text:
Re: Appended Writings Of Peter Young And Scott Horton
August 31, 2005
Re: Appended Writings Of Peter Young And Scott Horton.
From: Dean Lawrence R. Velvel
Dear Colleagues:
This blogger recently received two writings of great importance. They are both true stories, and are both appended below.
One is from Peter Young, who was a lawyer for Anthony Russo in the government's prosecution against Russo and Daniel Ellsberg. It is pertinent to the Roberts nomination. Young gives an amazing, an utterly riveting, description of events at the Ellsberg/Russo trial including -- pertinently to the Roberts situation -- an attempt by the Nixon Administration to in effect bribe and manipulate the judge who was presiding over the government's prosecution by offering the judge appointment as Director of the FBI. The whole story Young tells is just fantastic to read.
The other piece first appeared in The New York Law Journal. It is by Scott Horton, the prominent New York lawyer who was confidentially consulted about the Administration's efforts to authorize torture -- efforts they opposed -- by, I believe, the Judge Advocate Generals (or their subordinates) of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. This consultation marked one of the early steps to stop the torture. Horton's piece tells how George Washington reacted to serious mistreatment of American prisoners by the British and to suggestions that we reply in kind. It also discusses efforts by Senators and military officers to require that today's Americans act as Washington did -- efforts the Bush Administration has tried to stymie.
1. The Writings of Peter Young
Date: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 3:06 AM
Dear Dean Velvel:
Your piece on federal judges failing to recuse themselves when under consideration for higher appointment and, worse, their attempts to curry favor with the appointing authority bring to mind an episode from the Pentagon Papers trial of Dan Ellsberg and Tony Russo in Los Angeles in 1973. As a young lawyer, I was co-counsel for Russo alongside his chief counsel, Leonard Weinglass.
Older readers will remember that in 1971 the Government sought an injunction prohibiting publication in the New York Times and the Washington Post of the Pentagon Papers, a multi-volume history of U.S. involvement in Viet Nam that had been classified top secret. After the U.S. Supreme Court rejected that effort as a prior restraint on expression invalid under the first amendment, Ellsberg and Russo were indicted on espionage, theft and conspiracy charges as a result of their alleged unauthorized copying and transmission of the Papers. (The indictment was carefully framed to exclude allegations of the transmission of the Papers to the press. The Government did not want the defendants' underlying motive—revealing the truth about the War in Viet Nam to the American people via the press—to play any part in the case. In reality the case was all about the free flow of information to the people on matters of vital public concern which first amendment jurisprudence regards as central to democratic self-government, and yet in court the first amendment's free speech and press guarantees were deemed legally irrelevant to the criminal charges since they did not protect acquisition of secret information. All our efforts to raise the first amendment in a case based on conduct evoking the central meaning of the first amendment were cursorily rejected. The law, even constitutional law, works in mysterious ways.)
Towards the end of the ensuing trial, a Washington Post story revealed that while the case was underway the federal district court judge presiding over it, William M. Byrne, Jr., met with John Ehrlichman, chief White House advisor for domestic affairs, and President Richard Nixon, and that they told him he was under consideration for appointment as FBI director. (The FBI's first director, J. Edgar Hoover, had died in May, 1972, and the nomination of acting director L. Patrick Gray III as his successor had been scuttled when it was revealed he had burned records related to the Watergate crimes in his fireplace. Ehrlichman advised Nixon to make Gray the patsy for Watergate and to leave him "twisting slowly, slowly in the wind.")
Charles Nesson, the Harvard Law School professor who demonstrated he was also a very capable trial attorney as one of Ellsberg's lawyers, got word of the Post story early on the morning of its publication and notified Judge Byrne's chambers that we would be raising the matter in court that day. He had done so without giving it a second thought; it was instinctive for Charlie to do the decent thing. A few harsh words, mumbled, not yelled, passed between the Ellsberg and Russo legal teams, a rarity in the case since we presented a joint defense and ordinarily got along extremely well. We on the Russo side agreed that Charlie had done the gentlemanly thing, but we were convinced we were not dealing with gentlemen and thought tipping off Judge Byrne would allow him time to prepare a response and help him blunt the force of our argument that the White House approach to the judge had tainted the case. Furthermore, the opportunity to prepare a statement would allow the judge to shape the way the story was reported. Actually, I think we were more miffed that we had not been consulted before the decision to notify Judge Byrne was taken. Protocol apparently must have its place, even within the ranks of criminal defense lawyers and even when time is short. The hard feelings lasted only a couple of hours, and almost a third of a century later, I rather think Charlie was right to make the call. Judge Byrne probably would have learned of the Post story from another source before we appeared in court, and it is doubtful we could have gained anything more had we been able to spring the news on the judge. Because of Charlie's call, history will show that the defense (at least part of it) acted with civility when others did not (although that is not to say civility is always the best course).
Sure enough, when we got to court at the appointed hour, the usually punctual Judge Byrne was nowhere to be seen. We—and a larger than normal press corps, which had been alerted—were kept waiting more than an hour before he appeared. I sat closest to the judge; his face was ashen as he read a prepared statement. He said he had been invited to meet the President to discuss a matter not related to any cases pending before him, that he was told he was under consideration for the FBI directorship and that he had been asked whether he was interested in the post. No commitments were made, he declared, and the matter was left in abeyance until conclusion of the trial.
After reading his statement, Judge Byrne made it plain he regarded the matter as closed. Over the following weeks, he rebuffed the defense's repeated requests for an evidentiary hearing on the issue, particularly on whether the Government had sought to bribe him. Leonard Boudin, another of Ellsberg's lawyers and a wonderful advocate, renewed the request for an evidentiary inquiry almost daily. He must have been a continual irritation to Judge Byrne, who obviously wanted nothing more than to put the matter to rest without further ado.
Eventually it emerged that the judge had at least two secret meetings with Ehrlichman. The first meeting occurred in a public park overlooking the ocean in Santa Monica. The second took place at "the western White House" in San Clemente, where Ehrlichman introduced him to Nixon.
Shortly before the Post's story on the White House approach to Judge Byrne appeared, the Government had begun making a series of in camera submissions to him of materials from the Justice Department's Watergate investigation. The judge disclosed these materials to the defense, which then revealed them to the press. The information came in snippets—a portion of someone's grand jury testimony one day, an excerpt of someone else's FBI interview the next and so on. The trickle of information became a steady stream, and reporters began calling the trial "Watergate West." The courtroom was so packed that spectators sat on top of file cabinets and perched on ledges to hear the latest disclosures. It developed that the White House had put together its own investigative team consisting of various Watergate figures—Howard Hunt, Gordon Liddy, the White House Plumbers and the Cuban operatives of Bay of Pigs infamy—who committed several illegal acts, including the burglary of Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office. During the course of these disclosures, Nixon reluctantly requested and got Ehrlichman's resignation. It turned out later that Ehrlichman signed off on the Ellsberg psychiatrist burglary, albeit on the condition of assurances that it would not be traceable, and Nixon almost certainly knew of it in advance. The White House even sat by while an innocent man—an African-American, of course, and no doubt one of "the usual suspects"--was convicted of the burglary. He confessed to the crime while under police interrogation, and the prosecutor accepted his guilty plea as part of a plea bargain. Chalk up another crime as solved! The Nixon White House law and order gang must have enjoyed a good laugh over that one.
Shortly after Judge Byrne disclosed the first Watergate-related in camera submissions, the defense filed a motion to dismiss the case for governmental misconduct. That motion was regularly amended as new disclosures were made, and it eventually included the White House approach to Judge Byrne and the psychiatrist's office burglary as well as more mundane irregularities like missing wiretap records and discovery violations. Repeatedly we asked for an evidentiary inquiry into these matters, but to no avail. We wanted the whole White House gang, including Nixon, hauled into court so we could question them ourselves. We protested that we should not have to defend at one and the same time against governmental attacks on the defendants made both within and without the courtroom, that the governmental misconduct impaired our ability to defend against the charges, that the court should resolve the issues that misconduct raised before the trial proceeded further, and that we should not be limited to second-hand investigative reports compiled by Government attorneys in pursuing our motion to dismiss. We even conducted a partial boycott of the case to protest the refusal to accord us an evidentiary hearing. For the last part of the Government's rebuttal case, while the jury was present, we sat, arms crossed, behind a defense counsel table that was stripped bare—no pens, papers or books of any kind—and remained mute, making no objections during direct testimony of the rebuttal witnesses and declining the opportunity to cross-examine them. Some thought the protest immature; we thought it was an appropriate response to what the White House had done and what the court was doing and that it was a good way to bring public pressure to bear on the matter. (By that point, we were fairly confident we had won the case, and we did not regard the rebuttal witnesses as damaging.)
Just before we were to discuss jury instructions with the judge and as we were preparing to go to the United States Court of Appeals on a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to force an evidentiary hearing and ruling on our governmental misconduct dismissal motion, Judge Byrne announced he was prepared to rule on that motion to dismiss. Since he had refused to conduct an evidentiary hearing, his ruling would be made on the basis of what was already before him, mostly the Government's in camera submissions. He gave us the option of going to the jury for the verdict before he made his ruling. We were given a few minutes to decide. The lawyers smelled an imminent victory and wanted the ruling right away, Ellsberg was ambivalent, perhaps sensing that a dismissal on legal grounds would not constitute complete vindication, and Russo wanted to wait for the jury decision. In these pressure cooker circumstances, the lawyers prevailed—it is doubtful they should have—and the judge promptly read a prepared ruling dismissing all charges on the basis of egregious governmental misconduct violating the fifth amendment's due process of law guarantee. Noticeably absent from his list of governmental actions constituting misconduct was the approach the White House had made to him. The case was over.
The Pentagon Papers trial remains one of very few in which criminal charges have been dismissed for governmental misconduct violating the substantive due process guarantee of fundamental fairness. But the dismissal precluded any hope of judicial investigation into the White House approach to Judge Byrne. The U.S. Senate's Watergate later investigation touched on it, but it was not a primary concern there. Thus this extraordinary ex parte approach to a judge sitting in a highly publicized, politically sensitive case raised questions which remain unanswered.
1. Did the approach to Judge Byrne represent a White House effort to influence his rulings on disclosure to the defense of the submissions which the Government was about to make in camera to him as trial judge and which were highly embarrassing, to say the least, to the White House? Nixon White House officials apparently could not control Justice Department lawyers who made the in camera submissions to Judge Byrne, but they may have hoped Judge Byrne could be influenced to rule them irrelevant to the charges in the case and thus to refuse to disclose them to the defense. They may have hoped that he would refuse to disclose the in camera submissions either because he feared losing the prospective appointment as FBI director or because he feared the White House would retaliate by disclosing his secret meetings with Ehrlichman and Nixon. As far as we know, Judge Byrne disclosed to the defense all the Watergate-related materials which were submitted to him in camera over a period of several weeks. In fact, it appears he treated them like political hot potatoes and passed them on to the defense at his first opportunity. Yet I've always wondered what the judge would have done had the report of his meetings with Ehrlichman and Nixon arrived in the case by way of one of the Government's in camera submissions rather than in a published Washington Post story.
2. Was the leak to the Washington Post that produced the story on the White House approach to Judge Byrne revenge for his rulings releasing the in camera submissions to the defense and thus to the public? Was it an effort to divert attention from the White House's misconduct to Judge Byrne's conduct? Was it a deliberate effort to bring a premature end to the Pentagon Papers trial on the ground that the appearance of justice had been impaired, thereby shutting down the conduit the trial had become, as "Watergate West," for Watergate-related disclosures? Or was it all of these?
