text:
The past week saw a new twist in the national missile defense (NMD) debate, as overseas media focused on Russian President Putin's taking his "crusade against the U.S. NMD project" to Beijing and Pyongyang. In line with his trip last month to Europe--during which he tried to build on skepticism there by offering a counterproposal to the U.S. plan--Mr. Putin's current efforts to shore up resistance to NMD on the East Asian flank were greeted cynically by many. Editorialists from Europe and Asia questioned the viability of a "Moscow-Beijing axis" bound together "only by their respective opposition to NMD," and expressed doubt about the DPRK's apparent promise to abandon its missile program if other states provide it with technology for "peaceful space research." A fewer number of papers in Russia and elsewhere cheered his diplomatic forays, hailing Russian-Chinese "unity on the ABM issue" and judging the Pyongyang visit a "victory" and a "breakthrough." Pointing to a Sino-Russian declaration denouncing NMD, many writers noted that NMD has, in effect, become a lightning rod for Moscow and Beijing's concerns about U.S. military superiority and, more broadly, U.S. hegemony. Meanwhile, President Clinton's trip to the G-8 summit in Okinawa and Defense Secretary Cohen's recent visit to East Asia--with NMD figuring high on the agenda for both men--also kept editorial interest in the issue alive. While critics of the plan continued to far outnumber supporters, there was an emerging chorus of voices--emanating from conservative and independent outlets in Europe/Canada and Asia--either expressing support for the plan, or, at the least, advising against "knee-jerk hostility" to NMD. Themes follow:
PUTIN'S ANTI-NMD DIPLOMACY: Analysts gauged whether Mr. Putin's enlisting Beijing and Pyongyang more directly in his efforts "to torpedo U.S. NMD plans" and further isolate the U.S. on the issue would meet with success. Some asserted that "a loud reaffirmation of Russo-Chinese objections to Washington's controversial plans" would resonate in some capitals, and that his winning DPRK concessions would deprive the U.S of one of "its favorite enemies" as well as "an excuse to pull out of the ABM Treaty." Many more, however, agreed that as much as Moscow and Beijing oppose NMD, their economic interests dictate cooperation, not confrontation, with the U.S. A Munich daily averred, moreover, that Mr. Putin's energy would be better directed at "cooperating with the skeptical Europeans," since "they have good arguments against [NMD] and more influence on the Americans" than North Korea.
DEBATING THE PROS AND CONS OF NMD: Amid ongoing, heavy criticism of NMD from papers in nearly all regions, a spate of editorials in Britain, Germany, Norway, Australia, Japan and Canada steered away from the oft-heard condemnations of the U.S. plan. Insisting that "just saying 'no' is no longer enough," a Frankfurt daily maintained that "the old continent" needs to "take seriously" U.S. concerns about missile proliferation. Commentators in London, Oslo and Sydney, meanwhile, suggested that their governments should be "open to cooperation" with the U.S. on missile defense, and consider carefully the consequences for their "critical" security alliances with the U.S. of not doing so.
EDITOR: Katherine L. Starr
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 72 reports from 33 countries July 15-21. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials from each country are listed from the most recent date.
RUSSIA: "U.S. May Wreck Security System"
Mikhail Timofeyev held in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (7/21): "The deployment of a full-scale ABM system in the United States may cause arms control to stop altogether, not to mention other irreversible consequences. The United States, were it to pull out of the 1972 treaty, would surely ruin the very fragile security system in Asia and strategic stability the world over. The Russian president's visit to China and his talks with Chinese leaders might give a qualitatively new impetus to military cooperation between the two countries in the decades ahead."
"Weird Logic"
Aleksandr Chudodeyev said in reformist Segodnya (7/20): "The meeting between the Russian and North Korean leaders was largely due to the coming G-8 summit. Okinawa is the last chance for Putin to talk the White House into giving up its NMD plans. He wants to present Kim Jong Il as a sincere peacemaker.... According to Putin, countries fearing North Korean rockets may help solve the problem by offering North Korea their own space vehicles. In other words, the Americans should pay for rearming Kim Jong Il's rocket fleet.... The trouble is that Bill Clinton may not accept that kind of logic."
"A Major Breakthrough"
Reformist, business-oriented Vedomosti (7/20) printed a piece by Aleksei Germanovich: "Putin's visit to the [DPRK] ended with a major breakthrough.... Kim Jong Il, virtually promised to renounce his country's nuclear and missile plans. The leaders of the two countries signed a joint declaration which is 'without precedent,' according to Russian diplomats.... Yesterday's accords, even if they are just scraps of paper, will make Putin more confident as he fights against the United States' NMD."
"Russia's Policy Justified"
Dmitry Gornostayev filed from Pyongyang for centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (7/20): "ABM appears to be key to this tour. Putin's interlocutors in both China and North Korea are concerned about America's plans just as much as he is. A strictly bilateral dispute between Russia and the United States has become an international issue affecting a great many countries. That makes Russia's activity on the Korean Peninsula and China justified.... We can avoid the worst scenarios by depriving the Americans of their chief argument, a perceived nuclear threat from North Korea."
"U.S. Loses Excuse To Pull Out Of Treaty"
Reformist Izvestiya (7/20) noted editorially: "Kim Jong Il's statement that his country could use foreign missile technology means that the United States may lose another excuse to pull out of the 1972 treaty."
"The Final Russian-Chinese Warning"
Alexander Chudodeyev wrote in reformist Segodnya (7/19): "[According to Russian and Chinese leaders], stronger friendship between the [two] peoples...'contributes to the formation of a multipolar world and a new just and rational international order.' The real measures the 'strategic partners' intend to take to establish such an 'order'...are not specified. And observers believe things won't go beyond declarations. No practical actions will follow because a real confrontation with the West is not at all in the interests of Beijing and Moscow due to economic considerations."
"Russia And China United On ABM Issue"
Dmitry Gornostayev filed from Beijing for centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (7/19): "For all its predictable difficulties, the Russia-China tandem can be a significant counterweight to the U.S. quest for hegemony. As Putin said, 'Our common position on preserving the balance of forces in the world is one of principle and we intend not only to confirm it, but to strengthen it.'"
"Russia, China To Expand Military Ties"
Sergei Merinov filed from Beijing in official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta (7/18): "Many politicians compare the United States' NMD plans to a bomb which threatens stability in the world. Both Moscow and Beijing are worried. Experts point out that the two countries are considering wider military and technical ties with each other."
"Feeling Stronger In Okinawa"
Nationalist opposition Sovetskaya Rossiya (7/18) front-paged this by Vasily Safronchuk: "Coming to terms with China on joint measures to oppose the United States' NMD and securing North Korea's promise not to develop missile and nuclear technology would make Putin feel much stronger in Okinawa. The reverse may be true of Clinton, who may find himself isolated on NMD at the summit."
BRITAIN: "Safe Behind America's Shield"
The conservative Daily Telegraph had this op-ed byliner (7/20) by former prime minister, Margaret Thatcher: "I believe we should all be extremely concerned about unpleasant regimes such as those in North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction affords them new opportunities to threaten us and our allies.... The possibilities for achieving nonproliferation by diplomatic means were always much slimmer than the optimists admitted. Now they are all but a dead letter, and a new approach is needed.... But a nuclear weapons-free world is an infantile fantasy.... The proper response by its allies to the American superpower's dominance is gratitude and relief and a desire to improve our own performance. Instead, the response is all too often resentment and rivalry."
"Putin And Jiang Send Arms Race Warning To U.S."
The conservative Times observed (7/19): "The new warmer relations on the security front are matched in Beijing by a feeling that, in the new Russian leader, they have a man they can do business with on a broader front than his predecessor.... The symbolism mixed with communist comradeship was meant to seal a new Sino-Russian partnership against their perceived opponent, America."
"China And Russia Play Unity Gambit"
The liberal Guardian noted (7/19): "Jiang and Putin put their names to a statement warning the United States that if Washington persists with its plans for a 'mini Star Wars' missile defense, it could set off a new nuclear arms race.... Enough time has elapsed since the enmity of the 1960s and 1970s for these declarations to carry some meaning, though Beijing's foreign policy planners insist that China seeks equally good relations with the United States."
"Putin's G-8 Debut: Showmanship On The Road To Okinawa"
The conservative Times opined (7/18): "Vladimir Putin heads for his first G-8 summit in Okinawa declaring that Russia joins the party 'on an equal footing,' neither expecting nor asking for 'any sort of favor.'... His visits to China and North Korea en route should be understood in this political context; it is important to Mr. Putin to have goods of his own to put in the Okinawa shop window. Few things are better guaranteed to secure attention in the United States to Russia as a global player than some skillful juggling of the 'China card,' and few topics are more calculated to win the ear of Europeans (and thaw the heart of France) than a loud reaffirmation of Russo-Chinese objections to Washington's controversial plans to build a limited NMD system."
"Shooting Down The Anti-Missile Defense Myths"
In the independent Financial Times held (7/18): "Security arrangements are only worth preserving as long as they protect their partners' vital interests. The U.S. enthusiasm for missile defense tells us we have arrived at a moment when one party--America--feels its interests cannot be protected by merely buttressing an edifice designed to defend Western Europe from assault by a communist force that no longer exists. Missile defense may prove a catalyst to a more appropriate security arrangement. It may also be that the fealty of Europeans or Russians to the status quo is more about sustaining self-esteem than about diverting military attack. Hubert Vedrine, the French foreign minister, has accused the United States of acting like a hyperpuissance--something more arrogant than a superpower. This week Igor Ivanov, the Russian foreign minister, trumpeted the Russia 'was, is, and will always be, a superpower.' Perpetuating Russia's vision of itself may be important to Russia, but should not be a central goal of U.S. policy. Hence the opportunity of NMD. In pioneering the system, the United States will attract the criticisms it has always done. But when missile defense is made to work, it will have an enduring value both for America and its unhappy allies."
FRANCE: "Americans On The Defensive"
Pierre Beylau in weekly Le Point (7/21): "If North Korea truly renounces its plans, the White House's arguments for the NMD project will become seriously weak."
"The American Shield Up Against The G-8"
Adrien Jaulmes held in right-of-center Le Figaro (7/21): "The American antimissile shield project, which might just topple the G-8 summit program, is a new challenge for Clinton's diplomatic skills.... One of the United States' worries is that, as in the good old days of the Cold War, its allies will fear the return of American isolation.... While abroad, criticisms center around the disruption of the strategical balance, Republicans at home are accusing Clinton of not doing enough. Clinton risks leaving his successor the embarrassing task of putting the NMD project in order."
"Putin Announces A North Korea Without Missiles"
Right-of-center Le Figaro opined (7/20): "Putin has just scored points in his crusade against the American NMD project. The Russian president has just knocked the wind out of U.S. foreign policy by taking away one its 'favorite enemies.' Alluding directly to the United States, Putin twisted the knife by inviting other countries to respond to Pyongyang's proposal [that it would not develop missiles]. Even if it is unlikely that the United States will respond...this action has given Putin's argument against the NMD project more weight in Washington.... Putin has some serious cards to play when he meets Clinton tomorrow in Okinawa. This does not help Clinton out at all, and he finds himself more and more isolated on this controversial issue."
"The Sword And The Shield"
Right-of-center Les Echos said in its editorial (7/20): "Today chaos reigns...and the planet finds itself at odds with the American nation, which wants to bring to fruition its NMD project. Paradoxically, this defensive weapon, which could also be potentially offensive, risks destabilizing the entire global system by rendering nuclear deterrence strategy obsolete.... Don't be surprised that Russia, China and North Korea have joined forces against NMD. Even if the Sino-Russian coalition seems superficial today, the combined criticism of the U.S. geopolitical strategy will provide fodder for discussion at the G-8 summit."
"Putin And Jiang Replay Anti-Imperialism"
Right-of-center Le Figaro judged (7/19): "Yesterday from Beijing, Vladimir Putin promised a Russian response if the United States 'destroys the world's strategic balance' with...its NMD project.... 'The Beijing Statement' signed by Putin and Jiang is obviously aimed at the United States, whose denunciation becomes the visible cement of the Chinese-Russian strategic partnership.... But all cement, no matter how solid it may be, will inevitably crumble some day if it does not have a solid base. And the condemnation of the United States is founded on different bases for China and Russia, even though it may seem consensual."
"Putin Makes Headway In The East"
In the editorial view of right-of-center Les Echos (7/18): "Putin has set his cap for the East and wants Russia to play a major role in the Asia-Pacific region in a multipolar world.... It is a new occasion for Putin to renew his attacks against the U.S. NMD project, especially if he manages to get Kim Jong Il to declare null and void his intentions to develop ballistic missiles. It's a difficult bet to win, but it would put Putin in a position of power by depriving Clinton of one of his favorite arguments for the necessity of the NMD on the eve of the G-8 summit--the danger posed by North Korea."
GERMANY: "Putin's Trip To The Moon"
Tomas Avenarius filed the following editorial for centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (7/21): "Kim Jong Il, Vladimir Putin announced something sensational: North Korea would give up its missile program, if, in return, Pyongyang would be allowed to use aerospace technology of other nations. The great Putin and the small Kim said that North Korea is interested in missile technology only as a space explorer nation.... Putin knows this. But he wants to torpedo the U.S. NMD plans. Since Washington considers Kim's missiles a threat, Putin is taking away the U.S. arguments: Without Kim's missiles, there will be no missile defense. But this old wives' tale of North Korean space exploration is too cheap. If Putin wants to prevent...NMD, he should cooperate with the skeptical Europeans. They have good arguments against the missile defense system, and more influence on the Americans than astronaut Kim."
"Missile Defense And Arms Control"
