text:
What the Saudi leaks tell us: An interview with Julian Assange
Since June 2015 WikiLeaks has been releasing details of leaked cables and other documents that come from within the Saudi Foreign Office. They provide an insight into the internal workings of the secretive regime, its fears, and its strategies for spreading its influence abroad. More than 230,000 leaked Saudi documents have been published by WikiLeaks; a batch of 60,000 more cables and 50,000 pager messages was released last November.
Here are some things the leaks show us, according to Assange:
1 A paranoid ruling elite
'What comes across from the cables is a small cloistered, intellectually isolated ruling elite with a paranoid worldview.
'The cables make it clear that this is a small ruling elite with weak institutions such that a power structure can be taken over by other elements in that elite very quickly and instruments of state can be subordinated according to the will of the leadership.
'The Saudi cables are internal conversation of a Saudi ministry at very high levels and mid-levels from which you can distil observations of the internal culture. The observation that I distil is that to keep the coherence of the internal culture you need an external threat, and the one that is most natural for Saudi Arabia to pick is Iran. Yes, there are genuine reasons for rivalry in the region, but they are inflated in the internal culture in order to keep it coherent and unified.'
2 Moves to destabilize Syria prior to uprising*
'There is one high-level Saudi cable offering Saudi strategy in relation to Syria. The concluding paragraph says that the Assad regime will never forgive Saudi Arabia for what it has done to Syria. Because the Assad regime is "brutal and belligerent" it will always be after revenge. As a result it is a threat to the national security of Saudi Arabia.
'One cable from the Saudi foreign ministry speaks about a confidential agreement [in 2012] between Saudi, Qatar and Turkey in relation to intervention [to topple the Syrian government].
'In a US cable we published from 10 years ago William Roebuck, the US ambassador to Syria, outlines a smörgåsbord of proposals for destroying the Assad government. It included trying to make it paranoid so that it overreacts and believes that its military forces are engaged in a coup against it; trying to make Sunni Syrians paranoid about Iran and Iranian-backed Shi'a wanting to convert Sunnis; and that it [the US] was going to try and work with Saudi and Egypt to increase these sectarian divisions.'
3 Using religion
'One cable talks about the necessity of having the Saudi supreme religious leader say something to back up the government position. It's not written as "I wonder if he would do it" but rather: "Tell him to do it". What comes through the cables is that religion is a tool of the state. It's clear that Saudi Arabia sees Wahhabi Islam and Sunnis as fertile ground for state interest.
'The Saudi cables show that Wahhabism is a tool of Saudi Arabia as a regional hegemon that it tries to deploy not only in its own region but worldwide. It sees Sunnis as a potential source of converts to Wahhabism, or something close to Wahhabism. It sees Shi'a communities as places where it has no traction, but Iran has.'
4 Terrified of Iran and Shi'a influence
'The Saudi regime is exquisitely paranoid in relation to Shi'a influence. There are indications that they are terrified of Iran but there's no evidence of something they should be terrified of.
'The battle with Iran they perceive to be a fight against Shi'a Islam. The Shi'a population is quite small globally. But Saudi Arabia is trying to check the growth of Shi'a Islam and reduce its influence.'
5 How to bribe foreign media
'The cables show that Saudi embassies bribe Sunni or Arab media in foreign countries to take control of the discourse in relation to Saudi Arabia and its interests. They do this through direct investment: for example, by buying up a million dollar shares in a Lebanese TV station or establishing relations with journalists; buying up thousands of subscriptions to Arabic language magazines in order to tilt their coverage. It's a clever trick because they don't need any existing relationship or any intermediary. The Saudi foreign ministry just buys thousands of subscriptions, up to half the total in some cases. If they like what they write, they buy more; if not, they nose it down a bit to give the right signal.'
6 The Saudi-Israel nexus and the West
'There has been a Saudi-Israeli nexus in the Middle East for at least 10 years. It comes through [in] the US cables we published and to a lesser extent in the Saudi cables. Saudi considers Syria a mechanism of Iranian influence; Israel is occupying the Golan Heights which is part of Syria.
'But the US relationship to the Israeli-Saudi nexus is changing. The smart US strategists, including the head of the CIA, are of the view that Saudi and Israel are getting in the way of broader US strategic interests.
'We published some of CIA director John Brennan's emails from back in 2008-09, when he was security advisor for Obama. Brennan says that the US should engage with Iran. The US being so adversarial with Iran has reduced its influence in the region; the Israeli-Saudi nexus is cramping its operations.
'The US has not been as mindful of Saudi wishes as before. That has increased Saudi paranoia; it does not feel it has the unqualified backing of the US in the way it had. Europe takes its cues from US policy.
'I would not take [this shift away from Saudi] too far: the US and British arms industries are major recipients of Saudi money as are banks, and the British property market.'
7 Dodgy deals for UN votes
'There is some interesting traffic in relation to deals done for UN votes that reveals that the UK did a vote-swap with Saudi to get Saudi onto the Human Rights Council. The offer to the UK from Saudi included $100,000 to the section of the FCO [Foreign & Commonwealth Office] that deals with who should be elected to the human rights council. It's there in the cables, for "the campaigning expense that the FCO will need" to make sure that Saudi is elected to the HR council. Saudi ended up with the support of over 100 countries, so between bribes and vote-swapping that's what it gets. There are a number of cables on how Saudi manages the UN and payments going to officials, dressed up as "assistance to your programme".'
Julian Assange has been detained in Britain for five years, unable to leave his place of refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy without risk of being arrested and extradited to the US, which wants to try him for espionage. He is also unable to receive the hospital treatment he needs. 'It's tough,' he comments. 'But a super-max [prison] in the US would also be tough and I would not be able to work there.' He adds: 'Saudi has started a high-level criminal investigation into the cable release; it plans to put anyone distributing them in prison for 20 years. So we joke that we are much better off accepting extradition to Saudi Arabia because it's only 20 years, whereas the US is gunning for over half a century…'
In 2014 Assange and his lawyer filed a case in the UN for unlawful and arbitrary detention, under international law and the covenants Britain has signed up to. In February this year the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention ruled in his favour.
This article is from
the March 2016 issue
of New Internationalist.
- Discover unique global perspectives
- Support cutting-edge independent media
- Magazine delivered to your door or inbox
- Digital archive of over 500 issues
- Fund in-depth, high quality journalism


text:
Partner Success Stories
SumUp collaborates with a variety of partners. Check out our Case Studies to learn how SumUp can benefit your business.
Cashless Payments for the World´s Leading Logistics Provider. SumUp enables card acceptance and elevates service for doorstep delivery
Secure and Fast: FlixBus Elevates its Services in Ticket Shops with Card Acceptance. SumUp brings state-of-the-art card acceptance to all FlixBus Ticket Shops
Europe´s First Cashless Ice Hockey Arena: Simply-X and SumUp provide modern card acceptance for a sports and events venue in Switzerland
UBS successfully launches mPOS by Partnering with SumUp: Full-service bank enables card acceptance for SMEs in Switzerland

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Latex Dental Dams, oral safety in 3 different flavors.
Latex Dental dams are made of ultra thin latex come in 3 scented flavors including: Vanilla, Strawberry, Blueberry.
Dental Dams are becoming a widely used barrier for vaginal and anal oral sex and can help reduce the spread of disease.
To provide you with hassle free payment methods, we ease you up with the following ways for you to make a payment.
Method: Bank Transfer
We accept payment make through ATM Transfer, Direct / Over-Counter Bank-in or Internet Banking (Maybank2U, HSBC, RHB, CIMB Clicks etc.). The bank in infomation will send together to your email with the Order Confirm Email.
The bank requires one working day to process cash transfered using Interbank Funds Transfer (GIRO). Therefore, orders paid using GIRO will take one extra day to ship.
IMPORTANT: After you have successfully made the payment, kindly contact us immediately through e-mail to the e-mail address attached in the order confirmation letter with the following information:
All orders will be processed after the confirmation and verification of payment is successful.
You will be notified via e-mail regarding the approval and shipment of your items.
Direct Order by phone,Please Whatsapp: 012-2564876
How soon would I get my order?
Very fast! Day 1 : Pay today and submit your payment details.
Day 2 : We will send your order.
Day 3 : You will receive your order.
Direct Order by phone,Please Whatsapp: 012-2564876
2.Item will be send after receive payment.
3.Please allow 2- 4 business days for delivery.
4.All Email will be reply within 24 hours. All item will be send out within 48 hours after payment made.
5.Please Complete Deal within 3 Days after auction end.
Please understand what you are bidding on. A bid on our auction states that you have read and agreed to all Terms and Conditions. Please do not bid if you do not intend to complete your winning bid. Joy bidder will be blacklist.
Direct Order by phone,Please Whatsapp: 012-2564876
|5 star
|4 star
|3 star
|2 star
|1 star


text:
Filter by:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
19 of 19
currently displaying 19 of 19
Antirrhinums, or snapdragons, are invaluable for their full and sweetly scented flower spikes that can last well over a week in water. Sow your antirrhinum seeds in autumn and overwinter for huge early flowers in May, or sow under cover in early spring for picking in summer and autumn. Our range of antirrhinum seeds features hugely long-flowering new varieties, all bred for good rust resistance, that make brilliant border fillers. In the right conditions many of these varieties will self-sow, giving you even more flowers to pick and enjoy.Read More


