text:
4 Reasons to Upgrade to the Smarter Smart-UPS
4 Reasons to Upgrade to the Smarter Smart-UPS
Michael Maiello
Chances are the profile of your IT infrastructure has changed considerably over the last few years, as technologies such as virtualization make higher densities more common for servers and applications alike. If you haven't upgraded your UPS systems in some time, they may well be overmatched should an outage occur.
Today's UPS technology offers more sophisticated power protection that can help you keep up with the most demanding IT loads. The APC by Schneider Electric Smart-UPS offerings now support three features that make for compelling reasons to look into an upgrade: an efficient "green" design, user-friendly LCD display that makes life easier for IT, and an intelligent battery management system. What's more, APC is offering an attractive program for users that trade in their old UPSs, no matter the brand.
1. Efficient design saves money
The latest Smart‐UPS models are based on a patent-pending design that dramatically increases efficiency. When in "green" mode, the devices bypass unused electrical components during good power conditions to achieve operating efficiency of 97 percent or higher without sacrificing any protection. That means real savings on utility costs when compared to most line-interactive UPS units.
You can actually monitor UPS power usage via a power meter function on the unit's LCD display, so you know exactly where you stand. What's more, the new Smart-UPS units are compatible with high-efficiency Energy Star-rated servers from leading IT vendors. They also meet Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) standards, making compliance a non-issue.
2. User-friendly LCD display
The new Smart-UPS devices have a built-in LCD display designed for flexibility and ease of use. You can configure the UPS via software or the display itself. The display on rack/tower convertible units even rotates 90 degrees for easier viewing.
The intuitive alphanumeric display gives you clear and accurate UPS and power quality information at a glance. The standard view provides basic status and power quality data along with menus for configuration, test and diagnostics, and general information about the device. The advanced view adds a scrolling status screen with additional "control" and "logs" menu options.
3. New life cycle and battery features simplify management
We've also added a feature to the new Smart‐UPS line that no other unit on the market has: a battery life expectancy prediction. The display tells you the exact month and year in which to replace the battery for optimum protection. And the prediction is dynamic, meaning it adjusts for temperature fluctuations that may affect the battery's life cycle. With a quick glance, you'll know exactly how much battery life you have left at any time – no more guesswork.
Your battery will also last longer thanks to intelligent battery management features that supply only the charge the battery requires. This increases battery life through precision, temperature‐compensated charging, and prevents overcharge situations. And it's guaranteed to restart your loads after an extended power failure, even with a fully depleted battery.
4. Big savings with Trade-UPS
Besides all the new features, you'll also save money when upgrading to a new Smart-UPS thanks to the Trade-UPS program. Trade in your old UPSs – regardless of brand – and you'll save up to 25 percent on a new Smart‐UPS. We even pay for shipping of the old units and provide proper ecological disposal and recycling of them – one less hassle for you.
Make sure an old UPS isn't the weak link in your IT infrastructure. Check out the new, smarter Smart-UPS line and take advantage of its proven reliability, efficient design and new features that make it simpler to use than ever. Click here for more info.


text:
Amber Priddy shows off her curves
Our latest model slideshow is timely in that the lovely Amber Priddy is in the news today. RadarOnline.com is reporting that Chad "Ochocinco" Johnson is in even more trouble with new wife Evelyn Lozada, as he's been secretly dating model Amber Priddy. Chad has had a rough couple of weeks, and now his celebrity dating life is getting exposed for all to see.
We're fortunate to have this gallery of Amber Priddy courtesy of Black Men Magazine, and if you like your ladies curvy you're going to love Amber Priddy. Amber is of German and Italian descent and she happy to show off her assets in some skimpy lingerie. Enjoy, and check out Black Men Magazine for more exotic models!
Bullz-Eye.com brings you some of the sexiest Internet Models from around the web, along with producing our own original glamour photography in channels like our Featured Model and Girl Next Door sections. Check everything out starting on our Opposite Sex page. Contact us if you want your photos featured or if you'd like to shoot with us (all models must be at least 18 years old.)
Related Posts
You can follow us on Twitter and Facebook for content updates. Also, sign up for our email list for weekly updates and check us out on Google+ as well.
Posted in: Models
Tags: Amber Priddy, Amber Priddy Chad Johnson, Amber Priddy gallery, Amber Priddy photos, Amber Priddy pics, babes blog, beautiful exotic woman, best glamour models, bikini models, bikinis, Black Men Magazine, Black Men Magazine models, Chad Johnson, Chad Johnson mistress, Chad Ochocinco, curvy models, Evelyn Lozada, exotic beauty, exotic model, football players, German models, glamour models, gorgeous exotic women, hot exotic girl, hot exotic woman, mistress, model gallery, NFL, NFL players, sexy exotic babe, sexy exotic model, sexy slideshows, stunning exotic model, swimsuit models, swimsuits

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Generic name: Morphine Suppositories [ MOR-feen ]
Drug class: Opioids (narcotic analgesics)
Medically reviewed by Drugs.com. Last updated on Mar 14, 2024.
The RMS brand name has been discontinued in the U.S. If generic versions of this product have been approved by the FDA, there may be generic equivalents available.
- This medicine is a strong pain drug that can put you at risk for addiction, abuse, and misuse. Misuse or abuse of RMS (morphine suppositories) can lead to overdose and death. Talk with your doctor.
- You will be watched closely to make sure you do not misuse, abuse, or become addicted to RMS (morphine suppositories).
- This medicine may cause very bad and sometimes deadly breathing problems. Call your doctor right away if you have slow, shallow, or trouble breathing.
- The chance of very bad and sometimes deadly breathing problems may be greater when you first start RMS (morphine suppositories) or anytime your dose is raised.
- Even one dose of RMS (morphine suppositories) may be deadly if it is taken by someone else or by accident, especially in children. If RMS (morphine suppositories) is taken by someone else or by accident, get medical help right away.
- Keep all drugs in a safe place. Keep all drugs out of the reach of children and pets.
- This medicine has an opioid drug in it. Severe side effects have happened when opioid drugs were used with benzodiazepines or other drugs that may make you drowsy or slow your actions. This includes slow or troubled breathing and death. Benzodiazepines include drugs like alprazolam, diazepam, and lorazepam. Benzodiazepines may be used to treat many health problems like anxiety, trouble sleeping, or seizures. If you have questions, talk with your doctor.
- Many drugs interact with RMS (morphine suppositories) and can raise the chance of side effects like deadly breathing problems. Talk with your doctor and pharmacist to make sure it is safe to use RMS (morphine suppositories) with all of your drugs.
- Do not take with alcohol or products that have alcohol. Unsafe and sometimes deadly effects may happen.
- Get medical help right away if you feel very sleepy, very dizzy, or if you pass out. Caregivers or others need to get medical help right away if the patient does not respond, does not answer or react like normal, or will not wake up.
- Using RMS (morphine suppositories) for a long time during pregnancy may lead to withdrawal in the newborn baby. This can be life-threatening. Talk with the doctor.
Uses of RMS:
- It is used to ease pain.
What do I need to tell my doctor BEFORE I take RMS?
- If you are allergic to RMS (morphine suppositories); any part of RMS (morphine suppositories); or any other drugs, foods, or substances. Tell your doctor about the allergy and what signs you had.
- If you have any of these health problems: Lung or breathing problems like asthma, trouble breathing, or sleep apnea; high levels of carbon dioxide in the blood; or stomach or bowel block or narrowing.
- If you have taken certain drugs for depression or Parkinson's disease in the last 14 days. This includes isocarboxazid, phenelzine, tranylcypromine, selegiline, or rasagiline. Very high blood pressure may happen.
- If you are taking any of these drugs: Linezolid or methylene blue.
- If you are taking any of these drugs: Buprenorphine, butorphanol, nalbuphine, or pentazocine.
- If you are breast-feeding or plan to breast-feed.
This is not a list of all drugs or health problems that interact with RMS (morphine suppositories).
Tell your doctor and pharmacist about all of your drugs (prescription or OTC, natural products, vitamins) and health problems. You must check to make sure that it is safe for you to take RMS (morphine suppositories) with all of your drugs and health problems. Do not start, stop, or change the dose of any drug without checking with your doctor.
What are some things I need to know or do while I take RMS?
- Tell all of your health care providers that you take RMS (morphine suppositories). This includes your doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and dentists.
- Avoid driving and doing other tasks or actions that call for you to be alert until you see how RMS (morphine suppositories) affects you.
- To lower the chance of feeling dizzy or passing out, rise slowly if you have been sitting or lying down. Be careful going up and down stairs.
- Do not take RMS (morphine suppositories) with other strong pain drugs or if you are using a pain patch without talking to your doctor first.
- Do not take more than what your doctor told you to take. Taking more than you are told may raise your chance of very bad side effects.
