text:
Justice George H. Taylor, Jr. was born on April 22, 1873 in Westport, Connecticut. Educated at public grammar schools, he went on to earn degrees from City College in New York and New York Law School. Taylor was admitted to the bar in 1894 and for the next four years practiced at the firm of Johnston and Johnston. He was then engaged in solo practice until 1922. Taylor served as an Alderman in Mount Vernon from 1906 until 1910 and became President of the Mount Vernon Board of Aldermen. Later, he ran unsuccessfully for Mayor of Mount Vernon.
He joined the bench in 1923 after winning election as a Justice of the Supreme Court for the Ninth Judicial District. Justice Taylor was designated to the Appellate Division, Second Department in 1936. He left the bench in 1943, having reached the mandatory retirement age of 70, but continued to serve as an official referee for the Supreme Court for the next ten years.
Additionally, Justice Taylor was a member of the American, New York State and Westchester County Bar Associations, the New York County Lawyers Association, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and several clubs.
He was married to Irene E. Perry in 1896 and had two daughters. He died on November 18, 1958 at the age of 85.
"G. H. Taylor Jr., Ex-State Justice." New York Times 19 Nov. 1958: 37. ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The New York Times (1851-2008). Web. 3 Aug. 2012.
"Honorable George H. Taylor, Jr." Eminent Members of the Bench and Bar of New York. San Francisco: Knight-Counihan, 1943. 252. Print.


text:
(Reposted with permission of the Center for American
Making Public Policy Work for All Households
How Current Laws Fail to Address the Changing Reality of
American Families
Public policy has not kept up with the changing reality of the
American family. Our laws and discourse largely ignore the roughly
2 million children being raised by LGBT parents.
By Jennifer Chrisler, Ineke Mushovic, Jeff
Krehely | October 25, 2011
Read the full report (pdf)
Read the executive summary (pdf)
Read the condensed report (pdf)
Read the report's major findings (pdf)
Public discussion about American families often assumes the nation
is largely made up of married heterosexual couples raising their
biological children. Yet less than a quarter of all U.S. households
fall into this category. Today's children may be raised by
grandparents, single parents, step-parents, aunts, uncles, or
foster parents. Their parents may be married or unmarried. They
also may be heterosexual or lesbian, gay, bisexual, or
Unfortunately, public policy has not kept up with the changing
reality of the American family. Indeed, our laws and discourse
largely ignore the roughly 2 million children being raised by LGBT
parents. They also ignore children in other family configurations,
such as those with unmarried heterosexual parents. As a result,
most Americans are probably unaware of the many ways in which
unequal treatment and social stigma harm the millions of children
whose families do not fit into a certain mold.
A new report, "All
Children Matter: How Legal and Social Inequalities Hurt LGBT
Families," from the Movement
Advancement Project, the Family Equality Council, and
theCenter for American
Progress offers one of the most comprehensive portraits to date
of the wide range of challenges facing LGBT families in
It highlights three major needs that every child must have met:
stable, loving homes; economic security; and health and well-being.
In each of these areas, the report outlines how current laws and
social stigma create challenges for LGBT families. The report
offers detailed recommendations for eliminating or reducing
inequities and improving the lives of children with LGBT parents.
Where possible, the report also highlights how current laws and
stigma harm children in other modern family configurations, such as
those with unmarried heterosexual parents.
A summary of the report and its recommendations follows. You can
read the full reporthere.
Key findings from the main report
LGBT families are numerous and diverse
- The number of children with LGBT parents is
significant. Roughly 2 million children are being raised
by LGBT parents.
- LGBT families are more likely to be poor.
Contrary to stereotypes, children living in same-sex-couple
households are twice as likely to live in poverty as children being
raised by married heterosexuals households. Same-sex couples of
color raising children are more likely to be poor than white
same-sex couples raising children.
- Same-sex couples raising children are more racially and
ethnically diverse than married different-sex couples raising
children. In all, 59 percent of same-sex couples with
children identify as white compared to 73 percent of married
different-sex couples with children. Same-sex couples of color are
more likely to raise children than white same-sex couples.
- LGBT families are geographically diverse. LGBT
families live in 96 percent of U.S. counties, and same-sex couples
in the South are more likely to be raising children than those in
other regions of the country.
- LGBT families are more likely to be
binational. Among same-sex couples, 6 percent are
binational compared to 4.6 percent of married heterosexual couples.
Nearly half (46 percent) of binational, same-sex couples are
rearing children compared to 31 percent of same-sex couples in
which both partners are U.S. citizens.
Laws and stigma hurt children with LGBT parents
State and federal laws and practices often deny children legal ties
to loving, responsible parents. In many states, LGBT adults face
restrictions in adoption or fostering—even though roughly 115,000
children are awaiting "forever" homes. And when a child is born
to a married heterosexual couple, that child generally enjoys the
essential security of being the legal child of both parents. By
contrast, a child born to (or raised by) two LGBT parents may have
one parent deemed a legal stranger by law, threatening to undercut
family permanency.
Today's legal and social climate creates barriers to achieving
loving, stable homes for children in the following ways:
- Children denied permanent homes. Some states
and agencies still refuse to place children with same-sex couples
despite research consistently showing that children of LGBT parents
fare just as well as other children.
- Children denied legal ties to their parents. A
child living with two parents of the same sex can be assured that
their relationship to their parents will be recognized by law in
fewer than half of U.S. states. So if a child is born using donor
insemination, the partner of the birth mother may be a legal
stranger to the child, despite acting as a parent from birth.
- Children lack protection when their parents'
relationship dissolves or a parent dies. An LGBT parent
who is not recognized as a parent by the law can lose custody or
visitation rights even in instances when that parent is the most
suitable caregiver and has acted as a parent for the child's
entire life.
- Children live in fear that their families could be torn
apart by a parent's deportation. Children with
binational same-sex parents are denied the same protections of
family unity as their heterosexual peers. Under federal immigration
law, LGBT Americans cannot sponsor a same-sex spouse or partner for
permanent residency or citizenship, a right that heterosexual
Americans have.
Laws and stigma create obstacles to economic security for
Government-based economic protections, ranging from safety net
programs to tax deductions to inheritance laws, help families meet
their children's basic needs, including obtaining food, shelter,
and clothing.
Yet different treatment under the law creates barriers to economic
security for LGBT families in the following ways:
- Children fall through the safety net. Because
many safety net programs apply antiquated definitions of family, a
child with LGBT parents might be denied benefits provided to his or
her non-LGBT counterpart simply because the child's parents are
LGBT. Most government safety net programs use a narrow definition
of family tied to marital status, which often excludes same-sex
partners and non-legally recognized parents and children. The
result is that financially struggling families with LGBT or
unmarried parents cannot accurately reflect their household size or
economic resources and may be denied adequate assistance.
- LGBT families face a higher tax burden. A
series of tax credits and deductions are designed to help all
families, regardless of economic circumstance, ease the financial
costs of raising children. Tax law, however, also uses a narrow
definition of family that excludes LGBT families. This exclusion
usually results in a significantly higher tax burden for LGBT
- LGBT families are denied financial protections when a
parent dies or is disabled. Social Security benefits and
inheritance laws aim to protect families when a parent dies or
becomes disabled. But because the federal government fails to
recognize LGBT families, such families may be denied critical
Social Security death and disability benefits provided to non-LGBT
families. And if a married heterosexual parent dies without a will,
all the couple's assets transfer tax free to the surviving spouse
(and/or children). If a parent dies a wrongful death, minor
children and sometimes legal spouses also can sue. Yet LGBT
families have no such protections in states where their family ties
are not legally recognized.
Laws and stigma create obstacles to physical and mental health
and well-being
Government policies aim to ensure that children are physically and
mentally healthy, and that they can access the basic resources they
need to thrive, including quality and welcoming child care,
education, and health care.
Yet children with LGBT parents face additional obstacles to
achieving optimal health and well-being:
- LGBT families face health coverage disparities and
unequal access to health insurance. The Defense of
Marriage Act prevents the federal government from recognizing the
marriages of same-sex couples. This lack of recognition means that
employers do not need to extend health insurance benefits to the
same-sex partners of LGBT employees or to the children of these
partners (assuming the employee is a legal stranger to the
children). Even when employers choose to offer extended health
insurance benefits, an LGBT family will be taxed on the value of
the benefit while other families will not.
- LGBT families face unwelcoming health care
environments. Many professional caregivers—from
physicians to counselors to the receptionists at medical
facilities—are not accepting of, or trained to work with, LGBT
families. Some medical providers have even refused to treat LGBT
people, citing religious or personal reasons.
- LGBT family members are restricted in providing care to
each other. When an LGBT parent lacks legal recognition,
he or she may be denied visitation rights as well as the ability to
make medical decisions for his or her child. In addition, the
federal Family and Medical Leave Act does not require employers to
grant leave to a worker caring for a same-sex partner or spouse,
even while heterosexual workers have this right.
- LGBT families face social stigma and
discrimination. Many of the challenges LGBT families face
stem from a society that assumes that everyone is heterosexual and
comes from a family with two married heterosexual parents. The
stresses resulting from these expectations are heightened for LGBT
families of color, who also have to contend with additional
disparities as racial and ethnic minorities. Transgender parents
and their children also face added strains.
The main
report presents a detailed and comprehensive set of legal,
policy, and cultural solutions to address the disparities and
challenges outlined above. Below is a summary of key
recommendations which, taken together, could virtually eliminate
the legal inequities that harm the 2 million children with LGBT
parents. Many of the recommendations would also help an array of
other children, including those with unmarried parents and those
awaiting adoption.