text:
— -- Fired Ohio State University marching band director Jon Waters says the findings of an internal investigation into the band's culture were inaccurate -- and that he worked to improve the program's culture before the investigation began.
Waters was accused in the report of knowing about and failing to stop a "sexualized culture" of pranks, tricks and rituals. According to the report, students were regularly hazed, forced to perform sexually-explicit stunts and march into the stadium in their underwear late at night in a tradition called "Midnight Ramp." The investigation was launched after a parent raised concerns.
Waters argued that more than nine current and former band members should have been interviewed.
"The sample size was tremendously small for such an important issue as band culture," Waters told ABC News.
"I think I was the victim of a rush to judgment and a very inaccurate report."
Ohio State Names Interim Leaders for Marching Band
Fired Ohio Band Head's Backers Sets up Legal Fund
Fired Band Head Says He Was Fixing Vulgar Culture
Waters had led the band -- "The Best Damn Band in the Land," as it calls itself -- since 2012, creating popular halftime shows that drew millions of views on YouTube. He changed the shows by drawing them out on iPads instead of paper, directing marchers who morphed into the shapes of horses, superheroes and dinosaurs appearing to gallop, fly and tromp across the Buckeye football field.
Its technological advances landed the band in an Apple commercial in January. One performance in which the band takes the shape of a moonwalking Michael Jackson has more than 10 million views on YouTube.
But those accomplishments didn't stop Ohio State President Michael Drake from dismissing Waters on July 24, stating that the dismissal was the only solution.
"Even one instance of harassment or hazing or assault is one too many," Drake said in a video statement.
Waters argued that the problems started long before he joined the program.
"When you're dealing with a culture that is entrenched, again, since the 1930s, this does not change overnight," Waters said.
Waters said the university never gave him guidance on reforming the program's culture -- but he started taking those steps, anyway.
"No one came to me and said the band's culture needs to change, I realized that myself," he said.
Ohio State rejected Waters' allegations in a statement to ABC News.
"The former director was aware or reasonably should have known about this culture but failed to eliminate it, prevent its recurrence and address its effects," the statement read.
The university named two music professors the interim leaders of the marching band Monday, with one focusing on compliance and student safety. The school plans to find its next permanent director through a national search.
The OSU marching band was the second nationally acclaimed marching band to be rocked by scandal in recent years. Florida A&M's famed "Marching 100" was suspended for more than a year and veteran director and university president resigned after the death in 2011 of a drum major in a brutal hazing ritual. FAMU's band had performed at Super Bowls and presidential inaugurations.