- If you have been taking RMS (morphine suppositories) for a long time or at high doses, it may not work as well and you may need higher doses to get the same effect. This is known as tolerance. Call your doctor if RMS (morphine suppositories) stops working well. Do not take more than ordered.
- Long-term or regular use of opioid drugs like RMS (morphine suppositories) may lead to dependence. Lowering the dose or stopping RMS (morphine suppositories) all of a sudden may cause a greater risk of withdrawal or other severe problems. Talk to your doctor before you lower the dose or stop RMS (morphine suppositories). You will need to follow your doctor's instructions. Tell your doctor if you have more pain, mood changes, thoughts of suicide, or any other bad effects.
- Long-term use of an opioid drug may lead to lower sex hormone levels. Call your doctor if you have a lowered interest in sex, fertility problems, no menstrual period (women), or change in sex ability (men).
- This medicine may raise the chance of seizures in some people, including people who have had seizures in the past. Talk to your doctor to see if you have a greater chance of seizures while taking RMS (morphine suppositories).
- If you are 65 or older, use RMS (morphine suppositories) with care. You could have more side effects.
- This medicine may cause harm to the unborn baby if you take it while you are pregnant. If you are pregnant or you get pregnant while taking RMS (morphine suppositories), call your doctor right away.
How is this medicine (RMS) best taken?
Use RMS (morphine suppositories) as ordered by your doctor. Read all information given to you. Follow all instructions closely.
- Use suppository rectally.
- Wash your hands before and after use.
- If suppository is soft, chill in a refrigerator or run cold water over it.
- Take foil off the rectal suppository and put in, pointed end first. Do not handle too much.
- Wet suppository before putting in rectum.
What do I do if I miss a dose?
- If you take RMS (morphine suppositories) on a regular basis, take a missed dose as soon as you think about it.
- If it is close to the time for your next dose, skip the missed dose and go back to your normal time.
- Do not take 2 doses at the same time or extra doses.
- Many times RMS (morphine suppositories) is taken on an as needed basis. Do not take more often than told by the doctor.
What are some side effects that I need to call my doctor about right away?
WARNING/CAUTION: Even though it may be rare, some people may have very bad and sometimes deadly side effects when taking a drug. Tell your doctor or get medical help right away if you have any of the following signs or symptoms that may be related to a very bad side effect:
- Signs of an allergic reaction, like rash; hives; itching; red, swollen, blistered, or peeling skin with or without fever; wheezing; tightness in the chest or throat; trouble breathing, swallowing, or talking; unusual hoarseness; or swelling of the mouth, face, lips, tongue, or throat.
- Very bad dizziness or passing out.
- Chest pain or pressure or a fast heartbeat.
- Feeling confused.
- Noisy breathing.
- Seizures.
- Severe constipation or stomach pain. These may be signs of a severe bowel problem.
- Feeling very tired or weak.
- Depression or other mood changes.
- Swelling in the arms or legs.
- Fever, chills, or sore throat.
- Pain when passing urine.
- A burning, numbness, or tingling feeling that is not normal.
- A severe and sometimes deadly problem called serotonin syndrome may happen if you take RMS (morphine suppositories) with certain other drugs. Call your doctor right away if you have agitation; change in balance; confusion; hallucinations; fever; fast or abnormal heartbeat; flushing; muscle twitching or stiffness; seizures; shivering or shaking; sweating a lot; severe diarrhea, upset stomach, or throwing up; or severe headache.
- Taking an opioid drug like RMS (morphine suppositories) may lead to a rare but very bad adrenal gland problem. Call your doctor right away if you have very bad dizziness or passing out, very bad upset stomach or throwing up, or if you feel less hungry, very tired, or very weak.
What are some other side effects of RMS?
All drugs may cause side effects. However, many people have no side effects or only have minor side effects. Call your doctor or get medical help if any of these side effects or any other side effects bother you or do not go away:
- Feeling dizzy, sleepy, tired, or weak.
- Dry mouth.
- Constipation, diarrhea, stomach pain, upset stomach, throwing up, or feeling less hungry.
- Headache.
- Anxiety.
- Sweating a lot.
These are not all of the side effects that may occur. If you have questions about side effects, call your doctor. Call your doctor for medical advice about side effects.
You may report side effects to the FDA at 1-800-332-1088. You may also report side effects at https://www.fda.gov/medwatch.
If OVERDOSE is suspected:
If you think there has been an overdose, call your poison control center or get medical care right away. Be ready to tell or show what was taken, how much, and when it happened.
How do I store and/or throw out RMS?
- Store at room temperature.
- Protect from light.
- Store in a dry place. Do not store in a bathroom.
- Keep all drugs in a safe place. Keep all drugs out of the reach of children and pets.
- Throw away unused or expired drugs. Do not flush down a toilet or pour down a drain unless you are told to do so. Check with your pharmacist if you have questions about the best way to throw out drugs. There may be drug take-back programs in your area.
Consumer Information Use and Disclaimer
- If your symptoms or health problems do not get better or if they become worse, call your doctor.
- Do not share your drugs with others and do not take anyone else's drugs.
- This medicine comes with an extra patient fact sheet called a Medication Guide. Read it with care. Read it again each time RMS (morphine suppositories) is refilled. If you have any questions about RMS (morphine suppositories), please talk with the doctor, pharmacist, or other health care provider.
- If you think there has been an overdose, call your poison control center or get medical care right away. Be ready to tell or show what was taken, how much, and when it happened.
Frequently asked questions
- Which drugs cause opioid-induced constipation?
- Which painkiller should you use?
- How does fentanyl compare to heroin or other opiates?
More about RMS (morphine)
- Check interactions
- Compare alternatives
- Latest FDA alerts (12)
- Side effects
- Dosage information
- During pregnancy
- Drug class: Opioids (narcotic analgesics)
- Breastfeeding
Patient resources
Other brands
MS Contin, Kadian, Roxanol, Avinza, ... +9 more
Professional resources
Other brands
MS Contin, Kadian, Astramorph PF, Duramorph, ... +4 more
Related treatment guides
Further information
Always consult your healthcare provider to ensure the information displayed on this page applies to your personal circumstances.


text:
OpenEmbedded booth
You are going to FOSDEM and can spend some time at the OpenEmbedded stand to explain interested individuals the virtues of OpenEmbedded? Add your name and on which day you'll be available.
- Paul Eggleton (Saturday, Sunday)
- Philip Balister (Saturday)
- Fathi Boudra (Sunday morning)
- Florian Boor (Saturday, Sunday but not all the time)
A bunch of tasks need to be carried out to make our attendance a pleasant experience. Each task needs a volunteer who is willing to help.
Event box
- Florian brings the contents split into suitcase and TFT box
Device Tags
People standing in front of our booth often want to know what kind of device it is that blinks so funnily. ;) We could make things easier by being able to print small tags providing some information about board manufacturer, CPU, RAM and what its relation to OpenEmbedded is.
Volunteer: ?
Flyers and posters
You can bring and/or print OpenEmbedded flyers and posters? Add your name and what you'll bring.
I have more OpenEmbedded stickers, Philip (Crofton)
Power extensions, adapters and other stand material
Bringing devices is cool but we need a way to bring power to them too. Additionally people might need power sockets for different systems than the european one. List your name and what stuff you can bring.
- Presentation file for use on the display - Paul
- Machine to connect for displaying the presentation (hopefully with the ability to show off Toaster) - Paul
General attendance
Attending FOSDEM 2015? Add your name to this page so that other developers can look out for you!
- Paul Eggleton (bluelightning)
- Philip Balister (Crofton)
- Fathi Boudra (fabo)
- Florian Boor (florian)
Although FOSDEM itself takes place at the ULB campus, most folks prefer to stay nearer the city centre.
The Astrid has traditionally been the default choice for OE developers, though there are many other hotels in the area. If you are staying in a hotel other than the Astrid, feel free to add it to this section for the benefit of others. Recently, most of us stay at the Saint Nicolas due to the wifi.
Scandic Grand Place.
Rue d'Arenberg 18 Close to beer event (300 m) and Central Station. Tram to Fosdem around the corner. Bus to FOSDEM Train + Bus to FOSDEM Free WiFi
Saint Nicolas
Hôtel Saint Nicolas *** Rue Marché aux Poulets 32 1000 Bruxelles Tél. +32/2-219.04.40 Fax +32/2-219.17.21 http://www.st-nicolas.be close to beer event, bus to Fosdem few minutes by walk from hotel.