3. Did the White House approach influence Judge Byrne's rulings in any other way? The Government relied on the top secret security classification of the Papers to establish the unauthorized transmission and copying element of the espionage offense. Before the trial began, the judge had ruled that the defense would be allowed to challenge the "classifiability" of the Pentagon Papers to defeat this element of the espionage charges. Roughly speaking, that meant we would be allowed to show that the Papers were not even arguably subject to proper classification or that significant classification procedures were not followed, but that we would not be permitted to show merely that the Papers were incorrectly classified. The defense proceeded on the basis of that ruling throughout the case--until we put on the stand our expert on classification. Inexplicably, the judge sustained Government objections to the classifiability questions and indicated he had never made a binding ruling allowing such questions. Later, after the revelation of the White House approach to the judge, the thought crossed our minds that it simply would not do for a future FBI director to have made a judicial ruling allowing criminal defendants to attack the classification system.
(This surprising turn of events was particularly painful for me since I had, at the last minute, been assigned the job of examining our classification expert after Leonard Boudin threw up his hands in exasperation with this rather stubborn and pedantic witness, and the judge's change of ruling left me with nothing to examine him about. Largely because we had a considerable investment in this expert—putting him up in Los Angeles and paying him a stipend for several months—we decided, over a weekend recess, not to waste the money and to convert him into an expert witness on the national defense component of the espionage charges. Predictably, this was a mistake, and one we did not need to risk since we had many capable national defense expert witnesses. A couple of the answers this witness gave on prosecution cross-examination were absurd. Even the expert's wife, in coming to his defense, was reduced to: "Ask a silly question, get a silly answer." To this day, I have never been so relieved to see a witness get off the stand.)
That the White House's approach to Judge Byrne inevitably prompted questions about its influence on his rulings demonstrated that it irretrievably besmirched the appearance of justice. The rules surrounding judicial disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, ex parte judicial contacts and judicial recusal are, of course, intended to secure the appearance of justice as much as its substance. Judge Byrne surely knew that, and yet he was adamant that his own disclaimer was alone sufficient to put an end to any and all questions of impropriety.
Judge Byrne should have refused to meet with White House officials during the trial. Having met with them, he should have disclosed the meetings. He did neither. Judge Byrne has had a long and, by all accounts, highly successful tenure on the federal district court bench, but this early lapse in judgment may have cost him dearly in terms of his career, for he was both highly capable and, at the time, very young as federal judges go, 39 if memory serves. Surely he could have been expected to go on to bigger things.
In fairness to Judge Byrne, he probably did not realize he had been compromised until fairly late, probably only when the first of those in camera submissions about involvement of Watergate figures in the case arrived in his chambers but perhaps not until the Washington Post story appeared. He could have avoided that by doing the proper thing in the first place. Yet I don't think many federal judges at the time would have refused a summons from the White House to meet with a top White House aide, much less the President, particularly if the invitation was accompanied by an assurance the meeting was unrelated to pending cases, as Judge Byrne said his was. And I doubt many federal judges in those days thought the White House capable of improprieties as blatant as setting up a federal judge in an effort to manipulate his rulings in a pending case. Most federal judges of the day looked askance at leftist lawyers who claimed political considerations were influencing the institution of criminal prosecutions and the way they were tried. Early in the case, Judge Byrne made it clear that he would not countenance any claim that the trial was political. He insisted the case was merely another ordinary criminal prosecution and that it would be tried as that.
The Watergate era, including the Pentagon Papers trial, shattered the blind faith many had in the integrity of the White House, the Justice Department and the federal government in general. A new skepticism about governmental respect for the truth and the law prevailed across much of the land. Courts rejected governmental pleas for a "trust us to do the right thing" approach, and they explicitly said they were doing so. But this healthy state of affairs did not survive the 1970s. One wonders now whether any of the lessons of that time—above all, the lessons of the Viet Nam War—have been remembered.
Best wishes,
Peter Young
Los Angeles, California
2. The Article by Scott Horton
Date: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 1:51 PM
Dear Dean Velvel, I thought you might be interested in my recent article in the NY Law Journal.
New York Law Journal, Aug. 16, 2005, p. A2.
Washington, Honor and the Treatment of Prisoners
By Scott Horton
Two weeks ago, a trio of powerful conservative Republicans - Senators John Warner, Lindsey Graham and John McCain - drew the ire of the Bush Administration. They put forward legislation to outlaw torture and the cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees taken in the War on Terror. Their measure instantly drew backing from a legion of retired military officers and veterans. At the same time they joined with a number of other prominent Republicans in calling for a serious investigation of the mounting reports of abuse which were launched some 14 months ago with the first photographs from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The White House's reaction was swift and unequivocal: if the anti-torture act passed, it would meet with a presidential veto - the first of the Bush administration. After a quick head count showed a likely defeat for the White House, the defense authorizations act was withdrawn from the Senate floor to allow the Administration time to pressure wavering Republicans. In the words of one observer, a battle is now raging "for the soul of the Republican party."[1]
In putting his initiatives forward, John McCain said: "We are Americans. We hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment no matter how terribly evil or awful [our adversaries] may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, and it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for a lot more than that in the world: a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad."[2] As a POW tortured in the Hanoi Hilton, John McCain speaks to the issue with moral authority.
The issue of officially sanctioned torture and the introduction of a new arsenal of interrogation techniques that embrace cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment has been on the nation's front-burner for over a year, with remarkably little progress or resolution. The efforts by Senators McCain, Warner and Graham to set clear rules marks an important opportunity for public engagement. As McCain says, the question goes to our national identity. For what values do Americans, as a nation, stand? There is a clear historical answer to this question, for the question of treatment of detainees was fundamental to the Founding Fathers and it played a critical role in defining the nation and the traditions of its armed forces. Much of this history and tradition has been neglected in the current debate.
For George Washington, honor was a vital concept. Today the term may evoke the frivolous image of gentlemen dueling over a personal slight. But for Washington, guided by an education in the classics and a strong admiration for the Stoic philosophers and writers such as Cicero, Seneca and Cato (especially as popularized by Joseph Addison), honor had a profoundly moral and social context. In Washington's way of thinking, honor was a sacred thread that tied the fundamental values of a society to the conduct of an individual. "Honorable" conduct properly reflected the values of the society; conversely, conduct was "dishonorable" if it was untrue to these values. The concept of honor was especially important in war - an aspect of the human condition which, in Washington's view, provided a real crucible in which to test the moral character of a man.
From the outset of the Revolutionary War, Washington faced a dilemma: his British adversaries declined to accept the Continental Army as a regular military adversary and General Washington as its commander. Instead, they viewed the revolutionary Americans as disloyal or treasonous insurrectionists not entitled to the rights of honorable combatants (a position essentially identical to that recently articulated by the Pentagon with respect to insurgents in Iraq). American soldiers who fell into British hands were dealt with severely; many faced brutal punishments and were detained under inhumane conditions. In September 1775, Americans learned with horror that all 31 prisoners taken by the British at the battle of Bunker Hill had died in captivity. Of the 2,607 Americans taken prisoner at the capitulation of Fort Washington in September 1776, all but 800 had died inexplicably by 1778 - most of the deaths occurring aboard the infamous prison hulks the British maintained in New York harbor. But American public opinion was particularly rattled by reports that in February 1777, seven American soldiers who surrendered following a skirmish at Drake's Farm (in present day Metuchen, New Jersey) had been brutally murdered, their brains crushed with musket butts. The British commander denied any wrongdoing. Public opinion, and voices in the Continental Congress, demanded retribution for these acts. [3]
Washington saw things differently. For him it was imperative that America not descend to the level of the British. Rather, prisoners taken in combat should be treated in the manner that the ideals of the nascent American republic required: "Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands."[4] The general rule, fixed by Washington and retained as doctrine by the US military until the commencement of the present conflict, was that those taken prisoner would be given housing, food and medical attention in no respect inferior to that afforded American soldiers. Also, he insisted on firm respect for the religious convictions of those detained. "While we are contending for our own liberty, we should be very cautious of violating the rights of conscience in others, ever considering that God alone is the judge of the hearts of men, and to Him only in this case are they answerable."[5]
Washington's writings show that, while dictated by "honor," these policies had four specific underpinnings: (1) To bear witness to the ideals of the American Revolution; (2) To win over the "hearts and minds" of the adversary; (3) To avoid the vicious circle of retribution, which would most likely serve to make the war more brutal and inhumane for Royalist and Revolutionary alike - to shame the British into more civilized conduct by affording a superior moral example; and
(4) To maintain good order, discipline and morale in the Continental Army itself. In all of these points, Washington reveals himself a practical general capable of wielding the ideology of the American Revolution to his tactical advantage. At the Battle of Trenton, a group of elite German mercenary units fell captive to the Americans. Washington wrote, "If proper pains are taken to convince them how preferable the situation of their countrymen, the inhabitants of those counties, is to theirs, I think they may be sent back in the spring, so fraught with a love of liberty, and property too, that they may create a disgust to the service among the remainder of the foreign troops and widen that breach which is already opened between them and the British." [6] Most of the Hessians were quartered in the then largely German-speaking area around Reading, Pennsylvania. Subsequent studies have shown that Washington's objective was accomplished.[7] These Hessians came to see the advantage of settling and becoming American citizens, which they did, nearly to the man. Indeed, a number subsequently enlisted as soldiers in the Continental Army. The advantages of citizenship in a democratic state compared with highly repressive service under a German feudal despot (be it the Landgrave of Hesse or the Hanoverian king in England) were plain enough. Moreover, as the war reached its end, the British forces were plagued by desertion on a significant scale. This certainly would not have occurred but for the foresight of Washington's policy on the humane treatment of prisoners.
From his experience commanding troops in the French and Indian War, Washington saw that soldiers who mistreat captives generally also exhibit disrespect for command authority and military discipline, and are, therefore, highly undesirable soldiers. For this reason, the rule of humane treatment was also essential to military discipline and morale. Consequently, Washington favored swift, harsh punishment to soldiers who mistreated those under our power. "Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [of them]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause."[8] Washington promised similar severity to officers who failed to heed these rules, warning that in so doing they would bring "shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country." The war, said Washington, depended on a "conciliation of the affections" of the adversary "to the great interests of America." [9]
For Washington, the moral high ground was America's decisive tactical advantage. In a war against the world's greatest military power, in which citizen soldiers faced seasoned professionals, it brought victory when defeat seemed a foregone conclusion. As David Hackett Fischer writes in his Pulitzer Prize-winning account, Washington's Crossing: "In a desperate struggle they found a way to defeat a formidable enemy, not merely once at Trenton, but many times in twelve weeks of continued combat. They reversed the momentum of the war. They improvised a new way of war that grew into an American tradition. And they chose a policy of humanity that aligned the conduct of the war with the values of the Revolution." [10]
Washington's policies concerning the treatment of detainees, fixed for the first time at the Battle of Trenton - that Christmas miracle of 1776 which brought hope in that darkest phase of the war - constituted the military doctrine of the United States for 226 years. It is entirely appropriate, at this juncture, to focus attention on how those policies came to be overturned in 2002-03. Certainly, one can have differing views on the efficacy and morality of certain intelligence-gathering techniques. However, it is clear beyond any doubt that in Senators McCain, Graham and Warner, the ideas of the Founding Fathers have again found a voice on Capitol Hill.