text:
Copyright© 2004, National Broadcasting Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
NBC News
Guests: Secretary Colin Powell, Department of State; Senator Joseph Biden, D-DE, Ranking Member, Foreign Relations Committee; Senator John McCain, R-AZ, Armed Services Committee
Moderator/Panelist: Tim Russert - NBC News
This is a rush transcript provided for the information and convenience of the press. Accuracy is not guaranteed. In case of doubt, please check with:
(202) 885-4598
(Sundays: (202) 885-4200)
Meet the Press (NBC News) - Sunday, May 16, 2004
Tim Russert: Our issues this Sunday: Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld talks to the troops in Iraq about prison abuse.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld: In recent months, we've seen abuses here under our responsibility and it's been a body blow for all of us, but it doesn't represent America.
(End videotape)
Russert: An American civilian is beheaded.
President George W. Bush: There is no justification for the brutal execution of Nicholas Berg--no justification whatsoever.
(End videotape)
Russert: And the president asked Congress for more money for Iraq. What now?
With us: the Secretary of State, Colin Powell.
Will Iraq be the most important issue in the Bush-Kerry race? With us: former POW, now Republican senator from Arizona, John McCain, and the ranking Democrat of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Joe Biden of Delaware.
Powell, McCain, Biden, only on Meet the Press.
And in our Meet the Press Minute, a wartime secretary of Defense admits mistakes and miscalculations.
Secretary Robert McNamara: I don't think any of us predicted seven years ago or 15 years ago the climate of 500,000 men in Vietnam. I know I didn't.
(End videotape)
Russert: But first: Earlier this morning, I spoke to Secretary of State Colin Powell, who is in Jordan.
Secretary Powell, good morning.
Let me show you the headline that greeted Americans and people around the world yesterday. "Powell Says Troops Would Leave Iraq if New Leaders Asked." What happened to staying the course?
Secretary of State Colin Powell: We are planning to stay the course and we expect that the Iraqi interim government that will come into place on the 1st of July, would certainly ask us to remain and help them stay the course. Excuse me, Tim. But, basically, what we are anxious to do is return sovereignty, but it's a long way between that initial return of sovereignty and national elections. And we're confident that we will stay the course. This was in response to a specific question as to what sovereignty meant.
Russert: But, Mr. Secretary, if you look at a poll taken by our own government, the Coalition Provisional Authority, it says, "Four out of five Iraqis report holding a negative view of the U.S. occupation authority and of coalition forces, according to a new poll conducted for the occupation authority. In the poll ... 82 percent said they disapprove of the U.S. and allied militaries in Iraq."
This was before the allegations of prison abuse. If a government is in power in Iraq, is responsive to its people, why wouldn't they say to the U.S, "Get out"?
Powell: Because there's still a need for the U.S. to remain. They need our financial support. They need the reconstruction effort that is under way. And, frankly, they need the U.S. armed forces and the other coalition forces that are present to help create an environment of security and stability so they can get on with the process of rebuilding their country and preparing themselves for national elections. We don't want to stay one day longer than we have to, but we know they want us to remain long enough so that they have their own security forces built up and in place and that'll take some time.
Russert: John McCain said this the other day, Mr. Secretary: "If we fail in Iraq, we will have taught our enemies the lesson of Mogadishu, only one hundredfold: If you inflict enough pain, America will leave. Iraq will then descend into chaos and civil war. Warlords will reign. There will be bloodletting. We will have energized the extremists and created a breeding ground for terrorists, dooming the Arab world."
Do you agree?
Powell: We certainly are not going to cut and run. The president's made that clear. And quite the contrary, as you see from what Secretary Rumsfeld and General John Abizaid have done, we are stabilizing our force at a higher level than we thought we would at this point? Why? Because there is still danger there. Why? Because the work is not finished. Why? Because we need to help the Iraqi interim government as it is established create an environment of security.
So we're not going to walk away. We're not going to cut and run. We're going to stay and help the Iraqis do what we know the Iraqi people want and that is to have a democracy based on free elections. It takes time to get there and we are on our way with the creation of an Iraqi interim government.
Over the past several weeks, we've set up 11 Iraqi ministries that are now free-standing, not connected to the Coalition Provisional Authority. Of course, the Iraqis want the occupation to end. They want the Coalition Provisional Authority to cease its work and that's going to happen when this Iraqi interim government is established, but they need our troops there for some considerable period of time in the future to provide the security environment needed so that they can have free, open and fair election and have the time to build up their own security forces.
Russert: In those free, open and fair elections, if the Iraqi people choose an Islamic theocracy similar to what we have in Iran, we would accept that?
Powell: We will have to accept what the Iraqi people decide upon. But right now, I think most Iraqis understand that in order to live together in peace as a single nation, they have to have a nation which understands the role of the majority but respects the role of minorities within a country. And they know they have to have, for international acceptability, a country that preserves human rights, that is founded on democracy, that respects the rights of all individuals and respects the rights of women, that respects basic tenets with respect to open speech and meeting fundamental needs of the people and the fundamental standards of human rights that all of us believe in.
Russert: But, Mr. Secretary, if the Iraqis opt for an Islamic theocracy, which could easily become a haven for terrorists, how then do we explain to the 782 who died or the nearly over 4,000 who were wounded or injured that this was worth the fight?
Powell: I don't think that's going to be the case. I think that those who have given their lives in the cause of freedom for the Iraqi people will see that the Iraqi people are interested in creating a democracy. If you look at the same kind of polling that you mentioned earlier, that's what they are interested in, that's what they're looking for.
If you talk to some of the Shia leaders, such as Mr. Sistani and others, Ayatollah Sistani, they are talking about openness and freedom. Surely everybody understands it is a nation that rests on the faith of Islam, but they also know that in order to be successful as a 21st-century country, they have to respect the rights of all individuals and not allow a purely fundamentalist regime to arise in the country. And my sensing of what the Iraqi people want is a democracy with a majority, but with respect for all the minorities, all working together to create the kind of country they'll be proud of.
Russert: Bob Woodruff reports that on August 5, 2002, you met with the president and warned him about Iraq; that, in your words, "You break it, you bought it." In light of the fact that we have miscalculated being greeted as liberators, miscalculated the number of troops needed, miscalculated the extent of weapons of mass destruction, do you wish the president had followed your advice?
Powell: My advice to the president was that we had to be sure that we understood the difficulties of managing this country once we took it over, if that's what it came to. The advice I gave to the president was that we should take it to the international community, to the United Nations, to see if there was a diplomatic solution before we resorted to the use of force. And if we had to resort to the use of force, we had made the efforts with the United Nations so that we could get coalition partners to join us. And the president followed that advice.
My advice to the president was to make sure that we understood all the consequences of the actions that we're about to take. And he took that advice, and he responded to that advice by going to the United Nations. And we went to the United Nations. We knew that it would either be solved diplomatically or through of use of force. And we knew that if it was the use of force, we would be in for a challenging time. We would be responsible for the fate of 25 million Iraqis. The president understood that. And we are acting on that responsibility.
We have 138,000 troops there providing security. We have provided $18 billion for reconstruction and we're helping now the Iraqi people develop a democratic system. We are putting in place ministries that are functioning and we're going to be moving forward to elections. And so, yes, the place was broken after the war. And we're well on our way to fixing it.
Russert: Let me show you the video of Nicholas Berg, with the terrorists behind him who are about to behead him. When you see that picture and then what happened to Mr. Berg, are you satisfied with the level of outrage that exists in the Arab world, the level of outrage that has been formally announced by Arab leaders?
Powell: I think that should be a higher level of outrage. Notwithstanding what people think, what we did at the prison, there can be no comparison to the actions of a few who are going to be punished and brought to justice as a result of what happened at Abu Ghraib. But what we saw with this horrible, horrible, horrible, horrible murder of Mr. Berg should be deplored throughout the world. It is an outrage and the terrible thing about it is these individuals are yet to be brought to justice. They have no concept of justice. They have no concept of right. What a horrible thing for them to have done. But as the president said, we will do everything we can to bring all of these people to justice so they can pay for this horrendous crime.
Russert: Why the silence from the Arab world about Mr. Berg?
Powell: Well, I don't know, Tim. I wish I could explain that. There ought to be outrage. There is anger in the Arab world about some of our actions, but that is no excuse for any silence on the part of any Arab leader for this kind of murder. This kind of murder is unacceptable in anyone's religion, in anybody's political system, that is a political system based on any kind of understanding and respect for human rights. And so I would like to have seen a much higher level of outrage throughout the world, and especially the Arab world, for this kind of action.
Russert: Let me show you a picture of a United States soldier holding an Iraqi prisoner by a dog leash. That, too, is seen around the world. This morning, Seymour Hersh reports, "The roots of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal lie not in the criminal inclinations of a few Army reservists but in a decision, approved last year by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, to expand a highly secret operation, which had been focussed on the hunt for Al Qaeda, to the interrogation of prisoners in Iraq. ... According to interviews with several past and present American intelligence officials, the Pentagon's operations, known inside the intelligence community by several code words, including Copper Green, encouraged physical coercion and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners in an effort to generate more intelligence about the growing insurgency in Iraq."
Your reaction.
Powell: I haven't read the article and I don't know anything about the substance of the article. I've just seen a quick summary of it, so I will have to yield to the Defense Department to respond. And I think the initial response from the Defense Department is that there is no substance to the article, but I will have to yield to the Defense Department to handle any further comment, Tim.
Russert: But, Mr. Secretary, Newsweek reports that on January 25, 2002, the White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales, wrote a memo to your department which said, "In my judgment, this new paradigm of terrorism renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitation on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions, the Geneva Accords." And it is reported that you hit the roof when you saw that memo to scale back, in effect, on the rules governing the treatment of prisoners. Is that accurate?
Powell: I don't recall the specific memo and I wouldn't comment on the specific memo without rereading it again. But I think I have always said that the Geneva Accord is an important standard in international law, and we have to comply with it, either by the letter, if it's appropriate to those individuals in our custody that they are really directly under the Geneva Convention, or if they're illegal non-combatants and not directly under the convention, we should treat them nevertheless in a humane manner in accordance with what is expected of us by international law and the Geneva Convention.
Russert: Mr. Secretary, you met with the International Red Cross on January 15. In February, they released their report which said that, amongst the other allegations, male prisoners were forced to wear women's underwear; prisoners were beaten by coalition forces, in one case leading to death; coalition forces firing on unarmed prisoners. And then in May, you and others in the administration said you were "shocked" by the allegations about U.S. forces' treatment of Iraqi prisoners. Didn't you have a heads-up on this whole problem?
Powell: In January, when I met with the head of the International Committee for the Red Cross, Mr. Kellenberger, he said to me that a report would be coming and it would outline some serious problems with respect to the treatment of prisoners in Iraq. We were aware of that within the administration. He also met with Dr. Rice and with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.
And then in early February, the actual report was presented to our authorities out in Baghdad, both to Ambassador Bremer's office and to General Sanchez's office. By then, of course, an investigation was already under way as a result of a soldier coming forward in the middle of January and outlining specific cases of abuse, and so an investigation was well under way by time the report was made available in February to the command. I first saw the report in March when it was made available eventually to us in Washington.
Russert: But you're a military man. Do you believe that national reservists would go to Baghdad with hoods or dog leashes and actually undertake that kind of activity without it being devised by someone higher up?
Powell: I wouldn't have believed that any American soldiers would have done any such thing, either on their own volition or even if someone higher up had told them. I'm not aware of anybody higher up telling them. But that's why Secretary Rumsfeld has commissioned all of these inquiries to get to the bottom of it.
What these individuals did was wrong, was against rules and regulations. It was against anything they should have learned in their home, in their community, in their upbringing. So we have a terrible collapse of order that took place in that prison cell block. Let's not use this to contaminate the wonderful work being done by tens of thousands of other young American soldiers in Iraq. We'll get to the bottom of this. Justice will be served.
The command responded promptly. Court-martials are already scheduled. And I know that the president wants to make sure that we follow the chain of accountability up to see if there was anybody above these soldiers who knew what was going on, or in any way created a command climate in which such activities might in some bizarre way be found acceptable. They were not acceptable in any way. And one soldier stood up and said, "I know this is wrong," reported it to his chain of command, and the chain of command responded the very next day with the launching of an investigation that became the General Taguba investigation.
Russert: Finally, Mr. Secretary, in February of 2003, you placed your enormous personal credibility before the United Nations and laid out a case against Saddam Hussein citing...
Powell: Not off.
Emily: No. They can't use it. They're editing it. They (unintelligible).
Powell: He's still asking me questions. Tim.
Emily: He was not...
Powell: Tim, I'm sorry, I lost you.
Russert: I'm right here, Mr. Secretary. I would hope they would put you back on camera. I don't know who did that.
Powell: We really...
Russert: I think that was one of your staff, Mr. Secretary. I don't think that's appropriate.
Powell: Emily, get out of the way.
Emily: OK.
Powell: Bring the camera back, please. I think we're back on, Tim. Go ahead with your last question.
Russert: Thank you very much, sir. In February of 2003, you put your enormous personal reputation on the line before the United Nations and said that you had solid sources for the case against Saddam Hussein. It now appears that an agent called Curveball had misled the CIA by suggesting that Saddam had trucks and trains that were delivering biological and chemical weapons. How concerned are you that some of the information you shared with the world is now inaccurate and discredited?
Powell: I'm very concerned. When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best information that the Central Intelligence Agency made available to me. We studied it carefully; we looked at the sourcing in the case of the mobile trucks and trains. There was multiple sourcing for that. Unfortunately, that multiple sourcing over time has turned out to be not accurate. And so I'm deeply disappointed. But I'm also comfortable that at the time that I made the presentation, it reflected the collective judgment, the sound judgment of the intelligence community. But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it.
Russert: Mr. Secretary, we thank you very much for joining us again and sharing your views with us today.
Powell: Thanks, Tim.
Russert: And that was an unedited interview with the secretary of state taped earlier this morning from Jordan. We appreciate Secretary Powell's willingness to overrule his press aide's attempt to abruptly cut off our discussion as I began to ask my final question.
Coming next, the view from the Senate with Republican John McCain and Democrat Joe Biden. Then, our Meet the Press Minute, with wartime Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara from 36 years ago. All coming up right here on Meet the Press.
Russert: Senator John McCain, Senator Joe Biden, what should we do in Iraq? After this station break.
Russert: And we are back.
Senators McCain and Biden, welcome.
Senator McCain, let me ask you about a speech you gave in April of this year. "...as we continue to see large numbers of American casualties a year after Americans were told major combat was over, I fear U.S. public support is eroding. So I think we need to admit that serious errors have been made, increase our troop strength in Iraq and do what's necessary to turn this thing around."
What serious errors were made?
Sen. John McCain, R-AZ: I think several. One was the lack of sufficient troops there which allowed the looting to take place, which established kind of a lawless environment. I think any law enforcement person would tell you that the environment is a very important aspect of it. The fact that we island-hopped and left certain areas of towns and cities around Baghdad as well as in the Sunni Triangle alone. I think it's because we probably didn't make sufficient plans to turn over the government as quickly as possible and a level of expectation that probably was unrealistic, which led to a certain amount of disappointment, but a lot of it had to do with lack of sufficient troop strength at the time that "combat phase" was over.
Russert: Senator Biden, what serious errors were made?
Sen. Joseph Biden, D-DE: First of all, there was no imminent threat. By making it an imminent threat, we squandered the opportunity to get international support. We could have easily done this instead of in the fall, in the spring--isolated the French and Germans, gotten more support, number one.
Number two, too little power. John's right. Imagine if we had not treated the French--excuse me, the Turks with such disdain, that 4th ID would have come down from the north through the Sunni Triangle, there may not be a Sunni Triangle. As John pointed out, too few troops, looting, 850,000 tons of weapons left open, not able to guard them and then we went with too little legitimacy. Remember the notion. There was going to be a guy named Garner and a guy named Chalabi. Before they even flew in troops, they flew in Chalabi who was going to come from the south as a Shia and, you know, be the liberator from outside.
I think they just miscalculated from the very beginning which is--that doesn't bother me as much as the failure to acknowledge how badly they miscalculated, and as John suggested and others of us have, do something about it. A year ago, I called for more force. John visited after that, as well, argued we need more force. I don't know what it is. They seem to be unwilling to acknowledge the mistakes made and trying to correct them.
Russert: You mentioned Mr. Ahmad Chalabi. He was the person responsible for the agent Curveball, that I talked about with Secretary Powell, who gave discredited information. Mr. Chalabi is still on the payroll of the United States government for three...
Biden: Almost 400 a month.
Russert: Four hundred thousand dollars...
Biden: A month.
Russert: ...per month.
Biden: Yeah.
Russert: Should he be taken off?
Biden: He should have been taken off to begin with. Look, I was on your show after Chuck Hagel and I came back from--after we sort of got smuggled into northern Iraq before the war. The reason we went to see the Talibani and Barzani clans of the north and I said to them--I said, "By the way," I said, "Tell me about Chalabi. Are you guys with Chalabi?" They said, "Chalabi's his own man. We're not part of him," even though they formed the INC with him.
I think he seems to be the darling of the vice president and of some of the civilians in the Defense Department. I think he's a problem, he's not part of the solution. But yet there seems to be an unwillingness to break from him.
Russert: Senator McCain, in that speech I read to you a few minutes ago, you said "to do what's necessary to turn this thing around." I'm going to ask both you and Senator Biden to try to be very constructive here. What specifically must President Bush do "to turn this thing around"?
McCain: I believe that we have to make sure that we stick to the June 30 date. I believe we should accelerate the date of the elections. I think that many parts of the country, including in Baghdad, that we could have these elections. They may be flawed but the quicker we turn the government of the Iraqi people over to the Iraqi people, the more it will be then the insurgents verses the Iraqi government rather than the insurgents against us. And I would accelerate the timetable for the elections and I would certainly enter into the status of forces agreement so that we would know exactly the relationship between the U.S. military and new Iraqi government.
Russert: Senator Biden?