IBIS Brussels off Grand' Place
Grasmarkt 100 Rue du Marché aux Herbes 100 1000 BRUSSELS
Be Manos Hotel
23-27, Square de LAviation 1070 Brussels close to Midi station


text:
Rule #1 - Be Patient - Rule #2 - Don't ask when, if you don't contribute - Rule #3 - You have coding skills - LinuxMCE's small brother is available: http://www.agocontrol.com
Hello,I have an outdoor lights setup as X10 light, and I noticed that it seems to be automagically turning on at sunset and off at sunrise. I did not however ask for this, and did not find any relevant options under the light's configuration or under timed events.In case it matter, this light is linked to a camera (and will properly turn on or off when that camera is viewed).Does anyone know where I can enable/disable such behavior, as I can't have all my outdoor lights on all night, or is it just a matter of not setting up that "room" as an outdoor area perhaps?Thanks,Jean
can someone tell me PLEASE? what is SO WRONG with the system taking care of this by itself?are you people THAT much of control freaks?
Quote from: tschak909 on September 13, 2008, 11:04:09 pmcan someone tell me PLEASE? what is SO WRONG with the system taking care of this by itself?are you people THAT much of control freaks? I don't think it has anything to do being a control freak, but rather personal preference. What the automatic scenarios do is great.... for *some* people. What I would like is... if we edit a scenario the changes we make should stick and not be reset with a router reload. To me that makes LMCE seem like a control freak.


text:
The U.S. had its hottest year on record last year. That heat, combined with the relatively dry winter that came before, has brought a historic drought.
From forest fires and low crop yields, to infrastructure and recreation, the drought has been costly, with early estimates putting the cost at between $50 billion and $80 billion.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has declared a disaster area in more than 1,000 counties, and now the drought is hitting America's most important waterway — the Mississippi River. Water levels are so low that the Army Corps of Engineers is taking emergency action to keep the river navigable.
"This is critically important to the economy of the Midwest and of the nation," Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin told reporters a few weeks ago.
But beyond the dusty plains and dry rivers, the ripple effects of the drought are now being felt throughout the U.S.
A Not-So-Mighty Mississippi
Even if it doesn't look dry outside, you've no doubt seen the effect of the drought: higher food prices, water main breaks, dried-out lakes and most recently, a very empty Mississippi.
That river is the country's most important waterway. Everything from fertilizer to corn and coal are shipped along the winding river to cities across the country.
With 3,100 barges and 100 towboats, AEP River Operations, a St. Louis-based barge company, usually moves about 70 million tons of cargo on inland waterways each year. But this year has been different.
"With the drought scenario we're in on the Mississippi, the low water conditions has just about brought the river to a close," says Marty Hettel, manager of bulk sales for AEP. He tells weekends on All Things Considered host Jacki Lyden that in current conditions, the company is operating at less than 45 percent shipping capacity.
So far, Mother Nature and the Army Corps of Engineers have kept the river open for business. The St. Louis area got some rain a few days ago, helping raise the river level a couple of feet. Hettel estimates levels are now about 6 feet below normal, but recent work by the corps has him optimistic.
"We'll have enough water to operate at least through Feb. 7 or 8, and I'm really thinking it will be beyond that," he says. "What happens from that point forward is up to Mother Nature and how much rain she can give us."
Farms Hit Hard
One of the biggest commodities shipped on the Mississippi River is grain, but in some parts of the country, like the Texas panhandle, there's a lot less of it to ship.
The Texas Panhandle is still in the grip of drought. For the third year now, ranchers and farmers in Amarillo have been searching for signs of moisture. In 2012, they had a second record low of just 12 inches of rain, up a little from the year before, but not enough.
"If this goes on, we're going to be forced to sell our cows this next spring," says Phillip Smith. He and his wife, Doris, have been farming and ranching the land in Amarillo — growing wheat, grain sorghum and hay for cattle — for more than 50 years.
The Smiths tell Lyden that they have already sold off a lot of the herd, and this year might be the last for the "Sunshine Ranch," as they've dubbed their farmstead. As the drought began, Phillip Smith says, submoisture allowed them to produce a "less than average" crop for two years, but this year they might not be able to grow anything.
"There is nothing growing on [the fields], it's pretty much bare ground," Doris Smith says. "Even the crops that we did plant in the late summer and early fall, because of the lack of moisture, those crops have died."
Their farm is just one example of what is happening across the U.S., she says, and when agriculture suffers, we all suffer.
"If you eat you are involved in agriculture [and] this really affects everybody," she says.
Tracking Droughts
Climatologists are hesitant to link any one drought to climate change, but there is consensus there will be more severe dry spells in the years to come. Mark Svoboda, a climatologist with the National Drought Mitigation Center in Lincoln, Neb., helped create a drought tracking system about a decade ago. He says that many people didn't realize drought is one of the leading causes of economic loss in the country.
"The main goal was to heighten visibility of drought as a natural hazard that affects millions of people [and] covers millions of square miles across our country," Svoboda tells Lyden.
More than 60 percent of the country was under drought conditions at the drought's peak in 2012, Svoboda says. What sets this drought apart from previous years is how long it has lasted.
"A large part of the affected area[s] really are going into year two now," he says, adding that some parts of the U.S. are even heading into a third year.
Svoboda says dry conditions brought on by droughts can cause respiratory problems and that losing a livelihood can affect mental health.
Dry soil, coupled with poor infrastructure, can also lead to water main breaks. "In Houston, normally they might see 200 breaks a day," he says. "They were seeing 700 a day during the summer months."
There is not a lot that can be done to be "drought proof," Svoboda says, but a more conservation mentality might help when times get tough.
"Even when times are good, let's preserve that water [and] get it back in the ground so that we can tap into it when times go dry like they are now," he says.
Svoboda says he expects the country to be locked into the drought at least until spring.
Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
Russian oligarch faces $4.5 billion Swiss divorce
Russian 'fertilizer king' ordered to pay $4.5 billion to ex-wife in Swiss divorce settlement
GENEVA (AP) -- A Swiss court has ordered a Russian billionaire to pay more than $4.5 billion to his ex-wife in what could become the biggest divorce settlement in history.
In papers delivered Monday to both parties, the Geneva Tribunal of First Instance said Dmitry Rybolovlev, an owner of the French soccer club AS Monaco, must pay 4,020,555,987.80 Swiss francs ($4,509,375,184.80) to ex-wife Elena Rybolovleva of Geneva. Both are aged 47.
The judgment also granted his ex-wife property worth 130.5 million francs ($146 million) in property in Gstaad, Switzerland, where the couple owned two swanky chalets. It awarded his ex-wife two other pieces of real estate in the ultra-wealthy area of Geneva known as Cologny, where the couple once lived together, but listed no value for either address. And it confirmed her custody of their 13-year-old daughter, Anna. The couple also has an adult daughter, Ekaterina.
Her lawyer Marc Bonnant called it "the most expensive divorce in history," an unheard-of amount for Switzerland and for Russian oligarchs.
But Rybolovlev's lawyer said that the judgment's cash order was likely to be whittled down in coming appeals.
"There will definitely be a new appellate review and therefore this judgment is not final given the existence of two levels of appeal in Switzerland," said Tetiana Bersheda.
A separate statement by Bonnant and two other lawyers in the case, Corinne Corminboeuf Harari and Caroline Schumacher, called the record judgment "a complete victory" for her and said that under Swiss law she was entitled to half the fortune he made during their marriage. Most of that fortune was transferred to Cyprus-based trusts in 2005.
The three lawyers said Monday's ruling demonstrated that "no one — not even a Russian tycoon who put his fabulous fortune into legal structures such as trusts and offshore companies — is above the law."
But Rybolovlev's lawyer suggested the opposite, praising the judgment for "confirming both the validity of the trusts created by Mr. Rybolovlev and the validity of the asset transfer to them that occurred long before his wife initiated divorce proceedings."
His ex-wife had demanded $6 billion from the man known as the "fertilizer king," whose fortune from potash mining once made him the world's 79th richest person. He is now ranked 147th on the Forbes list of billionaires, with an estimated fortune of $8.8 billion.
The couple met as university students in Perm, Russia, and married there in 1987. Divorce proceedings began in 2008, when Forbes estimated his worth at $12.8 billion.
A Geneva court had provisionally frozen Rybolovlev's assets in Switzerland and abroad, but it may prove difficult for Rybolovleva to obtain the money because Switzerland has no legal aid treaty with Cyprus.
In the United States, Rybolovlev and his daughter Ekaterina used trusts to acquire some of the priciest real estate in the country, including a penthouse apartment at Central Park West in New York and a mansion in Palm Beach, Florida.


text:
Weird Cat Behaviors Explained
Cats often surprise us with their unpredictability and, at times, they may even seem downright ditsy. Big Boy, the extremely large cat who charmed my mother for more than fifteen years, was fond of darting into the kitchen sink. There he would sit, staring into the dish drainer as if it contained the answers to the mysteries of the universe. To avoid disrupting his peaceful meditations, my mother would use the bathroom sink upstairs. It was clear who owned whom in that relationship, but it begs the question: Why do felines like Big Boy behave in such puzzling ways in the first place?
