. The media has the story of the century with which to boost ratings and curry the favor of government.
These are formidable interests arrayed against the mere obvious truth, obvious, that is, to any educated person. The 2,100 Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have no vested interest in any explanation of 9/11. Indeed, they are harmed by disproving, as they have done, the government's explanation. None of them will ever again get a government contract, and many of their former clients have turned their backs on "those damn anti-Americans who don't believe their own government!" Cass Sunstein, a Chicago and Harvard law professor who sold out his integrity, if any, to the Obama regime by accepting an appointment and arguing that the federal government should infiltrate the 9/11 truth movement with agents and set-up truth-tellers so that they could be discredited, possibly even prodding them into actions for which they could be arrested [2].
In other words, the government's story cannot stand the light cast by the facts and independent experts, and the government's false story must be protected by shutting down the truth-telling experts. The government, Sunstein argued, needs to either gain control over these experts or to shut them down. Just as many different collections of interest groups and people have stakes in the Obama regime's story of the killing of Osama bin Laden by US Navy SEALS in Abbottabad, Pakistan. This story and its selling by an enthusiastic media guaranteed Obama's reelection. It served the emotions of super patriots desperate for revenge who wear their gullibility on their sleeves. It served the myth of CIA and NSA prowess. It served the reputation of the killing power of US Special Forces teams. It proved that America won even though it lost the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. All the trillions of dollars spent were worth it. We got revenge on the guy who did 9/11.
No one remembered that the US government, unable to find bin Laden for 10 years, had settled on a different "9/11 mastermind," Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and had him water-boarded 183 times until he confessed to being responsible for 9/11.
If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed "was responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z," why were SEALS sent, illegally, into Pakistan to murder bin Laden? As the FBI says, there is no evidence that bin Laden is responsible for 9/11. That is why bin Laden was not wanted on that charge by the FBI, as the FBI publicly stated.
How was bin Laden, who was known in 2001 to be suffering from terminal illnesses, including renal failure, and whose death was widely reported in 2001 still alive ten years later to be murdered by SEALs?
What sense does it make that the greatest terrorist leader of our time only had two unarmed women to protect him. What sense does it make that the US would murder the terrorist mastermind with all the plots in his head instead of capturing and questioning him? How can anyone be so gullible as to believe such a nonsense tale as told to them by Obama and the presstitute media? Is America really a nation of utter fools?
Like the 9/11 story, the story of bin Laden's murder is losing credibility with the US population. Pakistani National TV shot Obama's story down with an eyewitness interview that reported that not one single person, dead body, or any piece of evidence left Abbottadad, because the only helicopter that landed blew up when it attempted to leave and there were no survivors. No other helicopters landed. So there was no dead bin Laden to be buried at sea (there are no known witnesses to the alleged burial) and no photographs of a dead bin Laden.
Yet the nonexistent photos of a dead bin Laden have now emerged in controversy. Allegedly, the US government had photos of bin Laden's corpse after he was blown away by trigger-happy SEALs who didn't have enough sense to keep the "mastermind" alive for questioning. The tough macho SEALs were so threatened by two unarmed women that they just opened fire. Judicial Watch has been trying to pry the (nonexistent) photos of a dead bin Laden from the government's hands. For "national security reasons" the US government does not want anyone to see evidence that supports its far-fetched tale of bin Laden's murder. The photographic evidence of a successful raid are off limits. They are like the alleged videos of the airliner hitting the Pentagon that we are not permitted to see for "national security reasons."
In other words, the photos and videos do not exist and never did. No government, not even the American one, would be so totally stupid as to withhold the evidence for its claims.
The government, seeing its unbelievable stories lose believability at home and abroad used Judicial Watch's lawsuit to boost the credibility of its story. Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for the photos that the Obama regime alleged to have of the murdered bin Laden but refused to release. Obviously, the government has no such photos and never had any such photos. But the government does not need evidence when it can rely on the gullibility of the American people.
As the government had no photos to release, the US government decided to use the opportunity presented by Judicial Watch to bolster its story that photos of bin Laden murdered and dead were once in its possession. The government released to Judicial Watch a document under the Freedom of Information Act that is an order from Special Operations Commander Admiral William McRaven to "destroy immediately" the photos of the dead bin Laden.
Judicial Watch took the bait. Instead of realizing that there was no reason whatsoever for the government to destroy the only evidence that might support its claim to have murdered bin Laden, Judicial Watch focused on the illegality of destroying the evidence.
Judicial Watch says that "Federal law contains broad prohibitions against the 'concealment, removal, or mutilation generally' of government records."
Judicial Watch played into the government's hands. Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton was maneuvered by the government into defining the scandal as the destruction of evidence, "revealing both contempt for the rule of law and the American people's right to know." To the contrary, the real scandal is the massive lie that bin Laden was killed by a SEAL raid and the acceptance of this lie by the American people and Judicial Watch.
By damning the government for destroying evidence, Judicial Watch has given credibility to the government's claim that SEALs murdered O sama bin Laden. The SEAL team credited with bin Laden's murder was quickly eliminated when the team was loaded onto a 1960s vintage helicopter in Afghanistan. Apparently the team members were asking one another, "Were you on that mission that killed bin Laden?" Of course, no one was, and this information was too dangerous for the Obama regime.
TLB recommends you visit http://www.voltairenet.org for more great articles and pertinent information.
See original article here: http://www.voltairenet.org/article183151.html