Biden: About the same as John. I would make this about the Iraqi people, not about us. Look, it's real simple. Why are we there? We're there now to make sure the Iraqis end up with a government. What kind of government? One that's secure, its own borders, is representative, is not a threat to its neighbors and does not have weapons of mass destruction. How do you get there? You get there by an election.
An election is going to take place, hopefully in November or December of 2005. What do you need to do that? You need more security and more legitimacy. Right now, 82 percent of the people don't want us there. This new government we're going to get, they're not going to be happy if they wake up on July the 1st and there are still 138,000 Americans and no one else. We need a contact group. We need to get to the major powers and, say, "Look, here's the deal, guys. Sign on to Brahimi's plan. Help us pass a resolution that is a NATO-led multilateral force to be in place for Iraq," giving an excuse to the Iraqi government to be able to cooperate.
And those who say NATO will not cooperate, I met with five four-stars for a two-hour conversation yesterday, with Jim Jones. If the president will lead, if the president gets on a plane and/or summons or asks the major European leaders to come here, NATO will authorize the use of NATO forces.
Russert: Do you believe President Bush should reach out to Russian President Putin, French President Chirac, German Chancellor Schroeder, and meet with them?
Biden: Absolutely. Positively. This is about presidential leadership. That's what it takes. It needs a president. I don't believe this is lost. I believe it will be lost if the president does not lead.
Russert: Senator McCain, should the president embark on such a mission, meeting with Putin, Chirac and Schroeder?
Biden: As well as Blair.
McCain: I think he should. I think he should at every opportunity and I think that we should encourage more U.S. participation, but at this point I disagree with my friend Joe. I think the likelihood of that happening is not good. We have to increase U.S. troop strength to do the jobs that's necessary.
Biden: I agree.
McCain: But let me just say that the Iraqi people don't want Americans there as occupiers. But if the Iraqi people saw us there as a way to provide security and to bolster the government and help them make this transition, I think these numbers would be very different. I just don't see our friends in Paris now agreeing to significant NATO involvement. I'm sorry to tell you, because of many of the errors in the past, the bulk of the responsibility is going to lie with America. But should President Bush seek help wherever he can? Absolutely. But it's still going to be America's mission.
Biden: Tim, it is America's mission. Ninety percent of the troops will remain American. We've got to change the face of it, though. No German troops, no French troops, the no German or French veto for NATO-led force. I want a NATO commander, I want--which is an American. I want a NATO label on it. That, in turn, will get additional likelihood of Muslim countries being willing to participate. But the additional U.S. forces must be U.S. forces. But you need legitimacy along with it, Tim. And the legitimacy requires to give the new Iraqi government excuse to say, "It's not the same old deal."
Russert: Senator McCain, you know politics is politics. If 82 percent of the Iraqi people don't want U.S. troops there, if there are, in fact, free elections in Iraq, when someone runs for office, they probably in all likelihood will have to run against America or not be perceived as an American puppet. And what happens in those elected Iraqis say, "We don't want you here?"
McCain: Well, again, I just have to repeat what I said before. I believe that the religious leaders, the Shiites who have now turned on al-Sadr, and others understand that they cannot let an insurgency take over their country in ensuing chaos and return to some kind of authoritarian government. I believe that if there's a relationship where the United States of America and our allies--and I'm not that much in disagreement with Joe--do provide the security to make that government function well, then I think the Iraqi people would appreciate it. Eighty-two percent of them want us out because they don't want us governing their country, and I understand that.
Russert: Senator Biden, we have a situation where Mr. Brahimi, the U.N. representative in Iraq, has called Israel's policies poison and said the United States is supporting poison. We have a situation where Saddam's military is in charge of Fallujah. When you look at the situation in Iraq now, are you optimistic that it can get to a democracy anytime soon?
Biden: I've never been of the view, never once said that I thought there could be a democracy in the terms of a liberal Western democracy. My greatest hope would be that there'd be a representative government, secure within its own borders, where the bulk of the Iraqi people thought they had a stake in the outcome of that government. I still think that's possible, but, Tim, I'm not playing a game here. It requires presidential leadership. I met with the president on Wednesday and he asked me the same question. I said, "Mr. President, you sit in a chair that commands worldwide respect and you have a reputation for moral clarity. It's time for you to lead, Mr. President." We keep talking about not cutting and running. I want this administration to stop walking and reacting. They walk and they react. There's no sense of urgency here.
Russert: Senator McCain, do you think the Bush administration understands the sense of urgency necessary to deal with Iraq at this moment?
McCain: I think they're beginning to. I think the increase in troops, which actually has taken place and more may be needed, is an indication of that. I believe this commitment to hold firm to the June 30 date. As was mentioned earlier, mistakes happen in war. That's why we try to avoid them. Mistakes have been made. I think we all acknowledge that. The important thing is, we are in a crucial time. This is the point where we can still achieve success in Iraq if we get a legitimate election and a legitimate government in power. And now's the time that, yes, we need presidential leadership and we need congressional leadership, and we have to understand that if we lose this conflict, the consequences are enormous. And the benefits of success are also enormous.
Russert: Let me turn to the whole issue of the alleged torture of Iraqi prisoners. Senator Ted Kennedy on Monday took to the floor of the Senate and made this observation:
(Videotape, Monday):
Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-MA: On March 19, 2004, President Bush asked: Who would prefer Saddam's torture chambers still be open? Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management, U.S. management.
(End videotape)
Russert: Is that appropriate, Senator Biden?
Biden: I think it's a little harsh. Look, I don't think they're nearly equivalent, but I do think that the damage done by the treatment of Iraqi prisoners, and we saw the pictures and John--look, I yield to John totally on this. I think John has been absolutely eloquent about the lack of facility, the lack of success that comes with this kind of treatment. And it just undermines us. Big nations can't act small. Noble nations can't act meanly. It is not comparable to say that, "Well, they do it; therefore, we can do it similarly." It does us incredible damage, but I don't think it's comparable to Saddam's torture chambers by any stretch of the imagination. But it is as damaging to us as Saddam's actions were to his reputation.
Russert: Senator McCain, there is a debate within your Republican Party as to how to deal with this particular issue. Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma on Tuesday offered this:
(Videotape, Tuesday):
Sen. James Inhofe, R-OK: ...this outrage everyone seems to have about the treatment of these prisoners. I have to say--and I'm probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by the outrage than we are by the treatment.
(End videotape)
Russert: You were someone who was tortured in a North Vietnamese prison cell. Can you talk about torture of a soldier and how you see it as relates to this particular allegation against U.S. soldiers?
McCain: Tim, I believe my view is shaped more by my view of the role of America and the world than whether I was in a prison camp more than 30 years ago. I'm an idealist. I adhere to Wilsonian principles. I believe we are the noblest experiment in the history of the world, and now we are the world's superpower and we have the opportunity to bring democracy and freedom to every part of the world, not through bullets and Humvees but through our example. With all our problems and flaws that we have, which I point out almost every day, we are an incredible example to the world. We are a shining city on a hill. And what this does is that it diminishes our reputation so dramatically.
You're going to see pictures of that guard with a leash on an Iraqi in Burma and in Belarus. And that's a huge penalty that we'll be paying for the sins of a few or some. We still don't know how systemic this was and all the ramifications of it. We've got to get to the bottom of it. We've got to prove that we as a nation punish those--another difference between us and Saddam Hussein...
Biden: That's true.
McCain: ...and other countries criticizing us, we will punish those responsible. In many countries that are criticizing us today, it is common practice. But that doesn't matter. We distinguish ourselves by our treatment of our enemies. And there are conventions for the treatment of prisoners of war. And my view in Iraq, they were violated and we cannot let this happen again. And you got to get everything out as quickly as possible. Take remedial action and move forward and take the measures that we were talking about earlier in the program.
Russert: So you are not outraged by the outrage?
McCain: No. I'm saddened. I'm saddened by what it hurts the reputation of our brave young men and women who are serving with such honor and sacrifice. But I'm also saddened by the image of America in the world. There are prisons all over the world that are looking for our adherence to human rights, the people are, and that we will bring about their freedom. This diminishes our ability to achieve that goal.
Russert: Senator Biden, as I mentioned to Secretary Powell, New Yorker magazine has an article today talking about Operation Copper Green, which suggests that this coercion was instructed by the highest levels of the Pentagon. The Pentagon is denying that. Newsweek reports, White House counsel Alberto Gonzales wrote a memo back in 2002 suggesting that the Geneva Accords' strict limitations had become somewhat obsolete and rendered quaint. How high up do you believe this scandal may go?
Biden: I don't know. It's much higher than these young guards. Look, there's obviously, at a minimum, a policy of a studied ambiguity here, Tim. There is plausible deniabilities built in everywhere here. There's sort of the morphing of the rules of treatment. We can treat al-Qaeda this way and we can't treat prisoners captured this way, but where do insurgents fit, etc.? This is a dangerous slope.
And, look, we're talking about democracy in the Middle East. The single most essential element of democracy is accountability. There is no accountability so far. It cannot be just those people in that prison. It doesn't seem rational, based on my experience. And another piece of this is, where is this notion of the for the good of the country? Where's the nobility of this administration, somebody, coming forward and saying more than, "I take responsibility but I have--but there are no consequences here"?
I mean, look, it's not merely whether or not they were involved, it's whether or not they should have known and didn't do anything. But, again, accountability. The rest of the world, as John is saying, is looking for who is responsible. Are we different than other nations?
Russert: Senator McCain, you're a military man, highly decorated. Do you think it's plausible that National Guardsmen and Reservists would undertake this kind of activity without being instructed?
McCain: I don't think so. I think that there's real questions about this "shift in responsibility" where military intelligence people were given authority over the Guards. There are so many questions that need to be answered. And I agree with Joe in this respect. We need to take this as far up as it goes and we need to do it quickly and I am convinced that the sooner we do that, the sooner the United States of America can begin to reassert its rightful place in the world as a leading advocate for democracy and human rights. And we are signatories to certain protocols as well as adherence to the Geneva Convention which should apply in Iraq.
Russert: This is a presidential election year. I don't have to tell either of you gentlemen. Newsweek, this is the latest poll. President Bush's job approval? Approve, 42 percent; disapprove, 52 percent. President Bush's handling of the situation in Iraq? Approve, 35 percent; disapprove, 57 percent. Senator McCain, what do those numbers tell you for Republican President George Bush?
McCain: It means that we've got to get this issue--bring closure to this issue as quickly as possible, assign whatever responsibility there is and move on, because the thing that bothers me more than the presidential implications is that Americans, when they saw these pictures, turned away from him, as I turned away when I saw them, and we cannot lose this and we cannot lose the American support, public support for this conflict. And that's, I think, the more serious consequences than even to the fortunes of President Bush.
Russert: Senator McCain, do you believe that President Bush has bet his presidency on the outcome of the war in Iraq?
McCain: No, I think he's bet it on the economy, which is becoming very strong and going to be very helpful to him. But, clearly, what happens in Iraq will have significant impact. And I think one of the aspects of that will be the level of casualties and how Americans believe that we have done our stated goal of bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq.
Russert: Senator Biden, even though President Bush has a 42-percent job approval and 57 percent disapprove of his handling of the war in Iraq, in the head-to-head race with Senator Kerry, it's John Kerry, 43 percent, George Bush 42 percent, Ralph Nader, 5 percent. Practically a dead heat. What's the problem with Senator John Kerry, the Democratic candidate?
Biden: I don't think there's any problem. I think they just don't know John Kerry. You know, everybody thinks because when you go through and win a primary everybody knows you. The vast majority of the people don't have a firm opinion to John yet and they're not likely to. And I think the poll reflects a view of mismanagement.
Look, the Democrats cannot count on the failure of Bush for the success of the Democratic Party and because--and the American people, including this senator, want Bush to succeed because Bush's success is America's success. Bush's failure is America's failure. I think these poll numbers reflect the notion this has been mismanaged badly, and the war in particular. I think it is about the war, even more than the economy right now. And I think that the president is going to have to start to level with the American people beginning with the cost of the war, beginning with what we have to do from this point on. There has been no leveling with the American people. Foreign policy can't be sustained without the informed consent of the American people. And there has not been informed consent and the president, as I said, his--this has been badly mismanaged. Redeemable, but up to now, badly mismanaged.
Russert: Do you believe that George W. Bush has bet his presidency on the outcome of the war in Iraq?
Biden: He may not have intended to but I think that's what it is.
Russert: Senator McCain, it's the elephant in the room, the story that will not die. This is the front page of The New York Times yesterday. Headline: "Undeterred by McCain Denials, Some See Him as Kerry's No. 2. Despite weeks of steadfast rejections from Senator John McCain, some prominent Democrats are angling for him to run for vice president alongside Senator John Kerry, creating a bipartisan ticket that they say would instantly transform the presidential race. "Senator McCain would not have to leave his party," [former Democratic Senator Bob] Kerrey said. "He could remain a Republican, would be given some authority for selection of Cabinet people. The only thing he would have to do is say, `I'm not going to appoint any judges who would overturn Roe v. Wade,'" the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, while "Mr. McCain has said he opposes." What do you think of Senator Kerrey's recommendation?
McCain: I'd like to have the camera move over to a palm tree to start with.
Russert: Yeah.
McCain: With friends like Bob, who needs...
Biden: I'm about to jump in, John, so hang on.
McCain: I've said categorically--categorically, I will not be vice president of the United States. I will not be a candidate. And I mean that. I'm happy in the Senate. I'd like to maintain my role. I am a loyal Republican. I am supporting President Bush's re-election. I am campaigning for it. And I'd like to mention one other thing. The bullet played in all these stories is John McCain is angry at President Bush about 2000. Look, that was four years ago. My constituents don't want me to look back in anger. They want me to represent them. I work with President Bush on a lot of issues and I want him re-elected and I'm not looking back in anger at anything. That's not what my constituents deserve. So I'm afraid this will not be the last conversation you and I have on this issue and I categorically say no, but I can only hope.
Russert: Senator Biden, what do you think of John McCain as a Democratic candidate for vice president?
Biden: I think John McCain would be a great candidate for vice president. I mean it. I know John doesn't like me saying it, but the truth of the matter is, it is. We need to heal the red and the blue here, man, the red states and the blue states. And John McCain is a loyal Republican. God, he drives me crazy how loyal he is as a Republican as much of a friend as he is. We disagree on a lot of things, but I'll tell you, the fact of the matter is that we've got to bring together the red and the blue here. This is a divided nation. And I think that--I would still urge John Kerry to pick up the phone and call John McCain. He'll say no probably. But I think John Kerry has an obligation to do that for the way he wants to heal. And I know John will listen. He'll say no, but I'm going to tell you, I'm counting on him being a more loyal American than he is a loyal Republican.
And, John, I'm not so sure you're so happy about the Senate. I'd like to see you president instead of the guy we have now. So--but you're a great senator. But I think you'd also be doing a great service. Do I think it's going to happen? No. But I think it is a reflection of the desire of this country, and the desire of people in both parties, to want to see this God-awful, vicious rift that exists in the nation healed, and John and John could go a long way to healing that rift.
Russert: Senator McCain, as an American, you can stay a Republican. You can be a loyal Republican. It would be a fusion or a unity ticket. Would you contemplate it in any way, shape, or form? Would you take Senator Kerry's phone call if you knew he was calling about it?
McCain: I will always take anyone's phone calls but I will not--I categorically will not do it. But I would like to add one additional quick comment. Joe's right, there's too much partisanship in America and there's too much partisanship in the Senate and there's too much partisanship. We've got to have people sit down and start working on issues that are not partisan in nature and start working on them so we can do our job as legislating and working for America. And I'm very disturbed about the level of partisanship which has led to gridlock. And we're not doing our job as our constituents expect us to do.
Russert: All right, Biden. McCain is out. Who is in?
Biden: I'm sticking with McCain. It's safer right now. Look, there's a lot of qualified people. I don't know how John's going to go about the--John Kerry is going to go about the choice. I think the single most important thing that John Kerry has to do is, the day he announces that person for the Tim Russerts of the world--there are not many of you, but for the big feet, as they say, in the press--to say that makes sense, that guy could be president, or that woman could be president. I think that's the single most important thing for people, when he or she is announced, say that person could be president.
Russert: What if John Kerry picked his vice president and also said, "I want Joe Biden for secretary of state and John McCain for secretary of defense?"
Biden: Well, if John will do it, I'll do it.
Russert: Senator McCain, do we have a deal?
McCain: No, no. No, no, we don't have a deal. But I certainly look forward to following Secretary of State Biden on your show.
Russert: We have to leave it there. We'll be back with our Meet the Press minute. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, February 4, 1968.
Russert: And we are back.
Forecasts of victory in Vietnam are shaken when the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong mount a massive and deadly offensive in South Vietnam on January 30, 1968. It becomes clear that the North Vietnamese forces were growing, not diminishing. The secretary of defense, Robert McNamara, makes a rare television appearance right here on the Meet the Press in the midst of the Tet offensive and admits the war has not gone as planned.
(Videotape, Meet the Press, February 4, 1968):
Mr. Max Frankel (New York Times): Looking back over this long conflict and especially in this rather agonized week in Vietnam, if we had to do it all over again, would you make any major changes in our approach to this?
Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara: Oh, this is not an appropriate time for me to be talking changes. With hindsight, there's no question but what five or 10 or 20 years from now the historians will find actions that might have been done differently. I'm sure they will. As a matter of fact, my wife pointed out to me the other day four lines from T.S. Eliot that answer your question. Eliot said, "We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time." Now, that applies to Vietnam. I'm learning more and more about Vietnam every day. There's no question I see better today than I did three years ago or five years ago what might have been done there.
Frankel: Are you suggesting...
McNamara: On balance, I feel much the way the Asian leaders do. I think the action that this government has followed, the policies it's followed, the objectives it's had in Vietnam are wise. I don't, by any means, suggest that we haven't made mistakes over the many, many years that we've been pursuing those objectives.
Frankel: You seem to suggest that we really didn't--that none of us appreciated what we were really getting into.
McNamara: I don't think any of us predicted seven years ago or 15 years ago the deployment of 500,000 men to Vietnam. I know I didn't.
(End videotape)
Russert: The next week marked the deadliest for U.S. troops in Vietnam with 543 killed in action. U.S. involvement in the war continued for another five years. All told, the U.S. lost over 58,000 men and women in the Vietnam War.
And we'll be right back.
Russert: That's all for today. We'll be back next week. If it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.