[heading style="2″ color="#ff9933″ style_color="#ff9933″]Wacky Cat-isms[/heading]
"The why part [of cat weird] is easy — cats and people are different species with different genetic evolutions," says Oceanside, California-based Animal Behavior Consultant Arden Moore, who is the author of pet books such as The Cat Behavior Answer Book: Practical Insights & Proven Solutions for Your Feline Questions (Storey, 2007). As an example of a basic difference between cat and human behavior, Moore points to the fact that cats "rank as one of the top snoozers of all creatures, averaging around 16 to 17 hours of sleep each day. Most people are lucky to get seven hours of sleep a night."
[heading style="2″ color="#ff9933″ style_color="#ff9933″]Cats as Comedians[/heading]
Karen Santos, companion animals manager at the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) in Yarmouth Port, Mass. contends that cats have a "better sense of humor" than humans. She attributes this to the fact that cats "live more in the moment," adding that "They don't hold grudges and when they do, they are short-lived and specific to a particular event." That distinction could explain why one of my own cats, Miss Manners, tends to sulk in the coat closet for about an hour after returning from a trip to the vet. After her kitty retreat has ended, Miss Manners shows she has forgiven me by rubbing against my ankle and purring sweetly.
The "closet-sulking cat" illustrates just one kind of seemingly flipped-out feline. See if your own cat falls into one of the following types:
The Esther Williams Cat
This is a feline that, despite all scientific claims to the contrary, enjoys swimming and being near water. Your favorite feline may be exhibiting an evolved trait linked to breed. "Some cats love to swim, especially certain breeds like the Turkish Van," explains Moore. In their pursuit of water, these cats may even hop into the shower stall or bathtub to join their humans.
The Bowl Prober
Bowl probers sometimes paw their water bowls before they drink. The reason: it's following the pattern of "wild cat ancestors who need to test the water to make sure it is safe," says Moore. Cats' paw pads constitute one of their most sensitive areas so, "Pawing the water helps some indoor cats check for any possible 'dangers' lurking in the water bowl."
Mr. or Ms. Confidence
If you have a dominant and confident kitty, you may be in luck. Moore says this feline type makes the perfect candidate for toilet training. Before you toss the cat litter box, though, be forewarned. She cautions, "This training can be thwarted if you — or others in your home — forget and put the lid down or shut the bathroom door."
The Herb Lover
The herb-loving cat is always more than eager to get its paws on catnip. Feline fans of this perennial member of the mint family roll in it, sniff ecstatically at it, and close their eyes blissfully as they indulge. But, as many as 30 percent of adult cats have absolutely no interest in catnip, according to Moore. "Some cats prefer honeysuckle, which must be moistened to release its active ingredients," she adds.
The Ear Licker
Some cats seem to have a human earlobe fetish. They'll lick the ears of their owners, or even those of startled guests, with apparent enjoyment. Moore offers a simple explanation: "A young kitten separated from its mother before being weaned may be determined to lick your earlobes with its rough tongue. It may mimic the suckling it enjoyed while nursing."
Food Burier
Santos notes that some cats scratch around their food dishes, almost as if they're trying to "bury" their food under the kitchen floor or other surface. This behavior may reveal their lineage. "The wild ancestors of cats would bury their food to save it for later, so they could return to it."
The Gift Giver
Has your cat ever suddenly dropped a toy mouse in your lap? Several cat owners have reported receiving such unexpected gifts, whether they want them or not. The moment becomes even more memorable if the mouse was a once-live real one. Santos explains that it is your kitty's way "of showing affection."
Predator to the Invisible
Cats playing games with a speck of dust are not, contrary to their humans' bewilderment, losing their kitty minds. That speck of dust or ray of sunlight that they are chasing serves as entertainment, according to Santos. Call it the "Project Runway" or "Top Chef" equivalent of relaxing amusement in the kitty's world.
The Crazy Running Back
Almost all cat owners have observed what some call the "kitty crazies." Their cat abruptly runs around, occasionally leaping into the air like a ballerina or a football star on too much caffeine and then just stops as if nothing had happened. Santos theorizes this behavior can be attributed to a feline's inherited need to stay in shape for hunting.
Whether your cat has a bathtub fetish or, like Miss Manners, is fond of kneading hats, one thing is clear: Such behavior makes perfect sense to felines. So long as the behavior isn't destructive to you, your cat and your surroundings, it's best to take inspiration from your cat. Live in the moment and think of cat weird as the new feline wonderful.


text:
Boeket Tederheid
You can add a floral gift card to
your bouquet, by selecting below
a floral gift card theme.The floral
gift cards can be viewed on the
page floral gift cards. The surcharge
is listed in parentheses.
Note: The floral gift cards are in Dutch.
The personal message that you want
on the floral gift card you can fill in
the text box below. Of course you
can skip the floral gift card option
Subsequently you can determine
the size of the bouquet, by clicking
Select this option: You have the
choice between three bouquet sizes;
- Standard Bouquet
- Large Bouquet
- Extra Large Bouquet
You can also select the bouquet
sleeve by checking the box of choice
Then click on the shopping cart and
your bouquet is put in order.
Number of reviews: 0


text:
Serving 2,459 students in grades 9-12, Burbank High School ranks in the top 10% of all schools in California for overall test scores (math proficiency is top 10%, and reading proficiency is top 10%).
The percentage of students achieving proficiency in math is 65-69% (which is higher than the California state average of 34%). The percentage of students achieving proficiency in reading/language arts is 70-74% (which is higher than the California state average of 49%).
The student:teacher ratio of 25:1 is higher than the California state level of 21:1.
Minority enrollment is 38% of the student body (majority Hispanic), which is lower than the California state average of 79% (majority Hispanic).
Quick Stats (2024)
- Grades: 9-12
- Enrollment: 2,459 students
- Student:Teacher Ratio: 25:1
- Minority Enrollment: 38%
- Graduation Rate: 95% (Top 30% in CA)
- Overall Testing Rank: Top 10%
- Math Proficiency: 65-69% (Top 10%)
- Reading Proficiency: 70-74% (Top 20%)
- Source: National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), CA Dept. of Education
Top Rankings
Burbank High School ranks among the top 20% of public schools in California for:
Overall Rank
Math Proficiency
Reading/Language Arts Proficiency
School Overview
Burbank High School's student population of 2,459 students has stayed relatively flat over five school years.
The teacher population of 100 teachers has declined by 5% over five school years.
Grades Offered
Grades 9-12
Total Students
2,459 students
Gender %
Total Classroom Teachers
100 teachers
Students by Grade
School Calendar
School Rankings
Burbank High School ranks within the top 10% of all 3,649 schools in California (based off of combined math and reading proficiency testing data).
The diversity score of Burbank High School is 0.56, which is less than the diversity score at state average of 0.63. The school's diversity has stayed relatively flat over five school years.
Overall Testing Rank
#301 out of 3649 schools
(Top 10%)
(Top 10%)
Math Test Scores (% Proficient)
Reading/Language Arts Test Scores (% Proficient)
Student : Teacher Ratio
American Indian
Two or more races
All Ethnic Groups
Graduation Rate
Eligible for Free Lunch
Eligible for Reduced Lunch
School Statewide Testing
School District Name
Source: National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), CA Dept. of Education
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Burbank High School's ranking?
Burbank High School is ranked #301 out of 3,649 schools, which ranks it among the top 10% of public schools in California.
What schools are Burbank High School often compared to?
Burbank High Schoolis often viewed alongside schools like Burroughs High School, Herbert Hoover High School by visitors of our site.
What percent of students have achieved state testing proficiency in math and reading?
65-69% of students have achieved math proficiency (compared to the 34% CA state average), while 70-74% of students have achieved reading proficiency (compared to the 49% CA state average).
What is the graduation rate of Burbank High School?
The graduation rate of Burbank High School is 95%, which is higher than the California state average of 84%.
How many students attend Burbank High School?
2,459 students attend Burbank High School.
What is the racial composition of the student body?
62% of Burbank High School students are White, 23% of students are Hispanic, 9% of students are Asian, 4% of students are Two or more races, and 2% of students are Black.
What is the student:teacher ratio of Burbank High School?
Burbank High School has a student ration of 25:1, which is higher than the California state average of 21:1.
What grades does Burbank High School offer ?
Burbank High School offers enrollment in grades 9-12
What school district is Burbank High School part of?
Burbank High School is part of Burbank Unified School District.
School Reviews
Review Burbank High School. Reviews should be a few sentences in length. Please include any comments on:
- Quality of academic programs, teachers, and facilities
- Availability of music, art, sports and other extracurricular activities
Recent Articles
Banishing the Phone-based Childhood
The article advocates for a dramatic cultural shift - delaying kids' smartphone ownership until high school and social media access until 16, promoting more free play, and fostering a healthier, screen-free childhood through collective action.