Legally recognize LGBT families
Pass comprehensive parental recognition laws at the state
level to fully protect children in LGBT families. State
parentage and adoption statutes should allow joint adoption by LGBT
parents, recognize LGBT parents using assisted reproduction in the
same manner as heterosexual parents, and provide avenues such as
second-parent adoption and de facto parenting to allow LGBT parents
to gain full legal recognition.
Legalize and federally recognize marriage for same-sex
couples. Marriage for same-sex couples would help
strengthen the legal ties of the entire family, including that
between a child's parents and between the child and his or her
parents. Married LGBT parents would be recognized as legal parents
upon a child's birth, and they would also have access to joint
and step-parent adoption. If recognized by the federal government,
marriage would also allow accurate representation of LGBT families
for the purposes of safety net programs, tax credits and
deductions, inheritance and Social Security protections,
immigration sponsorship, and other benefits. And it would make it
easier for them to obtain family health protections, including
insurance coverage and the right to decision-making, visitation,
and family leave.
Provide pathways to immigration and citizenship for
binational LGBT families.This should include legislation
such as the "Uniting American Families Act," which would add
the category "permanent partner" to the list of family members
already entitled to sponsor a foreign national for U.S.
Provide equal access to government-based economic
Recognize LGBT families and children across government
safety net programs.A broad definition of family would
allow LGBT families to accurately reflect their household across
numerous government programs and protections. Forms and application
procedures should also accommodate the reality of LGBT and other
21st century families.
Revise the IRS tax code to provide equitable treatment for
LGBT families. The Internal Revenue Service should create
a designation of "permanent partner," who would be treated as a
spouse for the purposes of the tax code. The IRS should allow not
just legal parents but also de facto parents to claim a
"qualifying child" on their tax filing.
Provide equitable economic protections when a parent dies
or is disabled. Three steps should be taken to achieve
this goal. First, broaden Social Security's definition of family
to allow an LGBT worker's permanent partner and children to
access survivor and disability benefits in the same manner as a
heterosexual worker's spouse and children. Next, states should
change inheritance laws to treat LGBT permanent partners as
spouses, and ensure children can inherit from a de facto parent
when the parent dies without a will. Last, states should permit the
filing of a wrongful death suit by any individual who can show
economic dependence on a deceased person.
Provide equal access to health care
Advance equal access to health insurance and care.
Pass laws ensuring that an LGBT worker's domestic partner and
dependent children have access to health insurance on equal terms
with heterosexual families, including eliminating unfair taxation
of these benefits. Encourage private employers to offer domestic
partner benefits, and work to ensure the Affordable Care Act
defines "family" broadly both federally and in the states.
Enable LGBT family members to care for one
another. Pass or revise state hospital visitation and
medical decision-making laws to be inclusive of LGBT families and
de facto parents. Work with hospitals and other medical facilities
and providers to enact LGBT-friendly policies related to
visitation, advanced health care directives, and related issues.
And revise the federal Family Medical Leave Act to allow same-sex
partners to care for one another.
Protect LGBT families with antidiscrimination laws,
antibullying laws and outreach
Pass state antibullying laws and laws barring
discrimination in employment, adoption, custody and visitation,
health services, housing, and credit. Legislation
prohibiting bullying and harassment in schools and universities
should explicitly protect students based on their sexual
orientation, gender identity and expression, or association with
LGBT people. Nondiscrimination laws should include similar
Expand education and cultural competency training on LGBT
families. Education and cultural competency training for a
wide array of professionals should include outreach to adoption
agencies and child welfare departments, judges and law students,
government agency workers, health service providers, schools, and
faith communities.
Provide education, services support, and research to help LGBT
Create stronger support services for LGBT families,
particularly families of color, low-income families, and
transgender parents. Advocates should target LGBT families
with focused outreach and services, including opportunities to
participate in social and support groups. Advocates should also
educate LGBT families about the need to establish parentage ties
and other legal protections, and provide assistance in doing
Expand research on LGBT families and parenting, with an
emphasis on filling gaps in data on families of color, low-income
families, and transgender parents.This should include
lobbying for expanded private and government research on LGBT
families and parenting, such as improved demographic, financial,
health, mental health, and other data.
Today's American families are increasingly diverse. Yet current
laws ignore modern realities—with devastating consequences. These
laws deny children the protection of having a legal connection to a
parent who cares for them. They undermine families' economic
strength by denying access to safety net programs, family tax
credits, and health insurance and care. Antiquated laws can leave
children destitute if a parent dies or becomes disabled. They can
wrest children away from the most qualified caregiver if a
child's parents' relationship dissolves.
Two million children are already being raised by LGBT parents, and
there is no sound reason to exclude them from our public policies.
The states and the federal government have a huge opportunity to
modernize laws and regulations to put the best interests of
children first, ensuring that all children receive equal protection
under government laws and programs. It is a big challenge, but one
that should be met.
Read the full report (pdf)
Read the executive summary (pdf)
Read the condensed report (pdf)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Library Search
The NRFC Library is a collection of materials to build a knowledge base around fathers, fatherhood, and operating a Responsible Fatherhood program. It also houses all resources created by the NRFC, including fact sheets, PSAs, and past webinars.
Use the search options provided below to find resources that you are interested in.
54% of U.S. teens say they spend too much time on their cellphones, and two-thirds of parents express concern over their teen's screen time. But parents face their own challenges of device-related distraction. (Author introduction)


text:
Duste Dunn – CT Citizen Action Group, U.S.
The benefits to us of regular coaching sessions were immediate.
Groups Banner
Staff and activists of 4,900+ groups
have engaged with SMT trainings
We've heard really good things from our grantee partners. SMT has a strong, grantee-focused way of working.
The Design Apprenticeship course helped me become bolder in my design choices. I became confident enough to push for a more systemic approach to design in the team, developing templates and guiding other creative colleagues. This program was pivotal in my development as a designer!
SMT coaching enabled us to expand our presence within human rights spaces in Kenya beyond an LGBTIQ audience. It helped us use Twitter to connect with allies in the environmental justice and land rights movements. It was amazing to have someone to work with who knows our work and give us templates just when we needed them.
The trainings are terrific–geared for every level of experience. And being rooted in social change movement, especially helpful to organizers.
We have had a fantastic experience with SMT…they have been highly responsive to the needs of our grantees.
Our staff took a lot of SMT courses – including the intensive Digital Campaigning Certificate Program. It helped us take our digital campaigning and collectivizing actions to the next level! We used various tools to increase our follower base and successfully target authorities to take action at the village and municipal levels in India.
SMT helped us craft an effective public narrative for our campaign to get a mine closed. SMT helped us finalize a campaign strategy and come up with an effective plan to raise visibility and engage the public. Our campaign led to a pause in the mining. We will keep fighting!
I strongly recommend SMT. Their strong organizing background, preparation and thoughtfulness made our strategy assessment with them enjoyable and really helpful.
The program gave my team the tools and time to strategise how our grassroots migrant organising translates to a digital context. I picked up tools like source codes, which then enabled us to see that more people were registering from Instagram than through any other platform and caused us to adapt our strategy. We also became SMT an Outreach Partner to enable our network to benefit from trainings at lower prices
SMT helped us create a social media presence to expand our cannabis worker organizing campaign. Our organizers have enhanced their social media capabilities. We have succeeded beyond our expectations. Working with SMT has been a great experience. They really understand organizing and communications.
SMT helped GAIA use LinkedIn to reach a key constituency we were having trouble reaching - thousands of people who play a specific role in the waste management industry. We got responses from key players.
SMT's training helped me use my journalistic skills effectively to highlight people's struggles and create change. Using Twitter more effectively, we supported Syria's refugee camp hospital to get more media attention and raise funds to respond to the hospital's needs as well as build visibility on the issues affecting refugees.
I found a lot of value in this Certificate Program that I use in my everyday work: from using social media effectively; significantly growing accounts and activating people online, pressuring targets in campaigns, and running Twitterstorms. Even when using other tools, I still apply the principles I learned!
Without SMT we would not have been able to move our organizing from the field to the digital arena during COVID. They helped us set up systems, coached and trained our folks, helped us troubleshoot and launch digital outreach efforts all in crucial campaign moments. Can't speak highly enough about what their help meant!
SMT is the only training I know of that speaks our language of activism and uses the tools we use everyday in the field. They are a go-to resource to help raise the bar for communications in the labor movement.
I took the workers organizing in the digital age training. We really need this kind of training in Finland, which people in the US have had access to for some years. The training was effective to start organizing for instance on Twitter.
We're starting our third straight year providing grantee partners with Social Movement Technologies training and coaching…our grantees are in good hands.
I really liked the A.I. custom training session, especially the parts tailored to our workstream and with examples pulled from our staff. It really helped to situate the tools in our work and open our team's minds to the possibilities.
SMT's training on using WhatsApp to activate our bases helped us activate more leaders by creating conversational WhatsApp groups for members and assigning different leadership roles to volunteers.
Working with SMT was easy and collaborative. The training helped our Greenpeace Southeast Asia team get new insights into campaign best practices across the globe.
Having access to experts through the certificate program was amazing. The course is so practical. I set up google ads for the first time and created our digital security policy and implementation plan. Our whole team uses the campaign strategy template now. Now we know how to improve our email deliverability and started a texting program.
Our coach was an everyday reminder of what we needed to do. He checked in and followed up on us. It really helped us activate Twitter in our campaigns and tighten up digital security. We moved from just having a Twitter handle to building on a hashtag that saw a jailed human rights activist released from prison.
SMT has been a great partner to co-design and launch a set of offerings that meet the growing digital and remote needs of the organizations we support, including bilingual access for our Spanish-speaking partners. The team is relatable, attentive and knowledgeable and their use of case studies helps to make complex information accessible!
SMT's coaching was incredibly supportive, encouraging and accessible. SMT had a huge impact on evolving La Semilla's storytelling program. Through SMT coaching, we diversified our digital communications. Having SMT as a source of resources and as a thought partner has been incredibly impactful to our work.
I implemented lessons on personal narrative, public narrative and emails directly into my campaign, so this was an instant gratification. I loved learning from the other Digital Campaigning Certificate Program participants who came from around the world, working on different topics.
The SMT trainings I've taken have helped us mobilize and deepen engagement in our communities. Through Twitterstorms, phone banking, and other tactics that I learned through SMT's trainings, we succeeded in our call to #ExtendtheReg for a million young people who would otherwise be disenfranchised by anti-poor COVID policies.
SMT has worked with us to develop and implement a broad and integrated social media strategy. They helped our leadership understand the importance of such a strategy and taught our activists the basic skills to execute it. From website maintenance to targeted twitter campaigns, they are there when you need them and they understand that it is all about movement building.


text:
BMW X6 Parts
- Fuel System
- Engine
- Suspension
- Steering
- Cooling System
BMW X6 Parts
The BMW X6 was introduced in 2008 and is still in production today. Marketed by BMW as a Sports Activity Coupe, the X6 is a new type of mid-size luxury crossover vehicle. The BMW X6 parts ways with conventional SUVs and crossovers as it provides the best of both worlds- the stylish looks, luxurious comfort and seating position of a car along with a higher ground clearance, larger tires and all-wheel drive normally found in an SUV allowing a driver to face all types of driving conditions with confidence and ease. There is an extremely powerful M tuned high performance version of the X6 available, as well as a hybrid model (which was BMW's first full hybrid vehicle). Our easy to navigate BMW X6 catalog has a fitment guide that will allow you to pinpoint the exact parts that will fit the vehicle you have, and we're happy to make the experience as easy and effective as possible for you.
BMW X6 Parts at FCP Euro
With its wild styling and impressive performance, the X6 is yet another great automotive accomplishment by BMW. Although the X6 is an extremely modern vehicle full of cutting edge technology and features, all vehicles need some form of preventative maintenance or repairs eventually. Here at FCP Euro it is our goal to help you keep your vehicle operating smoothly and performing as it did when new. Whether you're looking for basic maintenance parts like filters and hardware or parts for more complex mechanical repairs, we've got the stuff you need in our ever growing BMW X6 catalog. All of our BMW X6 parts, including X6 original parts, are covered by a one year warranty and a quality and fitment guarantee that will give you the confidence you deserve while you're out on the road.


text:
Exactal expands to 6 offices in 5 countries around the world
Exactal is pleased to announce the opening of two new international offices in Singapore and Melbourne. The opening of both offices is necessary due to the continued growth within the company as more and more people adopt the CostX® technology worldwide.
Exactal (Singapore) Pte Ltd was officially opened two weeks ago and is located at Suite 28, One Raffles Place, Tower 2, #19-61, Singapore. Exactal has always had a high level of activity in Singapore and our local office will support our existing clients there as well as providing a local presence for new clients. As part of this office opening Exactal is pleased to welcome our new Account Manager in Singapore, Jason Ong. Of the new opportunity in the region, Jason states "Singapore has a strong focus on BIM and the CostX® range of products is a perfect fit. I am looking forward to expanding Exactal's presence directly in Singapore as well as Hong Kong and the rest of the region."
Additionally, Exactal has now opened a second Australian office, this time located in the Melbourne CBD. The address for the new office is Suite 260, Level 2, 1 Queens Rd, Melbourne. To provide the highest level of support for the new office, Senior Product Specialist Harsha Fernando has relocated to Melbourne and will be directly supporting our large client base in Victoria and the Southern States. Commenting on the addition of the second office Exactal CEO & Founder, Mark Kefford, states "Having a second office in Australia has always been a priority for the company. Melbourne is a logical choice as it will provide direct support for Victoria and the southern states whilst giving us overlap for New South Wales. Relocating Harsha to Melbourne provides the highest level of assistance possible and is indicative of our commitment to the region."
To contact our Singapore office, please call +65 3106 2322 or email email@example.com. To contact the Melbourne office or our International Sales Department please call 1300 006 222 or email email@example.com.
About Exactal
Established in Brisbane, Australia in 2003 to develop software specifically for the quantity surveying and estimating market, Exactal has continued to expand its worldwide presence and now has offices in the UK, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore and Melbourne, with sales and channel partner support across much of the globe. The main product CostX® provides a unique integration between the cost estimates and the elements on the CAD drawings that the estimate represents. This unique approach allows fast revisions of drawings to be easily handled and eliminates traditional scope creep in construction projects.
To read more news on Exactal please visit http://www.exactal.com/company/news/


text:
Guilty! - HomeWord - April 30, 2018
- Sign Up for Email?
- 2018 Apr 30
This devotional was written by Jim Burns
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. —Romans 3:23
The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. —Romans 6:23
On a sunny September day, a stern-faced, plainly dressed man stood on a street corner in downtown Chicago. Pedestrians hurried by on their way to lunch, shopping, or business. This solemn-faced man would lift his right arm, point to the person nearest him, and intone loudly the single word "GUILTY!"
Then, without any change of expression, he would resume his stiff stance for a few minutes before repeating the same gesture again, raising his arm and pointing to another person, then pronouncing loudly that one word, "GUILTY!"
The effect that this strange man had on the people was almost eerie. People would stare at him, hesitate, look aside and then hurry away as if they had been caught. One man turned to another man and exclaimed, "But how did he know?" Guilty! We are all guilty. We have made some major mistakes in our life and many minor ones; we are all guilty.
When it comes to our relationship with God, we have all sinned and fallen short of His glory. To sin means to "miss the mark," and we have all missed the mark of God's perfection.
The good news is that sin and guilt are erased in Jesus Christ. There is a Scriptural principle which helps us understand the beauty of God's forgiveness of our sin and guilt. It's found in 1 John 1:9: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness."
You don't have to live in the guilt of your past sins. You are forgiven. You are cleansed. Your sins are no longer remembered. Hallelujah!
1. According to Romans 3:23, who has sinned? Okay…now according to Romans 6:23, what are the wages of sin? Go to the next question!
2. We have established that we all have sinned and that we all face death because of that sin; but what hope does the second part of Romans 6:23 offer us? How can we be freed from the guilt of sin in our daily lives according to 1 John 1:9?
Genesis 2:17; Romans 5:12; Galatians 6:7-8
For more information and resources please visit HomeWord.com.


text:
Is 25 the New 40?
A full-term baby will get the best start in life, but more and more mothers are delivering beore 37 weeks. Although U.S. hospitals take excellent care of these tiny patients, what is the cause of the mysterious increase in preterm births?
At first all you see are the photos. They line both sides of the hallway in the neonatal intensive care unit at Baptist St. Anthony's Hospital in Amarillo, TX. They are poster-sized and framed under glass. Children—babies to school-aged—larger than life, all smiling, greeting everyone who walks in.
Nurse Cristina Vasquez pauses before the image of a smiling girl of about kindergarten age. "Emily," Vasquez says almost to herself as she smiles back. "She was our littlest one." The wall next to the frame displays Emily's name, the number of days she spent in the NICU, and her gestational age when she was born: 25 weeks. Almost four months before her due date.
Pregnancy may last only 40 weeks, but it represents years' worth of unanswered questions. Will my water break in a public place? Will I need drugs? Will I scream obscenities at my husband? Yet one of the most critical questions a mother-to-be can ask is often overlooked: Will my baby be born too early?
Each year, 540,000 American babies are born "preterm," which is defined as before 37 weeks of gestation. That's a 20 percent increase since 1990—and no one knows why. "We don't know what causes preterm labor, and we don't know how to prevent it," says Alan Fleischman, M.D., March of Dimes medical director.
The impact is financial as much as it is medical. A 2006 Institute of Medicine report estimated the cost of seeing preterm babies through early childhood at $26 billion. Per year. "Preterm birth is a major public health problem that concerns not just mothers and their babies, but society at large," Fleischman says.
Caring for the Early Birds
It's well known that being born early isn't ideal. Aside from being the primary cause of death in infancy, a preterm birth can lead to breathing and developmental problems, both short- and long-term. -Cerebral palsy, learning delays, and chronic lung disease can result from being born too soon; the earliest births generally lead to the most severe outcomes and longest hospital stays. Babies born closer to 37 weeks fare better but still aren't as healthy as full-term babies.
Fortunately, the United States does very well in caring for preemies. Thanks to the medical advances of the last 20 years, doctors are successfully treating babies that might not have even survived a generation ago. But while we excel in treatment, we're not as successful at prevention, says Paul Wise, M.D., the Richard E. Behrman Professor of Child Health and Society and a professor of pediatrics at Stanford University. With the rate of preterm births escalating, our primary goal must be to figure out why so we can reverse the trend.
In the U.S., preterm birth rates are lowest in Vermont and highest in Mississippi.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, 2005 final birth data
World's Worst Roller-Coaster
After two years of trying to conceive, Dawn White from Amarillo felt relieved that her first pregnancy was going so smoothly. "I loved being pregnant," she says. She prepared the nursery and looked forward to cradling her firstborn in her arms. But, with two months still to go, her water broke.
When White first saw her son Nolan, born by C-section two days later, he was in an incubator surrounded by wires and tubes, tinier than she could imagine. She felt like anything but his mother as she watched Nolan, nine weeks early, being cared for by strangers. "Nothing went the way we planned," she says now.
"People have described having a baby in the NICU as living on a roller-coaster," says Seattle-area mother Tiphanie Lynn. "But a roller-coaster is fun and there's always an end to it. There's nothing fun about this, and you never know when it's going to end." Lynn's daughter, Lilly, spent 12 weeks in the NICU after a hypertensive disorder called HELLP syndrome forced Lynn to deliver at only 27 weeks. "I couldn't believe it was happening," says Lynn, who was due in August but had a C-section in May. "Lilly was so small, just skin and bones. I couldn't touch her without rubber gloves on. My pinky finger was longer than her head."
When babies need to stay in the hospital, it's not easy for their parents to leave them behind. Intellectually, White understood Nolan wasn't well enough to leave when she was discharged. But she couldn't help how she felt. "I cried all day. I was angry and envious of the other moms with their car seats and their babies." Nolan remained in the NICU for a total of five weeks.
What's Kangaroo Care?
To better care for these infants, NICUs have been undergoing a rebirth. Hospitals around the country have replaced open, bright "baby bullpens" with more womb-like environments that embrace darkness and silence to foster the development the babies would have had in utero. Taking cues from studies showing that parental contact is instrumental in babies' progress, many NICUs now support a new family-centric care model, incorporating live-in rooms for parents and encouraging therapeutic practices like skin-to-skin "kangaroo" care. Parents are also urged to perform routine tasks, including changing diapers and bathing their babies—as long as the babies' health permits.
But primary responsibility for the baby lies with the medical staff, and navigating that as a parent can be tricky. At first, Lynn's daughter was doing well in the NICU, considering her extra-early arrival. But then Lilly got an infection, and then another one. When Lynn noticed staff handling her baby without the regulation gloves, she put her foot down and had signs posted listing the NICU guidelines. "I can't say that if the guidelines were followed she never would have gotten the infections," Lynn admits. "But I did what I felt I had to do to protect my baby."
Even stellar care has its challenges. Preterm babies' lives revolve around schedules that limit outside contact and promote sleep. "We were grateful to be blessed with incredible, compassionate nurses who always answered our questions and knew us by name," White says. "But it was still stressful to have to work within their schedule and have to ask permission to hold my baby."
"I know how hard it is for parents to face that loss of control. It's not in their birth plan to have a baby in intensive care," says Kory Dunn, a nurse at Baptist St. Anthony's. At least three of her colleagues—preterm parents themselves in the very NICU they staff—have even been in the same shoes. It's Dunn's goal to build trust with parents, so everyone can work together. "I want them to know that their baby's in good hands, and that it's not their fault they're here."
That sense of guilt can be a perpetual struggle. Samantha Malone is from Hereford, TX. Her third baby, Mylee, spent 139 days—she recites this number automatically—hospitalized in Amarillo and Dallas after she was born at only 25 weeks. As her daughter fought for her life through infections and multiple surgeries on her eyes, "I felt helpless," Malone says. "It's a mother's instinct to take care of her kids to the best of her ability, and I felt like I had fallen short. I kept asking myself what I could have done differently."
Wise has an answer to that question: nothing. "There's almost no way to pin blame on anything a woman did during pregnancy that would cause her preterm birth," he says. "Mothers have to let go of that guilt. This is not their fault."
Just Tell Me What to Do!
Preterm labor can't be prevented, but there's plenty you can do to lower your risk:
- Exercise and maintain a healthy weight.
- Reduce stress.
- If you fall into a high-risk category, seek out a doctor specializing in high-risk pregnancies.
- Get a first-trimester ultrasound to accurately determine gestational age.
- Familiarize yourself with the warning signs of preeclampsia, which often results in preterm birth: swollen hands and feet, sudden weight gain, dizziness, and vision problems.
- Listen to your body and ask questions if something doesn't feel right.
What Leads to Preterm Birth?
Although the reasons behind spontaneous preterm labor are not known, some risk factors are. A lot of these are physical, non-changing conditions, such as having given birth prematurely before or living with a chronic condition such as hypertension or diabetes. Mothers on both ends of the age spectrum—under 20 or over 35—are also at higher risk, as are women pregnant with twins and other multiples. Recent studies suggest that stress and depression may also contribute, and a link has been found to lower socioeconomic status.
One of the most alarming statistics of all: More than 18 percent of African-American women have preterm births, compared to just under 12 percent of Caucasian women. The reason why is, again, a mystery. Some experts have suggested that higher stress levels or subpar medical care might play a role, but nothing concrete has surfaced. "The only thing we know for sure is it's not anything the mothers did," says Wise, who researches disparities in health outcomes. "There seems to be a series of interactive factors at play. But it affects millions of women in this country. We have to pay attention."
The Late Preterm Baby
If preterm labor can't be prevented and no one knows what starts it, what's a pregnant woman to do? A lot, actually. First, make sure your due date is accurate. If your doctor wants to change it, find out why, and be comfortable with the answer. Be aware of any risk factors you have. And appreciate the importance of those final weeks of pregnancy.
Almost 75 percent of preterm babies are known as "late preterms," born between 34 and 37 weeks. Although close to full term, they're not necessarily ready to be born, Fleischman says. Their lungs are often underdeveloped, increasing the risk of respiratory distress. The lack of fat on their bodies translates to trouble maintaining temperature. Feeding problems can lead to jaundice and dehydration. These potential issues can either prolong intensive care or require rehospitalization, both of which exact financial and psychological tolls. A growing body of study in Europe and the U.S. suggests that these problems aren't limited to infancy; late-preterm babies have shown to have more behavior problems and a higher likelihood of referral to special education when they reach school age.
Perhaps most importantly, Fleischman says, babies' brains show tremendous activity the closer they get to term; 35 percent of brain growth happens in the last five weeks of gestation. Although babies can continue to grow in an incubator, the optimal environment is in utero, as nature intended.
Some experts believe we may be birthing late--preterm babies on purpose, without a full understanding of the gravity of doing so. This past fall, the March of Dimes released a statement urging doctors and hospitals to stop inducing labor and performing C-sections in healthy women before 39 weeks of gestation. "Delivering early is sometimes medically necessary," Fleischman says, "But when mother and baby are in good shape, delivering early can come at a cost. Women need to know that."
What the Future Holds
Last June, 300 experts convened for the Surgeon General's Conference on the Prevention of Preterm Birth to develop a multifaceted agenda addressing the issue across all planes: education, prevention, research. Hopes are high that with the new administration, funding will come through for legislation passed in 2006 that's known as the Preemie Bill.
For now, the medical community shall continue caring as best they can for the littlest babies and looking for answers. "When babies are ready to go home, we put them in here," says Vasquez, indicating two side-by-side rooms large enough for a family. Both doors are closed, the rooms quietly occupied. Baptist St. Anthony's NICU was just renovated, expanding storage space, doubling care areas, and adding special low-stimulation rooms for babies in the most precarious health. The nurses appreciate the ample space, efficient monitoring systems, and state-of-the-art equipment of this new NICU. But in these rooms, parenting supersedes medical care. For two days parents take care of their baby 24/7, with no outside help. In a cocoon of safety, parents learn to trust themselves, easing themselves into the role they were forced to abandon. "When they leave," says Vasquez, "they're ready." Behind these doors, families are built.
Sandra Hume wrote this report as part of a health-journalism fellowship she won at University of Southern California's Annenberg School of Journalism. Her work has also appeared in Parents and Parenting magazines.


text:
From Hot Takes to Watch Tape: Cris Collinsworth and the Evolution of NFL Broadcast AnalysisElias Stein
The other day, Cris Collinsworth, color commentator for NBC Sunday Night Football, was sitting in a cramped room in his basement in Fort Thomas, Kentucky. In a light-blue Polo and slip-on shoes, he gave off the aura of a suburban dad. Collinsworth is a suburban dad. But today, as on most afternoons beginning in late summer, he'd waved goodbye to his wife, Holly, and marched past a collection of memorabilia from his playing career. Collinsworth was watching tape.
Collinsworth had a clicker — called a "cowboy remote" — in his hand. On a large monitor above eye level, he was watching the Arizona Cardinals defense; below that, a second monitor showed a page of data from Pro Football Focus, a website in which he'd bought a majority stake; below that, a laptop showed an application called Game Day, into which Collinsworth and an associate had recorded factoids and statistics about every player on the Cardinals roster. Collinsworth narrated the action on the top screen softly and deliberately, as if he were recording an audiobook. Let's listen:
If I'm not mistaken, I think they have — is that five safeties on the field? They've got Mathieu, Johnson. There's Jefferson. I think Johnson's all the way back. Yep, Johnson's all the way back. Buchanon is right in the middle of the field. … Oh, that's the other one, Chris Clemons.
On the monitor, the five safeties backpedaled or charged at the quarterback, then retreated to their former positions. Collinsworth was rewinding the tape again and again.
Here's the problem, though. A little bit of a read blitz. I'm going to guess Clemons had Antonio Gates in coverage. Saw him block. Then Gates slips out late. And there's nobody on planet Earth to cover him now.
Collinsworth's voice was being recorded. The resulting file — which Sunday Night Football coordinating producer Fred Gaudelli calls a "tutorial" — would serve two purposes. It would help Collinsworth prepare to call the Cardinals' preseason game against the Raiders that weekend. It would also get distributed to key members of NBC's Sunday Night Football crew, who would try to absorb as much as they could.
For seven years running, Collinsworth has won the Emmy for best Sports Event Analyst. Any good NFL writer, however, would reject this metric as a measure of quality. So here's a better one: Every Monday, Aaron Schatz's Football Outsiders runs a feature that breaks down the weekend's games. "One of the things we found is that we tend to not have a lot to say about the Sunday-night game," said Schatz. "Collinsworth has already pointed out a lot of the stuff we would normally point out."
Color men are usually the comic foils of NFL writers. "You're exactly right, Joe …" — hyuck, hyuck. On his best days, Collinsworth is like the writers' TV analogue. His perch on Sunday Night Football proves something exhilarating: That the flood of analytics and tape study and hard-headed thinking that has enriched NFL writing in recent years hasn't gone completely ignored by TV. Just mostly.
In 2011, a Wall Street Journal study found that Collinsworth and Al Michaels said fewer words per minute than any other NFL broadcasting team. Indeed, it's often what Collinsworth doesn't say that's striking. He refuses to adopt the catechisms of 40-plus years of NFL announcing — e.g., "It all starts with the offensive line …"
"If you said, 'What is the most important aspect of winning football games?'" Collinsworth said, "I don't think I could give you an answer to that question."
Also striking are the small but unmistakable pauses you hear on Sunday Night Football when Al Michaels finishes his play-by-play. These are instances of Collinsworth taking an extra second to stare at the field and consider what he has just seen. "Sometimes, I just can't figure out what they're doing," he said. "I find myself sitting there like Boris Spassky or something, studying it."
When he's alone in his basement, Collinsworth can indulge such reveries. ("Yep, Johnson's all the way back.") When he goes silent on Sunday Night Football, leaving the show's 21 million viewers in a state of analytic limbo, the next voice Collinsworth hears in his headset is from Gaudelli. "What are you doing?" Gaudelli will say. "Wake up!"
In his natural state, Collinsworth is half-thoughtful, half-caustic. But as an announcer, he cycled through several iterations before he arrived there — or back there. It's a journey that illustrates the reward structure we writers place in front of TV people, and how they and their producers react to it. With unexpected vulnerability, Collinsworth told me, "You can't believe how hard it is to be yourself."
Even as a young wide receiver with the Cincinnati Bengals, Collinsworth was already thinking about ways to communicate. His head coach, Sam Wyche, noticed that Collinsworth had a tic in team meetings. A coach would explain an offensive concept or play. Collinsworth would usually understand it on the first take. But he would look around the room and spot a player with a furrowed brow. Collinsworth would ask the coach to repeat the statement, pretending that he was the one who didn't understand.
Collinsworth was the most presentable guy on just about every team he played for. In 1987, when the NFL players went on strike, quarterback Boomer Esiason became the Bengals' spokesman. "I came off as an angry millionaire trying to fight The Man," said Esiason. "I remember saying to Cris, 'There's something about you that people like. You can deliver the same message I'm trying to deliver, but they won't be nearly as mad.'" The disctinction would later reappear in the booth: Esiason worked unhappily with Al Michaels for two seasons of Monday Night Football; Collinsworth, who is deferential to Michaels in the extreme, said he and Al are the best of pals.
But beneath the placid exterior, Collinsworth was a questioner, a needler. "Blunt, I think, would be a better word," said Wyche. "He'd say, 'If I'm going to be running this route this way, it might be better to take it a couple yards deeper.' Honestly, the more I think about it, I think he might have done that so I could appear to have thought of it myself, and so that I could save face."
Even then, Collinsworth was fascinated by Howard Cosell. He once attempted an impression in front of the old muckraker; Cosell flattered him and made him a go-to interview. But Collinsworth's attempt to match Cosell's dark wit turned sour. "He was doing an interview with me before a game," Collinsworth said. "He introduced me to his wife. I did an old, standard line: 'Well, it's clear you married way over your head, Howard.' I don't know if I said it wrong, or he misinterpreted it, but he got incredibly mad." The two men never spoke again.
When Wyche cut him in 1989, Collinsworth told the press, "I don't feel cheated." Collinsworth had a sunny career ahead. He'd started going to law school while he was still a Bengal; if he'd used his degree, he said he would have liked to have been a tax attorney. A sitting U.S. congressman asked him to run for office. But announcing beckoned. Three weeks after he was cut, he got an offer to file features for Inside the NFL. He accepted, and later inherited Bob Trumpy's sports radio show on Cincinnati's WLW. Every night, that likable voice was echoing all over town.
Today, sports Twitter cries out in unison when a TV announcer says something dumb. Back in the '90s, this dyspeptic power resided in only a handful of newspaper sports TV critics, like the Boston Globe's Jack Craig and USA Today's Rudy Martzke. The critics had an abiding suspicion that NFL color analysts, typically retired athletes, were softies. It was "what Howard Cosell called the jockocracy," Collinsworth explained. "Where all the players do is take care of their buddies and the coaches."
Every week, Martzke tallied analysts' "strongest comments"; the announcers with the sharpest elbows got promoted. After a time, the criticism began to direct the art. The '90s was the era of brawlers like Trumpy, Dan Dierdorf, and Randy Cross.
As a sports radio warrior, Collinsworth learned that he needed to push listeners' buttons to thrive in a hot-take world. "It was a fistfight every night in talk radio," he said. "People thought that you said, 'OK, here are the phone lines,' and those phone lines just lit up. Well, they don't. … I think in my early television days, I was in the same mode. I probably was gonna make sure they hit their trigger points a few times."
Collinsworth had the reputation as a guy who made 'em mad as the enfant terrible on Inside the NFL, where he was cast opposite soothing vets like Len Dawson, and as a color man on NBC, where he landed in 1990.
Collinsworth was the low analyst on the totem pole at NBC, often assigned the worst game of the week. (Once, given just six seconds to preview a Patriots-Bengals game on NFL Live, he told host Jim Lampley, "The loser gets the no. 1 draft choice. Back to you, Jim.") He learned these were precious reps that allowed him to fail in relative anonymity. He also learned how easy it was to tweak a coach. Bill Belichick, struggling in his first go-round, with the Browns, was a frequent sparring partner. When Collinsworth was the subject of a celebrity roast, Belichick declined only because he was committed to a family vacation. It stands as a YouTube tragedy.
"I always thought early on, that's not the Cris Collinsworth I know," said Esiason, who's now a panelist on Showtime's Inside the NFL. "The Cris Collinsworth I know is one of the funniest guys I've ever been around. But sometimes he was overly serious. I guess that's what they wanted him to be at NBC." It was as if Collinsworth had overinterpreted the critics' demands. Years later, a New York Post critic wrote that Collinsworth "has a little too much Bill Walton in him."
In 1991, Collinsworth met a computer systems engineer named Andy Freeland, who would become his most important collaborator. A few weeks ago, I found Freeland in the new Cincinnati headquarters of Pro Football Focus, surrounded by unadorned walls. He's a thin, friendly man who looks like he has given himself to the digital realm. His motto is, "To me, every problem looks like a computer." Freeland convinced Collinsworth that the tools of the color analyst's trade — back then, info from media guides and basic statistics — could be put into databases, so that Collinsworth could access them quickly. Even if Collinsworth still hadn't yet found his onscreen persona, at least he had more digital firepower than his competitors.
When NBC lost its football rights in 1998, Dick Ebersol, the network's sports chieftain, told Collinsworth to go to Fox. "He said, 'You should go learn how to do the Fox humor-entertainment,'" Collinsworth said. "'You can do the other stuff.'" On Fox NFL Sunday, Collinsworth was cast as a yukster opposite Terry Bradshaw and Howie Long. He probably logged fewer fake laughs than his colleagues. But during this period, he also declared, "I'm thoroughly convinced that people want info-tainment."
It's now almost forgotten that Collinsworth replaced John Madden once before: In 2002, he became part of Fox's no. 1 NFL team with Joe Buck and Troy Aikman. Collinsworth liked his partners but hated the three-man booth. "You hit a button to talk to the producer to tell him what you want," he said. "At the end of the play, Troy and I would hit our button at the same time." It was like competing in a game show to see who got to talk to America.
Ebersol lured him back to NBC in 2006 when the network got Sunday Night Football. After a tryout as John Madden's play-by-play man — "it was almost the career-ender of all career-enders" — Collinsworth took a studio job and bided his time as Madden's heir apparent. At Super Bowl XLIII, the NBC staff threw Collinsworth a 50th birthday party. Madden was thunderstruck. "He's like, 'I had no idea you were 50 years old,'" Collinsworth said. It was as if the successor were going gray while Madden played out the string. Within three months, Madden had retired. Collinsworth had the most enviable job in football broadcasting, and the unenviable task of replacing a legend.
Deone Bucannon, a 211-pound safety, was on the screen in Collinsworth's basement. Let's listen in:
Deone Bucannon, no. 20, is a guy you'll see down there a lot. He is effectively a linebacker. Plays so much in that slot in there. … He really is going to be a linebacker this year. He still is going to get down the field some. But they really like him in that position.
Five days later, when Collinsworth called the Arizona-Oakland game, he delivered that summation nearly word-for-word during the Cardinals' first defensive series.
Al Michaels began the August 30 broadcast by asking Collinsworth if the Raiders were a playoff team. Saying "yes," a minor fudge, would give a dreary preseason game some life. Collinsworth said, "Eh, I still think they're probably a year or two away, don't you?"
Collinsworth comes to the booth armed with an arsenal. Freeland wrote the Game Day app as a piece of proprietary software. Instead of the clunky, analog boards analysts have lugged into TV booths for decades, Collinsworth and Freeland can add information on Game Day right up until kickoff. During games, Collinsworth views the data on a 13-inch laptop with a touch screen. The Game Day interface shows each player, often with phonetic spellings ("DAY-own Bucannon"), with one salient fact beneath their names ("1st round dime LB"). When saying Bucannon's name during a game, Collinsworth might glance at the screen to make sure he's pronouncing it correctly. If Bucannon does something great, Collinsworth will touch the name to bring up additional information that he and Freeland entered.
In the booth, Collinsworth also has a 28-inch touch-screen that houses a big, indexed document filled with notes that Collinsworth and Freeland have harvested from coach and player interviews conducted during the week. These notes may include longer, human-interest stories, or simply fully rendered versions of short notes in Game Day. For the Oakland-Arizona game, the document ran 38 pages.
Freeland acts as Collinsworth's spotter, but the post is largely ceremonial. He and Collinsworth almost never speak during games. Freeland will occasionally hand Collinsworth a notecard to remind him of a topic to discuss coming out of a commercial break or at the start of a drive. But when Collinsworth is on the air, the analysis is his alone.
You can break down Collinsworth's utterances into distinct types. When Collinsworth said during the Arizona-Oakland game that second-year linebacker Khalil Mack got one scholarship offer after his senior year of high school, that's pure research — it's probably the most repeated thing about Mack's biography.
When Collinsworth said that Raiders coach Jack Del Rio wanted to get Mack more sacks in Year 2, that came from a game-week interview.
When Collinsworth said that the Raiders had two sacks in a preseason game that Mack did not get credit for, but nonetheless should get credit for, because he forced them — that is film study. The kind of film study that writers do.
A few years ago, Collinsworth found himself in a weekly coach's meeting with his old adversary Belichick. He told Belichick that one of his linemen was playing both tackle and defensive end. Belichick scoffed: The guy was only playing tackle. No, Collinsworth said, he'd seen him playing end on film. Belichick returned a while later and admitted Collinsworth was right; with Collinsworth's command of the film established, Belichick larded him with inside dope.
The Collinsworth of Sunday Night Football shows how the old hot-take model of TV analysis is slowly changing. "The entire environment of television is so different than the '90s," said Gaudelli, the Sunday Night Football producer. "All these 24-hour networks — people are criticizing people all the time, or building them up all the time."
If hot takes no longer seemed unique, neither do we assume the ex-jock's knowledge of the inner workings of the game. The new breed of football writer — the Schatzes, Barnwells, and Browns — revealed that TV talkers were doing a Regular Joe gloss rather than real analysis. Some analysts were holding back; some didn't seem capable of real analysis at all.
The new paradigm required an analyst who could marry '90s brio with the new tools of research. The old analyst's boast was, "I'm not afraid to speak my mind." The new boast — repeated by Collinsworth, Ron Jaworski, and Mike Mayock — is, "I watch tape."
The Sunday Night crew pushes Collinsworth to lean on his tape study and make predictions during games. "That's what I think his uncanny ability is," said Drew Esocoff, Sunday Night's director. "He's able to see stuff prior to it happening, rather than relying on the traditional analyst role of why they did something or why it didn't work."
And when he whiffs? "I don't think the audience minds," said Gaudelli. "I think the audience forgets."
Sunday Night Football has been the highest-rated show on TV, period, for four seasons. For its producers to brag about doing X's and O's would be like The Big Bang Theory's producers bragging that they taught America particle physics. Instead, the Sunday Night troubadours brag about their accessibility. "You can't X-and-O every single play," said Michaels. "You don't want to do that. What makes our show special is how we talk about the personalities. People want to know about people."
To do plausible technical analysis but not turn off its casual fans, Sunday Night Football figured out a trick. First, it banished jargon — you won't hear a term like 3-technique except by accident. Second, it personalized the X's and O's. As Gaudelli put it, "To say, 'Zack Martin blocked the 3-technique' — I don't think 85 percent of our audience knows what that is. To say, 'Zack Martin blocked Linval Joseph and made his way to Eric Kendricks' — that you can understand."
And the audience can appreciate X's and O's in those terms? I asked.
"Appreciate it? Who knows," Gaudelli said. "Follow it? Yes."
At Sunday Night, Collinsworth is in his element: He has the tools to analyze football and a show that mostly rewards him for it. He hit a pothole when he started making weekly appearances on NBCSN's Pro Football Talk show, where he got asked about teams whose film he hadn't yet watched. "He said, 'I don't want to be a fraud,'" said Neil Hornsby, the founder of Pro Football Focus. "'I don't want to be like a lot of people standing up there talking about football teams they haven't seen.'" So Collinsworth bought a stake in PFF, a company that grades every play of every NFL and major-college game.
PFF can provide Collinsworth with a reel of every salient play that Zack Martin or Deone Bucannon participated in. Collinsworth, in turn, tried to lug the company further into the mainstream — to make it prime time. He was an advocate to move PFF from its old grading scale, which assigned players scores ranging from 2.0 to -2.0, to one that graded players from 0 to 100, which he felt was more accessible.
"Now, he's found a nice, level playing field," Esiason said. "Funny when he wants to be, thoughtful and thought-provoking at other times." Collinsworth has the technical undergirding that allows him to make thunderous pronouncements. It took about 25 years, but he has finally become himself.
When I prodded Collinsworth to talk about the NFL's off-field business, his face tightened. He was being pushed onto terrain that film study couldn't illuminate. "I hate all that stuff," he said. "It's such a distraction for me from what football is." But Collinsworth knows that under Roger Goodell's reign, it is what football is. Two events from last season dragged Collinsworth into some of the league's biggest nightmares.
On January 10, after the NFL issued a self-exonerating report about the Ray Rice domestic violence scandal, Collinsworth and Michaels addressed it during the Ravens-Patriots playoff game. It seemed clear that neither man had much interest, nor much time, which are two impossible constraints to put on a discussion about Ray Rice. While NBC cameras held a shot of Goodell in the stands, Collinsworth admitted that Goodell had bungled the initial, two-game suspension. He added, "I never once in all my dealings with the commissioner ever doubted his integrity — and I think that came out in the report, as well."
The reaction from critics was apoplectic. Interestingly, it was also a reboot of the old jockocracy complaint — though this time the color man was toadying to the commissioner, not his former pals. Collinsworth said he'd talked to Goodell in August, before the release of the second video tape. Goodell was torn between severe punishment and giving Rice a second chance — an anguish that never came through in Goodell's public statements.
I told Collinsworth that people couldn't process the idea of a truth-teller exonerating Goodell.
"I totally get it," he said. "Probably if I had not had the conversation beforehand, before the video was released and didn't have the background of what he was doing, I probably would have felt differently about it."
Interestingly, Collinsworth defended the sincerity of his stance by invoking the specter of the sports TV critic. "I know the fastest way for me to get acclaim is to criticize the league," he said. "I can do that tomorrow. I come out and criticize the league, and they're all going to be writing stories about how edgy I am. The problem comes in, what happens if you feel the other way?"
Collinsworth likes Goodell. "I think he's a very real guy," he said. But like Arthur Blank and Jonathan Kraft, he now questions why Goodell is meting out justice. "I've told him many times: 'Why do you want that role?'" Collinsworth said. "'Why do you want to be the ultimate supreme court justice?' He was at the trial level for a while — he was adjudicating the facts … I said, 'The facts get screwed up all the time at trial. That's the reason they have an appellate court, they have a Supreme Court, and all kind of stuff. Why do you want the pressure?'
"I do think the players' union is right on that one," Collinsworth continued, "that it should be somebody other than Roger with the final say over the punishment of various things. I think it would be better for him. I think it would be better for the league. That part, I don't really get it. I don't think it's the right move."
Julian Edelman's apparent injury during the Super Bowl ushered in a second storm. In the fourth quarter, Edelman caught a pass on third-and-long and then was walloped by Kam Chancellor. NBC cameras caught him stumbling, but Collinsworth didn't mention it on the air. Mark Lazarus, the chairman of the NBC Sports group, saw it at the stadium and considered getting word to the announcers.
Collinsworth explained that a strange televisual force had taken over: the tyranny of the replay. On the play, Edelman's elbow and knee nearly touched the ground; it was late in the game and the call was important. Television had pulled Collinsworth into a minor dispute that was discernible on a replay, rather than a nasty subject that was unknowable.
"I was looking at what the replay was going to show," Collinsworth said. "I'm really studying it. The staggering and what came out of that, I never saw. I never saw it. Freddy didn't see it, either.
"I wish it were a discretionary thing where I chose not to say it," he continued. "I just never saw it. I never knew it happened till I watched that game back." The guy who sees things beyond the broadcast would have been better off watching the broadcast.
It was getting late. Collinsworth would soon return to his "tutorial" to study the Cardinals defense. But I wanted to ask about Russell Wilson's interception in the Super Bowl. It struck me as a classic Collinsworth problem — a piece of merry confusion that tugged an analyst toward X's and O's, opinionating, or both.
With 1:06 left in the game, Jermaine Kearse caught the miracle heave from Wilson. NBC's crew snapped into action. "I hit Al and Cris in the headset and said, 'Gotta be thinking timeout,'" Gaudelli said. But Belichick didn't call timeout, and on first down, Marshawn Lynch ran off-tackle to the 1-yard line.
Things were moving very quickly now. Collinsworth's brain whirred. "I had it narrowed down to two plays," he said. "Either they were going to run Marshawn Lynch off tackle — it was second down, they still had the opportunity on third down, had a timeout, all that stuff — or they were going to put Russell Wilson on the edge. They were going to fake to Lynch, and hit him on the edge. … Nobody tackled Russell Wilson all day. Guys who were way more athletic than the guys on the field could not tackle him the whole game."
Wilson did something Collinsworth hadn't anticipated: He stood up. Collinsworth's brain whirred some more. "I thought it was a quarterback draw," he said.
It was not a draw. Wilson threw the ball to Ricardo Lockette. One of the strange things about standing in a booth at midfield is that Collinsworth couldn't see the result of the play. He had to rely on Michaels's voice in his ear to tell him what had happened: "The pass is INTERCEPTED AT THE GOAL LINE by Malcolm Butler. Unreal!"
"I don't need to lead him at that point," said Michaels. "I gave him the play-by-play call, with the appropriate drama. I used one word. If I can get by with one word, I love it. 'Unreal' is one word."
"Al said that and I was like, Oh my god …" said Collinsworth. "You just knew that moment was going to live in Super Bowl history forever. I just sat there and thought for a minute." It was a trademark Collinsworth pause, lasting about 20 seconds while Michaels cleaned up the action.
"I thought, What are you going to tell people tomorrow?" Collinsworth said. What would he tell the fan in the airport lounge, or at the gas station — the fan who'd ask, "How could they do that?" Collinsworth decided this hypothetical fan wouldn't want a football professor explaining how Brandon Browner jammed Kearse at the line of scrimmage — not right off the bat, anyway. He'd want stupor, outrage.
On the air, Collinsworth began, "They tried a pick play … " and then paused before changing course: "And I'm sorry, but I can't believe the call. I cannot believe the call. You've got Marshawn Lynch in the backfield — you've got a guy that's been borderline unstoppable in this part of the field … I can't believe the call." He didn't convince the audience at home so much as give everybody license to immediately say the same thing.
Two weeks later, at the NFL scouting combine, Collinsworth found himself at a table with Seahawks coach Pete Carroll. It was an awkward moment; Carroll had heard Collinsworth's words replayed dozens of times. Collinsworth finally said, "Listen, I know you want to talk about this." They repaired to another table and talked alone.
"Most coaches just wouldn't talk to you the rest of their lives," said Collinsworth. "But Pete's a great guy. … He said, 'I'm not mad. I just want you to know what I was thinking.'"
It was the chance at exoneration Carroll craved. For Collinsworth is a rare creature: a television personality devoted to describing football as it is played rather than how we've spent the past 40 years hearing it described. Collinsworth listened to Carroll for a few minutes. "Pete, I appreciate it," he finally said, "but I'm never going to agree with that call." Collinsworth was absolutely sure of himself. All he had to do was look at the film.
Filed Under: NFL, Cris Collinsworth, Sports Media, Bryan Curtis on Sports Media, Al Michaels, John Madden, NBC Sunday Night Football, Boomer Esiason, Roger Goodell, Ray Rice, Julian Edelman
More from Bryan Curtis
Meme People: The Meaning of College Football Viral Fan Shots
Disconcerting Signals: Charlie Strong and Texas Are 1-4
From Hot Takes to Watch Tape: Cris Collinsworth and the Evolution of NFL Broadcast Analysis
The Storm of Plenty: Why Deflategate Has Been the Perfect Sports Media Feeding Frenzy
The Need for Spieth: Why the Media Adores Golf's Latest Phenom
More NFL
NFL Week 8 Picks: The Weight of the Interim Label
Spirit of St. Louis: Todd Gurley Is Giving the Rams a Chance to Take Flight
'The Grantland NFL Podcast': Week 7 Review Part 2
The Legacy of the NFL Sin-Eaters
The Eagles on the Brink
More The Triangle
We Went There: Clippers-Mavs and DeAndre Jordan Night in Los Angeles
No Messi, No Problem: Neymar Becomes a Superstar
World Series Weekend: Five Questions for Three (or Two) Royals-Mets Games
NBA Overnight: Where Was the Spark?
NHL Grab Bag: Let's Get Spooky


text:
Hezbollah at Europe's doorstep
What further evidence does the European Union need to declare Hezbollah an international terrorist group?
The latest proof comes from Bulgaria.
Join EUobserver today
Become an expert on Europe
Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.
Choose your plan
... or subscribe as a group
Already a member?
After a six month investigation, Bulgaria has concluded in a new report that Hezbollah was behind the July 2012 bus attack in Burgas that killed five Israeli tourists, their Bulgarian bus driver and wounded more than 30 other Israelis.
The report finds the bomber, who died in the attack, was part of a Hezbollah cell that included two members using Australian and Canadian passports.
Interior minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov told reporters: "There is data showing the financing and connection between Hezbollah and the two suspects."
Security experts in America and Israel also agree Hezbollah was behind the attack.
The attack occurred on the 18th anniversary of the Hezbollah bombing of the Argentine-Israelite Mutual Association building (the Jewish center in Buenos Aires) that killed 85 people and wounded 300, sending a chilling reminder that the terror group's reach is far and wide. That was the second Hezbollah attack in Buenos Aires, following the 1992 attack on the Israeli embassy that left 29 dead and 242 injured.
The United States has first hand experience of Hezbollah's terror. The group is responsible for the 1983 suicide bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American service members. At about the same time, another Hezbollah suicide bomber also attacked a French military base in Beirut killing more than 50.
In the decade after its founding, Hezbollah kidnapped and killed some 30 Westerners, including the president of American University in Beirut in 1982, as well as the 1985 kidnapping and murder of a CIA station chief in Beirut.
Hezbollah attacks in Israel, Great Britain and Spain have also left scores dead.
The United States, Canada, Israel and the Netherlands already list Hezbollah as the terrorist organization that it is.
But so far, the European Union has refused to declare the obvious, often defending its intransigence by claiming Hezbollah has two distinct faces: a "political" wing and a "military" faction.
But using Hezbollah's seats in Lebanon's government is a false excuse to grant these terrorists any semblance of legitimacy. Does anybody believe that the "military" and "political" branches of Hezbollah are located on different planets?
There can be no doubt about the fungibility of funding within terrorist organizations. Hezbollah has effectively hijacked a sovereign government in Lebanon. In fact, isolating Hezbollah would contribute to freeing Lebanon from the grip of intimidation.
Striking at Europe's doorstep
Now that Hezbollah has struck right at Europe's doorstep with the Burgas attack, will this be the final bit of evidence to propel the EU to act? It should be.
Sadly, it seems even the attack in Bulgaria may not be enough for the EU to do the right thing.
Gilles de Kerchove, the top terrorism expert for the EU, told the EUobserver in recent weeks that: "First, we need to reach conclusions with strong evidence that it was the military wing of Hezbollah [which bombed Burgas]. That's the prerequisite, even in legal terms, but then, as always in the listing process, you need to ask yourself: 'Is this the right thing to do?'."
He also told the publication: "There is no automatic listing just because you have been behind a terrorist attack. It's not only the legal requirement that you have to take into consideration, it's also a political assessment of the context and the timing."
Why is the EU dithering on this?
European Union members who have indicated reluctance to label Hezbollah as a terrorist group are allowing it to hide behind its "political" face - the one with the seats in the parliament of Lebanon. When in reality, it is one organization responsible for a global reign of terror going back 30 years.
Hezbollah has become especially adept at hitting soft targets, as in its Burgas murders.
It has also become skilled in siding with those who carry out state-sponsored murder, such as lending assistance to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as he continues his ruthless campaign to silence his own people's opposition to his rule.
The Bulgarian investigation's conclusion that Hezbollah was behind the Burgas attack is courageous. It is not the first time Bulgarians stood up to do what is right.
Next month marks the 70th anniversary of a bold move by Bulgarians from every element of society - everyday citizens united to prevent some 48,000 Bulgarian Jews from being deported to Nazi death camps.
The inspiring story of the rescue of Bulgaria's Jews is a study in bravery and determination. Today in the face of the Hezbollah attack inside its borders, Bulgaria is standing up and speaking out again.
Will Europe heed its call?
A terror designation from the European Union could help cut off vital funding that Hezbollah receives from extremists and other supporters around the world. The terror label could limit the ability of Hezbollah operatives to move freely in Europe.
But perhaps most important, it would send a message, finally, that the global community will not tolerate terrorism.
Daniel S. Mariaschin is the executive vice president of B'nai B'rith International, a Washington-based international group for the fight against anti-Semitism founded in 1843
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.


text:
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Counter-Terrorism: Nothing to learn, nothing to forget
by B.RAMAN
It is less than 48 hours since the two blasts in the Dilsukhnagar area of Hyderabad on the evening of February 21,2013, resulted in the death of 16 innocent civilians.
2. The police and the intelligence agencies are still in the preliminary stages of the investigation. They have not yet done a reconstruction of the act of terrorism. The collection and examination of the forensic evidence have not yet been completed.No arrests and interrogation have been made yet.
3. Instead of waiting till the investigation makes substantial progress, the police and the agencies, with the help of sensation-hungry media, have already started pointing the finger at the Muslim community, the Indian Mujahideen and Pakistan.
4. If there is terror, it has to be a Muslim. If he is a Muslim, he has to be from the IM.If it is the IM, it must have acted at the instance of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). That seems to be the thinking reflex of the police and the agencies.
5. In October last, according to the Delhi Police, a Muslim suspect belonging to the IM told them during his interrogation that the IM had recced the Dilsukhnagar area as a possible target. From this, one could have reasonable suspicion that the IM might have carried out the attack. To strengthen the suspicion, one must have additional evidence which has not been forthcoming till now. Despite this, the police and the agencies in their mind have already turned the suspicion into certainty. Almost the entire investigation is now focused on the IM, overlooking other possibilities.
6. One cannot think of a more unprofessional way of dealing with terrorism.Very often, our initial hasty conclusions remain unproved or uncorroborated. That is why the investigation of so many of our terrorism cases has reached a dead end. Many of the cases remain undetected or unprosecuted or unsuccessful even if prosecuted.
7. After every few months, we are taken by surprise by a new act of terrorism because we didn't investigate professionally the previous acts of terrorism. Our track record has been one of hurtling from one hasty conclusion to another.
8. Instead of learning lessons from the past, we continue repeating the same mistakes. Imprecise intelligence, alerts not followed up by ground action to strengthen physical security, lack of beat patrolling by the police despite our talking about it for years, absence of professional reconstruction of an act of terrorism to determine how the terrorists managed to succeed, cover-up of the sins of commission and omission of our police and agencies----- that has been our track record. Unless we get out of this unprofessional rut, terrorists will continue to strike with impunity and innocent civilians will continue to die. ( 23-2-2013)
The writer is Additional Secretary (Retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director,Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, andAssociate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. Twitter: @SORBONNE75
Posted by Mike Hitchen at 13:41


text:
FP&A Week: Breaking the Paradox
October 10-13, 2023
By Luke Clark, the Senior Content Manager Asia-Pacific for Michael Page.
If any work disciplines can offer us a window to the future, Financial Planning and Analytics (FP&A) is certainly one of them. In an environment where your speed to move can make the ultimate difference to your company, it's no accident that financial forecasting is now at the cutting edge of change in today's business world. And indeed, future business success may lie with those who embrace these changes sooner rather than later.
Faced with a post-Millennium atmosphere of uncertainty and rapid change, accurate forecasting – and the ability to reforecast at pace – has gained huge currency for business leaders. Add to this the influence of automation tools on traditional accountancy roles, plus the growing need for top-line expertise in reading and disseminating our vast quantities of data, and you have a sector at the centre of the action when it comes to change. Michael Page recently sat down with one of FP&A's thought leaders to plot five factors driving change in today.
Larysa Melnychuk, CEO and founder of the International FP&A Board, spends much of her time these days in discussion with the world's leading CFOs about the changing world of financial analytics, financial planning and analysis.
She notes that in an environment of unprecedented "black swans" and "perfect storms" in our global financial market, business leaders are now more aware than ever of the need to move fast: "Situations that we never expected would happen, have happened in real life. Obviously in the business environment, this is one of the biggest reasons why financial analytics has changed," she notes.
Combine this pressure-cooker environment with the arrival of newer and cheaper Cloud-based systems that are easily managed within a finance department, and you have an environment ripe for change. "In this dynamic business environment, it's not possible to use the old, very detailed and static methods we used," notes Melnychuk, who is based in the United Kingdom. As a result, the landscape for financial analytics is now more forward-looking and speed conscious than ever.
In an increasingly complex environment, the ultimate goal is to understand in the simplest way, how a business makes its money. "We're talking about simplification beyond the incredible level of detail that we had before," notes Melnychuk. "It's all based on key business drivers that are very important to identify – it's about the 20% of drivers that explain 80% of the results."
She notes that while many managers claim to know these key drivers, the reality of our big data world is that some drivers become less sensitive over time, while others prove less reliable. The ideal key drivers process should be part of a company's business intelligence project, she notes. "It should be automated: and the drivers should be checked often, through analytical automation." Likewise, it is also important to pay attention to both internal and external drivers, she notes.
Yet are many companies in the world currently doing this? "I would say not many," she notes. "Definitely leading companies have started – and this is on the agenda of many companies."
Increasingly, she says modern FP&A teams require three distinct roles (as per Mark Gandy's model). The first is the Architect who builds the driver-based model. Next comes the Analyst, who can track its progress. And ideally, a third role, that of a business-partner, or Communicator. "It's difficult to find these three people in one role," Melnychuk notes from her own experience as an FP&A director. "Analysts and Architects can be introverts, and not so comfortable going to the business to communicate it. I've seen this a lot."
As such, it tends to be a tough job to fulfil: "Around 70% of UK CFOs, and 80% of US CFOs, say that FP&A roles are the most difficult to fill." While in traditional accountancy, being qualified and examining past financial history was once sufficient, this is no longer the case. "In FP&A it's different. We're seeing the emergence of big data, from which you have to analyse these key drivers."
In an environment of sudden and intense market change, being able to identify and simplify your business drivers can provide an invaluable chance to move fast against competitors. "It's dependent on the visibility of their data, and the ability to drill down and make decisions very quickly," Melnychuk notes.
She takes the example of a sudden market interruption, a so-called black swan event. "With traditional planning models and traditional hires, you needed four-to-seven months to reforecast. But with this new generation of systems, models and people, you can probably do this in a couple of hours – almost in real-time." One New York based banking group she spoke with, had reforecasting down to a fine art. "At the moment, it's less than 36 minutes, while previously it used to be more than three weeks. This is an indication of how the world's changed," she notes.
"And why? It's because traditional line-by-line forecasts were replaced by driver-based planning model that is implemented through system. Just 36 minutes and it's done – and the quality of this forecast is quite good as well. So this is a good example of how much this can achieve."
Larysa Melnychuk anticipates a realignment ahead in terms of job roles within finance departments, as some traditional roles become replaced by new ones. "Fewer traditional accountants will be needed, and more combinational skills, especially with this data management, analytical and business-partnering will be needed," she predicts. "I can see a time when data scientists work together with FP&A. And it is already happening in some leading analytical organisations"
Leading companies already enlist data scientists to identify, for instance, the one driver responsible for 60% of their forecasting. Melnychuk notes that effective driver-based planning can save teams a lot of time and effort: "You don't need a lot of data, or to spend a lot of time. But to identify those key drivers really can help you to very quickly and very effectively build your plans and different scenarios for the future."
"There will be this new work for analytical people, because they will start from different levels of analytics, and they will go forward. So it's very motivational for good analytical talent to be at such organisations."
The interview was first published on the Michael Page Asia-Pacific websites.
We will regularly update you on the latest trends and developments in FP&A. Take the opportunity to have articles written by finance thought leaders delivered directly to your inbox; watch compelling webinars; connect with like-minded professionals; and become a part of our global community.


text:
Statement by Elena Bondarenko—People's Deputy of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine
Statement from Sept 10, 2014, translated and published in English on Slavyangrad.org, April 18, 2015. Original in Russian here.
Introduction by Slavyangrad.org: Below, we publish a translation of a statement made by Rada deputy Elena Bondarenko on September 10, 2014 . The statement was originally published on her Facebook page but went largely ignored at the time. The recent spate of assassinations in Ukraine has given the statement a new, grizzly relevance, and it is for this reason that we are publishing a translation of it at this late date. Translated by Alya & Alan Bailey, edited by Olga Luzanova.
I, Elena Bondarenko, a deputy of Partiya Regionov [Party of the Regions –ed.], which is in opposition to the governing party in Ukraine, would like to make a statement about the fact that the government is directly threatening with assault opposition politicians, depriving them of freedom of speech in the parliament and in other places, as well as conniving in the crimes against opposition leaders and their children.
Persistent threats, an undeclared ban on opposition parties appearing in the majority of Ukrainian mass media, purposeful baiting—these are everyday things in the life of the opposition in Ukraine. Everybody who calls for peace in Ukraine immediately becomes an enemy to the regime as it was, for instance, in 30-40's Germany or in the USA during the McCarthyite era.
A few days ago the Ukrainian Internal Affairs Minister, Arsen Avakov, said: "When Elena Bondarenko ascends the parliamentary tribune, I want to reach for my gun."
I emphasise the fact that those are the words of the person who has the main authority over the police in the country. Exactly a week ago the Speaker of the Ukrainian Parliament, Alexander Turchinov, banned me from the parliamentary tribune as a representative of the opposition Party of the Regions. It was done solely because of my words, that "a regime that sends its army to bomb peaceful cities is criminal." After that, he kindly allowed the parliamentary radicals to call for the shooting of the opposition .
I remember last year, when Kiev was flooded with extremists, my car was shot at. I reported this fact to the police. I take such threats to myself very seriously. I also would like to inform everyone who is not aware yet, that the regime protects the criminals who dared to raise their hand against the son of another opposition politician—Vladimir Oleynik. Ruslan Oleynik, a district public prosecutor, was beaten up in his work place, putting his life and health under threat. Instead of investigating the attack and threats against the politician and his family, the regime fired the prosecutor. My colleagues complain weekly about their assistants being beaten up, their supporters' offices being searched, their lives, health and possessions threatened.
Ukrainian cyberspace is almost totally censored of this information, and ordinary Ukrainian citizens have no idea of the criminal fight against the opposition and of the fact that the constitutional right to freedom of speech is suppressed in many ways. The mass media who tell the truth in spite of their fear constantly get attacked by nationalist groups, and hooligans who assault publishing offices are never prosecuted, even when they are identified by video and photographic proof of their involvement is available.
I call upon international organisations who proclaim their democratic principles to not only pay attention to these facts but also to join the fight for democratic rights and freedoms of Ukrainian citizens. The methods used by the Junta in their struggle for power in Ukraine have nothing to do with democracy. Inactivity of the international community towards these outrageous facts looks like complicity and silent approval of all the crimes being committed in Ukraine. The free world is losing another outpost—Ukraine. All those who fight for democracy, peoples rights and freedoms, can bring about many changes together. Only together can we stop the Junta and the fratricidal war in Ukraine!
Yours sincerely,
People's deputy of Ukraine, Elena Bondarenko
September 1o, 2014
EDITOR'S NOTE: We remind our readers that publication of articles on our site does not mean that we agree with what is written. Our policy is to publish anything which we consider of interest, so as to assist our readers in forming their opinions. Sometimes we even publish articles with which we totally disagree, since we believe it is important for our readers to be informed on as wide a spectrum of views as possible.