text:
U.S. Energy Secretary secures $117 million loan for Kahuku wind farm
HONOLULU—U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu offered a conditional commitment on a $117 million loan guarantee to finance the construction and start-up of a 30 MW wind energy project in Kahuku, Hawaii.
Kahuku Wind Power, LLC will install twelve 2.5 MW wind turbine generators along with a battery energy storage system for electricity load stability. The loan guarantee is being supported by funds made available from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
"This investment will create jobs and cut our dependence on oil, while promoting America's leadership in the global race for the clean energy industries of tomorrow," Chu said.
Located on the island of Oahu, the Kahuku project will contribute to Hawaii's Clean Energy Initiative goal of meeting 70 percent of the state's energy needs with clean energy by 2030.
Currently, each island uses an isolated electric grid that relies on imported oil, which currently generates 90 percent of the state's energy supply. By harnessing wind power, the project is expected to supply electricity to 7,700 households and avoid the production of nearly 160 million pounds of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas.
The project sponsor, First Wind Holdings LLC, estimates that construction of the Kahuku project will create 200 jobs. After completion, the project will provide 6 to 10 full-time clean energy jobs in Kahuku. The electricity generated by the project will be sold to Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc.
This is the eighth conditional commitment for a loan guarantee for clean energy projects entered into by the DOE Loan Guarantee Program Office.