April 25, 2024
Spanking in Public Schools: The Ongoing DebateIndeed, there are still school districts today in America that allow teachers to spank students. Learn about the current spanking situation in schools and why the debate continues to heat up.
April 12, 2024
Understanding ADHD in Children: Signs, Diagnosis, and Support StrategiesThis comprehensive article explores the complex nature of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children, providing insights into its symptoms, diagnosis process, and effective support strategies. From recognizing early signs to navigating the diagnostic journey, parents will gain valuable knowledge to help their child thrive. Expert insights, real-life examples, and practical tips empower readers to create a supportive environment that meets the unique needs of children with ADHD.


text:
Balkinization   |
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu David Luban david.luban at gmail.com Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts Senate Passes Administration Bill [UPDATED with Link to and Analysis of S.1927]
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Senate Passes Administration Bill [UPDATED with Link to and Analysis of S.1927] Marty Lederman
So much for the Democratic/DNI bill. Ancient history. We're back to a White House-penned bill now, S.1927.
The House had a test vote on the Democratic leadership bill, under a procedure (suspension of the rules) that required two-thirds for passage.
The Democrats did demonstrate that they could hold a 218-207 majority in the face of the heavy White House terror tactics. If that vote holds tomorrow when the bill is called up under a conventional rule, there will be a conference situation between that bill and the White House bill that the Senate voted for.
Anderson is right. Why the Democrats feel the need to fold to a 28-percent president trying to circumvent the Constitution is quite beyond me. Show a little spine.
Sometimes it seems like they're waking up, and then...
I second the "spine" comments ... a reasonable person would think the Democratic majority would have the upper hand given the recent AG hearings and his weasel words on this very subject matter plus past actions by the administration that most probably violated FISA w/o constitutional sanction.
With all of that, to quote Marty Lederman, are we to believe that "Dems largely capitulated to DNI McConnell's demands" ... If so, how can we take them seriously?
What numbers! The lemmings reached critical mass and stormed the cliff. Worse than the MCA! Now the AG is a known lackey, and they no longer have the ruling party's apron strings to hide behind.
The lemming stampede should be bicameral. The only hope I see is that Pelosi drew a thicker line in the sand than Reid. If this bill passes it will be the negotiating floor six months down the road, with or without an attack from The One Whose Name Must Not Be Spoken.
The NYT story -- the Times finally started covering this legislative story, now that it is almost over -- says the Democrats expect to fold Saturday:
"The House is expected to take up the White House-backed measure on Saturday morning before going into its summer recess. "Democratic leaders acknowledged that the bill would probably pass."
What conditions might exist that would cause the dems to uncharacteristically support the president? Keep in mind, that the bill enables the us to spy on terrorists under conditions that are not presently legal.
Whatever those conditions may be, Jeff, they aren't present with this bill. While you may be right that this bill allows the NSA to spy on terrorists that can't be reached at the moment, it also allows the NSA to spy on virtually anyone that can't presently be reached.
When the target is a person overseas but one of the parties to the communication is in the US, FISA now requires a warrant to intercept communications in the US. FISA does not require a warrant for the NSA to intercept the same communication in one of the other countries through which it passes (England, Spain, Italy, Egypt, and Pakistan in the case of al Qaeda), nor if the conversation is rerouted to use satellite bandwidth instead of fiber cable, nor if one of the cables is tapped under the sea by equipment installed by one of the specially equipped submarines the Navy has for the purpose. All this bill does is to allow the NSA to do in the simple and obvious way what they can legally do today through more expensive or cumbersome means.
Of course the ability to legally intercept any individual communication using such means is not the same thing as the ability to monitor large amounts of communication for key phrases or identifiable voices. For that you need big computers that are best located in or near domestic switching centers. Thus this bill enables entire programs of communications monitoring that would not be both legal and technically reasonable without it. If the NSA can now monitor all telephone calls from Pakistan and Afghanistan with equipment that can detect Bin Laden's voice, the fact that such equipment will process and ignore someone's birthday call home to relatives does not invade their privacy.
Why do I feel less safe?
Claire McCaskill has earned herself a rattlesnake flag that reads "Be Gentle" where it used to say "Don't Tread On Me".
The language of proposed 105A is astonishing in its breadth. I would note that there's no requirement that the "person reasonably believed to be located outside the United States" NOT be a U.S. citizen.
Am I reading this correctly that, if this is enacted, then the next time Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, or John Boehner travels to Iraq, as a result of this change of law it is now legally permissible for the Bush Administration to intercept and read any and all phone calls, emails, etc. he has once he sets foot outside of the United States? Presumably this can't repeal the 4th Amendment, so if those intercepted calls turn up evidence of a crime (Boehner arranging for delivery of a bribe from drug industry lobbyists, say, via blackberry) it could not be introduced in a court of law. Likewise perhaps (?) there'd be a civil action under section 1983 for violations of 4th amendment rights, but there would be no crime on the part of Alberto Gonzalez sitting in the basement of the Justice Department reading through those emails. Am I right???
What I really want to know is exactly what dog whistle were the 16 Dems responding to? They don't think the Trent Lott "get out of Washington 'cuz we're all going to die" type fear-mongering still plays do they? What precisely do they fear?
Truly a sad day for governance and the true security of America. ... and I also am interested in what packerland notes. Is it mere physical location of the individual, or is there some other meaning of "located outside the United States".
If all sides agree that FISA should be limited to "US persons," this Senate bill appears to do just that.
This Dem rhetoric about violating the rights of US citizens by excluding foreigners from FISA is ridiculous on it face and is designed for consumption by the anti military attendees of YearlyKos. For surveillance to come within this exemption, there is no requirement that it be conducted outside the U.S.; no requirement that the person at whom it is "directed" be an agent of a foreign power or in any way connected to terrorism or other wrongdoing; and no requirement that the surveillance does not also encompass communications of U.S. persons. There is no reason why it should. NSA is conducting foreign intelligence gathering, not seeking a FISA or Article III warrant to gather evidence against a US person. Indeed, if read literally, it would exclude from FISA any surveillance that is in some sense "directed" both at persons overseas and at persons in the U.S. I am absolutely sure that this bill was intended on removing from FISA situations where foreign persons are calling into the US, which if the reporting is correct, includes most or all of the TSP. We had previous discussions about whether FISA even applied to situations where the target was a foreigner calling into the US. This reform clarifies that FISA does not apply to those situations and is instead limited to domestic surveillance of US persons.
I read 105A the same way (as making an Orwellian definition of "electronic survellance") - and see parts of 105B as completely circular.
Any comments on the notion of sunsetting immunity? THe text of the sunsetting amendment isn't on Thomas.
Can there even be a 4th amendment violation if the Congress and Courts are using the same playbook? The executive will never respect an amendment that restricts it power -- all evidence is reasonably acquired from that point of view.
Of all the names of Democrats that voted for this travesty, the most surprising (and disappointing) to me was Jim Webb. He is supposed to be one of the new guys that is going to change things, and he has the knowledge and experience to know better.
Among the votes for the White House bill were two senators who like to posture as protectors of FISA: Arlen Specter and Dianne Feinstein. A switched vote by either would have defeated the bill.
BTW, since the Senate adjourned for its August recess last night, there obviously was no Democratic strategy even to amend the bill in the House. Democratic leaders, having promised to pass something before they recess, left themselves no option but to accept the White House ultimatum without resistance. The House vote last night on its own bill was never more than symbolic, since it was taken up under a procedure requiring an impossible two-thirds majority. If Pelosi intended it as a serious legislative move for passage, she would employ a conventional rule that would allow passage by simple majority. So absent some extraordinary surprise today in the House, we must conclude that Democratic leaders took a calculated dive on this one.
Of course the ability to legally intercept any individual communication using such means is not the same thing as the ability to monitor large amounts of communication for key phrases or identifiable voices. For that you need big computers that are best located in or near domestic switching centers. Thus this bill enables entire programs of communications monitoring that would not be both legal and technically reasonable without it.
If the NSA can now monitor all telephone calls from Pakistan and Afghanistan with equipment that can detect Bin Laden's voice, the fact that such equipment will process and ignore someone's birthday call home to relatives does not invade their privacy. Yes, but -- ignoring that there are lots of persons outside the US besides OBL -- it comes down to what's being made feasible. And a quantitative difference can amount to a qualitative one, particularly where the administrator conflates the national security with the enhancement of partisan and executive power. What rankles me no less is that congressional oversight provisions are stripped out. This will not catch terrorists. And how is Congress to decide whether to extend in 6 months knowing no more than it does now? The answer is being written before our eyes this weekend.
I think oo has it right. The discomfort everyone feels is not related to anti-military sentiment. It is that this tool is being given to folks who have used private email accounts to conduct official business in order to avoid subpoenas and national archiving requirements, claimed to be part of two branches of governments to assume the protections of both without the burdens of either, and fired competent USAGs for political reasons. Take people like Rove and Addington out of the executive, and it will have an entirely different feel - though the the potential for them or those like them to return should still be cause for alarm regarding the current bill.