text:
Download of the Day: a-squared Free 126.96.36.199
Our Download of the Day today is a-squared Free 220.127.116.11.
Security must not be a privilege. Under this motto, Emsi Software provides the Malware scanner a-squared Free completely free of charge for private use. But it is not a very limited version, it is a full tool to clean your computer from Malware. Not only Spywares, as detected by classic Anti-Spyware programs, but also especially Trojans, Backdoors, Worms, Dialers, Keyloggers and a lot of other destructive pests, which makes it dangerous to surf the web.
The advantages to you:
- Frees your PC from Malware
- Quarantine for emergency
- Exceptionally easy to use
a-squared reliably detects:
- Trojans, Backdoors, Keyloggers
- Spyware, Adware, TrackingCookies
- Worms, Bots, Viruses
- Dialers

subset: commoncrawl


text: The Great Divide January 29, 2013 08:35 PM Tweet California dairy producers say they've fallen victim to a milk pricing formula that's failed to capture the true value of milk and its components. Since 2010, the cost of feeding herds has increased 55% for the state's 1,600 dairies. TAGS: Marketing, Overseas December 18, 2014 By Catherine Merlo Farm Journal's Milk Western and Online Editor Email California dairy producers, processors clash over proposed regulatory pricing changes. Hit hard by record feed costs and frustrated with milk prices that lag behind the national average, California dairy producers continue to seek pricing system changes they hope will lead them back to profitability. At least three propositions to alter how milk prices are determined have appeared in recent months. All are opposed by the state's dairy processors. Bonus Content Testimony from CDFA's Dec. 21 hearing CDI CDFA Hearing Testimony Council Testimony from Milk Producers Dairy Institute of Calif. Testimony Among the proposals is the controversial quest to adjust the whey factor in the state's Class 4b pricing formula. Producer groups have sought for two years to have the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) change the formula for the cheese byproduct so it more closely tracks the higher Class III levels in the Federal Milk Marketing Orders. CDFA has approved two increases, but producer groups argue they are inadequate. They maintain that dairies are losing hundreds of millions of dollars from the undervalued 4b formula. In the latest whey round, California Dairies, Inc. (CDI), Dairy Farmers of America–Western Area Council (DFA) and Land O'Lakes (LOL) petitioned CDFA in early December to again consider modifying the 4b formula. CDFA Secretary Karen Ross quickly denied that request but called for a Dec. 21 hearing to consider temporary price increases, not just for the 4b price but for all five classes of milk regulated by her agency. The hearing drew testimony from some two dozen producer and processor interests. Producer groups proposed increases in California's overall pay price of 75¢ to $1 per cwt. for the February to July 2013 period. The Dairy Institute of California, which represents the state's processors, proposed a three-month increase of 10¢ per cwt. for Classes 4a and 4b milk beginning in February. Bill Schiek, testifying for the Dairy Institute, said dairy plants simply don't have the margins to support large unilateral revenue transfers to producers. He added that processors can't get such revenues from the market in today's competitive environment. "Milk prices are not, and should not be, determined by milk production costs alone, but by supply and demand in the marketplace," Schiek said. "There is no way to raise California's regulated minimum prices without doing some damage to the processing side of the industry and consequently hurting producers in the long run." The 4b price is the minimum price handlers must pay. According to David Ahlem, vice president of dairy procurement and policy for Hilmar Cheese Company, nothing prevents handlers from paying more for 4b milk and co-ops from asking for more. "Many processors, such as Hilmar Cheese, pay much more than the minimum 4b price for milk," Ahlem says. "When the 4b price increases, our producers who receive premiums see their pay prices decrease as their premiums are redistributed to producers around the state via the pool. Almost all of our producers made less money in 2012 as a result of the last two 4b increases." At press time, CDFA's decision was expected by late January for a Feb. 1 start of short-term price adjustments. Those would be in effect for no more than six months. [Update: On Jan. 22, CDFA announced an average increase of 25.1 cents per cwt. among the state's five classes of milk . Read more here.] Processors have staunchly opposed regulated whey price boosts—arguing that milk prices are not, and should not be, determined by milk production costs alone but by supply and demand in the marketplace. Still, dairy producers hope a temporary price boost may buy enough time for a second whey-value effort to take effect. That endeavor is a legislative proposal introduced Dec. 3 in the California State Legislature. Assembly Bill 31 would keep the whey value in California's 4b formula within 80% of the regulated minimum price for whey in surrounding states. Western United Dairymen (WUD) sponsored the bill, which was introduced by Assemblyman Richard Pan (D-Sacramento). That alignment could give California producers a price increase of 25¢ to $1.50 per cwt., "which would have kept people in business," says dairy producer Tom Barcellos, who also serves as WUD's president. "Too many of our dairy families have fallen victim to a milk pricing formula that has failed to capture the true value of the milk and its components in the face of extraordinary feed costs," Barcellos says. "Without dairy producers, California has little need for dairy processors." Processors oppose Pan's bill. "It would be a disaster for the cheese industry," Schiek says. "We will see cheese plants close down or move out of state. They won't be able to recover the revenue they would have to pay into the pool." The third major push for change involves a proposal to move California's regulated dairy pricing from a state-governed system to a Federal Milk Marketing Order. CDI, DFA and LOL have jointly commissioned a study to investigate the impacts of adopting federal milk pricing regulations in the Golden State. The three dairy cooperatives represent 80% of California's milk production. The Federal Order study, by Mark Stephenson of the University of Wisconsin–Madison and Chuck Nicholson of Pennsylvania State University, won't be finalized until March. A Federal Order would require producer approval and take at least a year to be implemented. Processor interests say it's not a regulated pricing system that's causing California's dairy challenges. High feed costs, fueled by 2012's drought and growing global demand, are the primary culprit behind dairies' financial difficulties, Schiek says. Financial pressures facing dairies aren't unique to California but are playing out in other parts of the U.S., Europe, South America, Australia and "any region where grain concentrates are fed," he adds. "Unfortunately, our regulated pricing system is not capable of mitigating such events, nor was it designed to do so," Schiek says. "Real relief must come from the market." Proposed price relief for California's dairies won't come soon enough for some producers. "Unfortunately, another wave of producers is going out and selling off their dairies," Barcellos says. "There are more horror stories that are going to hit." Back to news


text:
Concrete Buffer Goes Wild! [VIDEO]
How many construction workers does it take to stop a rogue concrete buffer? According to this video it's 16 and it's hilarious to see how!
Honestly, the commentary (which is slightly NSFW) is almost as funny as watching the scene on it's own.
We sort of feel bad laughing at these guys just trying to do their job, but then again, if they watched the video, they would probably laugh too!


text:
Shares of Marathon Petroleum (NYSE:MPC) climbed more than 7% to an all-time high of $59.74 on Monday after the petroleum refiner said it inked a deal to buy BP's (NYSE:BP) 451,000 barrel per day Texas City refinery.
Continue Reading Below
The purchase will run Marathon up to $2.5 billion, including a base price of $598 million plus inventories estimated at $1.2 billion. The company may also be responsible for another $700 million over six years, subject to certain conditions.
The move is part of larger efforts by BP to shed global assets as it struggles to cover the cost of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill that is expected to cost the British oil giant billions of dollars.
Under the terms of the agreement, Findlay, Ohio-based Marathon Petroleum will also acquire three interstate NGL pipelines originating at the refinery, shopper history on BP's Colonial Pipeline Company representing 50,000 barrels per day, four light product terminals in Florida, North Carolina and Tennessee, retail marketing contract assignments for about 1,200 branded sites representing nearly 64,000 bpd of gas sales and a 1,040 megawatt cogeneration facility.
"This world-scale refinery and related assets complement our current geographic footprint and align well with our strategic initiative of growing in existing and contiguous markets to enhance our portfolio," Marathon Petroleum CEO Gary Heminger said in a statement.
The transaction is expected to be accretive to Marathon's earnings in the first year of operation and Heminger said it will provide the company the ability to capture synergies across its existing Gulf Coast operations, while expanding its retail presence in the southeast U.S., closer to export markets.
The BP Texas City refinery, one of the largest and most complex in the U.S., is strategically positioned to provide products throughout the Gulf of Mexico, Midwest and Southeast. The facility has the ability to process a wide range of crude oils and has access to mid-continent and Canadian crudes which are often more price-advantageous due to pipelines and cargoes.
BP first announced it would put the refinery, which was the site of a 2005 explosion that killed 15 people, on the block in 2011.
The oil giant has said it is trying to dispose of as much as $38 billion in assets by the end of 2013. It has already recorded some $32 billion in asset sales since the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.


text:
Smart: Graduating As Valedictorian Of An Ivy League School; Not Smart: Plagiarizing Part Of Your Speech From A Famous Comedian
from the did-he-think-no-one-would-notice dept
It has come to our attention that a portion of our Valedictorian's remarks at this year's School of General Studies Class Day was taken from a comedy routine by Patton Oswalt. As an institution of higher learning that places a core value on respect for the works of others, we were surprised and disappointed to have learned of this matter today. Columbia University and the School of General Studies do not condone or permit the use of someone else's work without proper citation. The student speaker has appropriately issued an apology to his classmates and to Mr. Oswalt for failing to provide such attribution.Oswalt, for his part, wrote on his own site that while the kid apologized, he wonders about what sort of valedictorian would copy in such a manner:
Brian Corman apologized to me. Flat-out admitted his thievery, his stupidity. Owned it all. Good man. Still makes me wonder what he might have done to become valedictorian -- I mean, if he's willing to steal material for something as inconsequential as a speech, how rubbery did his boundaries become when his GPA and future career were on the line? Oh well.Quite a story all around, and it raises a bunch of different points that we'll hit in bullet form:
- Joke copying: This is a popular topic that we've discussed a few times in the past. While it certainly does piss off comedians, they seem to ignore the fact that it's not just quite common among comedians, but, historically, it was considered quite normal. That's because people realized that there is no monopoly on being funny -- and that it's usually the timing and the delivery that matter much more than the joke itself (which can be seen in the clips above -- where Oswalt's version comes off much funnier than Corman's copy).
- Social mores: But, more importantly, it's the social cost to copying that keeps this from getting too far out of line. In the comic world, comedians who have a reputation as big time joke copiers tend to get shunned. That's not to say that many haven't been successful still, but there is an effort within the community to self police, without any sort of legal regime needed.
- Reputation: Related to that, what this really comes down to is a reputational issue. While Oswalt is wrong to call Corman's actions "stealing," he's right to question the kid's decision, and raise questions about his reputation. For a long time, now, Corman will be tagged as the guy who didn't have the good sense to (a) know that it's inappropriate to copy someone else's work in a valedictiorian speech (b) realize that people would notice and (c) to realize that it would get a lot of attention, including a condemnation from the original comedian in the first place.


text: Currently REMI repository does not seem to have the latest php for the 5.3 series. It seems to only have version php 5.4 series. I need to update my current php 5.3.19 from REMI repository to the latest php 5.3.21. Unfortunately REMI repository does not have php 5.3.21. Is there another repository that I can use to update php 5.3.19 to php 5.3.21? Really need advice on this issue. Is anybody else also experiencing this issue? P.V.Anthony


text:
New Bike Co-op Strives to Take BW, Berea for a Ride
With the price of gasoline skyrocketing, it's no wonder the Baldwin Wallace community is making strides in breaking out of the "cycle" of driving cars on campus.
Now more than ever, bicycles can be seen throughout campus as students, faculty and staff embrace wellness and a concern for the environment. This year twice as many students as anticipated brought bikes to campus, creating the need to add racks.
In response to the growing trend, a new initiative has been introduced that will have big implications for the campus community.
The Baldwin Wallace University Bike Cooperative opened its door on Saturday, April 9. Located behind 378 Front St., the facility is part of a large-scale project that includes bike rentals (for an hour, semester or year), sales of new and used parts, community fund-raising events and other engagement activities.
Making Sustainability, Wellness a Priority
One of several sustainability initiatives on campus, the Bike Co-op encourages participants to get involved.
"With the sustainability movement in full gear on campuses across the nation, co-ops are becoming more and more common," said Bike Co-op Shop Manager Ashton Cortright, a business administration 3/2 accounting graduate student who is spearheading BW's program.
"Over the past year or so I have seen a huge increase in the number of bikes on campus. Not only is riding a bike fun, it is a really quick way to get to class and is a healthy alternative to driving," she noted.
Bridging BW, Berea
A major component of the co-op will be to foster ties between the campus community and the residents of Berea.
One way this will be achieved is through Social Rides. Participants will depart from the BW Bike Shop and travel to local businesses. Other trips will journey through the Cleveland Metroparks North Rocky River trail to Lakewood and the Lake to Lake trail in Middleburg Heights.
During these rides, co-op volunteers will help participants learn proper biking techniques and traffic skills.
Bike Registration Round-ups will be another important community event sponsored by the co-op. Partnering with the Berea Police Department, BW volunteers will register local bikes with identification stickers and ownership forms that will be kept on file at the co-op. These registration events will deter bike theft in the Berea community and give bike owners a security net if their bike is lost or stolen.
Future plans to increase community visibility will involve the Berea Children's Home and the Berea School District. These programs will promote bike safety among children and teens.
Cortright went on to say that Berea is an ideal place to bike because it has wonderful bike lanes on Front Street and the Metroparks. Starting the co-op was just a way to get people to think about biking instead of driving and to explore life outside of campus.
For more information about the co-op, contact Ashton Cortright at email@example.com.


text:
Please click this internet hyperlink to read the entire post over at Call to the Pen
Unnamed (eg: fake) sources are not reporting that the Nationals have shut down Dan Haren, and he will likely miss most, if not all of the 2013 season. Haren is said to be "not too happy" with the decision. No one reports that this was a joint decision between manager Davey Johnson, pitching coach Steve McCatty, and general manager Mike Rizzo. Johnson has been quoted as saying, "My job is to do what's best for the player. And this is what's best," while Rizzo added, "This is a plan we put in place, this is just the culmination of that plan. I believe in my heart that it's the right thing to do for the player and the right thing to do for the player is the right thing to do for the franchise." The Nationals believe they are doing what is best for the long-term viability of their organization, as well as Haren's health, but given Haren's recent comments, the pitcher does not seem to be totally on board with the decision: "I don't know if I'm ever gonna accept it to be honest," Haren said of the plan to end his season prematurely. "It's something that I'm not happy about at all. That's not why I play the game. I play the game to be a good teammate and win."


text:
Twenty-seven people, including 18 children, have been killed in a shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, according to the Associated Press.
Another person was found dead at 36 Yogananda St. in Newtown, sources told The Courant.
Many of the shootings at the school took place in a kindergarten classroom, sources said. One entire classroom is unaccounted for.
The shooter is dead, and the situation is secure, said State Police Lt. J. Paul Vance.
CNN identified the shooter as Ryan Lanza, but authorities have not confirmed the name. The AP reported that the suspect is 24 and that the suspect's younger brother is in custody.
Another official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation was still under way, said the gunman apparently had two guns.
A law enforcement official in Washington said the attacker was a 20-year-old man with ties to the school and that one of the guns was a .223-caliber rifle.
Public records show that Ryan Lanza lived at 36 Yogananda St. at one point, and he is also listed as living at 1313 Grand St. in Hoboken, N.J. Police are searching that residence as well, sources say.
Lanza was a "pretty quiet" student at Newtown High School said, Chris Fulcher, 18, who lives in the Yagananda Street neighborhood and used to ride the bus with Lanza.
Three people were brought to Danbury Hospital, but their condition is unknown. The emergency room is on lockdown.
Shortly after 9:40 a.m., police reported that a shooter was in the main office of the school. A person in one room had "numerous gunshot wounds," police said.
Groups of students — some crying, some holding hands — were being escorted away from the school by their teachers. Some students were still in the school at 10:30 a.m., parents said.
Police were still searching the school at 11 a.m., and police dogs were brought in. Around noon, the triage area was broken down, stretchers were taken away and the SWAT team left the building.
Sandy Hook Elementary has nearly 700 students in kindergarten through fourth grade. Its doors are locked at 9:30 a.m., and visitors are required to sign in, according to the school's website.
School and local emergency officials were accounting for the children, who were released to their parents. Some parents were sequestered at the Sandy Hook fire department, directly in front of the school.
Other frustrated parents were desperately trying to get information from officials as they searched the school.
Vanessa Bajraliu, a 9-year-old fourth grader, heard the shots.
"I saw policemen -- lots of policemen in the hallway with guns," she said. "The police took us out of the school. We were told to hold each others' hands and to close our eyes. We opened our eyes when we were outside."
Her brother, 17-year-old Mergim Bajraliu, a senior at Newtown High School, was at his nearby home when he heard shots, he said. He first went to a neighbor's house.
"Then we heard sirens," he said.
He rushed to the school on foot and saw a girl being carried out, he said. She looked badly injured. Another girl had blood on her face, he said.
Mergim soon found his sister and took her away from the scene.
Parent Richard Wilford said his Sandy Hook second-grader, Richie, heard what he described as "pans falling" when gunshots rang out. He said that his son told him that the teacher went to go check, came back in and locked the door and told the students to stand in the corner.
"What does a parent think about coming to a school where there's a shooting" It's the most terrifying moment of a parent's life … you have no idea," said Wilford.
Brendan Murray, a 9-year-old 4th grader, said he was in the gym with his class when they heard "lots of banging." He said the teachers put the students in a nearby closet where they stayed for about 15 minutes before police officers told them to leave the building.
The boy said the students ran down a hallway where there were police at every door. He said "lots of people were crying."
Eight-year-old Alexis Wasik, a third-grader at the school, said police were checking everybody inside the school before they were escorted to the firehouse.
"We had to walk with a partner," she said.
One child leaving the school said that there was shattered glass everywhere. A police officer ran into the classroom and told them to run outside and keep going until the reach the firehouse.
Audra Barth, who was walking away from the school with her first-grade son and third-grade daughter, says a teacher took first-graders into the restroom after bullets came through the window.
Students at nearby Newtown High School on Berkshire Road were stunned Friday when they learned of the shootings.
Senior Alex Buttery said when she learned the shootings had taken place on Dickinson Drive – where the school is located – "I immediately thought of Sandy Hook," she said. "It's devastating."
Buttery, walking out of the school Friday afternoon with her friend Clare Donnelly, said she'd cried a lot today.
Donnelly said "it's hard to wrap your head around" the shooting. "It's difficult to watch [young children] go through this."
Junior Renee Henriquez said she was "shocked, speechless" by the shootings.
Buttery said she had been texting back and forth with her mother all day. "I went there," she said of Sandy Hook School. "I know the teachers. I'm just wondering who it is." Her mother, she said, was very emotional. They "know a lot of neighbors who go to Sandy Hook."
NHS student Stefanie Carr said she was having a hard time processing what had happened. "I just couldn't process how I felt. I'm still trying to get over it."
All of the students had the same question: "Why someone would do that to the children."
Newtown United Methodist Church opened the doors around noon after ministers there heard of the tragedy. Brad Tefft, a bereavement minister at the church, drove in and opened the doors.
"I better get down there. It's in our neighborhood," Tefft remembered thinking.
He created a sign that said "prayer vigil," which he placed out by the street, and also put a sign on the door saying sanctuary open.
"We are taught to listen and offer that cold cup of water when necessary," Tefft said.
As word spread of the magnitude of the tragedy in Newtown, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy talked on the telephone Friday with President Obama about the incident.
The conversation was part of the federal, state, and local response to the shootings.
"The governor is in the room with the families,'' Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy's senior adviser, told Capitol Watch shortly before 1:30 p.m. Friday. "He is attempting to make sure they get the information they need. It is an unspeakable scene.''
In Washington, D.C., House Speaker John Boehner ordered flags at the U.S. Capitol to be flown at half-staff.
State officials reacted with shock and alarm to the shootings at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, where multiple people were killed this morning by a gunman.
House Republican leader Larry Cafero and Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams were both stunned upon hearing that 27 had been killed. Cafero put his hand over his mouth in an immediate reaction.
"The governor is on scene,'' Doba said. "He has spoken to the Department of Homeland Security and theFBI, which has pledged any resources we need.''
The state departments of public health, education, mental health and addiction services, and the state police are all working on the incident.
Incoming U.S. Rep. Elizabeth Esty, who represents Newtown as part of the 5th Congressional District, said, "As a mother, I can only begin to imagine what the students, parents, teachers and staff of Sandy Hook Elementary must be experiencing. My thoughts and prayers go out to everyone impacted by this horrific tragedy. While details are still emerging, I hope for the safety and well being of the children, teachers and staff at Sandy Hook Elementary and for the Newtown community.''
Incoming U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy arrived at the firehouse around 2:30 p.m. and went to talk with parents.
Afternoon buses and kindergarten has been cancelled. The entire Newton district is on lockdown, and other school districts took similar measures across the state.
In West Hartford, Superintendent Karen List sent a recorded message to families Friday noting an increased police presence at town schools after the Newtown shootings.
"It's really for reassurance," List said. Counselors will also be available for students at the schools, and West Hartford administrators are now creating a set of talking points for parents if they decide to explain the shootings to their children over the weekend.
A meeting of Farmington Valley-area superintendents that was scheduled for Friday was canceled.
"We need to be in our districts," List said. "We need to be communicating with our families, we need to be supporting our faculty and children."
Southington schools were placed on a precautionary "passive lockdown" in which exterior doors are locked, Assistant Superintendent Karen Smith said. "We're asking all administrators to be vigilant and to be aware of what is going on."
In Waterbury, Wilby, Crosby and Kennedy high schools have canceled Friday's afternoon and night games, according to the school system. Other after-school activities for Waterbury schools will go on as planned, but there will be police on the premises.
Bridgeport Superintendant of Schools Paul G. Vallas has canceled all after school programs except for the Central High School basketball game.
All Winterfest Hartford activities in Bushnell Park in Hartford will be closed today. The skating rink is closed effective immediately and will re-open tomorrow on regular schedule.
The only mass shooting in the U.S. with more than 27 killed since the 1950s took place on April 16, 2007, when a student named Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in Blackburg, Va., before shooting himself.
- Staff writers David Owens, Dave Altimari, Josh Kovner, Marc O'Connell, Bill Leukhardt, Chris Keating, Samaia Hernandez, Denise Buffa, Steve Goode, Brian Dowling, Hilda Munoz, Jenny Wilson and Stephen Busemeyer contributed to this report. Associated Press reports are included.


text:
The maps and data of BGR are sold or mediated by the geodata catalog productcenter of BGR .
Link to the geodata catalog Produktcenter:
The printed version of the products are available at a low price and digital freely available in different sizes and formats (PDF, TIFF, JPG , as well as ESRI Shape).
Printed maps and digital data sets
Printed and digital publications
Products not covered by our referencing systems can be found in the products of the specialist areas by using the left-hand navigation bar in the specialist topic sub-menus:


text:
Dear Dr. Laura,
Last week I was invited to attend the Bat Mitzvah for a young Jewish WOMAN. I say "woman" because her whole community followed thousands of years of Jewish religious tradition and declared her to be a woman under Jewish law. The age of a Bat Mitzvah, the age when a girl is declared to be "woman" under Jewish law is around 12 or 13. In New Mexico where I lived for 20 years the legal "age of consent" in that Catholic traditional state was 12. Until feminism declared "all sex is rape" in the middle of the 20th century, everyone knew that teenage women were ready to be married with children. Until feminism, it was the standard of Jewish and Christian alike. Only during the feminist domination of the last half of the 20th century have laws been re-written to make it a serious crime for men to marry or do sex with teenage women. You continually ignore the religious tradition and preach the feminist revisions.
A few years ago I was friends with a traditional Italian family from a traditional Italian neighborhood. The 5 generations of women who still were a family had averaged 16 years between generations. That meant that they had been married and getting pregnant at age 15. Before feminism that was the standard, that was NORMAL, that was how everyone lived. Before feminism everyone knew that a young women should get married and start a family of her own.
You often complain loudly about abortions, and about young women who do sex without husbands. Those behaviors are the inevitable result of feminist dogma and feminist social revisions. The highest rate of "teenage pregnancy" in the US since statistics have been kept was in 1957, one of the last years before feminism changed our culture. In 1957 almost all the "teenage mothers" were married and having their families. In 1957 there were a few "unwed mothers" but they were very few compared to the NORMAL behavior of waiting until marriage for sex. And waiting until marriage did not mean waiting decade after decade for young women full of mommy hormones. It meant getting married and getting on with their lives when their Jewish or Christian church and their bodies said they were ready. It did not mean postponing marriage to follow the false feminist goal of education and career.
Biologically, women are most ready to bear their children from about age 14 or 15 until about age 26. A widely published recent major study shows that female fertility starts to decline after age 26 and declines rapidly after age 30. Women who follow the false feminist goal of education and career before marriage aren't even beginning to have their families until their fertile years are already past, and their ability to bear children is in decline. Look around you at all the "fertility clinics" that now cater to 30-something women who have finally figured out the emptiness of a business career, and are trying to have the children they put off for feminist goals until it's too late. One of the saddest and most screwed up women I know is a NYC lawyer who put off her family while she went to school, went to college, went to law school, went to the city to practice law, became a film producer, and became a successful lawyer. When she finally got around to being a WOMAN, it was too late. The fertility clinics could do nothing for her. Now in her late 40s she cries almost every day for the children she never will have, and for the lost life she chose not to have.
Biologically, and by religious law, young women are ready for their families when their bodies are ready. Yes, young women are often emotional basket cases. Yes they are not as mature as they will be ten years later. But women in their 20s are not as mature as women in their 30s, and women in their 50s are not as mature as women in their 60s. So where should we as a society draw the line. By Jewish law the line is drawn at the Bat Mitzvah. Yes, the young woman who had her Bat Mitzvah is still immature by several standards, but a lot of that is because her body is full of mommy hormones and she wants badly to have her babies. Forcing her to wait usually doesn't work. Millions of young women still get pregnant because hormones take over from judgement. Millions of these young women are getting abortions because they have not been permitted by the feminist culture to have a husband and family. Millions more become "single moms" for the same reason, they weren't permitted or encouraged to have a husband by a feminist dominated culture. It's really hard to fight biology. Half a century of feminist dogma and social revisionism can't change the biological drives of young women who's baby making years are in full swing.
The false feminist goals of education followed by a career and then think about family doesn't work for all the reasons mentioned already. Young women are declared to be adults by Jewish and Christian law, but kept confined in an extended childhood for longer and longer periods. Instead of being supported in marriage as respected mothers, they put off their families while satisfying sexual drives and making unwanted babies. It's a societal disaster of monumental proportions, with millions and millions of kids and abortions paying the huge price. Conversely, the Italian women I mentioned above were grandmothers in their middle 30s. They still had 50 years to go to college, get that Masters degree, and pursue any intellectual interest they wanted to pursue. Their married daughters were looking after their grandchildren. Any woman can postpone her college education until her 30s, but most can not postpone their families until her 30s. Biology and sex drives don't work that way. Fighting mother nature doesn't work no matter how strongly women believe the false feminist dogma.
Often I have heard you advising a mother that she should report a young man to authorities for criminal prosecution because her 16 year old daughter had been intimate with a young man. I am greatly offended by the radical feminist misandry in that advice. It's right out of "all sex is rape." It criminalizes young men for acting like normal men and being attracted to normal young women. It is raging feminist hate dogma, and that's all that it is. It is often proceeded or followed by your loud condemnation of feminists. That claim, to oppose feminism, falls way short when you so loudly preach and follow the misandrist dogma criminalizing young men and condemning parents who haven't done the feminist thing by running to police to make a normal young man into a criminal "sex offender" for the rest of his life.
It is entirely NORMAL for young women to be attracted to older men, men who are old enough to support them and their child. A man's role is to have a career and to have amassed skills and resources sufficient to provide for the young mother and her children while she stays home and takes care of them. A young man just starting out, just after his Bar Mitzvah is not old enough or experienced enough to take on a wife. It is normal and traditional for young women to mate with men a few years older than they, men who are educated, in a career or trade, and who can support them. It's normal for a young Jewish man to live with his parents until his middle 20s before being established enough to take on his own wife. Yet you, Laura, call them "rapists" for wanting to mate with the very women who nature and society has made into the women they should be mating with. Once more it's raging hypocrisy and blatant feminist misandry.
It's time to re-think your attitudes and morals, Laura. Are you a religious woman who follows thousands of years of Jewish Law, or a 20th century fem-nag who condemns men because "all sex is rape?" Are you a traditional religious woman who supports families and women who choose to be mothers, or do you promote the faux feminist dream of postponement of family in favor of college and career? Are you in favor of the abortions and single mother children that are the inevitable results of the feminist attempts to confine young women during their biological breeding years, or are you willing to give up the feminist misandry and dogma and support young women who give up the career path to choose the mommy, married with children, life?
Sometimes, Laura, you offer good advice, but I get so tired of the raging hypocrisy. Jewish law declares girls to be WOMEN at the Bat Mitzvah, but Dr. Laura calls them "children," condemns their lovers and demands young men be called "criminals." It's time to re-think your positions. Do you follow tradition and religious law, or are you another feminist demanding that people follow the feminist dogma you continually preach?
Dr. Laura's reply:
Mon, 26 Dec 2005 07:25:36 -0800
"Dr. Laura" <email@example.com>
"Bob Allen"
Re: Feminist hypocrisy
misinformed, incorrect and just silly. have a nice day. We don't forward silly stuff to DrL - she is the only true supporter of men (rights and respect) in the media today. For anyone who listens to her - you look nutty. For those who have not yet heard her/read her books (like THE PROPER CARE AND FEEDING OF HUSBANDS) you damage her ability to help/support them...shame on you. Have a nice day. Staff


text:
FROM THE FRONT | Illamasqua opening first stand-alone shop!
WOO! ANYONE familiar with the cult British beauty brand will be happy to hear this, especially if you live within the ring Road or happen to be visiting London anytime soon. PLUS, there are going to be courses (YAY) for those with yearning to learn a bit more about applying makeup or, as Illamasqua would have it, finding your alter ego through makeup.
- WHEN: Soon. Exact date TBA
- WHERE: 20 Beak Street, London W1
We're waiting with bated breath. Find out more here.


text:
Hysteria, then silence, marked the end of the world
THE Mayan calendar might have ended, but the world certainly has not.
As the clock ticked over to 10.11pm on Friday, December 21, there was no fanfare nor fatal collision with another planet. In Byron Bay, where close to a thousand people gathered to witness the Mayan prophecy of the end of the world, heavy rain fell instead.
A four-day Uplift festival celebrating the event fell into in complete silence with a mass group meditation. Only the snoring of a young boy and the rain on the roof could be heard in the auditorium.
But for those on the brink of the mother of all come-downs, there was an expert on hand certified to administer cheer and first aid: clown doctor and '80s phenomenon, Patch Adams.
It was a remarkably sedate end to the hysteria about the so-called doomsday.
Despite academics and even NASA dismissing the armageddon, paranoia had been widespread in several communities, and many (notably environmentalists, spiritualists and the media) flocked to hotspots around the world and to witness the world's end.
At Mayan ruins, thousands of mystics, hippies, druids and pagans beat drums and blew conches around ceremonial fires as the sun came up. ''We are in a frequency of love, we are in a new vibration,'' said Ivan Gutierrez, 37, an artist, before a security guard told him to stop sounding his conch because he did not have a permit.
Earlier, Oxlaljuj Ajpop, a Mayan activist group in Guatemala, told reporters there that they objected to the commercialisation of the date. In Mexico, ageing New Agers from the United States, dressed in white and carrying yoga mats, raised their hands into the air at the Mayan pyramid at Chichen Itza, while a dude with dreadlocks played a didgeridoo.
''It's not the end of the world, it's an awakening of consciousness and good and love and spirituality - and it's been happening for a while,'' Mary Lou Anderson, 53, an information technology consultant from Las Vegas, told Reuters news service.
Locals cashed in on the hype in Bugarach, in the French Pyrenees - where journalists almost outnumbered villagers - by selling end of the world wine and apocalypse pizza. A global online conspiracy theory had suggested that the town's mountain was a vast underground car park for UFOs, but few true believers made it close enough to hitch a ride if the aliens did appear: only those with press or village passes were let through a police cordon to the mountain's peak.
In Byron Bay, the apocalypse heralded a new era for festival goers, with speakers suggesting we are at the cusp of a ''consciousness revolution''.
In the preceding hours, speakers including stem cell biologist and New York Times best selling author, Bruce Lipton, Patch Adams, Australia's poetry Slam champion, Luka Lesson and respected Aboriginal elder, Uncle Bob Randall, all called for a change in our current approach - to ourselves and to the earth.
''We need to make a decision,'' said Randall. ''Am I going to live for my need or for my greed?''
The peaceable message of the speakers was that the path to a healthy, sustainable future is one of love, awareness and connection with ourselves and one another.
Patch Adams, of movie fame, said people shouldn't feel depressed and powerless in the face of negative world news. ''The point is not to get depressed, but to get a fire [in your belly],'' he said.
The talks were punctuated with live music and dancing. At 10pm American musician Jonathan Goldman took the stage. He began by leading a chant, ''connecting through sound'' before guiding the audience into the silent meditation to mark the supposed moment the world, as we know it, would be wiped out.
The reflective mood lifted the following morning with the new dawn. Hundreds gathered with the rising sun at Main Beach, Byron Bay, on Saturday. Aboriginal elders performed ceremonies and spoke again about the importance of people coming together to create change. Accompanied by didgeridoos, they then led the crowd in dance, which continued, barefoot on the beach, throughout the morning. The world did not end and people, it seemed, were in the mood to celebrate.
With GINA McCOLL, Agencies
Sarah Berry is a lifestyle and health writer at The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.


text:
Tuned ?In Stemm says farewell;? the Dolly watchers ?reunite at Mohawk
The hard-core original rock act Stemm has been one of the best bands of any genre coming out of our music scene for well over a decade now.
The group's list of accomplishments are too numerous to mention, but here's a quick hit: the band's "Face the Pain" is the theme song for the Ultimate Fighting Challenge and is now heard in the Kevin James comedy, "Here Comes the Boom"; the single "Awake" is on the "Iron Man 2" video game; plus performances with heavy metal giants Korn and at the Mayhem Festival with Slipknot, Disturbed and Slayer.
Those are not only achievements to be proud of, but you would have to assume, they would be tough to walk away from. But, after 14 years, Stemm is calling it quits. Why? The band's open letter to fans on Facebook (www.facebook.com/STEMMBAND) is an eloquent piece that says it all. Here is a snippet, but it's worth taking the time to read it all:
"Over time our priorities have shifted until we found ourselves at the point were Stemm was taking the backseat more and more often. Stemm was never something that was meant to be a hobby, something to be left in the corner until more pressing matters were attended to.
"Stemm was well and truly a way of life. It was the focus, never a diversion. As a collective we agree that if the time to make Stemm a great band isn't available to all of us then nothing else will do. We will never settle for just OK. We owe at least that much to you all, the ones who have allowed us the great privilege of making this music for all these years."
To that end, the band will perform its final show starting at 6:30 p.m. Saturday in the Town Ballroom (671 Main St.).
In a night that celebrates "friendship, good times and great music," joining guitarist/vocalist Joe Cafarella, guitarist Alex Scouten, bassist Mario Nobilio and drummer Dan Nelligan will be former Stemm bandmates Louis Penque, TJ Frost and Steven Crowl.
Whiskey Reverb and His Name Was Yesterday share the bill. Tickets are $10 advance (Tickets.com, box office and www.stemm.bigcartel.com), $12 at the door.
> Dollywatchers return
It's been a decade in the making – and it's sure to be a crowd-pleasing, hard rocking and very loud night.
For the first time in 10 years, the Dollywatchers – vocalist Terry Sullivan, bassist Kent Weber, drummer Howard Fleetwood Wilson II and guitarist Mikel Doktor – will reunite in their old haunt, Mohawk Place, for a one-night stand Saturday.
"It came out of the blue," Sullivan said earlier this week of the reunion show. "We really never broke up – it was just one of those things where everyone has a lot on their plates. People have had children, gotten married and just our lives in general. But we felt it was time.
"We wanted to dust it off and see what happens and it really sounds great. So we figured we'd come out and play one show and see where it takes us," Sullivan said. "We're basically having fun with it."
Doors open at 9 p.m. Saturday in Mohawk Place (47 E. Mohawk St.). Music starts at 10 with Sleepy Hahas, with a promise of the Dollywatchers on stage at 11 p.m. The $10 admission includes a free collector's CD and earplugs (while supplies last)! Expect to hear classic Dollywatchers, some solo Sullivan and even a new tune or two.
"It will be a good night of rock 'n' roll," Sullivan said, "and Buffalo needs that."
email: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
In its annual "Best Law Firm" rankings, U.S. News recognized Wiggin and Dana's Franchise Law practice nationally and 22 additional practice areas regionally in Connecticut, Philadelphia and New York.
Wiggin and Dana has been ranked nationally among a select group of firms as a "BTI Mover and Shaker" in BTI's Legal Innovation and Technology Outlook 2019: Clients Rank Their Needs and Law Firm Performance. The ranking identifies Wiggin and Dana as one of the firms, "disrupting the legal industry by making strategic and tactical moves." BTI Consulting Group's new report, is the only guide to rank firms on legal innovation and technology based solely on client input.
Wiggin and Dana is pleased to announce that Kevin Carroll has joined the firm as a Litigation Partner in the White Collar Defense, Investigations and Corporate Compliance practice group in the Washington, DC office. Mr. Carroll is a skilled litigator with experience advising the White House, a Cabinet member, CEOs, a congressional committee chairman and generals. Mr. Carroll's practice will focus on representing corporations and individuals in white collar defense, internal investigations, Congressional investigations and corporate compliance matters.
Wiggin and Dana is proud to announce that Benchmark Litigation 2019 ranked seven Wiggin and Dana Partners "Local Litigation Stars" and five Partners as "Future Stars".
Wiggin and Dana is proud to announce that 42 of our attorneys have been recognized in 2018 Super Lawyers. Two of them have also been recognized on various Connecticut's Top Lawyers' Lists. Twenty-four of those attorneys were recognized in 2018 Connecticut Super Lawyers Magazine, four in the New York Metro Area Super Lawyers Magazine, and one in the Pennsylvania Super Lawyers Magazine. We also have thirteen attorneys listed as Rising Stars. The following are the recognized Wiggin and Dana lawyers and their respective practice areas:
Wiggin and Dana is pleased to announce the promotions of four new Partners effective January 1, 2019. We are proud to congratulate the following attorneys who will be promoted to Partner:


text:
Robert Wilson
Services for Robert "Bob" Wilson, who passed away Thursday, April 11, 2013, at Providence Hood River Memorial Hospital, are planned for 3 p.m. Sunday, April 28, at Shepherd of the Valley Bible Church, 1631 8th St., Hood River. There will also be a memorial at 12:30 p.m. Friday, April 26, at the National College of Natural Medicine in Portland where Bob taught.
Arrangements are under the direction of Anderson's Tribute Center (Funerals, Receptions, Cremations), 1401 Belmont Ave., Hood River, OR 97031; 541-386-1000. Please visit www.andersonstributecenter.com to leave a note of condolence for family.
Comments are subject to moderator review and may not appear immediately on the site. A user's first several comments must be manually approved by a moderator.
Please read our commenting policy before posting.
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.
Information from the News and our advertisers (Want to add your business to this to this feed?)


text:
Interim President Adly Mansour issued a presidential decree late last August to remove a very interesting part from the armed forces' oath of loyalty.
That part concerning the allegiance to the President of republic does not exist anymore. That part was "to be loyal to the president of the republic."
I was surprised when I had heard the news. Of course all the world consider that move was another example on how the Egyptian armed forces will not obey any civilian president enforcing the military state and political power in Egypt.
Still no one had paid attention to the history of the armed forces' oath of loyalty before.
It turned out that the original military loyalty oath had not had this part before ousted Hosni Mubarak. Yes it turned out that Mubarak added this phrase to the loyalty oath. Some say that Mubarak added to the oath after getting rid from his rival defense minister Abu Ghazla.
As you may know Abdel Halim Abu Ghazla was popular not only among the army but also by the public and Mubarak got rid of him in a big for fear that he would lead a coup against him. "Of course some say that Program T was behind his dismissal"
The oath continued after the 25 January 2011 revolution and of course Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi would not think to change it.
Well ironically the army turned against Mubarak and Morsi whom the officers swore loyalty to it !!
Now the current oath is as follows :
"I swear to God to be a loyal soldier to the Republic of Egypt...protecting its security and peace...protecting and defending it on land, at sea or in air, inside and outside the republic...obeying military orders, implementing my leaders' orders, protecting my weapon which i will not leave until death...God is witness to what I say."
Well I know that the Commander of Chief of the armed forces is the President thus the army should be loyal to him or "her… yes I am dreaming but it will not hurt ;)" according to military judiciary law of 1966.
The Pro-military supporters Of course say that it was a great decision because it liberated the army from loyalty to one person that is the president whom can be good or bad , fair or dictator to become fully loyal to the nation.
On the other hand I would say Pro-democracy and revolutionaries are concerned from that change saying that it would enforce the state within the state notion.
Personally I believe that the oath does not matter as much because we got already a constitution that gave the army privileges more than any constitution in the history of Egypt. I do not think that the new amendments those articles about the army will be touched.
Nevertheless we have to think about the timing of the decision , why would an interim president or rather the army take it now ??
In the end that oath can be changed by the next president. Again Mubarak who added the president's loyalty words ; was sold by the army during the January revolution.
People should realize that the constitution is the real deal here and it defines everything in the state including the relation between the president and the army. Of course SCAF got the upper hand in this relation thanks to Constitution 2012 especially if our next president will be a civilian.
Again the constitution is the thing that we should pay attention to now.
By the way I wish someone begins to discuss without fear the Civil-military relations especially in democratic transitions times in a simple way to the public in Egypt with all the challenges we got now. We need someone to discuss in Arabic too before English as it turned we got many articles and too many speakers about that topic in English but not in Arabic.


text:
Robot. Robot. Here is Robot X to print and make into a puzzle.
Print and cut out this cute pirate puzzle. Print on plain paper or printable magnetic page.
Make this colorful Mermaid puzzle - just print, cut and play!
Goodie TwoShoes has a motto. You can never be TOO nice. Have fun making this fun puzzle to play with.
Make this fun Dragon puzzle - print on a magnetic page for even more fun.
Make this fun Magnetic Puzzle Just print, cut and play!


text:
Block Spoilers
How to Avoid Spoilers During Heisenberg's Return to TV
Breaking Bad's final season is under way, but if you're not caught up, avoid online spoiler landmines at all costs. The series' shocking last episodes are upon us, and you'll want to soak up every nail-biting moment. Steer clear of spoiler heartache without having to give up the Internet with a few digital friends that'll keep the web from ruining Walt and Jesse's perilous exploits.
- Silencer (free) — This Chrome extension offers "Mute Packs," which blocks a variety of related terms on Twitter and Facebook, for shows like Orange Is the New Black, Game of Thrones and, of course, Breaking Bad. Silencer also mutes specific keywords or followers.
- Tweetbot ($3 iOS app, $20 Mac client) — This Twitter client is perfect for power users. In addition to multiple account support and smart gestures, you can mute keywords, conversations, mentions, and more. The killer feature is the ability to set a time frame to stay temporarily spoiler-free.
- Tumblr Savior — Keep GIFs from the last episodes of Breaking Bad from your Tumblr feed with this work-around script that blocks specific tags.
- CommentBlocker — The browser extension for Firefox and Chrome combs through comments to ensure that one of the most unsuspecting spoiler landmine — the comments section — doesn't give the season's surprise plot twist away.


text:
Start Your FREE Demo Account Today!
Experience the speed and reliability of CQG Integrated Client powered by CQG data technology:
Streaming Real Time Data
Single Click Trading
Depth of Market (DOM)
Historical Data
Advanced Charts
We cater to experienced self-directed traders who require robust trading platforms and fast order routing. We do not discriminate traders based on their trading volume or account size. Traders are treated as equals at our firm.
Dorman Trading is our exclusive futures commission merchant (FCM). Dorman Trading clears all futures and options on futures trades.
The funds in your account with Dorman Trading are held as "Customer Segregated" funds. Dorman's principal bank is Harris, NA, a subsidiary of BMO Financial Group of Toronto Canada.
Yes, Trade Futures 4 Less offers server co-location for traders who want faster, low latency access to Rithmic's exchange matching gateway:
- CME Aurora Trading Server
- Dedicated Trading Server
- Virtual Private Server
Dorman Trading is a clearing member of the CME Group, and ICE. Dorman Trading clears hundreds of "local" Chicago floor traders, the most demanding professional day traders in the world. Dorman Trading brings this same level of service to all their clients.
ICE Exchange is the leading network of regulated exchanges and clearing houses for financial and commodity markets. ICE delivers transparent, reliable and accessible data, technology and risk management services to markets around the world through its portfolio of exchanges, including the New York Stock Exchange, ICE Futures and Liffe.
EUREX is one of the world's leading derivatives exchanges offering a broad range of international benchmark products, operating the most liquid fixed income markets in the world and featuring open and low-cost electronic access.
With market participants connected from 700 locations worldwide, trading volume at EUREX exceeds 1.5 billion contracts a year.


text:
Data Confrontation Seminar, 1969: Comparative Socio-Political Data (ICPSR 38)
Version Date: Jan 12, 2006 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
This study contains selected electoral and demographic national data for nine nations in the 1950s and 1960s. The data were prepared for the Data Confrontation Seminar on the Use of Ecological Data in Comparative Cross-National Research held under the auspices of the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research on April 1-18, 1969. One of the primary concerns of this international seminar was the need for cooperation in the development of data resources in order to facilitate exchange of data among individual scholars and research groups. Election returns for two or more national and/or local elections are provided for each of the nine nations, as well as ecological materials for at least two time points in the general period of the 1950s and 1960s. While each dataset was received at a single level of aggregation, the data have been further aggregated to at least a second level of aggregation. In most cases, the data can be supplied at the commune or municipality level and at the province or district level as well. Part 1 (Germany, Regierungsbezirke), Part 2 (Germany, Kreise), Part 3 (Germany, Lander), and Part 4 (Germany, Wahlkreise) contain data for all kreise, laender (states), administrative districts, and electoral districts for national elections in the period 1957-1969, and for state elections in the period 1946-1969, and ecological data from 1951 and 1961. Part 5 (France, Canton), and Part 6 (France, Departemente) contain data for the cantons and departements of two regions of France (West and Central) for the national elections of 1956, 1962, and 1967, and ecological data for the years 1954 and 1962. Data are provided for election returns for selected parties: Communist, Socialist, Radical, Federation de Gauche, and the Fifth Republic. Included are raw votes and percentage of total votes for each party. Ecological data provide information on total population, proportion of total population in rural areas, agriculture, industry, labor force, and middle class in 1954, as well as urbanization, crime rates, vital statistics, migration, housing, and the index of "comforts." Part 7 (Japan, Kanagawa Prefecture), Part 8 (Japan, House of Representatives Time Series), Part 9 (Japan, House of (Councilors (Time Series)), and Part 10 (Japan, Prefecture) contain data for the 46 prefectures for 15 national elections between 1949 and 1968, including data for all communities in the prefecture of Kanagawa for 13 national elections, returns for 8 House of Representatives' elections, 7 House of Councilors' elections, descriptive data from 4 national censuses, and ecological data for 1950, 1955, 1960, and 1965. Data are provided for total number of electorate, voters, valid votes, and votes cast by such groups as the Jiyu, Minshu, Kokkyo, Minji, Shakai, Kyosan, and Mushozoku for the Communist, Socialist, Conservative, Komei, and Independent parties for all the 46 prefectures. Population characteristics include age, sex, employment, marriage and divorce rates, total number of live births, deaths, households, suicides, Shintoists, Buddhists, and Christians, and labor union members, news media subscriptions, savings rate, and population density. Part 11 (India, Administrative Districts) and Part 12 (India, State) contain data for all administrative districts and all states and union territories for the national and state elections in 1952, 1957, 1962, 1965, and 1967, the 1958 legislative election, and ecological data from the national censuses of 1951 and 1961. Data are provided for total number of votes cast for the Congress, Communist, Jan Sangh, Kisan Mazdoor Praja, Socialist, Republican, Regional, and other parties, contesting candidates, electorate, valid votes, and the percentage of valid votes cast. Also included are votes cast for the Rightist, Christian Democratic, Center, Socialist, and Communist parties in the 1958 legislative election. Ecological data include total population, urban population, sex distribution, occupation, economically active population, education, literate population, and number of Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jainis, Moslems, Sikhs, and other religious groups. Part 13 (Norway, Province), and Part 14 (Norway, Commune) consist of the returns for four national elections in 1949, 1953, 1957, and 1961, and descriptive data from two national censuses. Data are provided for the total number of registered voters, valid votes, raw votes cast for the Communist, Labor, Liberal, Agrarian, Conservative, Christian Peoples parties, and other parties, and the percentage of total votes cast for each party. Data are also provided for total population by gender and age, economically active population, number of church services registered, and number of communes within each province, as well as percentagized number of population economically active in select industries, dissenters, and total population attending church. Part 15 (Norway, Year 1965) contains returns for national elections in 1961 and 1965 for 466 communes created by administrative reorganization in 1961, and ecological data from the 1960 census. Data are provided for total votes cast for the parties, and the number of registered voters. Other items specify the type of commune, region code, television coverage code, and politicization, two-day election, and periphery indexes. Part 16 (Sweden, Constituency) and Part 17 (Sweden, Commune) contain data for all communes, provinces, and constituencies for Parliamentary elections in 1948, 1952, 1956, and 1960, and ecological data from two national censuses for 1950 and 1960. Data are provided for total electorate, number of votes cast, raw votes, and percentage of votes cast for the Conservative, Agrarian, Liberal, Social Democratic, Communist, and other parties. Data are also provided for total population by gender, population economically active, number of salaried employees, and wage earners. Part 18 (Denmark, County) and Part 19 (Denmark, Commune) consist of data for all communes and provinces for the national elections of 1947, 1950, 1953, 1960, 1964, and 1966, and ecological data from the censuses of 1950 and 1960. Data are provided for total number of electorates and raw votes for the Social Democratic, Radical Liberal, Conservative, Liberal, Single-tax, Communist, Danish, German Minority parties, and other parties. Data are also provided for total and percentagized population by age and gender, industrially active population, and urbanization. Part 20 (Netherlands, Municipalities) consists of data for all municipalities, provinces, and economic-geographic areas for national elections in 1959 and 1963, and ecological data for 1954 and 1962 for total population and industrially active population by gender and age, urbanization, occupation, education, and religion. Part 21 (Poland, Poviats), Part 22 (Poland, Electoral Districts), and Part 23 (Poland, Voievodships) consist of data for all poviats, voievodships, and electoral districts for national elections in 1952, 1957, 1961, and 1965, two council elections, and ecological data for 1950, 1960, and 1965. Data are provided for total population by gender and age distribution, occupation, investments, communication media, industrially active population, number of dwelling units, farms, pigs, cattle, physicians, and population growth ratio in urban and rural areas. Items also specify the number of staff, employees, and council members in local councils in 1965. See the related collection, DATA CONFRONTATION SEMINAR, 1969: UNITED STATES DATA (ICPSR 0005).
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes
The data map is provided as an ASCII text file, and the codebook is provided by ICPSR as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file. The PDF file format was developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be accessed using PDF reader software, such as the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Information on how to obtain a copy of the Acrobat Reader is provided on the ICPSR Web site.
Universe View help for Universe
Germany, France, Japan, India, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, and Poland, in 1969.
Data Source View help for Data Source
Data were supplied by: (1) Borre, Ole, and Jan Stehouwer. Aarhus University, Instituttet for Statskundskab, Sociologisk Afdeling, (2) Dogan, Mattei. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Centre d'Etudes Sociologiques, Paris, (3) Kasse, Max, and Uwe Schleth. Universitat Mannheim, Institut fur Sozialwissenschaften, (4) Hoschka, Peter, and Klaus Liepelt. Institut fur angewandte Socialwissenschaft, Bad Godesberg, (5) Brouwer, Marten. Steinmetz Institute, Amsterdam, (6) Stouthard, Philip. Instituut voor Arbeidsvraagstukken, Tilburg, (7) Bashiruddin, Ahmed, R. Chandidas, and Rajni Kothari. Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, New Delhi, (8) Takabataki, Michitoshi. Rikkyo University, Department of Political Science, Tokyo, (9) Rokkan, Stein. The Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen, (10) Valen, Henry. Institute for Social Research, Oslo, (11) Ostrowski, Krysztof. University of Warsaw, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Academy of Sciences, (12) Carlsson, Gosta, and Goran Gustafsson. University of Lund, Department of Sociology, (13) PREZEKROJE TERENOWE, 1945-1965, Glowny Urzad Statystyczny, Warszawa, 1967, (14) ROZWOJ GOSPODARCZY POWIATOW W LATACH, 1950-1965, Glowny Urzad Statystyczny, Warszawa, 1967, and (15) MONITOR POLSKI, Dziennik urzedowy Polskiej Rzeczpospolitej Ludowej, 1952, 1957, 1961, 1965
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date
Version History View help for Version History
- Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. DATA CONFRONTATION SEMINAR, 1969: COMPARATIVE SOCIO-POLITICAL DATA. ICPSR version. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor], 2000. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR00038.v1
2006-01-12 All files were removed from dataset 24 and flagged as study-level files, so that they will accompany all downloads.
Data in this collection are available only to users at ICPSR member institutions.
- The citation of this study may have changed due to the new version control system that has been implemented.
This study is provided by ICPSR. ICPSR provides leadership and training in data access, curation, and methods of analysis for a diverse and expanding social science research community.