text: On the intiative of azeezia medical college, Kollam has launched primary health centre at kulapdam to provide best health treatments in affordable price is the primary moto of azeezia medical college, says the Director of Dr. Ansar aziz, and threatments charity of BPL families in azeezia hospital is the best example of this. Ustad Ahmed Sherif lead's the prayer part. Nizar Ahmed, Kananallur Samad, J.N. Mansoor, Dr. Cherian job has attend the opening ceremony. All days 9.AM to 1.30 and 4.PM tp 7.PM is the treatment time. And General medicine, Orthopaedics, general surgen, ENT, Skin speciality, Ophthalmology, Gynaecology and paediatrics treatments alsoprovide on 5.PM to 7.PM


text:
The thieves in "Tower Heist" may have a skyscraper-dwelling rich guy as their target, but the movie itself is reaching into your wallet. It's such a crassly commercial action-comedy that you won't be surprised to learn that its towering aspirations only involve box office gross.
What ultimately matters is entertainment value, of course, and on that count the movie is so relentlessly busy that it will hold your attention. Movie stars, tall buildings, piles of money and even the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade will keep your eyes on the screen.
Although the frantic story isn't nearly as funny as it asumes itself to be, it's loud and silly and diverting.
If it aspired to be a more accomplished movie, "Tower Heist" would have, er, built more solidly on its durable premise. The title tower is a swank residential New York skyscraper whose occupants include a wealthy investor, Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda), whose frequent claims that he has remained true to his humble roots can't conceal just how smugly entitled he really feels himself to be. This financial wizard is also a crook, making "Tower Heist" a topical 2011 release.
When the building's nice-guy manager, Josh Kovaks (Ben Stiller), naively entrusts his fellow maintenance workers' pension funds with Shaw, the promised investment returns don't materialize. Just the opposite occurs, as Shaw steals the money and then is arrested on other charges.
Josh and his colleagues hatch a plan to rob a safe in Shaw's apartment and thereby make far more than they lost. They expect to realize $20 million from the heist, which sure qualifies as a comfortable retirement account.
Although "Tower Heist" gets some mileage out of the class warfare aspect of this plot, it's sloppy about its procedural aspect. It can be nervously compelling in such a movie to watch how the thieves scope out the situation and then methodically go about putting their plan into action. The movie admittedly has plenty of sneaking around, but there are so many gaps in logic and also in the staging of the action that it's a mess.
Many of these noisy and violent scenes happen inside what's presumably a fully occupied building, but it's as if everything were being played out on a movie studio soundstage.
There's even a splashy scene involving an automobile pushed through a large window and now dangling over a street packed with parade watchers. Nobody looks up and shouts that there's a car overhead. Perhaps it's because the street-level onlookers are mesmerized by the parade balloons and also by a real-life cameo involving comedian Joan Rivers on a float.
Although it's an intensely New York movie in terms of its locations, character types and attitudes, director Brett Ratner treats the city as a photogenic backdrop for a generic comedy that exists in a world of its own. You may not believe much of what you're watching in this New York fantasyland, but at least the breezy pace ensures that the movie lurches ahead.
Josh is joined in his heist scheme by the doorman, Lester (Stephen McKinley Henderson); the elevator operator, Dev'Reaux (Michael Pena); the concierge, Charlie Gibbs (Casey Affleck); and the housekeeper, Odessa (Gabourey Sidibe). Robbed of their pension funds and then fired when they protest, these building management workers are out for revenge.
Also joining them in the heist scheme is Mr. Fitzhugh (Matthew Broderick), a stock trader whose financial troubles are not directly related to Shaw's criminal behavior. Broderick's character serves as a reminder that the economy has been rough on some Wall Street types, too, so the movie extends its web of sympathy to the upper-middle-class. Incidentally, it's impossible not to notice how pudgy and faded-looking Broderick has become. It's either the economy or middle age.
There's also Slide (Eddie Murphy), a streetwise fellow recruited by Josh to give these non-criminals some tips. It's actually a nice casting move to allow Murphy to get away from his recent kiddie movie roles and return to his more profane roots.
Not on their side but kinda sorta rooting for them is an FBI agent, Claire Denham (Tea Leoni), who knows a good Robin Hood story when she investigates it.
The scripted point is that Arthur Shaw is the epitome of slimy evil and everybody else is pretty nice. In a movie that makes no great demands on the viewer, it helps that there is only one clearly defined villain to hiss. Grade: C+
"Tower Heist" (PG-13) is now playing at area theaters.


text:
Tech standards are important. They're, well, standards. They shape the way the world works, ideally. So if you wanna influence your little world, you probably wanna shape (or maybe even create) standards. Take Apple, for example.
They Call It "Open" For a Reason
One of the more excellent aspects of Snow Leopard, actually, is its full-scale deployment of OpenCL 1.0—Open Computing Language—a framework that allows programmers to more easily utilize the full power of mixes of different kinds of processors like GPUs and multi-core CPUs. (Much of the excitement for that is in leveraging the GPU for non-graphical applications.)
OpenCL lives up to its name: It is a royalty-free open standard managed by the Khronos Group, and supported by AMD/ATI, Apple, ARM, IBM, Intel, Nvidia, among others. Interesting thing about this open industry standard is that it was developed and proposed by... Apple.
What Is a Standard?
By "standard," we're talking about a format, interface or programming framework that a bunch of companies or people or organizations agree is the way something's going to get done, whether it's how a movie is encoded or the way websites are programmed. Otherwise, nothing works. A video that plays on one computer won't play on another, web sites that work in one browser don't work in another, etc. With increased connectedness between different machines and different platforms, standards are increasingly vital to progress.
Standards can range from open (anybody can use them, for free) to open with conditions (anybody can use them as long they follow conditions X, Y and Z) to closed (you gotta have permission, and most likely, pay for it). Some companies view standards strictly as royalty machines; others don't make much money on them, instead using them to make sure developers do things the way they want them to. Apple falls into this latter category, by choice or possibly just by fate.
Kicking the Big Guy in the Shins
Of course, OpenCL isn't the only open standard that Apple's had a hand in creating or supporting that actually went industry-wide. When you're the little guy—as Apple was, and still is in computer OS marketshare, with under 10 percent—having a hand in larger industry standards is important. It keeps your platform and programming goals from getting steamrolled by, say, the de facto "standards" enforced by the bigger guy who grips 90 percent of the market.
If you succeed in creating a standard, you're making everybody else do things the way you want them done. If you're doubting how important standards are, look no further than the old Sony throwing a new one at the wall every week hoping it'll stick. Or Microsoft getting basically everybody but iTunes to use its PlaysForSure DRM a couple years ago. Or its alternative codecs and formats for basically every genuine industry standard out there. To be sure, there is money to be made in standards, but only if the standard is adopted—and royalties can be collected.
Web Standards: The Big Headache
The web has always been a sore spot in the standards debate. The web is a "universal OS," or whatever the cloud-crazy pundits call it, but what shapes your experience is your browser and in part, how compliant it is with the tools web developers use to build their products. Internet Exploder shit all over standards for years, and web programmers still want IE6 to die in a fiery eternal abyss.
Enter WebKit, an open source browser engine developed by Apple based off of the KHTML engine. It's so standards-compliant it tied with Opera's Presto engine to be the first to pass the Acid3 test. What's most striking about WebKit isn't the fact it powers Safari and Google Chrome on the desktop, but basically every full-fledged smartphone browser: iPhone, Android, Palm Pre, Symbian and (probably) BlackBerry. So WebKit hasn't just driven web standards through its strict adherence to them, but it has essentially defined, for now, the way the "real internet" is viewed on mobile devices. All of the crazy cool web programming you see now made is made possible by standards-compliant browsers.
True, OpenCL and WebKit are open source—Apple's been clever about the way it uses open source, look no further than the guts of OS X—but Apple is hardly devoted to the whole "free and open" thing, even when it comes to web standards.
All the AV Codecs You Can Eat
The recent debate over video in the next web standards, known collectively as HTML5, shows that: Mozilla supports the open-source Ogg Theora video codec, but Apple says it's too crappy to become the web's default video standard—freeing everyone from the tyranny of Adobe's Flash. Apple says Ogg's quality and hardware acceleration support don't match up to the Apple-supported MPEG-4 standardized H.264 codec, which is tied up by license issues that keep it from being freely distributed and open. (Google is playing it up the middle for the moment: While it has doubts about the performance of Ogg Theora, Chrome has built-in support for it and H.264.)
Apple has actually always been a booster of MPEG's H.264 codec, which is the default video format supported by the iPhone—part of the reason YouTube re-encoded all of its videos, actually—and gets hardware acceleration in QuickTime X with Snow Leopard. H.264 is basically becoming the video codec (it's in Blu-ray, people use it for streaming, etc.).
Why would Apple care? It means Microsoft's WMV didn't become the leading standard.
A sorta similar story with AAC, another MPEG standard. It's actually the successor to MP3, with better compression quality—and no royalties—but Apple had the largest role in making it mainstream by making it their preferred audio format for the iPod and iTunes Store. (It saw some limited use in portables a little earlier, but it didn't become basically mandatory for audio players to support it until after the iPod.) Another bonus, besides AAC's superiority to MP3: Microsoft's WMA, though popular for a while, never took over.
FireWire I Mean iLINK I Mean IEEE 1394
Speaking of the early days of the iPod, we can't leave out FireWire, aka IEEE 1394. Like OpenCL, Apple did a lot of the initial development work (Sony, IBM and others did a lot of work on it as well), presented it to a larger standards body—the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers—and it became the basis for a standard. They tried to charge a royalty for it at first, but that didn't work out. It's a successful standard in a lot of ways—I mean, it is still on a lot of stuff like hard drives and camcorders still—but USB has turned out to be more universal, despite being technically inferior. (At least until USB 3.0 comes out, hooray!)
Update: Oops, forgot Mini DisplayPort, Apple's shrunken take on DisplayPort—a royalty-free video interface standard from VESA that's also notably supported by Dell—which'll be part of the official DisplayPort 1.2 spec. Apple licenses it for no fee, unless you sue Apple for patent infringement, which is a liiiiittle dicey. (On the other hand, we don't see it going too far as industry standard, which is why we forgot about it.)
That's just a relatively quick overview of some of the standards Apple's had a hand in one way or another, but it should give you an idea about how important standards are, and how a company with a relatively small marketshare (at least, in certain markets) can use them wield a lot of influence over a much broader domain.
Shaping standards isn't always for royalty checks or dominance—Apple's position doesn't allow them to be particularly greedy when it comes to determining how you watch stuff or browse the internet broadly. They've actually made things better, at least so far. But, one glance at the iPhone app approval process should give anybody who thinks they're the most gracious tech company second thoughts about that.
Still something you wanna know? Send questions about standards, things that are open other than your mom's legs or Sony Ultra Memory Stick XC Duo Quadro Micro Pro II to email@example.com, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line.