-- The Casual Observer
I apologize in advance for veering off point, but I am very concerned about what this Democratic cave-in on FISA portends for the war-funding authorization in September. I simply cannot see the Democrats doing ANYTHING meaningful, such as denying war funding or even insisting upon funding attached predicated upon phase withdrawal. I strongly suspect that the Democrats will capitulate yet again when push comes to shove and give Bush whatever he demands. Is ANYBODY optomistic that the Dems will stand up?
Feinstein??? The conditions under which the Congress passed the bill are another transparently fraudulent "terror alert", this one aimed only at Congress: Capitol Police officials have stepped up the department's security presence on Capitol Hill in response to intelligence indicating the increased possibility of an al-Qaida terrorist attack on Congress sometime between now and Sept. 11. The August-to-Sept. 11 time frame was confirmed by a Capitol Police source who said Congressional security officials were recently made aware of the potential threat by federal anti-terrorism authorities. [reported by Roll Call on Wednesday, relayed by TalkingPointsMemo.com After the blatant abuse of intelligence to hype threats to stampede Congress into pre-approving a ruinous war of aggression, and to retroactively legalize torture and destroy habeas corpus, after the open, defiant lawlessness of the regime on this very issue and its open contempt for Congress, they fall for this particular Lucy-with-the-football once again. I'm not stupid enough to go along anymore.
What does this have to do with national security? Whether or not a communication is a threat to national security does not depend on the locations, citizenship, or US immigration status of the communicators, nor does it depend on whether or not the communication is electronic.
As Ben Franklin said, "those who would sacrifice essential liberty for some temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
The abuses that led to FISA were caused by Hoover and the FBI, not some policitical hack in the White House. Despite the usual partisan conspiracy theory, NSA intelligence gathering is done by career analysts in the NSA hired over the decades by both Republican and Democratic administrations. They can distinguish between al Qaeda and the ACLU and if ordered to do anything improper would disclose such orders immediately to the House and Senate Intelligence committees (not the Judiciary committees no matter how hard their chairmen try to muscle in).
Of course there would be a problem if we let another J Edgar Hoover figure take over the NSA and run it himself for thirty years. So you address that problem directly rather than weaking our defenses against foreign attack.
NSA intelligence gathering is done by career analysts in the NSA hired over the decades by both Republican and Democratic administrations. They can distinguish between al Qaeda and the ACLU and if ordered to do anything improper would disclose such orders immediately to the House and Senate Intelligence committees
I simply do not have the confidence you do about this. When the White House gets actively involved in these activities, things change. Remember, DOJ was historically non-political. Trust us doesn't cut it anymore.
Howard, I want to believe that you are correct. However, we all know that this administration has removed such obstacles from all areas of our government, to include its military and executive agencies/departments. Neither the NSA nor the FBI are immune from careerism and certain of their members yielding to the whim of their current masters. On that score, didn't I read an allegation fairly recently that the FBI had been used to gather information on political opponents of the current administration? (This is intended to be a serious question as I deem myself to be apolitical.)
I second the last reply to the point per how politics interferes, but Howard's "trust the professionals" remark is annoyingly naive.
Suddenly -- like those who feign total acceptance of "civil unions" but not "marriage" for same sex couples -- we hear of a past day ... the Hoover Era ... as if this same crowd back then didn't have the same line. THAT is the problem. All is well now. You know, when key info to judge their job performance only comes via press leaks. Or, did the Hoover FBI not consist of many "career professionals" appointed by both Democrat and Republican administrations? Lest we forget, he got his start in a Democratic Administration (Wilson). Likewise, there is this assumed thought that as long as career professionals are involved, hey, no problemo. Only rank partisan sorts threaten our liberties. Brandeis' words in his dissent in Olmstead ring lound here. This thing reminds one of detective novels. Private detectives, often charming sorts, often think nothing of violating privacy in the pursuit of thier benign ends. "Good" people do troublesome things too esp. when professional they have different concerns than those expressed here. But, yes, ultimately we have to realize WHO is running the show. How exactly -- see Glenn Greenwald today -- we are supposed to "trust them" when their bosses are the likes of Bush and the AG is beyond me. A quite rather passionless sort would reasonable say that was downright unreasonable. Seems quite telling given the 4A, I say.
The abuses that led to FISA were caused by Hoover and the FBI, not some policitical hack in the White House.
A great many of Hoover's abuses were directly authorized by the White House. Just for example, Bobby Kennedy signed off on the MLK, Jr. wiretaps. There's no doubt Hoover acted on his own much of the time, but... 1. There were plenty of times when Presidents of both parties used Hoover for their own political ends; and 2. I see every reason to expect that someone similar to Hoover will eventually be appointed as DNI. It's only a matter of time. This is not a partisan issue. The abuses by Hoover benefited D's and R's alike. It's an issue of quies custodiet. Every American has an interest in that.
Like others I wish you were right. In A Pretext for War Jim Bamford gives a blow-by-blow description of the technical crisis 9/11 brought to the fore within the intelligence community. He painted picture like yours. I don't dispute it. It is authentic. But for Bamford it's a minor theme. Let me repeat. The bill eliminates the oversight Congress had asked for. That demand had zero to do with catching terrorists. It had another reason: How we are governed is becoming more and more opaque, private, concentrated, and unanswerable to public opinion. We see daily evidence that the civil service is being reprofessionalized in furtherance of these trends. The intelligence community is hardly immune to them. In most respects they can fit in simply by playing to type, for reasons brought out here. What you see as restoring the spy business to the status quo ante is in a sense correct, but it is also in synergy with these antidemocratic trends, which are further along than most dare admit to themselves. Our republic is slipping away. This bill greases the skids.
Adding to those who have already responded to Howard's dismissal -- which is either hopelessly naive or cynically disingenuous -- of concerns over the breadth of scope of this bill:
Even assuming arguendo that Howard is correct about the upstanding character of NSA professionals (who, if he is to be believed, apparently take their duty to uphold the United States Constitution far more seriously than do all Republican Senators and 16 Democratic Senators), why does Howard presume that any and all intelligence-gathering must, of necessity, run through the NSA? Indeed, hasn't one significant aspect of the scandal surrounding the march to war in Iraq involved the issue of "stovepiping" intelligence and doing end-runs around the equally serious, nonpartisan professionals at Langley? Under present law, if the Executive Office of the Vice President set up its own independent wiretapping operation, gathering information on all electronic communications involving all elected officials while on official business outside of the United States, it would be illegal. Under this bill, if enacted, such communications would not be covered by FISA and such activity would be legal so long as it could be argued to satisfy the vague definition of "foreign intelligence information". And in light of everything we've learned over the past 6 years, if you believe that the employees of the Bush-Cheney Administration would be morally incapable of engaging in such behavior, then I would submit that you are the one who is delusionally engaged in the "usual partisan conspiracy theory" mongering. But again, let's assume arguendo and in the face of all evidence to the contrary that the current members of the Bush Administration wouldn't engage in such behavior. Having rendered such behavior no longer criminal, the only thing protecting the American people from such mass surveillance is that "we trust that the people in office won't abuse their trust and take their commitment to the Constitution and to post-Enlightenment principles of basic human rights and civil liberties seriously" (again, in the face of all eveidence to the contrary), then tell me just exactly what differentiates our system of government from a Benevolent Dictatorship?
If you think there's no possibility of undue influence from the top on the NSA, you need to read up on our current DNI. He's a former director of the NSA, and former lobbyist for the private intelligence industry.(The combination of the two explains much of the outsourcing craze, if only a small part)
-- then tell me just exactly what differentiates our system of government from a Benevolent Dictatorship? --
. Our form of government has a greater number of "dictators" than exists in the textbook version of dictatorship. . But seriously, the tension between personal autonomy and responsibility accompanied by small government vs. government the protector/provider is age old stuff. . The people expect government protection and a safety net, and obtaining that isn't "free." . What disappoints me is that the debate over the inevitable trade-offs is conducted more on emotional and partisan grounds than on rational grounds.
I would pose questions to those who worry that this bill is a travesty violation of your constitutional rights:
1) How do you anticipate that the international telecommunications of you or anyone you know will be subject to the TSP as it has been reported? Are you at all likely to call or be called from foreign numbers used by al Qaeda? 2) Assuming that you are one of the incredibly miniscule subset of the US citizenry who may innocently call or be called from a foreign number used by al Qaeda, exactly what reasonable expectation of privacy do you have in making or receiving such and international call? Every other border crossing is subject to inspection without the need to obtain a warrant under the 4th Amendment. Why would your telecommunications be any different?