Nikolaus Busse noted on the front page of right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (7/20): "Only a few scientists and members of Congress still question the project in principle. The rest of the United States fully agrees on the project.... The Europeans need to take this national mood of determination much more into consideration than in the past. Just saying 'no' is no longer enough. The Americans do not understand why European politicians reject the notion of possible danger from missiles.... But Europe is also not speaking with one voice. Britain, for example, has declared its support for the U.S. project. These European differences could be as damaging to the cohesiveness of NATO as U.S. tendencies pursue its own security interests irrespective of the position of its allies or other parties. One possible way out of the controversy could be a compromise over the size and nature of the system. Allied protests appear to have prompted Washington to think about technical modifications that would be easier for the NATO partners, Russia, and China to accept.... In return for their approval the Europeans could demand new political initiatives from the Americans.... But the United States will listen to all these objections only if it gets the impression that the old continent takes seriously the dangers emanating from the proliferation of missile technology in particular."
Right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (7/19) noted in a front-page editorial: "European concerns about U.S. plans for NMD may have served as additional encouragement for Putin and Jiang Zemin to call on the entire world to resist the American project.... However, substantial economic interests serve as a natural obstacle to a new hardening of fronts. As much as Russia and China are opposing U.S. missile defense plans, both countries remain highly interested in close cooperation with the United States. While Russia remains attractive to China as a provider of energy and arms, the annual exchange of goods between the two countries...is 15 times smaller than the exchange taking place between China and the United States. And, in the end, that counts more than even the finest strategic partnership."
"An Alliance Of Weaklings"
Centrist Tagesspiegel of Berlin opined (7/19): "In reality, Russia and China are two lame giants who support each other when they want to oppose the only world power.... And when the two countries practice partnership--as they are doing now in opposition to NMD--experience shows that it is usually an ad-hoc alliance that does not last too long.... Nobody has to be afraid of a Chinese-Russian alliance, [but] both the United States and Europe should take seriously their complaints about global U.S. hegemony.... Both countries are economically dependent on Western know-how and capital, including U.S. support. And both countries know this."
"Unequal Partners"
Left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau suggested (7/19): "If the United States pushes ahead with its NMD plans, conflict with Moscow and Beijing is guaranteed.... [They] fear that a functioning defense shield above North America would make them lose their last trump card--nuclear deterrence. Washington has the choice: The more the United States endangers the current balance of power, the closer together Beijing and Moscow will move."
"Playing With The Yellow Card"
Kai Strittmatter opined in centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (7/18): "China and Russia have again joint interests. The greatest one is to find a counterweight to the United States....
"In Beijing and in Moscow as well, the United States is considered arrogant and disliked because of its know-all attitude...and current criticism focuses on the NMD project.... Arms trading is a sound pillar of Sino-Russian friendship. The problem is that it is the only pillar.... And all the nicely-sounding words of cooperation to achieve a multipolar partnership do not have the necessary substructure: Economic relations are weak.... In this situation, the United States can lean back in a relaxed mood and watch Sino-Russian overtures from a distance.... It is the aim of Putin's visit to correct the [global] imbalance.... But...the Chinese leadership is more interested in turning the country into an economically strong nation than asserting geopolitical visions. And in this respect, China needs the United States more than Russia."
ITALY: "A Diplomatic Victory For Putin"
Vladimir Sapozhnikov noted in leading, business Il Sole-24 Ore (7/20): "North Korea is ready to give up its missile program in return for...foreign space technology. Following a two-hour meeting in Pyongyang with leader Kim Jong Il, Vladimir Putin has declared that 'North Korea is ready to utilize missile technology exclusively from third countries, should they be provided with tools useful to space research.'... Putin is then going to attend the G-8 Summit in Okinawa with a...diplomatic victory that might weaken Washington's hand on its space shield."
"In Beijing, Putin Defies U.S."
Alberto Stabile filed from Moscow in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (7/19): "It is not so important that the goal of the U.S. project...is to defend the United States against attacks coming from risky countries. Moscow and Beijing are convinced that the United States is just trying to obtain 'unilateral advantages' to the detriment of world stability.... The political signal (from Beijing) is strong. U.S. obstinacy in carrying out its anti-missile defense project...has finally irritated both Moscow and Beijing.... However, the Beijing summit is based on the paradox...that both China and Russia...for different reasons, are dependent on the United States. Just think about recent negotiations that allowed China inside the WTO, which would have never been possible without Clinton's okay; and Russia's continued request for aid to support its transition."
"Putin And The 'Road Of Silk'"
Franco Venturini argued in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (7/18): "Putin believes that America's hegemonic attitude has re-created the conditions for a long postponed embrace: Russia and China both want a multipolar world.... Among other things, they both criticize the NATO presence in the Balkans and oppose U.S. projects for a 'space shield.'... In his role as a strategic charmer, Vladimir Putin displays optimism, but deep in his heart he realizes that a new Russian-Chinese axis, alone, would risk collapsing. It is, therefore, necessary to expand the game to other Asian protagonists, such as North Korea."
AUSTRIA: "Putin's Temporary Diplomatic Victory"
Foreign affairs editor Livia Klingl filed this piece for mass-circulation Kurier (7/20): "On his trip through Asia, Vladimir Putin is acting like a powerful man, who is soliciting 'strategic partnerships' and standing up against the United States. Mainly because of Washington's Star Wars defense dream.... Russia would have liked to participate in a transatlantic missile defense system. But the Americans prefer to go it alone, which has unhealthy diplomatic side effects.... Putin scored a--temporary--diplomatic victory (while Clinton was struggling...at Camp David). But when it comes to economy, the Sino-Russian-Northern Korean friendship will immediately be shelved. Then money counts and not 'strategic partnership.'"
BELGIUM: "Putin's Crusade"
Edouard Van Velthem opined in left-of-center Le Soir (7/20): "It is a major concession which Mr. Putin obtained from his host.... On the eve of the G-8 summit...Mr. Putin could not have come up with a more thundering introduction at the table of the 'big ones.' This concession, of course, comes with numerous conditions.... But still, at a time when great reconciliation between the two Koreas is shaping up...Mr. Putin's contribution does not go unnoticed. First and foremost, it should be seen in the framework of the crusade which Mr. Putin is leading against the United States' controversial [NMD].... With Putin's hand held out to Pyongyang, Washington is being attacked on solid grounds.... Will it be enough to influence Bill Clinton who has to make a decision this summer? Vladimir Putin will be able to get some idea at the Okinawa summit.... And the Russian president, in the uncomfortable position of the 'eighth man,' did not want to participate without a few trump cards."
CROATIA: "Chess--Or Ping Pong--In Missile Diplomacy"
Tomislav Butorac judged in Zagreb-based Vjesnik (7/19): "The Chinese, and the Russians, still need good relations with the Americans. Hence, in their future competition [with the United States], they will keep finding solutions that will restrain, but not really challenge, the opponent.... The missile-diplomacy games without frontiers is far from being over."
CZECH REPUBLIC: "A Greater Danger To China"
Dmitrij Belosevsky held in economic Hospodarske noviny (7/19): "The U.S. anti-missile shield is a much lesser danger to Russia than to China. If Taiwan managed to hide under the American shield, China would lose the possibility to actively oppose attempts of separation."
GREECE: "Anti-Hegemonic Front"
In top-circulation, pro-government Ta Nea (7/21), foreign affairs scholar Athanasios Platias said: "Putin's recent visit to China was seen as a step toward a Sino-Russian, anti-hegemonic bloc.... There is also talk of a return to an 'arms race' and the Cold War. But the Russian and Chinese views remain far enough apart that even the American NMD will not be enough to create such a bloc. China has nothing to expect from the Russian economy; on the contrary it has every reason to 'flirt' with the West. The interests of the two countries also diverge in central Asia, where they are rivals in the 'great game' for petroleum. A final obstacle is Russia's refusal to transfer defense technology as long as the two countries' border dispute continues."
HUNGARY: "Where Interests Meet"
Beijing correspondent Gyula Ortutay wrote in leading Nepszabadsag (7/20): "The interests of Moscow and Beijing meet at one common point: the questioning of the U.S. superpower role.... Beijing and Moscow fully agree in opposing the U.S. missile shield. It is now up to Washington to decide what the consequences of these converging interests will be."
THE NETHERLANDS: "Reagan's Dream"
Maarten van Rossem commented influential, liberal De Volkskrant (7/18): "Supporters of NMD like to pretend that the United States is totally defenseless against malicious intentions of such rogue states.... Those...who wish to blackmail the United States by threatening to use [NMD] would not do so by firing long range missiles...but instead by smuggling them into the United States or firing them off...cargo ships off the U.S. coast.... The true reason behind developing a missile shield...is not of a strategic nature but rather a political one.
"The Republicans, who created the political momentum for the mini-system, in this way honor their hero Ronald Reagan.... They also hope to blow up the ABM Treaty so as to enable the United States to build a larger strategic defense system. In the eyes of people such as conservative Senator Jesse Helms, American security should not be limited by agreements with other nations. The only true security is unilateral security. The Democrats tolerate these Republican plans because they are scared to death that, in the election campaign, the Republicans will blame them for being soft on defense."
NORWAY: "We Must Be Open To Looking Into Missile Defense Cooperation"
Newspaper-of-record Aftenposten commented on Norway's role in a possible future missile defense within NATO (7/19): "When Chief of Defense Sigurd Frisvold...says that if such systems are developed in the future on a joint basis inside NATO, Norway should 'look into participating in such a cooperative effort,' he is saying little more than the obvious. We must be open to 'looking into' a possible missile defense--and the consequences for Norway in NATO should we say no.... That missile defense is a difficult issue is because the United States and Russia have made mutual vulnerability the basis for several disarmament agreements."
POLAND: "Equal Footing According To Putin"
Leopold Unger wrote in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (7/18): "Before hitting the road, Putin has warned that he wants to be...treated on equal footing.... To ensure that Russia will be treated the way Putin wants, he has outlined two new doctrines defining the main themes of Russia's foreign and domestic policy. The first doctrine proclaims that Asia is playing an important role in Russian policy, and that in this context, Moscow is going to push for a 'multipolar' world.... In this strategy China appears to be a logical ally."
SPAIN: "Clinton Is Pulling China And Russia Closer Together"
Independent El Mundo asserted (7/19): "The renewed Star Wars anti-missile shield project brings with it a far from negligible secondary effect: It brings together Jiang 's China and Putin's Russia.... According to the declaration, the initiative 'can end the peace which has followed the Cold War, because the U.S. attempt to achieve invincible military superiority could reignite the arms race.' They are correct."
TURKEY: "We Must Convince U.S. Not To Realize NMD Project"
Mensur Akgun commented in intellectual/liberal Yeni Binyil (7/19): "Although the rapprochement between Russia and China has not yet become an alliance, it is still not very pleasant.... Such a rapprochement will have enough influence to shake the strategic balance in Asia.... In other words, if the NMD project goes forward, it will not only accelerate nuclear armament, but will also heat up regional power struggles... Turkey must do everything it can to convince the United States not to realize the NMD project."
CHINA: "Pentagon's Eagerness To Deploy NMD"
Ma Shikun and Zhang Yong wrote in official Communist Party People's Daily (Renmin Ribao, 7/21): "Eager to deploy the NMD system, the Pentagon is trying to obtain more war funds to raise its position and to expand the influence of the military in decisionmaking in terms of national security. Some media put it even more straightforwardly: 'NMD makes the U.S. president a mere figurehead'."
"Joint Statement On ABM"
Xinhua wrote in the official, English-language China Daily (7/19): "According to a statement signed by...Jiang Zemin and...Putin, the establishment of the NMD system as planned by the United States makes people 'deeply worried.' China and Russia believe that the nature of NMD 'is to seek unilateral military and security advantages,' which will 'pose grave consequences not only for the national security of Russia, China and other countries, but also for the security and international strategic stability of the United States itself.' China and Russia are 'firmly opposed to such a system.' The damage wrought by NMD will trigger a new arms race and lead to an about-face in the positive trend that appeared in world politics after the end of the Cold War."
"What Effect Is Test Failure Likely To Have?"
Xu Fukang commented in intellectually-oriented Guangming Daily (Guangming Ribao, 7/19): "The failure of the July 7 missile defense test is not bad news for President Clinton, as it provides sufficient reason for postponing the decision, thus alleviating the pressure on the president. Analysts say that Clinton is most likely to agree to continue developing NMD, but will not make a final decision on full deployment of the system, leaving the hard nut for his successor to crack."
HONG KONG: "Foundation For China-Russian Partnership Is Not Stable"
The independent Hong Kong Economic Journal remarked in its editorial (7/19): "The [NMD] and [TMD] systems, [the latter of] which aims at protecting U.S. troops...and protecting Asian allies like Japan and South Korea, may lead to the elimination of China's strategic nuclear capability.... The fact that China detests this defensive system is completely understandable.... NMD will strengthen the United States' status as the sole superpower.... Russia is therefore eager to draw China over to its side.... Actually though, both Chinese and Russian leaders understand that the so-called strategic cooperative partnership is not the same as the Chinese-Russian military alliance in the 50's. Now, there are only permanent interests among nations. There are no permanent good friends, good neighbors or good partnerships."
MACAU: "China And Russia Contend With U.S. Hegemony"
The Pro-PRC Macau Daily News remarked in its editorial (7/20): "This [NMD] system will...give the United States absolute military superiority. However, it will also upset the [ABM Treaty]...damaging the balance of strategic nuclear weapons. It will also trigger a new round of the arms race. This system will give the United States the back-up to promote its hegemonism, but it will also create a new danger to global security.... Whether or not China and Russia can stop the establishment of NMD and TMD, Sino-Russian cooperation will spur the United States to think twice before acting."
AUSTRALIA: "Why Buy Into This Deadly Fantasy?"
Kenneth Davidson opined in the liberal Age of Melbourne (7/20): "The purpose of the weekend visit to Australia of U.S. Defense Secretary Cohen was to seek Australia's support for development of a $60 billion-plus program of missile defense for the U.S. mainland.... It won't work. And even if by some miracle it did work, it would be irrelevant if a terrorist or rogue state decided to deliver its bombs in a container or a suitcase, or by a low-flying Tomahawk missile fired from a nuclear submarine.... But worst of all, TMD degrades the security environment of us all.... The United States claims that the shield is not directed at China or Russia. But both countries will be forced to respond, setting off another arms race."