text:
|Contra Syncretist
Beatles Contra
When we talked to Glen Loper, he mentioned that he'd been a part of the Beatles Contra on May 23, 2008 with Rick Mohr. Read all about it (and see pictures!) here.
This project has concluded as of mid-2013 (with an epilogue posted mid-2016) but we hope to see you soon on a contra dance floor! Meanwhile, head over to our Facebook page for upcoming techno contra events and other items of interest.
The 100+ Friday Flourish videos can still be found on YouTube.
I dance with abandon. I play with glowsticks. I look for music that is conducive to one or both. I play behind cameras. I write about all of the above. I'm based in Glen Echo's contra dance community outside of Washington, D.C., but I'm happy to go dance afield when I can. Lather, rinse, repeat. Always repeat.
June 2016
Comments are welcome; spam-bots and disrespectful behaviors are not. Please do (nicely) point out errors if they are found.


text:
"Rizhao--Southeast Asia" container liner is officially launched
Date:2017-10-18 08:23:58 Author:Li Ling Click:82
On October 17, with the successful opening of "Navigator of Rizhao Port" liner loaded with 180 containers, the "Rizhao--Southeast Asia" container foreign trade routes which has linked to many countries for the first time and operated independently by Rizhao Port Group is officially launched.
It is said that the liner shall berth in Ho Chi Ming Port of Vietnam after 7 days. The "Rizhao--Southeast Asia" route sets sail from Rizhao port every Tuesday, linking successively to Shanghai port, Ho Chi Ming Port of Vietnam, LEAM Chebang of Vietnam and Bangkok port and so on. It mainly exports the building materials and agricultural products in Rizhao central region as well as all kinds of goods in Shanghai, while the import goods are mainly bulk goods in Southeast Asia, such as cassava, fruit, rubber, grain and so on.
After route of this liner is launched, not only the layout of Rizhao foreign trade container line can be optimized to open up a new channel for shipping from Rizhao to Southeast Asia and provide convenient and efficient logistics service for customers of Rizhao, south Shandong and other regions as well as countries in Southeast Asia, but also it achieves eficient connection with the launched international railway container liner from Rizhao to Europe and Central Asia, which shall further facilitate the economic and trade exchanges among Europe, Central Asia, our central and western regions as well as Southeast Asia. It is of very important significance for further enhancing the international service capability of Rizhao Port, promoting the facilitation of transportation and trade, and enhancing the "the belt and road" economic and cultural exchanges of countries along the road.
Since this year, in order to do its best to run "container, oil, business, industry and finance" and modern logistics, implement "open and active city" strategy, strive to create "the belt and road" comprehensive pivotal port, and initiate "go out" policy, Rizhao has successively launched some projects including the cooperation between Gasim coal unloading terminal of Pakistan and Melaka Gateway of Malaysia. And for land route, it has launched the "Zhaorongou" (from Rizhao to Chengdu and Europe) and "Rizhao--Central Asia" container international line; for sea route, it has launched the "Rizhao--Australia" and "Rizhao -- Middle East" general cargo line.
Sailing of the "Rizhao -- Southeast Asia" route is another important achievement for Rizhao Port to open up the Maritime Silk Road in twenty-first Century. As the operation unit of this route, Haitong Ferry Co., Ltd., subordinated to Rizhao Port, has promoted actively the sailing of the Southeast Asia routes, based on the mature experience and market resources obtained from the operation of the Pacific route, to build a boarder career platform and growth space for customers and partners.


text:
They shed light on atomic and molecular processes: ultrashort laser pulses are required to study extremely fast quantum phenomena. For years, scientists have been trying to tune the shape of light waves so as to, for instance, steer an electron on exactly the right path. At the TU Vienna, an extraordinarily powerful new method to influence the shape of the laser light wave has been developed in cooperation with the Imperial College in London and the Max-Born-Institute in Berlin. Much like the characteristic sound of a musical instrument, which results from the combination of different frequencies, a characteristic laser waveform can be designed by cleverly combining different frequencies of light. The crucial ingredient is a long-wavelength component – the bass, speaking in musical terms.
Light Pulses Create Even Shorter Light Pulses
An attosecond is a billionth of a billionth of a second. That is the unimaginably short time scale on which processes such as the motion of an electron in an atom can be studied. "Attosecond light pulses can be created by firing a laser pulse which is a thousand times longer onto atoms", says Stefan Haessler, a scientist at Vienna University of Technology. First, the laser pulse tears an electron from the atom and drags it away.
After a short time however, the electron gets decelerated by the oscillating laser field and eventually pushed back towards its atom leading to a re-collision. "The exact shape of the laser wave determines whether or not the electron hits the atom and with which energy this collision takes place", says Stefan Haessler. Ideally, the electron gains so much energy in the laser field that upon impact with the atom, a much shorter flash of light with very high energy is emitted – an attosecond laser pulse, with a frequency in the ultraviolet- or x-ray regime.
Composing a Laser Symphony
The optimal shape of the original, longer laser pulse is created by combining different frequencies, such that the oscillation of the wave is not sine-shaped, but has a more complicated sawtooth-like pattern. Similar effects are used in acoustics: Different sounds are created by combining waves of different frequencies.
Attempts to control the shape of the laser wave have already been made: The laser frequency can be doubled and then the original wave is combined with the double-frequency-wave. However, the shaping possibilities opened up by this simple frequency doubling technique are limited.
At the TU Vienna, a complementary method was developed: not only a higher-frequency wave is added to the laser pulse, but also a lower-frequency one. The laser wave is accompanied with an "optical bass", and this dramatically extends the range of possibilities for waveform shaping.
"We can tune the intensity and the relative phase of three different frequencies", says Stefan Haessler, "this brings us close to the 'perfect wave', which can be calculated in numerical simulations." With the newly shaped laser pulses, electrons can be ripped from the atoms very efficiently, and the electrons subsequently gain a large amount of energy. That way, the team succeeded in creating attosecond pulse radiation a hundred times more intense than simple sine-shaped waves could produce.
Stefan Haessler is convinced that many other laser-driven effects could be optimized this way as well. Not only atoms, but also molecules, plasmas or solids could be irradiated with specially shaped laser waves, inducing many different effects. In principle, the method can be scaled up: knowing how to add lower frequencies to the laser pulse, even more frequencies can now be combined. A larger number of frequencies means more possibilities for wave shaping, just like a composer finds more ways of expression composing not just for a flute, but for a full orchestra.
<link http: www.tuwien.ac.at dle pr aktuelles downloads lichtpulse _blank link_intern>Picture Download
<link http: journals.aps.org prx abstract physrevx.4.021028 _blank link_extern>Original publication
Further Information:
Dr. Stefan Hässler
Photonics Institute
Vienna University of Technology
Gusshausstraße 25-29, 1040 Vienna


text:
CU-Boulder to partner in FAA commercial space transportation center
A team of eight institutions that includes the University of Colorado at Boulder has been selected by the Federal Aviation Administration to participate in a newly formed Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Transportation.
The center will focus on four major research areas: space launch operations and traffic management; launch vehicle systems; commercial human space flight; and space commerce including law, insurance, policy and regulation. The new FAA center is expected to begin operations shortly, said aerospace engineering sciences Professor David Klaus, the principal investigator for the CU-Boulder portion of the project.
"This is an exciting opportunity to help shape the future of commercial space flight," said Klaus, who also is the associate director of BioServe Space Technologies, an established commercial space research group headquartered in CU-Boulder's aerospace department.
"This industry is currently at a point in time that is somewhat analogous to the barnstorming days of early aviation," Klaus said. "We have tremendous potential to advance the capabilities of space travel for the generations to come."
Said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt, "Commercial space flight is ready to play a greater role in the nation's space program. Universities working with industry partners will fuel the research necessary to help keep us in the forefront of both technology and safety in space."
The Obama administration recently released its new National Space Policy, which recognizes opportunities and advancements in commercial space transportation and lays out specific ways to use commercial capabilities.
Congress authorized Air Transportation Centers of Excellence under the FAA Research, Engineering and Development Authorization Act of 1990. This legislation enables the FAA to work with universities and their industry partners to conduct research in environment and aviation safety, and other activities to assure a safe and efficient air transportation system.
The FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation is responsible for licensing, regulating and promoting the commercial space industry. Since the office was created in 1984, the FAA has issued licenses for more than 200 launches and has licensed the operation of eight FAA-approved launch sites known as spaceports.


text:
Partnerships and Parental Empowerment
OCR recognizes that federal, state, and local education agencies, as well as parents and other interested parties, share a common goal of equal opportunity and access to high quality education. OCR combines its expertise through educational partnerships to prevent civil rights problems and stop illegal discrimination. P artnerships also are proving helpful in arriving at effective solutions, including educationally sound remedies that increase opportunities for all students.
Empowering Parents
One of OCR's strategic goals is to empower students and parents to solve their own problems of securing equal access to quality education. OCR has encouraged parental involvement in agreements resulting from complaints and compliance reviews. Parental involvement is essential to achieving lasting change by ensuring that positive actions implemented by education institutions continue once OCR is no longer involved.


text:
When atoms in a crystal are struck by laser light, their electrons, excited by the light, typically move back and forth together in a regular pattern, resembling nanoscale soldiers marching in a lockstep formation. But according to a new theory developed by Johns Hopkins researchers, under the right conditions these atoms will rebel against uniformity. Their electrons will begin moving apart and then join together again repeatedly like lively swing partners on a dance floor.
Moreover, the researchers say, this atomic free-style dancing can be controlled, paving the way for tiny computer components that emit less heat and new sensors to detect bio-hazards and medical conditions.
"By choosing particular atoms in the proper configuration and directing the right laser light at them, we can control the behavior of these 'nano-dancers,'" said Alexander E. Kaplan, a professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering in Johns Hopkins' Whiting School of Engineering. "The essential thing is, these are completely designable atomic structures."
Kaplan and Sergei N. Volkov, a postdoctoral fellow, described this phenomenon in a paper published recently in the journal Physical Review Letters. The next step is for other researchers to conduct lab experiments in an effort to validate the theory and predictions advanced by Kaplan and Volkov.
Kaplan, an internationally known nonlinear optics expert who studies how matter interacts with strong light, said his and Volkov's "nano-riot" idea runs counter to a widely accepted concept. For decades, Kaplan said, scientists have adhered to the Lorentz-Lorenz theory, which asserts that the atomic electrons in a crystal, exposed to a laser beam, will move back and forth in tandem in a uniform way under any conditions.
"But we've concluded that under certain circumstances, the nearest atoms will behave much differently," he said. "Their electrons will move violently apart and come back together again, staging a sort of 'nano-riot.'"
For this to happen, Kaplan said, several critical conditions must exist. First, the system must be very small, typically involving no more than a few hundred atoms, and the atoms must be arranged in a one-dimensional or two-dimensional configuration. The atoms must be grouped in a sufficiently close concentration; interestingly, though, this arrangement may allow more space between atoms than exists in a typical crystal. Also, the frequency of the laser driving the atoms must be closely tuned to one of the specific frequencies of the atomic electrons — the so-called atomic resonance.
When these critical conditions are met, the interacting excited atomic electrons get strongly "coupled," and their motion is affected by one another. The atomic dance partners begin to match or counter-match the motion of each other, while still being driven by the laser's "music."
When this occurs, the dancing atomic electrons form waves of collective motion. Kaplan calls these waves "locsitons," based on the words "local" and "exciton," the latter referring to a physics concept. Within the atomic systems envisioned by Kaplan and Volkov, these locsiton waves are strongly affected by the boundaries of these structures or any irregularities, such as holes. The presence of these boundaries results in size-related resonances, or highly excited motion at certain frequencies, resembling those of a violin string fixed at two end-points. In this case, the string's end-points would be the boundaries of the group of atoms. A smooth violin string produces mostly a main tone, and nearby points of the string move in unison. But an atomic array more closely resembles a chain of connected beads, and with the right laser tuning, the neighboring beads, or atomic electrons, can oscillate counter to each other.
"Fortunately, once this atomic structure is built, the 'dancing style' of the atoms can be controlled by the laser tuning," Kaplan said. "Furthermore, if the laser intensity is sufficient, we believe the atoms in this lattice will engage in so-called nonlinear behavior. That means they can be made to behave like switches in a computer. They will act like a computer's memory or logic components, assuming the positions of either 1 or 0, depending on the initial conditions."
Computer makers, trying to produce ever smaller metallic or semiconductor components, have run into problems related to the excessive release of heat. However, the nanoscale switch envisioned by Kaplan would be a dielectric, meaning it would involve no exchange of free electrons in the structure. Because of this, the proposed components would generate far less heat.
If their theory is confirmed, the Johns Hopkins researchers foresee other applications for these nanoscale atomic systems. The tiny lattices, they say, could be designed so that when a specific foreign bio-molecule enters a system, the atomic electron 'dancing' would stop. Because of this characteristic, they said, the system could be designed to trigger an alarm signal whenever a biohazard or perhaps a cancer cell was detected.The research by Kaplan and Volkov was supported by a grant from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.
Johns Hopkins University
::Design World::


text:
Scout Sunday - February 5, 2017
Tuesday, January 31, 2017
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
Scout Sunday is an annual event among all faiths which recognize the good work that is done by Scouts in our religious communities. This year, Scout Sunday will be observed on February 5, 2017. The observance of Scout Sunday tradition was started years ago to make people in the church aware of Scouting, and to allow Scouts to live out of what is pledged each week. The Scout Law says that a "Scout is Reverent" and the Scouts of all ages promise to do their "Duty to God". These values strengthen youth character in their family, community and faith.
In 1960, the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas [SCOBA] endorsed Scouting as viable part of their youth ministry and created the Eastern Orthodox Committee on Scouting [EOCS]. This was the first agency created by SCOBA and presently an agency under The Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas.
The EOCS Executive Board encourages all Orthodox Churches to recognize and celebrate this Scout Sunday even if their church does not sponsor a Scout unit. Anyone interested in their good work can go to the EOCS website at www.eocs.org to learn more about Scouting and the Orthodox Church. This year will be the National Boy Scout Jamboree at the Summit Bechtel Reserve in West Virginia from July 23. Once again the EOCS will be sponsoring an Orthodox booth, holding services and meetings with Orthodox Scouts from around the country and around the world. I would encourage all Orthodox Scouts to attend and be involved at the Jamboree.
Some Scout Sunday Ideas:
- If your parish sponsors a Scout unit have them arrive in full uniform.
- If the church does not have a Scout program, have the Scouts come in uniform. Many priests are aware of Scout Sunday and will discuss Scouting at some point of the service. You can have the uniformed Scouts:
- Serve at the candle table in the narthex
- Serve as Ushers
- Help pass the collection tray
- Help serve during the coffee hour
- And any suggestions from the parish priest
- Present Eastern Orthodox Religious Scout Awards and/or any other Scout Awards earned.
- Have a Scout Display and recruitment.
- Think of sponsoring or establishing a Scout unit in your parish.
- Approach a local Scout unit and give them ideas for service projects which can benefit your parish and community.
- Look at the many Orthodox Scout awards and encourage your Scouts to earn them. Scouting has proven to develop stronger church membership and it is a natural fit. Good Scouts make better Church members and good Church members make better Scouts.
- Volunteer to assist the local Scout troop/pack/crew.
- Take a collection and contribute funds to the EOCS so they can continue their good work. Think about establish a local EOCS committee so all Orthodox Scouts in the region can gather and support one another.
May the Lord God send His Blessings upon our Scouts, our leaders and the many volunteers across the United States of America.
+ Bishop DANIEL
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States
Episcopal Liaison to the Eastern Orthodox Committee on Scouting
Additional Formats:
Latest News
Orthodox Christian Mental Health Needs Assessment Quick Facts 2021
Assembly of Bishops Sends Delegation to the November General Assembly of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops
Archbishop Elpidophoros Presents at the November General Assembly of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops
Encyclical for IOCC Sunday 2021
Assembly of Bishops Concludes 10th Anniversary Meetings, Creates New Agencies