"Under present law, if the Executive Office of the Vice President set up its own independent wiretapping operation, gathering information on all electronic communications involving all elected officials while on official business outside of the United States, it would be illegal." Maybe, but not under FISA. If the wiretaps are done overseas, then FISA is silent about it because electronic surveilliance is only defined to include targeted US persons in the US or intercepts made in the US. Since the DNI and AG both have to sign off on any program, it is unlikely to happen outside the NSA.
You can't create a second NSA in a basement of the White House, nor do you need to. You see, in most of the interesting places (Pakistan, Iraq) there are local secret police already listening in on such visitors, plus a dozen or so foreign secret services (Mossad, Russians, Chinese, etc.) with perfectly adequate equipment to track a soft target like a politician. This or any future White House is in a position to make a side deal with any of these agencies to provide consideration in return for any useful intercepts. This also doesn't violate FISA since no US law can constrain what other governments do overseas. This is so simple and undetectable that it would be insane to do it any other way.
I'll ignore the inane trollery of Bart "your defense of civil liberties triggers suspicion" DePalma, but respond to cboldt since he/she seems to actually to be interested in genuine discourse.
-- then tell me just exactly what differentiates our system of government from a Benevolent Dictatorship? -- . Our form of government has a greater number of "dictators" than exists in the textbook version of dictatorship. But in all seriousness, that's precisely the point I'm challenging. Yes, of course it's always been the case that, say, if a crooked DA decides he doesn't like you and brings a weak murder case against you using falsified evidence, and if he pays off the jury to find you guilty, and the trial judge is either incompetent or in league with the DA, and ( . . . continue with the series . . .) then there's left to protect you from having your liberty taken away without morally justifiable cause or procedural due process -- or, alternatively, at the higher-level case we're looking at, that if the President decides he just isn't going to follow a Supreme Court ruling against him (and he disdainfully suggests "the Justices have rendered their decision; now let them enforce it") -- that then we're left with a consitutional crisis and absent a Congress willing to impeach or otherwise hold the rogue President to account, he has effectively elevated himself above the rule of law. But that's precisely my point -- there are numerous checks and balances, and in a well-developed mature representative democracy committed to the rule of law, miscarriages of justice are supposed to require so many independent actors buying in that -- absent a grand conspiracy -- they are by design thought to be remote. This law quite literally places in the hands of two people (one of whom serves "at the pleasure" of the other) the legal ability to engage in precisely the sort of mass surveillance of political enemies that I described above. My comment was partly intended to be a pre-emptive response to those who say "you're crazy if you compare the U.S. under Bush to an authoritarian monarchy -- federal authorities aren't actually rounding up large numbers of non-citizens and holding them in detention centers indefinitely without access to legal counsel or recourse to a court merely on the say-so of the President (as the MCA quite literally would allow, as a legal matter)" -- but the point is, whether a government IS in fact arresting people at will and holding them in dungeons incommunicado forever, and torturing political enemies, isn't the test of whether it's authoritarian vs. a western-style representative democracy -- rather, it's the fact that the government in fact arrogates to itself the right to do so. (In part, because the expectation is that, human nature being what it is, a strategy of giving absolute power to Good Men (and Women) and hoping for the best is ultimately doomed -- Federalist 51's "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary" and all that jazz.) In fact, I would argue and suspect as a historical matter that the most effective authoritarians are the ones who torture and detain the least number of political opponents -- because the strength of the threat is sufficient to keep everyone in line and to keep people from speaking out in the first place. (I suspect that Louis XIVth and Caesar Augustus and Philip II tortured far fewer than far less competent tyrants). And finally, as to the comment that "What disappoints me is that the debate over the inevitable trade-offs is conducted more on emotional and partisan grounds than on rational grounds" which I presume to be at least partly directed at me (since your comment led off by quoting me), I'm not sure what to make of that. I'm not sure if what you really intend to be saying here is that anything other than Benthamite Utilitarianism (a rational weighing of the various costs and benefits of safety versus freedom, in which case a finite number of utiles is assigned to each individual's liberty) is "disappointing" to you, or what? Because those of us more steeped in the Lockean and Kantian traditions -- and certainly most of our founding fathers -- tend to view certain things as sacrosanct, or if you will "inalienable," such that no countervailing ends can justify infringing on those rights. Sorry if that disappoints you.
Let me see if I've got this straight. We have no right to demand that we not be spied on unless we can prove we're being spied on. And if we can prove we're being spied on, we have no right to demand that we not be spied on. This is -- did you ever read "Catch-22'" when you were younger? You might want to go back and read it. It's very interesting. It seems to be part of your training manual. Sorry. Gotta go. Someone's trying to make me safe.
occasional observer said...
Bart, Let me see if I've got this straight. We have no right to demand that we not be spied on unless we can prove we're being spied on. And if we can prove we're being spied on, we have no right to demand that we not be spied on. No, in order to claim that you have lost "rights" because the government is "illegally" spying upon you, you must first present some evidence of the predicate claim that the government is in fact spying upon you.
The language "directed at" sounds a lot more like a blunderbuss weapon than targeted surveillance.
By its nature, the blunderbuss is not a very precise weapon nor one which could fire very far. It has seen most of its use as a means of self-defence, as the spread of shot meant that one did not need to be particularly skilled in aiming to wound or kill intruders or attackers. It has also seen use in hunting, where the aforementioned spread of shot allowed a greater chance of hitting small fast-moving animals, such as rabbits or birds. Although it was sometimes used in a military setting, it was more effective when the goal was not to hit a specific target, but rather any one of multiple targets, such as for crowd control. During combat, the blunderbuss was a very unpredictable weapon; it could hit an entire group of enemy soldiers or miss all of them. The blunderbuss thus became a byword for inaccurate marksmanship in any field. As well, the word itself came to mean "a clumsy or stupid person". It was also a common weapon of choice among pirates when boarding ships. This bill is about giving the Bush administration the ability to have bad aim on purpose.
I would pose questions to those who worry that this bill is a travesty violation of your constitutional rights: 1) How do you anticipate that the international telecommunications of you or anyone you know will be subject to the TSP as it has been reported? In case you've been missing out on recent developments, it is becoming increasingly clear that the TSP as it has been reported is not the only game in town. Something much more extensive has gone on in the past, and may still be going on. In asking us to limit our concerns to the TSP as it has been reported is taking the Gonzales approach, "Nothing to see there, folks. Move along." I am not willing to accept assurances of, "Trust us; we're the government." Apparently you are.
The Democrats should have called George Bush's bluff on this one; passed a bill expanding his surveillance powers and then accused him of being soft on terrorism and/or being a spoiled child insisting on his own way and "playing politics with national security" if he vetoed.
The whole thing smacks of political theater.
Am I the only one who sees the bitter irony of The Bourne Ultimatum - a movie about an out-of-control and unchecked CIA program targeting US citizens - grossing 70 million box office dollars the same week-end that the US Congress passes a bill legitimizing unchecked espionage targeting US citizens? Apparently the movie-going public knows something our Congressional representatives do not.
The abuses that led to FISA were caused by Hoover and the FBI, not some policitical hack in the White House. "Ben, one word, just one word. You listening? 'Nixon'".... Nixon's shenanigans were a major impetus for the Church Commission and the subsequent FISA laws, even if some of the abuses eventually uncovered had preceded Nixon's reign. And part of the reason that Nixon's shenanigans were so shocking is that they were "political". Cheers,
It is naive to think the US does not collect intel (spy is such an ugly word) on every major government and group in the world.
Post a Comment
However it is another example of the incompetence of our current Administration that a low-level contractor would have access to sources and methods involving a NATO ally. authority spy bonus |
Books by Balkinization Bloggers Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin's Press, 2022) Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |


text:
- Bienvenue
- Choix des produits
- Informations personnelles
- Envoi de votre requête
Choix des produits
Étape 1 de 3
Votre requête est vide.
Votre requête est vide.
Ce texte est seulement disponible en anglais.
No, each Province's list is specific to that market. Orders can only be fulfilled in market. If you see something of interest we can put you in touch with a representative in your market to update on future orders or arrivals specific to your Province.
As an importer we cannot vend directly to the consumer. All orders must pass through a retailer (either a government liquor store or a private wine or liquor store). As the retailer must purchase a full case, we can only accept orders for full cases. If you are interested in purchasing wine in quantities less than a case, please contact us and we can refer you to a location that stocks the our wines.
You will receive a confirmation from us via email or phone.
Orders can be sent to a government liquor store or a private wine store or liquor Store. When you first order, we will recommend the best retail store for you to pick up your order with respect to your location. The retailer will contact you via phone or email when your order is ready to be picked up on site.
Orders can take anywhere from 1 to 4 weeks depending on the availability at British Columbia Distribution Branch. Distribution for all imported wines is controlled and operated by the British Columbia Distribution Branch. We as the agent do not have any control of the distribution of the wine in BC.. Most orders will be delivered within 2 weeks of ordering. The expected arrival time will be communicated in your order confirmation.