"It's Safer Behind The Shield"
An op-ed in the conservative, national Australian (7/19) by Michael O'Connor, Executive Director of the Australian Defense Association, argued: "An air of unreality pervades the knee-jerk hostility to suggestions that Australia might cooperate with the United States in its futuristic [NMD] program.... The argument that it contravenes the [ABM] Treaty is flawed.... If NMD is expanded...to a [TMD] system, there will be substantial benefits for Australia's defense if long-range missile capabilities continue to proliferate.... Any Australian decision to close or limit the use of the [Pine Gap] facilities would legitimately be considered hostile to the United States and therefore an abrogation of an alliance that is critical to our security."
"U.S. Missile Shield A Call To Nuclear Arms"
Former prime minister and political commentator Malcolm Fraser gave this op-ed standpoint in the conservative, national Australian (7/18): "If the United States seeks to use facilities at Pine Gap...Australia should refuse absolutely.... ANZUS would become an impediment to our security rather than a safeguard.... Since the end of the Cold War the United States has become more assertive, more convinced in its own righteousness.... The United States is now putting world stability and world security at risk. It is a policy of selfishness, of shortsightedness and of ignorance."
"Son Of Star Wars--Do We Need It?"
An editorial in the liberal Canberra Times raised the following questions (7/18): "What could Australia expect to gain from allowing Pine Gap to be used in an early-detection system?... What impact, if any, would involvement have on Australia's defense budget, given that, at least in the first phase, the missile shield would seem designed purely to defend the United States.... Perhaps just as important as the physical viability of the shield is the issue of its psychological viability: Would the deterrent value of a vast early-warning be greater than the risk that it might trigger the proliferation of a new generation of warheads? These are questions the United States must ask and answer well before the question of Australian involvement is addressed."
"Flip Side Of Pax Americana"
An editorial in Melbourne's liberal Age held (7/18): "Internationally, this debate is proving disruptive and potentially dangerous. Washington appears to be alone in its enthusiasm for missile defenses. For this reason, Australia should treat with extreme caution Mr. Cohen's suggestion at the weekend that the Australia-U.S. joint facilities at Pine Gap could play a role.... There are powerful reasons for Australia to think twice before joining the Americans in embracing this vision."
JAPAN: "DPRK's Missile Development Must Be Stopped"
Conservative Sankei opined (7/20): "During their meeting in Beijing, Putin and Jiang issued a joint statement opposing U.S. plans to develop a NMD system. But calls for NMD development apparently gained momentum in the United States only after the DPRK test-launched a Taepodong missile over Japan in August 1998. At recent talks with the United States, the DPRK called for a payment of one billion USD in compensation for the suspension of its missile development. Given these circumstances, Putin, who is visiting Pyongyang, and Jiang, who is 'close to' Kim Jong Il, must persuade the North to stop its missile development.... First and foremost, Russia and China must suspend the sale of their modern weapons and missile-related technologies to other countries. They must 'behave themselves' before criticizing the United States' NMD development plan."
"Hardly A Trustworthy Alliance"
Conservative Sankei's Beijing correspondent Takagi observed (7/19): "Visiting President Putin and Jiang 'staged' their burgeoning partnership by denouncing U.S. plans to build anti-missile shields. In reality however, the Russian-Chinese relationship...can hardly be called a strong or trustworthy alliance. The two nuclear powers...are bound together only by their respective opposition to NMD."
NORTH KOREA: "Nothing Can Conceal The U.S.' Sinister Design"
Pyongyang's official KCNA news agency published this piece (7/18): "[Worker's daily] Rodong Sinmun said today in a signed commentary: The United States claims that its 'NMD' is for protecting its 'security' from a 'threat' from the DPRK. This, however, is a sheer lie. The United States is the world's biggest possessor of missiles and nuclear power. The U.S. move to establish 'NMD' is prompted by its aim to have military supremacy over the world. Its main target is big powers around the Korean peninsula...which are challenging its move to build 'unipolar world' and keep Europe under its military control. With nothing can the United States conceal its sinister design and danger of the 'NMD.'"
THE PHILIPPINES: "NMD's Destructive Force"
Former ambassador Armando Manalo wrote in the independent Manila Times (7/19): "The deployment of NMD is expected to revise all the ground rules in nuclear weapons management.... Deployment of NMD is likely to destroy all hopes of [future] agreements on nonproliferation. Its immediate effect is to encourage current nuclear powers to follow suit on a similar claim of security. As for potential nuclear powers, it is certain that NMD gives them the green light to proceed with their own nuclear plan. Worst of all, the U.S. action may start a new era of fear, which will cause the consequent destabilization."
SINGAPORE: "Dragon Hugs Polar Bear"
The pro-government Straits Times asserted (7/19): "This is all about Russia wanting to reclaim a role in North Asia...and China having concluded that the U.S.' post-Cold War mission has been to delay its development to its full potential.... America has all but made a China-Russia axis inevitable. The grouse-list is long: U.S. plans to build anti-missile systems which Moscow and Beijing regard as imperialist over-reach; crusades about human rights...disguised support for secessionist movements...[and] bypassing the UNSC in controversial actions like the bombing of Yugoslavia.... The joint statement on missile defenses signed yesterday, among a clutch of agreements, puts the United States on notice not to proceed with provocative acts. American policy-makers should reflect deeply on what has transpired in Beijing. The rules are changing."
"Unforeseen Consequences"
The pro-government Business Times carried a column by editor Mohan Kuppusamy (7/18): "It seems everyone is agreed that a new U.S. missile defense effort will trigger the domino effect. All who feel threatened by Washington will turn to missiles and other arms delivery systems to neutralize U.S. power. In turn, this will trigger yet other nations to build up their arsenals. If the Chinese decide on an arms build-up, India first and, subsequently, Pakistan will go down the same path. It will destabilize Asia with consequences that cannot be foreseen."
SOUTH KOREA: "Looking At Putin's North Korea Visit"
Moderate Hankook Ilbo held (7/21): "In their joint communique, North Korea and Russia declared their shared opposition against the United States' missile defense shield. That is futile.... The recent media report--that the North told Putin it can give up its missile programs in exchange for space technology--offers nothing new either. The North has already done that: asking something--monetary compensation from the United States--in exchange for putting on hold it missile program. Pyongyang, in other words, is repeating itself. In addition, talk about the North's interest in space research and getting rocket boosters simply makes no sense."
"Shared Opposition"
Independent Dong-A Ilbo asserted (7/19): "Russia and China, who share strong opposition to the United States' NMD and TMD, have strengthened their strategic partnership in the wake of Putin's Beijing visit. Their shared ground on these important issues served to leave the impression that they have formed something like a joint anti-American front and that they together are challenging America's hegemony in this region. Things are becoming quite complicated in this region."
"Why Is Putin Running Around Eurasia?"
Senior columnist Kim Young-hee wrote in independent Joong-Ang Ilbo (7/19): "Why is Putin running around Eurasia? The answer is obvious: He is trying to build an anti-American front in Europe and Asia. With the U.S. NMD aggravating things for Washington, Putin is having a golden opportunity to bring together nations that are critical of the United States."
"U.S. Isolated"
Tokyo correspondent Park Chung-hoon wrote in conservative Chosun Ilbo (7/15): "It looks as if Russia will launch a major offensive against the United States on NMD, with European leaders most likely getting on the side of the Russian president. Even such traditionally pro-U.S. nations like Canada and England are said to have their reservations about NMD. At this point, Japan remains the only U.S. supporter, a clear indication that the United States is quite isolated on this issue."
VIETNAM: "Chinese-Russian Strategic Partnership"
Thanh Tam wrote in Sai Gon Giai Phong, mouthpiece of Ho Chi Minh City's Communist Party (7/19): "Washington is now distressed by the closer relations between Beijing and Moscow. This strategic Russian-Chinese partnership will be a firm barrier to prevent the crazy ambitions of Uncle Sam."
"NMD And The U.S.' Diplomatic Advantage"
Tuong Van wrote in Sai Gon Giai Phong, mouthpiece of Ho Chi Minh City's Communist Party (7/18): "Western Europe, Third World states, Russia and China all denounce the U.S. [NMD] plan.... If [it] continues to deploy an NMD plan, Washington will lose its diplomatic advantages with hostile countries such as Iran, Iraq and North Korea and suffer diminished confidence from its allies.... The NMD plan also...will contribute to the formation of a Beijing-Moscow axis.... Mr. Clinton must be present at the G-8 meeting where he will definitely have to face Putin's questions on NMD. Apparently, this NMD plan is distressing for U.S. diplomacy."
INDIA: "Missile Misses, Mission On Course"
The centrist Hindu (7/16) had this piece by Washington correspondent Sridhar Krishnaswami: "The expectation is that Mr. Clinton will move forward on the $60-billion project. Politically this will give some cover to the vice president and save him from the accusation of being associated with an administration 'soft' on defense issues.... Beijing--and Pyongyang--have told Washington that if it proceeds with the NMD, it should not expect any cooperation or restraint on missile and nuclear exports to countries such as Pakistan.... And perhaps to some others in West Asia."
"Nuclear Circus"
The centrist Times of India's editorial read (7/15): "[Secretary Cohen's visit to China] and the anodyne pronouncements of both sides highlight their unwillingness and inability to come to grips with the real conflict of security interests between the two.... The United States hopes that NMD will enable it to intimidate China with its technological superiority. The consequent degradation of China's deterrent capabilities would then freeze the present status quo, enveloping the Taiwan issue. To achieve that, the United States is prepared to accept risks of some more proliferation by China.... [This situation] may not immediately upset the U.S.-China balance of power but it is likely to increase the risks of proliferation by China. The United States is obsessed with the NMD program to protect itself and that is a clear indication that it is resigned to further proliferation by China."
EGYPT: "U.S. Drives China And Russia Together"
Pro-government Al Ahram held (7/20): "There is a gap in Chinese-American relations because of Washington's insistence on playing the role of the sole superpower.... These developments drove China and Russia to seek mutual cooperation.... If Washington has ignored the individual protests of China and Russia against the anti-missile shield program, it cannot ignore their joint statement confirming their intention to cooperate to respond to American measures. In fact, Beijing and Moscow are seriously seeking to blot the image of a unipolar world...and this summit came as an important step on this long road."
CANADA: "Flying Madly Off In All Directions"
Adjunct lecturer at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, Thomas S. Axworthy wrote in the leading Globe and Mail (7/21): "If Washington carries out its program, China's solution would likely be to expand its rocket force. The impact would not stop there. Any expansion of Chinese missile forces would raise fears in India and, if India built up its missile forces to match China's, then Pakistan probably would expand its forces to match India's. Missile defense in Alaska--seemingly so far from any conflict--has the potential to destabilize the existing nuclear balance and promote a new nuclear arms race in Asia. It doesn't have to happen. The United States is no longer a superpower. It is a hyperpower with no real economic, military or technological competitors.... Let us pray that, in the discussions on nuclear strategy at the G8 summit, the United States will demonstrate wisdom as well as power."
"Premature Eradication"
The conservative National Post commented (7/15): "The 'technological unfeasibility' of [NMD] is becoming a popular mantra among critics of the program, many of whom are veterans of the anti-Reagan campaign to eradicate 'Star Wars.'... They did not succeed then, and they should not succeed now.... Seizing the moment, U.S. Senate Democrats managed to tack on an amendment to a defense authorization bill requiring the Pentagon henceforth to test the system against all conceivable enemy countermeasures. The amendment had less to do with ensuring NMD was invulnerable than with attempting to impose impossibly high standards on a system in the very early stages of its development. When, inevitably, the system fell short of these premature expectations, critics could claim it was 'scientifically unfeasible.'... There is no doubt that NMD requires rigorous testing. But politicizing these experiments now, just before a presidential election, is gambling with international security."
ARGENTINA: "Could U.S. Itself Become A 'State Of Concern?'"
Nicolas Meyer commented in the liberal, English-language Buenos Aires Herald (7/18): "The United States is giving serious thought to erecting a kind of Maginot Line in the sky--officially, a NMD system.... Pious protestations to the contrary, NMD would appear to be designed to reopen the kind of mega-arms race that the world thought had...ended.... For the United States to get itself some protection--with a technically dubious value to boot, at the cost of foisting resurgent nuclear nightmares on the rest of the world, doesn't track with the United States' self-image as the main force for good in the world.... Breaking ABM now, or even just bending it out of shape, willfully destroys one of the most successful of all disarmament measures.... The dismal failure of the NMD test on July 8 is only a temporary setback for the project.... Any technical difficulty can be dismissed by NMD partisans as temporary. Only farsighted statesmanship can put an end to this dreadful mistake before it's too late."
BRAZIL: "Sino-Russian Rapprochement Hampered"
Liberal Folha de Sao Paulo commented (7/18): "Putin's visit to China has a clear goal: to strengthen the 'strategic partnership' conceived to confront U.S. hegemony.... The Russian-Chinese initiative is now aimed at protesting against U.S. plans to install new anti-missile defense systems. But the Moscow-Beijing rapprochement...is hampered by the two nations' economic models.... Their economies depend on foreign capital, and a more acute confrontation with the United States would mean the cutting off of vital investment flows."
CHILE: "Putin's Goals"
Conservative, influential, newspaper-of-record El Mercurio (7/20) ran this editorial: "Putin wants to restore Russia's influence...and is therefore seeking alliances to establish a multipolarity in a world ruled by U.S. hegemony.... It is possible that Russia and China will manage to lure India into taking a similar position."
MEXICO: "No Counterbalancing U.S. Hegemony"
Nationalist Milenio (7/19) carried a column by Mireya Olivas: "As had been anticipated, both [Russia and China] rejected [NMD].... They then go on to list a series of threats to stability.... What were they thinking of? They have more than enough to be concerned about.... The United States is fully aware of this list of problems, which is why it is not worried when the Russians and Chinese complain about its nuclear missile defense system.... The United States knows that only if [they] had strong economies and truly democratic governments could they be a real counterbalance to U.S. hegemony." ##


text:
Huffington Post
By Dr. Peter Breggin
America and Australia are two countries I vastly admire. Nonetheless, they are continuing to abuse psychiatric patients with electroshock treatment (ECT). In America involuntary adults are being shocked despite the best efforts of psychiatric reformers (Oaks, 2009). In Australia psychiatrists have taken shock treatment to a new level of barbarity by shocking 55 toddlers age four and younger in Victoria (Hale, 2009).
The controvery over shocking children has a long history. In 2000 before his untimely death, Steve Baldwin, at the time a professor of psychology in Australia, and his co-author Melissa Oxlad wrote a book reviewing and condemning the practice throughout the world.
Electroshock "treatment" was discovered in the 1930s in a slaughterhouse in Italy. Before being killed, hogs were knocked out by a jolt of electricity to the head and brain. If they weren't slaughtered, after a while the animals awoke and were able walk around on wobbly legs. Two Italian psychiatrists learned about this phenomenon and immediately tested it on an involuntary patient. The patient wasn't knocked out by the first jolt and struggled from the table screaming "Murder!" The doctors gave him a bigger jolt. When he awoke, he was docile and no longer complained. A miracle treatment was born and the two psychiatrists became famous.
Why in the world would medical doctors be so excited about a jolt of electricity that knocked out a hog without killing it? This was the era that originated lobotomy–slicing up, burning or poisoning the highest centers of the human brain. It was also the era that originated insulin coma therapy–putting patients into a coma with overdoses of insulin that destroyed brain cells in great batches throughout the brain. Doctors were looking for new ways to inflict controlled damage on the patient's brain without completely destroying its function.
In those early days, many psychiatrists voiced the opinion that brain damage was good for the "mentally ill." It certainly made the patients more docile and hence easier to manage in giant state lockups. Only in more recent times, in response to criticism, did shock advocates begin to claim that the treatment was harmless and corrected biochemical imbalances.
Shock treatment damages the brain through a variety of mechanisms. First, it causes grand mal seizures that are much more intense and destructive than those spontaneously experienced by people with severe epilepsy. These multiple seizures (typically 3 per week for a few weeks or more) exhaust and damage neurons or brain cells. Second, the electric current by itself damages the brain by disrupting electrical function, over-heating brain tissue, stimulating massive hypertension inside the brain, breaking down the blood brain barrier, and causing tiny blood vessels to spasm shut, depriving neurons of oxygen and nutrients. Commonly, patients undergo several seconds after ECT in which their brain flatlines–zero detectable electrical activity–a sign of permanent brain death when extended for minutes. Animal studies have shown small hemorrhages and cell death throughout the brain and in the frontal lobes after exposure to doses of ECT that are smaller than nowadays used in clinical practice. Human studies show that former ECT patients suffer from persistent loss of mental function and dementia (see Breggin, 2008; Sackeim et al., 2007).
Shock advocates have proven impervious to science and to public criticism. Like men who beat their wives and abuse their children, shock doctors escalate their violence when criticized. Like other abusers, criticism by itself will not stop them. Shock treatment must be banned. We can begin by banning it on children eighteen and younger, and involuntary adults.
I began writing about this abusive practice exactly thirty years ago when I published the first and only medical book devoted to looking at the damaging effects of this treatment (Breggin, 1979). I have written scientific articles on the damaging effects of ECT (Breggin, 1998) and updated the scientific facts in my latest medical book, Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry: Drugs, Electroshock and the Psychopharmaceutical Complex (2008).
I have not been alone in criticizing the "treatment" as wholly ineffective (Colin, 2006) and as dangerous. One heroic shock survivor, Leonard Frank, spent decades re-educating himself and learning to live with long-term harmful effects, devoting himself to reform in psychiatry, and even to writing one of the best scientific critiques of ECT (Frank, 1990).
Lately, doctors who recommend or carry out ECT have been taking heat in the U.S. court system. In June 2005 in south Carolinia, I was the medical expert in the first ever malpractice trial in which a jury found a doctor negligent for referring a patient for ECT (see breggin.com for details). Not long ago, I was the medical expert in a malpractice case that was settled for a very large sum. It involved a man whose life was ruined by considerably more than 100 treatments (a huge number!) over a two-year period.
Meanwhile, the shock advocates themselves have published a long-term followup of patients treated with electroshock and found massive harm to the brain and mind, including persistent dementia (Sackeim et al., 2007). How have the shock doctor's responded to the latest confirmation that their treatment destroys the brain and mind? Not a single one has expressed any caution following the publication of the study. As we now see, they have pressed harder to enforce it on children and involuntary adults.
Shock treatment has been going since 1938–more than 70 years. Let's celebrate the passing of its 70th anniversary by putting a stop to it, once and for all.
Times: Police get power to detain individuals indefinitely in mental institutions for having fixated ideas *
From FDA to GSK: Corporations' Partnership With Government *
The FDA Wants to Stop You from Protecting Yourself Against Drug Companies
Medication Madness: How Psychiatric Drugs Cause Violence, Suicide, and Crime

subset: commoncrawl


text:
EDS Today won a $20,000 dollar grant from the Chase Community Giving program on Facebook, thanks to the support of the EDS community. The entire amount was donated to Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, towards on-going Ehlers-Danlos research. This research is being done by Hal Dietz and his medical research team. We truly thank them immensely!
Information on this Vascular EDS Research
Dr. Hal Dietz on Vascular EDS Research
Research at Johns' Hopkins Offers Hope for EDS
Here are all the correspondences:
The Board of Directors voted to send the entire amount to EDS Research.


text:
Begin Your Search
WineAccess Travel Log
Read stories from the world's greatest wine trails.
More About This Wine
Related Products
Additional Vintages
Other Wines from this Producer and Vintage
2009 Pegasus Bay Chardonnay Waipara Valley
Producer: Pegasus Bay
Style: White Wine
Grape Type: Chardonnay
Origin: New Zealand
Region: New Zealand
89(+?) Points | Stephen Tanzer's IWC - September/October 2013
Good full medium yellow. Enticing aromas of lemon oil, nutmeg and ginger. A step up in fruit intensity from the 2010 bottling but still a bit tight, with the lemon oil and stone fruit flavors showing a touch of youthful bitterness on the firm, brisk back end. This should benefit from another year or two of bottle age.


text:
I invite you to travel back in time…
To the 1800s
To meet Lydia, a cream-colored slave torn between the love she has and the life she doesn't in my debut novel, THE LOOM.
To the 1970s
To meet Shella, a coffee-colored girl torn between her love of theatre and writing.
Within the pages of my book and my blog, you will come to know both of us and a slew of other characters–some imagined, some real–and experience life through our eyes. I would be honored to discover you along the way as well.
Let's journey together.
Q&A with Shella about The Loom


text:
SPARTANBURG, South Carolina - Former Murphy High School football and track standout Captain Munnerlyn reports for the Carolina Panthers' preseason training camp at Wofford College today intent on establishing himself as an every-down cornerback in the NFL.
At 5-foot-8 and 195 pounds, Munnerlyn thinks he's been typecast as a nickelback in the pros. After being elevated to starting duty at cornerback last season because of injuries, Munnerlyn wants to stay in that position.
Munnerlyn is entering his fifth season with the Panthers after being drafted in the seventh round out of South Carolina. He signed a one-year, $1.1 million contract with the Panthers in the offseason.
"I want to establish ourselves and the secondary," Munnerlyn said on Saturday before conducting his annual youth football camp in Mobile. "Nobody knows anybody in our secondary. They always say my name, like, 'They have Captain Munnerlyn, but he's a small guy. He's shooting just for the nickel.'
"I don't like that. I'm a guy who feels like I can play every down. I'm a competitor, and I go out there and compete every single day. Hopefully, we can just establish ourselves as a secondary."
Munnerlyn, who started 11 games, posted a career-high 61 tackles during the 2012 season, when he returned both of his interceptions for touchdowns. His two interceptions tied for the team lead last season.
The secondary is one of the biggest questions marks for the Panthers entering training camp. It's considered the weak link of the defense.
Carolina had rookie Josh Norman from Coastal Carolina at the corner spot opposite Chris Gamble or Munnerlyn for most of the 2012 season, but he struggled and lost the starting job after 12 games. He's still in the cornerback mix for 2013. Josh Thomas is back, too, after starting four games at cornerback for Carolina last season.
Also vying to start at cornerback is veteran Drayton Florence, a former Tuskegee standout who played for the Lions last season. He has 10 years and 96 starts of NFL experience.
The Panthers also signed cornerback D.J. Moore as a free agent. He was the Chicago Bears' nickelback last season.
In the offseason, the Panthers decided to move strong safety Charles Godfrey back to free safety to take over from Haruki Nakamura, who's now Godfrey's backup after starting 13 games for the Panthers in 2012.
Former Foley star Robert Lester, who is an undrafted free agent from Alabama, Mike Mitchell and D.J. Campbell are the candidates at strong safety. A four-year veteran, Mitchell played for the Raiders last season, although he started just two games. Campbell started four games for Carolina in 2012 as a rookie out of California.
Munnerlyn didn't help clear up the secondary picture during OTAs and mini-camp in June because he missed those workouts with an abdominal injury. But he's good to go for the start of training camp.
"I feel great," Munnerlyn said. "I'm excited about training camp. I'm not going to go out on a limb like one of my teammates did last year and say we're going to win the Super Bowl and we didn't make the playoffs. I'm trying to just go out there and, hopefully, help my team make a playoff run, and we'll see what happens from there."
However, Munnerlyn has predicted that Carolina's defense will be the league's best this season.
Munnerlyn cited the return of linebacker Jon Beason, a three-time Pro Bowler who has played five games in the past two seasons because of injuries, as one reason he expects the Panthers to improve from being the NFL's 10th-best defense in 2012. That's measured by yards yielded per game. Measured by points given up per game, Carolina ranked 18th in defense last season.
The Panthers spent their top two draft picks in April on defensive tackles, bringing in Star Lotulelei of Utah and Purdue's Kawann Short, who was the North MVP in the Senior Bowl in January, to go with ends Greg Hardy and Charles Johnson.
The Panthers had a 7-9 record in 2012. They play in the NFC South with the Atlanta Falcons, New Orleans Saints and Tampa Bay Buccaneers.


text:
A new instrument, the aberration generator, has been developed for introducing precise amounts of aberration into an optical wavefront. Piston error, wavefront tilt, defocus, sphėrical aberration, coma, and astigmatism can be generated either individually or in combination. The instrument can be used to study the effects of aberrations on image quality and the optical transfer function for a wide variety of optical systems.
© 1975 Optical Society of AmericaFull Article | PDF Article


text:
|Voters across New Jersey
Camilla Arthur Farmer spoke slowly, to savor the moment, in a voice tinged with only a ghost of Southern accent, a South her family fled many generations ago and left far behind.
"To live to be my age. And see a black man run for president of the United States. To vote (yesterday) was an honor."
Camilla Arthur Farmer is 82, the matriarch of an extensive family in the Camden County town of Lawnside. Her bloodlines date all the way back to when Lawnside was called Free Haven, a farm town founded for freed slaves on land bought by Abolitionists in 1840. In 1926, New Jersey chartered it, and it became the only black-governed town north of the Mason-Dixon line.
With all that history, Lawnside was ready to make more yesterday.
"I got here at 5:15 (a.m.)," said Lawnside poll worker Joan Smith, "by 20 (minutes) to 6, there were five people outside. By 6, there were about 50."
It was like this all around New Jersey. The election generated something bigger than excitement. It inspired passion; it was a call to duty.
"I was determined to be the first person at my polling place," said Rutgers-Newark professor Clement Price, a leading scholar of African-American history. "I wanted to cast the first vote on this historic day, to honor my deceased father. I got up at 5 a.m., and rushed down to the polling place (at Rutgers-Newark) -- and there were already a dozen people in line. But I understand this. This is a momentous occasion. This is history."
Down in Lawnside, the line outside the boxy town hall was steady and the atmosphere was part town celebration, part family reunion.
"I never thought I'd live to see this day. Not in my lifetime. Maybe not in hers," Skip Harris said as he held the hand of his granddaughter, Zharia, 4.
"This means everything to me," said Clinton Higgs, a Republican councilman in town. "For the legacy of our people, for the history of this town. This town is a model community for African-Americans. It showed what an African-American town could be. We don't have crime, we don't have poverty. We've been governing ourselves since 1926."
While New Jersey may be blanketed in blue on electoral maps, it is, like many places, a patchwork of many colors; in race, in ethnic flavor, in politics, in economic base. In all those places yesterday, voters came out in numbers never before seen, and the election was the talk of all the towns.
Just a few miles from Lawnside is Audubon Park, the most Democratic town in New Jersey. Of 811 registered voters, 10 are Republicans.
The town was built as housing for shipyard workers in 1941 as America geared for World War II. In the town's municipal building, there are laminated newspaper clippings from the day, with prominent pictures of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The shipworkers were union men, their wives were union men's wives, and their children were the children of union men. All Democrats, forever; blue, as in collar.
Today, the 500 barracks-like houses in the 500-acre spit of land are painted all white. Town rules say so. Town rules do not say residents must vote Democratic, but it works out that way. Yesterday was no different.
"I'm a retired union ironworker," said Tom Costello, leaving the polls with his wife, Peggy. "Any union guy votes Democrat."
Farther north, in the Hispanic neighborhoods of Perth Amboy, Obama headquarters was open, and red, white and blue balloons danced in the breeze on the sidewalk.
Perth Amboy became blue when white Europeans flocked to work in the waterfront factories. It remains blue, even if newer residents are brown.
"There is a lot of excitement over this election," said Melissa Santiago, a poll worker at Edward J. Patten Elementary School. "Especially with young people. We're seeing a lot of first-time voters."
One was William Munoz, who, at 27, decided to get involved.
"I was never interested enough before," he said. "But I like Obama."
Essex Fells is a white-collar town. It was built that way; a planned executive community from the 1910s when New York and Newark business prosperity created the rich suburbanite class. The architecture of the homes -- Stick Style Victorians, English Tudors, Georgian Colonials, Craftsman bungalows of giant proportions -- is much more diverse than the voting block. Essex Fells has one of the highest percentages of Republicans in the state.
Michael Candido is proudly, unabashedly one of them, and wore his multicolored elephant tie as he voted at the town school. But he said Essex Fells might not be as Republican this time around.
"There is more support for both candidates in town than any election since I've lived here," said Candido, a 20-year resident. "But the country is drifting more toward liberal socialism all the time. It doesn't surprise me, but it disappoints me."
In the green pasture-lands of the Hunterdon hills, the Zion Lutheran Church in Oldwick was the District 1 polling place for Tewksbury Township, settled by German farmers and conservative to this day. Across from the church, a restored Victorian house had a large American flag hanging from the porch and McCain/Palin signs in the yard. This is red country; former governor Christie Whitman voted here earlier in the day.
Poll worker Janet Weber said that when Whitman came to vote, she saw a line like never before.
"She came in and saw a line of people around the room, and said, 'This is how it's supposed to be.'"


text:
Three of the undefeated coaches -- Tully's Denise Abbott, Skaneateles' Doreen Doctor and Canastota's Marcia Laidlaw -- offered their views on coaching, the playoffs and the future of their sport.
Q. As the season progressed, how much did your team focus on remaining undefeated? As a coach, how hard was it for you to keep your team focused on each individual game rather than the streak?
Abbott: Our team never focused on the "streak."The season was more about keeping pace with the league leaders and capturing a league championship. Over the course of the last 20 years the OHSL Patriot American Division's champion has won the division by having less than two league losses for the season. An undefeated season guarantees the league title, one loss earns you a co- championship and 2 losses gives you second place. Although we do have a 16 match win streak, we did not win the Patriot American Title until last night. The "streak" is not the goal... the goal was the title of League Champions.
Doctor: We seldom talked about it but I know the players thought about it I didn't want that to be the measure of success, I wanted them to play well. I've always told them that doing that is "icing on the cake" We approached the season as "one match at a time and no one is going to give you anything... you have to go out a take it"
Laidlaw: I believe every team begins their season with the hope of going undefeated, qualifying for Sections and going on. We don't talk about it (the streak), but I'm sure it's on their minds. Our main focus is one game at a time. At Canastota, it is expected of us to win, which is the price of previous successful teams. Someone wins, someone loses, but you have to remember...the day begins anew tomorrow. Streaks are great, we've had many at Canastota. We've taken pride in that they have happened, but it only sets you up as the target. We play for the moment, what each opponent will present to us and go from there.
Q. Who are the emotional leaders on your team and what make them leaders?
Abbott: My emotional leaders are my seniors. We have seven seniors who have led by example for the past three seasons. These seniors have attended every open gym, every summer and fall league, they have participated in an off season summer boot camp, they attended a team camp at Penn State this past summer and they have attended every off season program that has been offered. My seniors are the emotional leaders of our team and the Tully volleyball program, their commitment, work ethic, and dedication to the program have made them the heart and soul of our team and is directly correlated to our success this season.
Doctor: Senior Emily wood is very intense and driven so she keeps the others on task. Senior Katherine Hill is very energetic and is the emotional cog in the wheel. The two of them usually keep our practices going strong.
Laidlaw: I feel it's very hard for today's generation to lead. Thoughts of, "Who are you may boss?" or "Coach's pet," are around. I find the best "leaders" are the ones who work HARD, can withstand PAIN to the point where they will sacrifice anything for the TEAM and the DESIRE has to come from them. There is NO WAY a coach can teach HEART... it must come from within.
Q. Team chemistry? How have you developed and maintained it through an undefeated season?
Abbott: My Volleyball players are very close friends on and off the court but they are also all very competitive athletes which can make team chemistry a challenge over the course of a 3-plus month season. They are all so competitive that they want so desperately to compete... so at times, "playing time issues" have come up that could have disrupted our team chemistry but because my players are so competitive and goal driven, their goal of raising the "banner in the gym" is what keeps our team together.
Doctor: This is by far the team with the best chemistry in my coaching time. They are friends on and off the court. They are very supportive of each other and very unselfish when it comes to playing the ball. There is mutual respect between the upperclassmen and the underclassmen and it definitely helps a team go. They are constantly reminded that our success is due to ALL 13 players on the team. They truly are a joy to coach.
Laidlaw: We have hosted pasta dinners; we eat together at the Beaver River and Oneida tournaments. Have gone to play Lazer tag, movies, etc. we tor to do "team cheers" at practices were either myself or a player(s) must come up with a phase or word for the moment.
Q. Now, tell me about your stat leaders. Who has performed as expected and who is your biggest surprise player this year?
Abbott: Capri Trivisonno (assists per game), Erin Noonan (kills per game), Kelseigh Groth (blocks per game) in regards to stats have performed as expected and are Section III Class C stat leaders. The biggest surprise comes from freshman Sarah Klaben. Sarah's offensive production in both hitting and serving was a huge surprise to the team. Sarah has a very consistent and hard top spin jump serve which is why she is one of the Section leaders in aces per game. The moves of the year that have been just as critical to our success were: Ali Klaben's move from Middle Hitter to the Right Side and Emilie Sullivan from Outside Hitter to Libero. Those two moves had a direct impact on our overall play.
Doctor: Ryan Merle (115 kills); Gabby Eckles (40 aces); Ryan Merle (35 blocks); Gabby Eckles (165 assists); Katherine Hill (251digs). Biggest surprise player has been Destin VanTyle. She took on the role of setter and right side hitter and has come through wonderfully. She has displayed her great athleticism.
Laidlaw: We have two starters return from the 21-2 team last year, Jessica Pattereilli and Deane Rinaldo. Both were All-Conference, All-Section and All-State and that was nice to build around. The greatest thing that has developed has been the role play of our players. They work hard and have a lot of heart. They have surpassed my expectations unbelievably.
Q. Superstitions and/or Rituals? Does your team have any?
Abbott: None
Doctor: The girls have the ritual of doing their court cheers prior to a match and then their team cheer ("DO IT") before they take the court
Laidlaw: Must have Deane Rinaldo's motivational flyer before every match. She's carrying on the tradtion started by former player Courtney Kahler. We've even delayed the bus because Deane wasn't done! Carmella Renaldo has to eat a quarter pounder before every game, and players have ribbons in their hair.
Q. Playoffs. What will you tell your team when the playoffs begin?
Abbott: The old cliché: "It is the thrill of victory... or the agony of defeat". Win and we get to practice and compete for another day. Lose and it will be the last time we will compete as a team and for my seniors for many it will be the end to their competitive volleyball careers. One goal: make it to the last day... Feb. 27th or bust!!!
Doctor: I will tell them it's a new season, so let's finish strong and if you put it all out there then good things will happen and always remember... at the end of the day... you play because you love this game"
Laidlaw: First of all, it's a whole new season. Your regular season got you there and it is a great accomplishment, but now the WAR begins! Ever one is 0-0 and its anybodies game. As a coach I try not to overemphasis stay as calm as you can. If they don't know it by now, then it's too late.
Q. Since playoffs are here, ill ask, would you rather have your league play in the Fall sports season so you could participate in State competition, or is regional good enough?
Abbott: NO. Of course everyone would love the opportunity to compete for a state title but I believe along with my team, that volleyball is an indoor sport that should be played in the winter. The move to the fall to compete for the State Title provides opportunity for just 1 team to play 1 more weekend yet it denies so many others the opportunity to participate. Our athletes would have to choose between 3 sports and some of the larger schools would have to choose between 6 sports in the fall and by doing that denies participation in the winter where for most schools Basketball is the only sport offered for girls. Even the AA's agree with this fact because they continue to schedule their Junior High Volleyball programs in the winter so that those players can have exposure to volleyball and an opportunity to participate. The State for years has recognized there is an unbalanced distribution of sports for girls within the 3 seasons and yearly try to determine ways to balance the sport season. To me it is obvious... go back to 4 sport seasons or move Volleyball from the Fall to the Winter. With CNY winters as harsh as they are give our high school girls a competitive sport to participate in from November to March.
Personally, I would love to coach volleyball in the fall. My coaching stipend remains the same and I do not have to give up Thanksgiving, Christmas, or February Break. Selfishly, that is a great financial move for me... but is that move really good for our female athletes?? As one of my players who takes part in soccer, volleyball and lacrosse tells me: Don't let them move Volleyball to the fall until 2013 when I have graduated.
Doctor: I am not a fan of high school state champions so personally that isn't a factor. I do for see a problem with that move because just about everywhere, enrollment is declining and if you make the switch then you might be regretting it in 3-5 years because there won't be enough athletes to field five Fall teams and so programs will be lost. For example, the current graduate number for Skaneateles 140 and the current 3rd grade enrollment is 90. A move to the Fall would be a problem.
Laidlaw: College coaches would not be able to see them play in the Fall. Having been a college coach I had practice every day and tournaments on Saturday. There is now way to see Fall teams play. Also, how many sports can you put in one season? Field Hockey, Cross Country, Soccer, Tennis, Swimming, Gymnastics, Cheerleading in the Fall. That would leave basketball, bowling, indoor track, cheerleading in the winter. Small schools would lose programs. Basically, we are pleasing a few at the expense of many.


text:
The product is no longer available
CITB Construction Skills Health and Safety Test Book: All the Questions and Answers 2007
Product details
Format: Book
Pages: 213
Publisher: Construction Industry Training Board
Date Published: Mar 2007
Stock Code: 61517
Binding: Paperback
Aimed at junior and middle managers, this is the latest version of the compelling CITB Construction Skills Health and Safety test, from 2007. Help make construction safe by buying a copy and letting its contentstrickle into your mind over a prolonged period, never to depart.
Related Items
Health and Safety Law for the Construction Industry
Provides a step-by-step guide explaining the responsibilities that every construction employer, self-employed person, or site occupier faces on a...
£30.00Add to basket
Health and Safety Pocketbook
This pocket book contains a unique compilation of tables, data, checklists and a glossary for a wide range of health and safety topics. It includes...
Add to basket


text:
The final draft of a long-delayed Army Corps of Engineers study on how to protect New Orleans and other populous areas of Louisiana's coastline from catastrophic hurricanes remains deeply flawed, experts who reviewed the study for the corps said on Friday.
The biggest problem continues to be the corps' failure to recommend a single statewide list of hurricane-protection projects to Congress for authorization, rather than five regional plans offering a multitude of options, the scientists and engineers said during Tulane University's 2010 Engineering Forum.
"The Corps of Engineers prides itself as being the nation's coastal engineers, so who better to choose the correct options, to tell Congress which is the best option, and they didn't do that," said Robert Dahlrymple, a civil engineering professor at Johns Hopkins. Dahlrymple chaired the National Research Council panel that conducted a peer review of the corps study nine months ago.
"They just provided a menu (of a half-dozen sets of projects for each region) and stopped, expecting Congress to choose the right one," he said.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Congress ordered the corps to provide it with the study outlining a plan for protecting New Orleans and other coastal communities from the effects of "the equivalent of a Category 5" hurricane.
The nearly 8,000-page Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Study was supposed to have been submitted to Congress by December 31, 2007, but is being held in the office of Assistant Secretary of the Army Jo-Ellen Darcy.
President Barack Obama's administration created an interagency working group last fall to look at coastal restoration issues in Louisiana and Mississippi, including the projects being considered under the corps study.
The draft estimates the cost of providing protection to the state's coast at between $70 billion and $136 billion. Included are five or six lengthy lists of alternatives for each of five regions of the state's coastline.
In the New Orleans area, the alternatives include much higher levees along existing levee alignments and extended north into St. Tammany Parish, a variety of gate alternatives for the Chef Menteur and Rigolets passes into Lake Pontchartrain, and proposals to either relocate or buy out homes and businesses in areas at greatest risk of surge flooding.
Areas with higher populations, such as New Orleans, could be protected from either a "modest" Category 5 hurricane -- a so-called 400-year storm that would have a 0.25 percent chance of occuring in any year and cause surge similar to that created by Katrina on the Mississippi coastline -- or a much stronger Category 5 hurricane -- a 1,000-year storm with a 0.1 percent chance of occuring in any year, according to the study.
Areas with smaller populations might be provided with protection from surge created by a hurricane with a 1 percent chance of occurring in any year, a so-called 100-year storm, which would be similar in size to Hurricane Rita in 2005 or Gustav in 2008.
The draft included a recommendation of as much as three years further study that would lead to a winnowing of alternatives, with individual projects then to be presented to Congress under existing authorizations, such as the Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity levee project that includes hurricane levees on the east bank, or the Louisiana Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration program, which includes diversions and wetlands restoration projects.
Dahrlymple said another "fatal flaw" of the corps study was its failure to detail what Louisiana's future coastline should look like, in light of the continuing loss of 24 square miles of wetlands along the coast each year and the fact that the Mississippi River carries only half the land-building sediment it did 100 years ago.
"This (the rate of wetlands loss) has been going on for 80 years or better, yet the Corps of Engineers has as the premise of their entire report that the shoreline of the state of Louisiana will be maintained in place, that is, what we have now is what we'll have in the future," he said.
"There are plenty of other authorities besides us that say this is a fool's errand," he said. "You've been losing 24 square miles a year for a very, very long time, and it's not clear how you're going to stop that."
That recommendation tracks a 2006 National Research Council report aptly titled "Drawing Louisiana's New Map," which also concluded that state and federal officials must identify which areas of the coastline are sustainable before choosing which restoration projects to build.
The LACPR peer review committee recommended that the corps must come up with a budget for using the sediment and water carried by the river as part of its comprehensive plan in two reports, the first following the release of an initial draft of the corps study in 2008, and the second after the most recent draft was released in 2009.
The corps has agreed to develop such a budget, but has said it won't be complete until July, Dahlrymple said.
John Boland, another committee member who also is an engineering professor at Johns Hopkins, said the corps also failed in its efforts to create a "multicriteria decision analysis" to weigh the positives and negatives of individual strategies, including construction of higher levees and gates, rebuilding wetlands and coastlines, and moving or buying out residents in the most vulnerable areas.
The corps study was extremely complex, Boland said, with thousands of individual projects first winnowed down to 111 individual plans spread out over the five planning districts.
But the corps' first effort at weighting projects and plans against each other was flawed by basing it on input from only those "stakeholders" who attended several meetings held across the state to identify what issues should be considered most important, Boland said.
At that first meeting, the stakeholders weren't told what projects were being considered, so they had no way of determining the importance of the individual characteristics they were asked to rate -- fisheries, shipping, flood insurance costs, etc. -- to the projects that the corps was studying, he said.
When the peer review committee pointed out such problems, the corps didn't throw out its earlier results. It instead made those results a single factor in a new list of factors they chose to weigh individual projects.
The ultimate weighting system still failed to consider a variety of values that are difficult to measure, Boland said. For instance, in comparing the use of a ring levee around a small community against elevating all of the community's buildings above potential storm surge levels, "nothing in the metrics captured the cost and inconvenience to residents of having to elevate their homes and then living that way," he said.
The corps has said the failure of the winnowing process is a key reason why it is recommending in its draft that Congress give it several more years to determine the best projects for each segment of the coast.
The study also is flawed in addressing storm surge risk only in areas south of Interstates 10 and 12, said John Christian, another panel member who is a retired senior vice president of the Stone & Webster engineering firm.
"I'm not sure the surge water is aware it is supposed to occur only south of I-10," he said, adding that the study should have included Baton Rouge and upper areas of the Atchafalaya River.
Mark Schleifstein can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.com or 504.826.3327.


text:
|By Kings18 (Kings18) on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 09:32 pm: Edit
People had told me the SAT service is no longer available. I had request for my orders last Friday and I got them today.
|By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 10:06 pm: Edit
Glad to hear it that.
|By Phantom (Phantom) on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 10:13 pm: Edit
I think I missed something over the past few days, but why exactly did the disclosed SATs service shut down?
I'm extremely disappointed to hear that since I was just planning to order some to prep for my Jan SAT.
|By Zechs (Zechs) on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 10:31 pm: Edit
There MUST be a way to find real SAT II subject tests.
Is there another department for SAT II's?
Oh and I ordered the Sparknotes 5 MATH IIC tests, are these any good? Accurate? Score improving?
|By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 12:24 am: Edit
They are planning to transfer the disclosed SAT sales to ETS but no starting date has been confirmed yet.
As far as I know, no SAT-II have ever been offered for sale.
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page


text:
Editor's Note: This is the third of four stories this week looking at Ypsilanti city budget issues as the City Council prepares to meet each of the next two Saturdays to determine funding priorities. Tomorrow: The department of public works.
Previous stories:
• Number of Ypsilanti firefighters could fall
• Ypsilanti to prioritize cuts
The Ann Arbor News
In October, Ypsilanti Police Chief Matt Harshberger designated two officers for neighborhood policing to crack down on speeding, noise and prostitution in the city.
Location: 505 W. Michigan Ave.
Personnel: 39 sworn officers and 10 support staff.
Calls per year: 18,000
Budget: $5.5 million.
Services: Road patrol, detective bureau, school liaison officers, SWAT team, accident investigation unit, K9 unit, evidence tech unit, hostage negotiation, LAWNET, parking enforcement, neighborhood police team, bicycle police team, school crossing.
Average response time for emergencies: 1 to 3 minutes.
Budget items:
The result has been a drop in the number of complaints by residents about those problems.
Now Harshberger is hoping that the City Council spares his department in a new round of spending cuts so he can continue neighborhood policing. The neighborhood team works six days a week to solve quality-of-life issues, which generate the largest number of complaints, Harshberger said.
"It has been very effective," Harshberger said. "Road patrol officers have to take emergency calls and cannot follow through on these issues."
City Manager Ed Koryzno is proposing about $2.7 million in spending cuts to balance the city's budget in the coming three years, including eliminating six police officers and a position with LAWNET, the Livingston and Washtenaw Narcotics Enforcement Team. The council is meeting each of the next two Saturdays to decide the cuts and set long-term goals to increase the city's shrinking revenues.
Harshberger said the Ypsilanti Police Department has 39 sworn officers, which leaves it below the national average of 2.3 officers per 1,000 residents. Ypsilanti has 22,000 residents, and about 5,000 Eastern Michigan University students are in the city on daily basis, he said.
Ann Arbor, with about 113,000 residents, has 150 police officers, the largest force in the county, followed by the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Department and the University of Michigan Public Safety Department, Harshberger said.
Ed Jacques, director of member services at the Police Officers Association of Michigan, said each community has unique law enforcement needs, and municipalities decide on what's best for their residents. There is no set formula for a number of police officers, and some cities require more policing than others, depending on density and population, he said.
All communities are struggling financially and have trimmed police services over the years, but the impact is more acute with large cuts, said Howell Police Chief George Basar, a former Ypsilanti police chief and vice president of the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police.
Large budget cuts are forcing some police departments to become reactive and 911-driven instead of being proactive and focused on community policing, Basar said. That change "has a negative effect on quality of life in the community," he said.
Basar said there are 600 fewer police officers on the streets in Michigan today than before the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, and communities have to evaluate the level of service they want and see if they can afford it, he said.
Harshberger said he would like to add more officers to address neighborhood concerns, but he understands the council's need to address the budget deficit. The Police Department takes the largest portion of the budget in Ypsilanti, about 34 percent.
"The deficit is a reality and no matter what happens this month, we would continue to do the absolute best for our community," Harshberger said.
Khalil E. Hachem can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.com or 734-482-3225.


text:
Thursday February 7, 2013
The Friends of the Berkshire Athenaeum invite the public to "Relatively Speaking -- A Valentine Cabaret" featuring Sherri James Buxton at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, Feb. 12, at the Berkshire Athenaeum, 1 Wendell Ave.
An instructor at the Berkshire Music School where she conducts Adult Cabaret Workshops, Buxton has also appeared in New York City and Chicago with Freddie Prince and Jackie Mason.
Accompanied by Bob Shepherd on piano and Otto Gardner on bass, Buxton will set the mood for Valentine's Day with her interpretations of standards, show tunes and jazz.
The Friends of the Berkshire Athenaeum, entering their 75th year of service to the library, are sponsoring the free concert.


text:
I survived week 4......but my house, yard and kiddos are barely hanging on :) Ok, just kidding about the kiddos, but the yard and housework are definitely in need of some help. This designer survivor is tough.....lots of late hours trying to get it all done. I was genuinely surprised to see my name on the list of survivors for this week. If any of you took the time to go to the gallery and look at the other kits, you know there was some awesome stuff. We are now down to 11 designers. Next Friday the final five will be decided.
If you have not taken the time to go to the gallery and download the kit (both the Caramel Chiffon and the Rustic Glamour) you will want to before tomorrow evening (around 8 EST or so) as I will disable the links then. Some of the designers have already disabled theirs, so hopefully you were able to get their parts.


text:
- News
- Calendar
- Blogs
- Sports
- Entertainment
- Business
- Lifestyles
- Community
- Opinion
- About Us
- Classifieds
- Coupons
- Local Savings
- Green Editions
- Legal Notices
- Weekly Ads
- Connect2Classes
Connect with Us
Harrison sticking with what it has
Building a new 400-bed hospital is out of the financial range for Harrison Medical Center, but expanding the Silverdale campus remains one of the viable options spearheading the master facilities plan.
The cost of building a new facility was estimated at $600 million and was recently dismissed from the considerations in an ongoing process for a master facilities plan for Harrison. The alternatives, including expanding Harrisons Silverdale campus, will be undertaken in phases, said Patti Hart, Harrison spokeswoman.
NBBJ architects Seattle office and Rice Fergus Miller, a Bremerton-based architecture and planning firm, are charged with developing the master facilities plan for Harrison and are expected present their recommendations in April. The medical centers Vision 2010 study committee will then consider the architects findings before making a recommendation to HMCs board of directors.
In the five-year strategic plan that is Vision 2010, Harrison is setting its sights on becoming the regions leading health care provider and will keep Kitsap County as its primary service area but will reach further out as well.
Even though there are no conclusions drawn yet about the final draft of the master facilities plan, providing easy access from all parts of the region, SR 3 has been mentioned as a key transportation artery. Considering population and geography, Central Kitsap is the hub of the county. Both of these factors place Harrison Silverdales expansion within the top options considered in the master facilities plan.
Latest news, top stories, and community events,
delivered to your inbox.
Trending Stories Oct 14 - Oct 21
Read the Oct 21
Green Edition
Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.
Browse the archives.


text:
WEST FALMOUTH CROSSING, Maine -- Hannaford Bros. has introduced a new store format that emphasizes fresh foods with open-air market flair, stressing variety, quality and heightened levels of service and technology. The 55,000-square-foot prototype is "an experiment," according to Caren Epstein, spokeswoman for the 142-unit chain, based in Scarborough, Maine. "We're not committing ourselves to saying this is our store of the future until we gauge performance," she said, though she added ...
REGISTER TO VIEW THIS ARTICLE - Register for a Free Account
Why Register for FREE?
Registering for content on Supermarket News will give you INSTANT access to invaluable articles and media content that industry professionals rely on. You will have access to our special reports, feature articles, and industry analysis. It's FREE, easy and quick. What are you waiting for! In addition you will also receive complimentary access to the SN salary survey data tables.
Click here to read the FAQ page if you have any questions (opens in a new window)
Attention Paid Print Subscribers: While you have already been granted free access to SN we ask that you register now. We promise it will only take a few minutes! Or visit your profile and add your print magazine account number and zip code.