text:
Country Blues Guitar Basics
Learn the fundamentals of blues fingerpicking and slide from the master teachers at Acoustic Guitar magazine with this PDF & Audio Download package. Explore the essential sounds of country blues as played by seminal guitarists such as Robert Johnson, Big Bill Broonzy, and Lightnin' Hopkins. In these ten lessons, you will learn the basics of blues fingerpicking, play some ragtime licks and cool turnarounds, learn walking bass lines, try your hand at slide guitar, and more.
GET STARTED- Fingerpicking the Blues. By Pete Madsen.
- The Monotonic Bass. By David Hamburger.
- Ragtime Guitar. By Jerry Snyder.
- The Art of the Blues Turnaround. By Ron Forbes-Roberts.
- Let Your Fingers do the Walking. By David Hamburger.
- Blues-Rag Licks. By Pete Madsen.
- Embellishing a Fingerstyle Blues. By Ernie Hawkins.
- Intro to Slide Guitar. By Steve James.
- Blues in Open-G "Spanish" Tuning. By Steve James.
- Slide Techniques. By Pete Madsen.


text:
Family Wellness Exams in Valley Village, CA
It is common practice for parents to bring their children in for annual health exams, but regular visits to a family doctor should also be scheduled for parents and grandparents. Well family visits are the most effective way to prevent the onset of illness, or to diagnose existing conditions before they progress to more serious levels.
Regardless of age, visiting a primary care doctor at least once a year can have a significant impact on your overall health and even improve your chances of overcoming serious conditions. To schedule an examination for you or your family, please call (424) 365-1800 or contact Vitality Integrative Medicine online.
Annual Examinations for the Family
Tests and health screenings vary by the age of the patient, but there are several treatments that are performed regardless of your stage of life. For example, vaccinations such as tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough) need to be maintained regularly. The following is a list of other exams that doctors perform during a typical every office visit:
- Eyesight and hearing test
- Heart and lung exam
- Oral health exam
- Neurological exams to test the nerves, muscle strength, reflexes, balance, and mental sharpness
In addition to a physical examination, your doctor will also discuss nutrition and physical fitness to prevent obesity and heart disease .
Physical Exams for Children and Adults
Wellness exams for children include many of the same tests and treatments as the ones performed for adults. As a child grows though, doctors are also concerned with monitoring developmental milestones, and making sure that their height and weight increase at a consistent rate.
As a patient ages, a number of other tests become a standard part of annual wellness exams:
- Blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar tests
- Skin cancer tests
- Test for infections such as viral hepatitis
- Testing for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)
Women should also have the following annual screenings:
- Pelvic exams
- Breast exams (mammograms)
- pap smear, for early identification of cervical cancer
- Human papillomavirus (HPV) (genital human papillomavirus) screenings
After the age of 40, men should consider annual prostate and colorectal exams for early detection of cancer.
Keep Your Family Healthy
The goal of preventive medicine is to stop certain medical conditions from occurring, and to identify serious issues early on so that treating them can be more effective. Wellness exams are a large part of this.
Whatever your age, visiting a family medicine doctor at least once a year is essential to staying healthy. To schedule an examination for you or your family, please call (424) 365-1800 or contact Vitality Integrative Medicine online.
Vitality Integrative Medicine
4849 Van Nuys BlvdSuite 104
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
(424) 365-1800
8:00 am - 6:00 pm
8:00 am - 6:00 pm
8:00 am - 6:00 pm
8:00 am - 6:00 pm
8:00 am - 6:00 pm
8:00 am - 12:00 pm


text:
Imagine her reaction receiving this beautiful Love Knot Necklace. Representing an unbreakable bond between two souls, this piece features a beautiful pendant embellished with premium cubic zirconia crystals. Surprise your loved one with this gorgeous gift today!
Your piece is lovingly packaged in a complimentary soft touch box for easy gifting. Elevate your presentation by upgrading to the mahogany style luxury box, which features a brilliant LED spotlight.


text:
Learn About SMA is a resource for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) patients, families, and researchers. The site includes stories of living with SMA and recent advances in the understanding and potential treatment of SMA.
Learn About SMA is divided into five sections that can be browsed in a non-linear fashion, with video interviews, animations, and narrative.
What is SMA? includes interviews with doctors and patients, plus an animation explaining the cause, inheritance and diagnosis of SMA. SMA Science provides an introduction to the genes and mechanisms involved with SMA, including 2-D and 3-D animations and interviews with Nobel Laureates. In SMA Therapies doctors discuss current and potential treatments for SMA and a father describes the daily routine of physical therapies for his daughter, who has SMA. Antisense Therapy for SMA includes videos and animations to explain antisense therapy for SMA. In Living with SMA four SMA families describe daily routines, disease progression, children's understanding of SMA, and grieving.


text:
By Ken Blackwell
(Townhall.com) Daniel Webster was the most famous lawyer of his day. In 1819, the "Godlike Daniel" stood before the U.S. Supreme Court and argued passionately for the right of Dartmouth College to govern itself, and not to be brought under the rule of the New Hampshire legislature. Webster appealed to the Constitution, arguing that New Hampshire's actions would violate that provision that forbade states to "impair the obligations of contract." But the emotional power of his argument caught the attention of Chief Justice John Marshall, Justice Joseph Story, and in truth, captured the hearts of the country.
Richard N. Current gives us a gripping description of Daniel Webster's defense of Dartmouth College in a 1963 American Heritage article.
"Sir, you may destroy this little institution. It is weak. It is in your hands! I know it is one of the lesser lights in the literary horizon of the country. You may put it out. But if you do so, you must carry through your work.
You must extinguish, one after another, all those great lights of science which, for more than a century, have thrown their radiance over our land. It is, Sir, as I have said, a small college, and yet, there are those who love it. …"
The Dartmouth College case became one of the pillars of American jurisprudence. And Webster's powerful appeal propelled him to a brilliant career in the U.S. Senate.
The Supreme Court that year ruled in favor of Dartmouth College. It recognized not only the supremacy of the Constitution, but it showed that it valued the signal role played by colleges and universities in American life.
The Obama administration is showing it values that role not at all. It is attempting to crush The Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio. Mr. Obama's HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, is trying to force Steubenville to dispense abortion-producing drugs and pay for sterilizations. This is a Roman Catholic institution. Such things are strictly proscribed by the Catholic faith.
Sec. Sebelius may be aware that Catholic institutions are required by faith and fidelity to their mission to uphold these principles. It is an indispensable part of their mission and their reason for being. To force a Catholic institution to violate the consciences of its faculty, students and alumni in this fashion is like forcing a Yeshiva to serve pork to Orthodox Jewish students.
This attempt to crush The Franciscan University of Steubenville is, tragically, not an isolated example. From the first days of the Obama administration, there has been a kulturkampf (culture clash) against Catholic institutions not seen since the days of the Iron Chancellor of Germany, Otto von Bismarck. It was Bismarck who attempted to put all churches and universities in Prussia under his hobnailed boot.
Writer Charlotte Allen wrote of the "Persecution of Belmont Abbey" by the Obama administration in 2009. There, too, liberal zealots were demanding that the Catholic school, founded in 1876, provide contraception, abortifacients, and sterilizations or face federal sanctions. This, according to the institution's president, could lead to closing down the historic little college.
Chai Feldblum is a tenured professor at Georgetown University Law School. This is the oldest Catholic university in the country. Ironically, Feldblum, is also a homosexual legal activist. She was Barack Obama's choice for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She told a panel at Family Research Council that if it came to a clash between what she calls gay rights and religious liberty, religious liberty must give way. In other words: "Be Amish, or be quiet."
We have already seen this as the most anti-Israel administration in U.S. history. Never before has an American president and secretary of state stooped to counting Jews in Jerusalem.
The Obama administration is also the most anti-Catholic administration in American history. Never before have tens of millions of Catholic Americans been forced to subsidize the killing of unborn children with their taxes—as they are under ObamaCare. But now they are also forcing Catholic institutions to take part in the destruction of innocent human lives and the maiming of others by paying for abortifacients and sterilizations. As Americans, we must defend our religious liberties--while we still have them. Steubenville is a little college, but there are those who love it!


text:
Weight Loss Calories
The significant loss of overweight reduces the health risks associated with obesity and drastically improves the style of life and overall well-being of a person. Reductil Sibutramina was created specifically to help lose weight overweight and obese people and causes a more rapid weight loss in combination with a low calorie diet and physical exercise. Although it is classified as an antidepressant, also increases levels of serotonin, or epinephrine, and dopamine, suppresses the appetite and promotes weight loss. That may arise as adverse effects are: headache, constipation, back pain, insomnia, nervousness. Therefore, it is available only after a physical exam to rule out any underlying medical condition. What a person eats and how much energy consumed has a direct effect on your weight. If energy is not spent through activity, simply transforms into fat.
Under normal circumstances, to stay in a specific weight, one would need ingest the necessary calories that burn through daily activity. However, if a person is trying to lose weight, you need to reduce your daily calorie intake. An overweight person would need to reduce your normal diet in 500-1000 calories per day to lose 1 to 2 pounds (450-900 grams) per week. If a person has very overweight, is better adjusted to a diet consisting of 1200-1600 calories per day for men and 1000-1200 calories for women. In any case it is necessary to consult a doctor or dietitian to prepare suitable plan for losing weight in combination with Reductil.


text:
Find CBD Shops in Maryland With Best Price
Find CBD shops and more in Maryland. Looking for a store in a city near you? Shoppers in Maryland often also shop online for dry herb vaporizers, enail dab kits, and electric nectar collectors. But hey, supporting your local CBD shops is cool too, choose your city below to find the best CBD shops near you!
Find CBD Shops in Maryland
Save More By Shopping On Puffing Bird
Save More Than 30% By Shopping Online!
With more than 10 years of experience in carrying dry herb vaporizers, dab pens and electric nectar collectors on our online store, Puffing Bird guarantees to be one of the most popular headshop to buy your vaporizers for cheap and providers hassle free refund and returns!


text:
Rayman Legends - PlayStation 4 (US)
Availability: In stock
Vendor: Ubisoft
- 3D Boss Battles: The bosses have a big advantage over Rayman's gang… an extra dimension! Dragons and other epic creatures can attack from all angles, so you'll have to be on top of your game to defeat them
- New Challenges: Connect with your friends through a variety of challenges that will test your skill and speed. Check the leaderboards to see where you rank around the world.
- Rayman Rocks!: Jump to the beat of a drum, punch to the bass line, even zip-line during a guitar sustain. Timing and rhythm are the key to beat these maps set to music. See if you have what it takes to be a Platforming Hero.
- UbiArt Engine Advancements: The UbiArt engine has expanded its abilities to now include 3D gameplay elements, a new lighting design, and a new rendering system which take Rayman's award-winning graphics to the next level.
- The Award-Winning Team Is Back: The legendary team of decorated artists, designers and composers are teaming up again to create new worlds, new characters and a new soundtrack.
The Legendary Hero Returns:
The multi award winning game by Michael Ancel is back once more to continue its exhilarating fun-filled adventures in Rayman Legends! It is the sequel to the highly acclaimed Rayman Origins that now brings Rayman's adventures to a wider range of platforms like the WiiU. Taking full advantage of the power of WiiU, Rayman Legends offers detailed graphics and lighting and a whole new way to enjoy gaming!
Adventures in a Strikingly Colourful World:
Join Rayman, Globox, and the Teensies as they journey and unravel the secrets of different mythical worlds. Jump run and fight your way through every stage in this beautifully crafted world of Rayman complimented with award winning musical artistry. Play with up to 5 friends with the game's co-op feature or find a variety of challenges that will test skills and speed. Fight your way over 120 levels including incredibly entertaining musical maps and 3D bosses that have a dimension of their own!
WiiU Feature:
Enjoy Rayman Legends in an exciting new way with WiiU's GamePad capabilities; manipulate the whole level by using the touch screen capability to take out enemies, clear paths and so much more!


text:
What's included
Samak plush
Polyester fill
/sah'mahk/ means "desert" in Korean
At Samak, we design and create simple desert plants of high quality fabric to bring life to your space. Our artificial fabric cacti are perfect for those with black thumbs or those who just don't have time to care for real plants. Each fabric cactus plush is handcrafted and sewn with detail and care that will last forever.
These original creations will be a great complement for your home living space, nursery, office or shop.


text:
Zak Pashak, Detroit Bikes Entrepreneur, Buys 50,000 Square Foot Factory On City's West Side [Huffington Post]
Zak Pashak had heard a lot of negative stories about Detroit. Still, for some reason, the Canadian entrepreneur felt compelled to check out the city for himself. And after he visited in October 2010, Pashak realized that he really liked this place -- so much so that he picked up and moved from Calgary the following July.
And once he got here and bought a home in Boston Edison, his next challenge was even more radical -- opening a bicycle manufacturing plant in the city.
Now his business, Detroit Bikes, is poised to become more than an idea. On Monday Pashak closed a deal for a 50,000 square foot factory on the city's west side. He's put $500,000 of his own money into the venture and is excited about getting to work.
"I definitely want to get started as soon as possible," Pashak told The Huffington Post. "We're going to be making 50 bikes in the next month or so and giving them out to local Detroiters. They'll be testing them and giving out feedback."
Pashak's background is in the music industry, not manufacturing. He ran music venues in Vancouver and his hometown of Calgary and began Canada's popular Sled Island Music Festival. His interest in bicycling began when he ran for Calgary's City Council, when Pashak began investigating how alternatives to cars could benefit the city.
Ultimately, Pashak decided to start making bicycles because he couldn't find the type of bicycle he wanted -- one built for casual city use at a reasonable price.
His target customers are people who aren't hardcore cyclists but are still interested in bikes.The model he plans on producing in Detroit will be a lightweight steel three-speed with a tire that's thicker than those used for racing bikes. The bike will come in one color -- black-- and sell for a little under $500...
Keep reading at Huffingtonpost.com


text:
Can anyone help me identify this which I think I saw in a book dedication a few years back
"To those who in their freedom have no homeland and in their homeland have no freedom"
Here's this week's column
Independence days
From Economist.com
What can émigrés do this time?
DURING the four dismal decades of the last cold war, in places like New Jersey, Toronto, west London and Melbourne, communities distinguished by strange-sounding surnames and distinctive cuisine took root.
In the early years, many hoped they would be going "home" soon. But memories of their captive homelands became faded and rosy. The cause seemed all but hopeless: folk-dancing dentists against the evil empire.
But that changed as communism weakened. Dusty embassies, forlorn governments-in-exile, and powerless pressure groups, which for years had survived only to squabble, suddenly had real jobs to do. Strange men with bad teeth and shaggy beards—freedom fighters from "home"—had to be polished up and used to win over western public opinion, still bemused by the strange news from the east. Thousands of volunteers went back to help. When victory was won, some stayed, as businessmen, journalists, charity workers, officials—and politicians.
| |
Recognition for the Baroness |
Life may be duller now, but it can still be fun. A lively party at the Estonian House in New York last weekend toasted the 90th anniversary of the first Estonian republic. That is no historical footnote: it is a crucial political point for the Baltic states that they did not "gain" independence from the Kremlin in 1991, but "regained" what the Soviet occupation took from them.
Earlier, hundreds of Lithuanians celebrated their national birthday at a gala dinner in London, where speakers included Baroness Thatcher (frail of foot, but still in fine, fluent form on her favourite subject of freedom) and their own President Valdas Adamkus (who spent most of his adult life in America).
The former British prime minister received Lithuania's highest honour, the Order of Vytautas (with a huge cream and crimson sash), and a thunderous ovation. Not her last hurrah, perhaps, but certainly a memorable one.
The third speaker was Lithuania's hot-shot ambassador to Britain, Vygaudas Usackas. Some think he may be in the running for Mr Adamkus's job next year. With more than 150,000 Lithuanians living in Britain, the new diaspora would be a useful pool of votes should he choose to seek them.
Some younger members of his audience have similar ideas. A few years' hard work in the City of London sets an ambitious east European up for life. That could mean a badly needed new political class, of financially independent politicians and public figures with a clear idea of what still needs to change back home.
It would be nice to think that all ex-communist countries see the value of their diasporas. But all too often, they are shunned. If you are a corrupt and incompetent politician, it may suit you quite well if the most impatient people go abroad and don't come back.
The big worry among the most seasoned émigrés is that the cold wind from the east has started before eastern Europe is ready. Politics is too close to business, and business too close to Russia. The public—at least the part of it that hasn't emigrated—is disillusioned. Disgraced or dodgy politicians seem troublingly resilient, even when ties to organised crime and foreign secret services seem alarmingly clear.
"We needed another ten years", says an old Baltic hand in Washington, DC. More time would foster a new generation of politicians and officials, stronger public institutions, and greater confidence among voters that the European and Atlantic option was really working.
Nobody is saying that the picture is hopeless. And it's much worse if you are, say, Belarussian and are not sure your country is going to survive at all, let alone be free or well-governed. But among some hard-bitten veterans of the last cold war, the mood is surprisingly sombre.