You pay for your order at the selected retail location at pick up.
Nous avons bien reçu votre message, nous communiquerons avec vous lorsque le vin sera disponible.
caisses disponibles


text:
"Now we can see [success in Vietnam] clearly, like the light at the end of a tunnel."
– Gen. Henri Navarre, commander French forces in Vietnam, May 20, 1953
"A new phase is starting … we have reached an important point when
the end begins to come into view … there is a light at the end of the
– Gen. William Westmoreland, commander U.S. forces in Vietnam, November 1967
"Yesterday's attack [in Kabul] was a fleeting event; it came and
it went. The insurgents are on the defensive.… [Afghans] can sleep well at night."
– Gen. John Allen, North Atlantic Treaty Commander in Afghanistan, Sept. 14, 2011
Dear Lord, what is about generals that seem to make them so particularly immune to history's lessons?
Gen. Navarre had a surefire plan to draw the Vietnamese insurgents into a great battle that would end the war. Worked like a charm. On May 7, 1954, the French army surrendered at Dien Bien Phu.
In November 1967, Gen. Westmoreland was making the rounds in Washington, talking up "body counts" and "pacification," and how the U.S. would have this little matter in Vietnam wrapped up pretty quickly. Ten weeks later, on Jan. 31, 1968, the National Liberation Front and the North Vietnamese launched the Tet offensive that put the U.S. Embassy in Saigon under siege, seized the city of Hue, and shattered the myth that the U.S. was winning the war in Vietnam.
And now Gen. Allen says the attack on Kabul indicates the Taliban are on their last legs.
For NATO this year has been the deadliest in the decade-old war, and the Kabul assault suggests that the Taliban are hardly on the ropes. As Matthew Green of the Financial Times put it, "The attack was among the most sophisticated insurgents have launched on the capital and exposed the inability of Afghan forces to guarantee security even in the most heavily defended districts."
A "fleeting event"? I suppose that depends on how one defines "fleeting." Seven Taliban pinned down NATO and Afghan security forces for 20 hours, scattering embassy officials and pretty much paralyzing a major part of the capital. It was the 26th major attack on Kabul since 2008; the assaults have killed 225 people.
What generals don't get (it tends to be above their pay grade) is that wars like Vietnam and Afghanistan — wars of occupation — are political, not military, affairs. The U.S. military continues to claim that the Tet offensive was a huge military victory because it killed lots of insurgents, and the U.S. took back all the cities it lost. But Tet was less a military offensive than a political undertaking aimed at derailing the myth that the U.S. was "winning" the war in Vietnam. And that is exactly what Tet did. Regardless of what the generals thought, the American people concluded that they had been lied to and the war could not be won.
During the Paris peace talks to end the war in Southeast Asia, an American colonel confronted his North Vietnamese counterpart and told him that the U.S. had won every battle in the Vietnam War. The North Vietnamese officer nodded, "Yes, that is true, but also irrelevant." I doubt the American officer got the point.
Gen. Allen's line about "the insurgents are on the defensive" can now join former Vice President Dick Cheney's dismissal of the growing Iraqi insurgency as nothing but Saddam Hussein "dead-enders."
As for Kabul residents being able to "sleep well at night" because of the performance of the Afghan security forces: "The nature and scale of today's attacks clearly proves that the terrorists received assistance and guidance from some security officials within the government who are their sympathizers," Naim Hamidzai, chair of the Afghan parliament's Internal Security Committee, told The New York Times. "Otherwise it would be impossible for the planners and masterminds of the attack to stage such a sophisticated and complex attack in this extremely well-guarded location without the complicity of insiders."
The Afghan army saw its desertion rate more than double in the first six months of this year. Between January and June, some 24,590 soldiers deserted, compared with 11,423 who left in the same period in 2010. The Afghan army is supposed to reach 195,000 by October 2012.
The Afghan army has also been unable to recruit Pashtuns from southern Afghanistan, the heart of the insurgency. According to a recent study by The New York Times, Pashtuns from Kandahar, Helmand, Oruzgan, Zabul, Paktika, and Ghazni make up 17 percent of the population but only 1.5 percent of the army. In short, the Afghan army in the south is essentially a northern army of occupation, which explains why no one in the southern provinces will join the army and virtually no Taliban have switched allegiances to the government.
To shore up security, the U.S. has been recruiting and arming militias that, according to a recent Human Rights study, have killed, raped, and stolen from local villagers. U.S. Special Forces recruit the militia members, who then shift their loyalties to local warlords. This should hardly come as a surprise. The Soviets tried exactly this tactic during their occupation, which ended up fueling the growth of the warlords and led to the devastating 1992-96 civil war.
Of course, Gen. Allen might have had something else in mind when he talked about getting a good night's sleep.
According to the United Nations, this year will be a bumper crop for opium. Prices for dry opium increased 306 percent this year, from $69 a kilo to $281 a kilo. As Jean-Luc Lemahieu, an official of the U.N. Office of Drugs and Crime, told The New York Times, "This is not business as usual. There is no crop that can compete with those prices."
Smoke enough opium and you can sleep through anything.
For the last 10 years we have bombed, shot, incarcerated, and waterboarded a lot of people in Afghanistan. We have allowed opium to become the country's major source of income, and we are currently bringing back the warlords and their armies. Afghanistan is a far more dangerous place today than it was a decade ago, and the only tunnels are the ones in which the Taliban store their weapons and supplies.
It seems like a good time to resuscitate a line from another decade and another war: "Out now!"
Reprinted courtesy of Foreign Policy in Focus.


text:
Bobby Knight has his "YouTube Moment!" What I'm looking for is this: A link to the YouTube clip showing him slapping his player, Michael Prince, on the bench during last night's game. I don't see it on YouTube yet. Can anyone help me out?
(Meanwhile, what a dumb-ass Knight is: 871 career wins and he can't even control himself enough not to physically smack one of his players ON CAMERA. At least do it on a game that isn't televised. In the over/under on games suspended, I'll take "Zero" and you can have every other number. Anyone dare to take me up on it? In the over/under on "media outrage," however, I'll take "too many to count.")
Ohio St-Michigan Countdown: Jim Tressel says that the game's loser should NOT get a second chance in the national title game, but not because it's a competitively corrosive concept (my feeling) -- he just doesn't like the idea of a team not winning its conference championship making the national-title game.
(1) Panthers d. Bucs on MNF: Donovan McNabb could take a lesson from Steve Smith, who upchucked on the sidelines, but not without catching 8 passes for 149 yards and a TD. Boot away!
(2) Brunell benched for
(3) Randy Moss blames his mood: He blames his dropped passes on being unhappy. I'm serious. Even Moody All-Star, T.O. STFU and got the job done.
MLB Awards Season: Today: NL Cy! My pick is by attrition. Brandon Webb's team wasn't in contention; I can't reward Chris Carpenter's 15 wins (particularly after he won the Cy in '05 over a more deserving Roger Clemens). Carlos Zambrano – who is probably the NL's top starting pitcher – just isn't realistic.
So my NL Cy pick? Trevor Hoffman, who led the NL in saves and led his team to the playoffs -- not a bad season for one of MLB's elder statesmen who also happened to set the record for career saves.
(1) Matsuzaka to Red Sox tonight: The announcement will be made official that Theo won the rights to negotiate with the Japanese superstar. It only cost him $45 mil. And that's just to start talking to Scott Boras. (Yikes.) It's the bold move the Red Sox needed. I'm calling it now: Matsuzaka will win the AL Cy Young Award in 2007.
(2) Cubs eyeing Soriano: Having already spent big (5Y/$75M) to keep Aramis Ramirez, the Cubs are looking to drop another $100M(?) to get Alfonso Soriano. The Angels – who were hot for Aramis – likely won't let the Cubs take another player from them.
(3) Mets targeting Barry Zito: Is he a cornerstone pitcher? Does it matter? He'll get paid like one. If I was Omar Minaya, however, I wouldn't give up on trading the farm to the Marlins for Dontrelle Willis, too.
NBA Wrap: The Celtics don't just suck, but they suck as bad as they ever have since 1978. LeBron owns New York, both with his 29 points and his commercial presence. The Sonics can beat a solid team like the Nets, but they're still moving to
CFB: Butch


text:
Welcome to our final January blog hop! We are so excited to bring you more projects and inspiration from our ever so talented designers.
Before I introduce the designers that will be sharing their work with you today I think I owe you some winners!
First for commenting on all the blogs is:
maxadriane who left this sweet comment on Michelle Beck's blog...
Merci! The layout is very lovely. He is such a sweetie and the photo is definately highlighted by your creative embellishments. Title work is great!
and for commenting on the Bo Bunny face book page is:
Melissa Vettorel who said...
Great Blog Hop!! Such beautiful LO's and altered items!!
And now for the Blog Hop prizes: