text:
Visit the Greek American Women's Network (GAWN) Homepage
TURKISH PRESS AND OTHER MEDIA No.233/01 5.12.01
[01] The Turkish Cypriot leader held a press conference in the occupied areas after meeting President Clerides
[02] Statements by the Turkish Cypriot leader to NTV after meeting President Clerides
[03] Sukru Sina Gurel assesses the meeting between President Clerides and the Turkish Cypriot leader
[04] Statements by the Turkish Prime Minister on Cyprus
[05] Statement by the Turkish Foreign Ministry
[06] The President of Turkey spoke with Denktash on the phone
[07] Eroglu alleges that the talks between President Clerides and the Turkish Cypriot leader will be held on a new and realistic ground.
[08] Turkish Daily News publishes the paper Rauf Denktash presented to President Clerides at their meeting yesterday
[09] True Path Party criticizes Cyprus policy
[10] Reactions to Yesterday's Meeting Between President Clerides and Turkish Cypriot Leader Denktas
[11] The fight over the European Army is on the 12-mile issue
Illegal BRTK Television (4/12/01) broadcast live a press conference by Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash in occupied Nicosia.
Following are the opening statement and the questions and answers of Mr. Denktash:
As you know, the Cyprus issue has embarked on its 38th year. We have experienced various stages of negotiations, which did not yield any results. We had to declare a state because we just could not have accepted the opposite side's claim that it is or will be the legitimate government of the whole of Cyprus. We fulfilled the requirements of our rights stemming from the 1960 partnership agreements. We have not withdrawn our peace offer from the Greek Cypriots. Our hands of peace were always extended to the Greek Cypriots. I can say that we have displayed the necessary flexibility in order to achieve a result.
The EU interference in the issue and the message it gave to the Greek Cypriot side that their EU membership is safe regardless of an agreement almost closed the door to an agreement. The consequences could have been unpleasant because Turkey will never give up its rights stemming from the 1960 agreements. The Turkish Cypriot people, in turn, would not have accepted a situation, in which the Greek Cypriots claim to be the legitimate government of Cyprus. The events were not leading to a reconciliation, but rather to a separation. Our duty is to avoid those initiatives which will lead Cyprus to new adventures, and, if possible courageously search for ways of reconciliation.
For this reason, after thinking about it long and hard, and after the EU members started to issue statements to the effect that Turkey was bluffing and that the Turkish Cypriots will most certainly give up defending their rights because of the EU, I felt the need to have a face-to-face meting with Clerides. I believe that he also loves his people and Cyprus. I believe that he is acting with an intention not to drag Greece into new adventures. I am acting with the thought that these beliefs and our love will enable us to meet on one point. As you can see, the results were for the good.
The door to face-to-face meetings has been opened. He accepted to have the talks in Cyprus. Without any conditions and in goodwill, we will look for what to do in face-to-face meetings as of 15 January. In my opinion, this is a positive development. I hope that both sides will conduct a good assessment to determine their common points and find ways to settle their differences on grounds of those common points. This is our hope.
Naturally, we conveyed to Clerides our views at the meeting. As he said, Mr. de Soto acted as a passive observer and did not interfere. As a result, the statement known to all was issued.
Question: Did you give Mr. Clerides any documernts?
Answer: I gave Clerides a written statement of one and one-half page long of my opening address. It was the summary of my address. Then Clerides told me: Now if you present your position and I present my position we will not be
able to achieve anything. He was right. He said that no positions should be stated. Consequently, the results you know were achieved.
Question: Will the meetings be held on the basis of the principles cited in the written statement you submitted to Clerides?
Answer: They are our principles. Among these principles, there are articles not acceptable to Clerides. For this reason, it was decided not to put forward any positions and that they be raised at the meetings.
Question: Is the summary of your address you referred to above similar to the 12 November letter?
Answer: No. No. We did not delve into this detail. The written statement actually explained our intentions -- our goodwill intentions -- and the grounds of our intentions. It was an opening statement, which explained the results that can be expected from talks. I suppose that the statement will be distributed to you. I suppose, it is being translated into Turkish.
Question: What happened after you submitted this written statement? What did Clerides say?
Answer: I think that the following is Clerides/ approach: Let us not exceed the boundaries of a goodwill framework. The goodwill framework has, anyway, been defined in broad lines and in line with the principles we declared today. The borders of the goodwill approach is anyhow out in the open. We accepted to hold talks in line with this framework. Naturally, we talked about the past and future with Clerides. Our hope is for the way to open.
Question: What was the atmosphere? Was it sincere?
Answer: The atmosphere was very sincere. It was certainly very sincere.
Question: Will there be a happy end?
Answer: Let me tell you, now, that these words are meaningless. The important thing is to exert efforts in goodwill. I would like to say outright that my reply to the question on whether I am hopeful is as follows: The work ahead of Clerides will be difficult if the EU says that the Greek Cypriots will join the EU regardless of an agreement because those surrounding him will tell him not to make any concessions and not to budge. They will tell him that the issue is already over because the EU will anyhow let us join. Let the Turks do whatever they want, his surrounding will say. In other words, the EU is obliged to review its assessments on Cyprus. They will be assisting if they review their assessment. Otherwise, we face a situation in which we depend on Clerides initiative and goodwill.
Question: You talked about 15 January. Is this the date of the beginning of the new process?
Question: Do you envisage any other contacts until then?
Answer: No, no. That is, this is a preparatory period for both sides.
Question: Were you behind the statement issued?
Answer: It was a joint statement. If I contributed one line, Clerides must have contributed another.
Question: Were there any arguments on the wording of the statement?
Answer: No, there were no arguments.
Question: According to what we understand, a new process is launched. There are direct talks on the agenda of this new process.
Answer: Yes, and the direct talks will be held in Cyprus.
Question: Did you envisage a definite period of time for this news process?
Answer: No. Perhaps, we decide on this issue at our first meeting. I do not know whether this is reasonable, however. What will happen when the process does not yield any results according to the fixed period of time? Will we say good-bye when the period ends? This process should also not extend over years, however. Actually, we say in our statement that the meetings will continue until results are achieved. This means more than once a month meetings. We should start and finish.
Question: Do you envisage achieving a result before the EU meetings in June?
Answer: If we are to conclude these meetings, they will have to end before this time.
Question: Who will participate at the meetings? Will the UN Secretary- General or Alvaro de Soto be present at the meetings?
Answer: De Soto will be present at the meetings. If the UN Secretary- General misses us, he can invite us for a day or two to give momentum to the talks, but it is not a good idea to neglect our business here, go into all that expense, and stay for 10, 15, or 20 days in New York with an entourage of five-10 persons. We have been saved from all this. As you know, we were trying for quite some time to avoid this.
Question: The EU parameters changed a lot. Why do you think that the EU is more important than the United Nations now?
Answer: When Boutros-Boutros Ghali realized that he will not be able to resolve this issue within the framework of his goodwill mission, the EU was recruited. It was Ghali who recruited the EU to action. The parameters, in turn, can be taken up after conciliation is secured. They thought that Turkey's EU membership will secure a balance. That is, they thought that Turkey will give up Cyprus for the EU membership. They thought that, in this way, they will achieve balance. The difficulties increased, instead of decreasing, once they realized that this is not working.
Istanbul NTV (04/12/01) broadcast live the following interview with Turkish Cypriot Leader Rauf Denktash by Mithat Bereket in occupied Nicosia.
Question: First of all let me ask whether you are pleased with today's developments, the results?
Answer: What were our difficulties in the meetings that were held up till now? The UN Secretary-General's representative talks with Clerides, then he talks with me, then the sides are not aware of what has been said. The result is that neither I nor he is pleased. As soon as we announce our displeasure and our rejection, the Greek Cypriot side announces its endorsement. We have been wasting time with such a game. Naturally, these games, together with the intervention of the EU, have led the Cyprus question into an impasse. The Greek Cypriots, benefiting from this impasse, have attempted to drag the entire island into the EU in a bid to protect their interests, thus creating a great crisis. Having seen that, it became imperative to hold a direct meeting with Clerides to understand whether a conciliation is possible. I wanted to tell Clerides that Turkey is not bluffing about safeguarding its legal rights and that our people are not affected by reports to the effect that the community is collapsing and that therefore it should tag along to the Greek Cypriots and accede to the EU as a minority. It was beneficial. Now we will hold direct talks. We will hold realistic talks. We will try all in our power and seek ways to resolve the issue.
Question: How was the meeting? Can you explain a little? What did you do when you entered the room? Did you drink coffee or tea? How was the conversation conducted? You are old friends.
Answer: We are friends. As soon as I entered the room, I told him that time is passing by and that we are not getting younger. I began with a joke saying that he does not seem to be looking younger.
Question: What was his response?
Answer: He told me that I was right and that I did not get any younger either. We entered the room and we sat down. Then I explained to him the reasons for wanting to hold a face-to-face meeting. Then I had a written statement which I placed on the table. Then Clerides told me: Now if you present your position and I present my position we will not be able to achieve anything. Therefore, I asked him: Do you accept to hold talks? This is the reason why I came here. His response was: Naturally, I accept it. My suggestion was: Let us hold talks, but let us hold them in Cyprus. Let us not cross oceans with delegations of tens of people for some 10-20 days in order to hold talks. Clerides accepted. Subsequently, together we dictated that short announcement. We made that announcement. Now we will begin the talks on 15 January. My wish is the following: Let there be no outside interference. Let these people not be encouraged. Let them realize that they cannot take Cyprus anywhere. Let them work sincerely with us, their old partners, in a bid to form a new partnership. Cyprus is sufficiently large for both communities. It is not large enough, however, to fight and shed blood. In that case, it is very small. We have been suffering the consequences for years now, so have they. Therefore, we have to look to the future and find the right path.
Question: How was it inside? You are probably one of the persons who know Clerides best. You have been holding talks since 1968. Was he optimistic and willing? What is your opinion?
Answer: Had he not been willing he would not have come. Maybe, he came in order to advance the Greek Cypriot cause, but he was sincere and willing. He was at ease. So was I.
Question: I would like to ask a few things about the announcement that has been made. The date of the meeting is set for 15 January. There are certain interesting points. The face-to-face talks will continue until a comprehensive agreement is reached. Nothing will be agreed until an agreement is reached on all issues. What does this mean? Can you explain
Answer: Each time the talks begin, these two principles are accepted? Why? Because, for example let us say that an agreement is reached on the judicial issue but no agreement is reached on the other issues. Then no one can claim that there is an agreement on the judicial issue. Only if an agreement is reached on all the issues, can the agreements on individual issues be valid. This is normal. In other words, there is nothing strange about it.
Question: Are you optimistic about the future? How should today's atmosphere be interpreted?
Answer: Let me repeat. For us to be optimistic the outside world should renounce those attitudes that prevented the solution of the Cyprus problem so far. This means that the two sides should be treated equally. They should realize that one side is not the government of the other side. Equal treatment is a prerequisite if justice and equity are to prevail. One of the sides cannot be told that it owns the other side. Otherwise, the side that wants to own you will never give in. Therefore, the outside world, those who presumably are trying to help and especially the British, should be very careful with regards to this issue.
Question: We were covering the meeting live. We arrived there before you, Clerides, and de Soto did. There, I said that as soon as Denktas arrives and enters the room, he will ask Clerides: Are we partners, or are we a minority? Was this issue raised?
Answer: Naturally, this was an old partnership. A new partnership will be established. There is nothing to think or discuss with regards to this issue.
Question: What did Clerides have to say to this? Is he still talking about a single state, a minority?
Answer: We did not discuss such issues. As I have said, we presented our document, there was a short conversation. Then once he agreed to the talks, the issue was solved.
Question: There is something interesting. Such press releases usually begin with standard sentences as to those attending the meeting and the agreement reached. There is a similar beginning in your statement but there is also a point for which you have struggled a lot. It refers to Greek Cypriot leader Clerides and Turkish Cypriot leader Denktas. In other words, it does not say the Greek Cypriot President. Should that not be considered an achievement? What is your opinion?
Answer: No, for years our titles have not mentioned at the negotiating process because we do not accept one another's titles. There were times when we had arguments with the UN Secretariat General in New York
because of a reference to President Clerides and leader Denktas. This happened twice during Boutros-Ghali's time. I refused to participate in the meeting until the titles in the program were changed. They have learned this already.
Question: What will your future priorities be? What are the messages that you want to convey?
Answer: If we are going to resume the talks, then there is no point in declaring these issues now. We will get prepared. We will be well prepared. This is the reason why we postponed it to 15 January. We will begin these talks in goodwill.
Question: There have been endless talks. Is there hope this time? This is what we are all curious about, what we want to hear. Is this a new process?
Answer: It is a new process. It is definitely a new process. It is an important one. Maybe, as some say, it is the last tango. We would, however, make the most of this opportunity. We should not waste it. This depends on the two sides approaching the issue seriously, on replying to the question of why we reached the current point in Cyprus, and on realistically studying what can be done in the future. I hope that this is what will happen.
Istanbul NTV (04/12/01) broadcast the following interview with Sukru Sina Gurel, Turkish State Minister in charge of Cyprus affairs, by Murat Akgun in Ankara.
Question: Mr. Denktas met with Clerides today. What is the assessment of the Turkish side on the issue?
Answer: Mr. Denktas has already said whatever had to be said. The truth is that, these talks are, in a way, the acceptance of certain realities which Mr.
Denktas and we have been advocating. We have always said that it was unnecessary for Mr. Denktas and the leader of the other side to go to other countries to be imprisoned within frameworks introduced by others and to hold talks under the supervision of others. As a matter of fact, it led to unhealthy results. Now Mr. Denktas has pointed this out and has said that if others accept the reality that there are two nations and two states in Cyprus and that the Greek Cypriot side does not represent the Turkish Cypriots and if they do not intervene in the issue, then the two sides can solve the problem among themselves. Denktas said that at least they can discuss the issue in a realistic manner. This is the initial step. I hope that the talks to begin on 15 January will continue within the framework of the same understanding.
Question: This is not the first time that Denktas and Clerides are holding a face-to face meeting. Actually, they are two leaders who have known one another for over 30 years. There have been either indirect or face-to-face meetings in the past. What has changed to make us hopeful of these talks?
Answer: I believe that all the sides involved in the Cyprus issue have understood that the expectations of the Greek Cypriot side and the so-called solutions which the EU is trying to impose on the sides will not be realized. We have reached a point where either the issue will be realistically assessed and the wishes of the Turkish Cypriot side will be borne in mind or no solution will be reached. Therefore, either every party will continue on its own path and will either reach or not reach its goal, or the two sides will reach a goal together through a realistic assessment. Everyone is more hopeful because that point has been reached and the possibility of making a realistic assessment has emerged.
Question: About a month ago Foreign Minister Ismail Cem, and the leaders of the coalition partners, including the prime minister, said that Turkey is ready to pay every price with regard to the Cyprus issue. Subsequently it was said that Turkey will renounce neither Cyprus nor the EU. If the price Turkey will pay is not the EU, then what is that price? What are we renouncing, on what are we insistent?
Answer: Only one of the officials you mentioned used the word price. The honorable prime minister did not make such a statement, nor did he make any similar statements in other governmental problems. I, however, do not think that we have to pay a price on the issue. None of us think that we have to pay a price. A price has already been paid by the Turkish Cypriots, by Turkey. Why was this price paid? Actually a price was not paid to hold on to Cyprus. On the contrary, it was paid in a bid to ensure the security of the Turkish Cypriot people, and to guarantee the vital interests of Turkey. Turkey has no price to pay in the future because if you consider exchanging something in return for something else, then you have to be holding on to both of those things or you have to be receiving something. The EU membership is not in our hands, neither does it seem to be in the horizon. Therefore, equations on renouncing Cyprus in exchange of EU membership, or holding
on to Cyprus by renouncing EU membership are not valid. Therefore, Turkey has no price to pay. Turkey's vital interests necessitate that Turkey ensure the security of Cyprus. This is what Turkey will be doing.
Question: Now let us come back to the talks. The two leaders will meet again in mid-January. There are the intercommunal talks. Turkey, however, also has certain conditions. When the negotiation process begins, both sides will make compromises given that both sides have goodwill and both sides desire a solution. As a result, we shall make certain compromises, and we will receive something in return. What are the things the Turkish side can give at this stage? Over which issues can the Turkish side compromise? What are the issues the Turkish side will insist upon?
Answer: The issue should be considered from the very beginning. A solution should be based on the sovereign equality of the Turkish Cypriot people. This is the first issue. In other words, Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot people will never agree to reduce the Turkish Cypriots to the status of a minority. This is the first issue. The second one is that Turkey will never renounce its rights and obligations over Cyprus. In other words, Turkey has the right of speech on the whole of Cyprus. This means that Turkey has the right of speech on Cyprus' membership in another international entity be it under a single roof or any other model. This right has been granted through international agreements and statutes. No one can ignore this.
Question: Can Turkey have a right of speech over a Cyprus that accedes to the EU under a single roof?
Answer: No, I am talking about the process that leads to that accession. The right thing is for Turkey to accede to the EU together with Cyprus after a political solution acceptable to both sides is reached in Cyprus. In that case,
the Aegean problems will become easier. It would also be easy for Turkey and Greece to reach an agreement on the Cyprus issue. Everything will become easier. If Turkey is left outside the EU and Cyprus accedes prior to a solution -- in other words, the Greek Cypriot side will accede -- then this means that the island will be divided. Then Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot people will be freer than ever to take certain steps in unison. Another possibility is that a political solution is reached and meanwhile, Turkey is given EU perspective -- in other words talks might start for full membership -- and is guaranteed that its rights and obligations over Cyprus will continue during the transition period until Turkey becomes a full member. In this manner, European law does not suddenly become effective over Cyprus. The special ties between Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots are preserved for the duration of the transition period. Then maybe Turkey can agree to such a transition.
Question: Let me ask you a last question. We have discussed positive issues. I do not want to be pessimistic. If, however, these talks do not yield any results either, what will happen then given the fact that the unilateral EU membership of the Greek Cypriot side seems to be imminent?
Answer: I would like to clearly state that, given these conditions, I do not believe that the EU will accept the Greek Cypriot side as a member.
TRT 2 Television (04/12/01) broadcast statements by Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit on Cyprus and the situation in Palestine.
Mr. Ecevit/s statements and his replies to questions are the following:
This morning, there were two important positive and negative developments. The positive development is the one in Cyprus. For the first time, two leaders who are next-door neighbors, Mr. Denktas and Mr. Clerides, met directly in their own country as two neighbors, rather than hiding from one another, thousands of miles from their country. This is a pleasing development. Naturally, we cannot foresee the outcome, but a dialogue to be brought about in this way could open certain doors. I hope that this will yield a positive outcome.
On the subject of the Palestine-Israel issue, as you know, I spoke to Mr. Yaser Arafat last night, and I conducted a conversation with Israeli Prime Minister Sharon early this morning. Unfortunately, there is a hopeless situation. Mr. Sharon seems to be determined to impose very extensive unjust sanctions on the Palestinian Authority and territories. The pressure on the Palestinians and on Arafat is mounting all the time. As you know, Israel destroyed the Gaza airport. This airport was Mr. Arafat's main outlet to the world. Now, it has become difficult for them to reach the world.
As it happens, it is very important for the entire Middle East that Israel and Palestine reach a conciliation and a just agreement. If the situation in Palestine and Israel turns into an actual war, this could create a situation that is even more dangerous than the one in Afghanistan, especially in terms of our region. Therefore, I am saddened and concerned. I hope that the two leaders, Mr. Sharon and Mr. Arafat, come together in a constructive approach as soon as possible. I also conveyed this hope to the two leaders during our conversations. I believe that it will be very beneficial, even essential, for the United States to become involved in a more effective and active manner.
Question: The question of a European army is one of the most important items of the agenda. Turkey declared that it will support this army, but Greece was extremely uneasy over the assurances given to Turkey with regard to its participation in the decisionmaking mechanism. Some messages began emanating that Greece will exercise its veto right in NATO. Can you comment on this?
Answer: If so, Greece would probably be alone on this matter.
Question: Have you spoken to Mr. Denktas on the telephone?
Answer: Yes, I did.
Question: Is there any hope for the future?
Answer: They have not gone into detail yet. As you know, they made a concrete decision to meet again in mid-January in Nicosia. During that meeting, they will probably discuss some concrete items on the agenda. For now, this was a beginning to reestablish a dialogue. In that respect, it is a pleasing development.
Question: You stress that external forces such as the EU should not intervene in the Cyprus issue. Now that the talks have begun, do you have a message to the EU and to the other international circles?
Answer: The Clerides-Denktas meeting constitutes a message in itself. They are meeting directly through their own will, not under the supervision or the shadow of other people or organizations, taking into consideration the good offices of the United Nations. When the existence of two separate states and nations in Cyprus is accepted, a solution to satisfy both sides can easily be implemented.
Question: The Greeks acknowledged 14 September as the Asia Minor genocide day. It is being reported that the Turkish Government will retaliate in kind, by declaring 15 May as the genocide day of the Turks of western Anatolia. It is also being said that a similar initiative will be undertaken with regard to the Armenians. Can you comment on these developments?
Answer: Greece's decision regarding Asia Minor is so illogical and such a ridiculous allegation that Greek officials tried to conceal this decision for a long time. They were practically ashamed of it. In the end, of course, the decision was revealed. As you noted, we are also doing whatever is necessary, and we will continue to do so in the future as well.
Ankara Anatolia (04/12/01) reported that the Turkish Foreign Ministry
released a statement, on the meeting between President Clerides and Rauf Denktas. The statement said: "The meeting is considered a further and positive step on the path for a comprehensive solution which aims at a new partnership on basis of equal status on Cyprus``.
Alleging that Turkey had always supported the ``constructive initiative`` of Denktas since the beginning, it said: ``We wish that the face-to-face meetings which are expected to start on the island in mid-January would create the opportunity and basis of bringing the common understanding and positive atmosphere which has been formed between the two leaders today, to a further level with concrete steps.``
Ankara Anatolia (04/12/01) reported that President Ahmet Necdet Sezer talked on Tuesday with the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas on the phone.
A statement of the Presidential Press Center quoted Sezer as saying during the phone talk with Denktas that Turkey considered Denktas` face-to-face meeting with President Glafcos Clerides as a positive development.
The statement noted that Sezer expressed Turkey's pleasure that this constructive approach of Denktas would continue by a second meeting scheduled for January.
Sezer expressed Turkey's wish that that process would contribute to a fair and permanent solution in Cyprus on the basis of a new partnership understanding, the statement added.
Ankara Anatolia (04/12/01) reported that the so-called Prime Minister of the pseudostate Dervis Eroglu said on Tuesday that the meeting between Rauf Denktas and Glafcos Clerides served its purpose.
Pointing out that the sides decided to start negotiations in January 2002 without any preconditions, Eroglu said that the sides would continue the talks in their own "countries" on a new and more realistic ground and without any mediators.
Eroglu said thus, the new and realistic ground which they stressed on following the verbal statements of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on November 8, 2000 was laid and noted that it was very important that talks on that new and realistic ground would be held in Cyprus, not abroad, and without any mediators.
Eroglu went on: ``As the mediated talks concept has ended, other organizations will not overshadow such meetings and the sides will express their views clearly and try to lay the groundwork for an agreement.``
If the Greek Cypriot administration had goodwill as the Turkish side does, and if ways to reach an agreement were searched sincerely, in light of the realities and without denying the realities in the island, they believed that an agreement could be reached, Eroglu pointed out.
Eroglu stated that they wished that the talks started with goodwill would continue in the same course and that an agreement which would not deny the current realities and the vested interest of the Turkish Cypriots which were gained in the end of the struggle, would be made.
`This will become definite in time,`` Eroglu said and noted that people should not think that an agreement would be signed the following day.
Eroglu stated that theTurkish side gave the signals that talks could be continued with goodwill and that an agreement could be reached if that goodwill was reciprocated.
Some messages were given not only to the EU but also to the United States and U.N. Security Council by today`s meeting, Eroglu said.
Eroglu pointed out that the message was ``provided that nobody overshadows, we are around the table with goodwill. We have met around the table with goodwill and we will continue the talks with goodwill.``
``We hope that the other side will stay at the table with good will. I wish that the negotiations will be continued in a way that an agreement will be reached in the end,`` Eroglu added.
Turkish Daily News (5/12/01) publishes the following report on yesterday/s meeting between President Clerides and Turkish Cypriot Leader Rauf Denktas.
"The leaders of the two sides of Cyprus agreed at a summit meeting Tuesday to launch a new and invigorated direct talks process.
Emerging from a 75-minute meeting Rauf Denktas, Greek Cypriot leader Glafcos Clerides and Alvaro de Soto, the special envoy of United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, declared that the U.N. chief would invite the two leaders to the January talks. He did not spell out a date.
However, briefing the Turkish Daily News about the meeting, Denktas said the new process would be launched on Jan. 15, and would continue to negotiate in good faith until a comprehensive settlement was achieved.
A brief statement issued after the meeting by the U.N. mission on Cyprus also stressed that point, besides underlining that there would be no preconditions.
The statement also underlined that the January invigorated talks process of the two leaders would be held with an open agenda and that "All issues will be on the table" and will be conducted with the principle that "Nothing will be agreed until everything is agreed."
The statement, as anticipated, referred to the two leaders without their respective official titles.
Denktas, appearing relaxed, said he has extended a hand in peace in good faith to Clerides, and that he was happy that a "good result" was obtained.
Denktas said his latest initiative was a courageous search for an avenue for resolution of the Cyprus problem. He said he believed that Clerides was loving Cyprus also.
"I can say that we have opened a door for direct talks. This is a new and invigorated process and we have committed ourselves to continue the talks in good faith until a settlement is reached," Denktash said.
The Turkish Cypriot leader, acknowledging that despite the existence of political will in northern Cyprus and his belief that Clerides would do his best as well to reach a solution, search for a settlement would be an uphill task particularly for the Greek Cypriot leader.
Denktas said as long as the EU kept the doors open for Greek Cypriot accession with or without a settlement on the island, he was sure that the Greek Cypriot leader would face serious opposition and obstructions.
"He will have great difficulty," he said.
Clerides to attend Denktas dinner The Turkish Cypriot leader also disclosed that he has invited Clerides to dinner and the Greek Cypriot leader has accepted the invitation.
The last time Clerides was in northern Cyprus was in 1980.
Denktas said the dinner will be held today and will also be attended by de Soto.
The Turkish Cypriot leader said Clerides, in return, invited him to a dinner in southern Cyprus on Jan. 15, and that he would attend that dinner.
"We will meet first at the U.N. mansion at the Nicosia Airport region -- in the buffer zone -- and then attend a dinner hosted by Clerides in southern Cyprus," Denktas said.
The Denktas visit to southern Cyprus will be the first such official trip since 1974 Turkish intervention in the island.
Denktas presents position paper He added that at the meeting he presented Clerides a position paper, but the Greek Cypriot leader, stressing that it would be inappropriate to trade at that meeting" did not present a paper. "He said he will present me a position paper in January," Denktas said.
In his position paper Denktas underlined that the Cyprus problem has come to a critical point and at that juncture the Turkish Cypriot side has the political will and readiness to start a new process "based on the political equality of the two parties for negotiating the establishment of a new partnership."
"We have a major role to play in reaching a comprehensive settlement and in creating a desired environment of confidence, cooperation and partnership. I believe the time has come for Clerides and myself to move ahead and to take the necessary initiatives so that future generations do not go through the bitter experiences we have endured," the position paper presented by Denktas to Clerides and a copy of which was obtained by the TDN, said.
The paper continued:
A few facts need to be reiterated at this juncture. The Turkish Cypriot people and the Greek Cypriot people are the co-owners of Cyprus and this Island is the common home of both peoples. The independence and the sovereignty of the Partnership Republic of Cyprus were entrusted In '1960 to these co-founding partners with equal status upon explicit recognition of their separate rights to self-determination, while establishing a balanced status between the two guarantor motherlands and their rights over Cyprus. Today there exist functioning democratic Institutions on both sides, which reflect the political will of their respective peoples.
In shaping our future the basic requirement is realism. This realism must be solidified with an atmosphere of mutual respect, reconciliation and a working relationship between the two parties.
We took notes of the recent statements by EU officials that EU will accommodate itself to the terms of the political settlement to be agreed by both parties. In this respect, we will support the membership of the Cyprus Partnership on the EU within the terms of a political settlement. The balance established between Turkey and Greece with regard to Cyprus by the 1960 Treaties is also crucial and has to be maintained in every respect.
I believe that this face-to-face interaction provides a new and significant opportunity for both parties in reaching a common understanding on how we can move forward.
Our vision is a peaceful Cyprus where our two peoples live in harmony and cooperation under a new partnership structure based on the equal status and sovereign equality of the two Partner States. The new Partnership will have
single international personality in its areas of competence. We believe this vision is within reach.
We should focus on what our common interests are and how we can serve them by mutual efforts. What needs to be done now is to lay down the objectives and elements of a comprehensive settlement addressing the legitimate concerns of both parties.
Efforts for a viable settlement in Cyprus could yield desired results only in an environment of mutual trust. The way to a Cyprus settlement is through
positive relations between the two parties on the Island. Therefore, if we are to initiate a process for settlement with the expectation of a successful outcome, the issue of trust and confidence must also be addressed.
With this understanding, I propose, the setting up of a Bilateral Committee under our Co-Chairmanship. Such a Bilateral Committee could take up and discuss:
I) All major Issues of the Cyprus Question
II) The steps to be taken for generating a climate of mutual respect and confidence.
We should continue to discuss all aspects of the Cyprus Question. I suggest that we start to take up the core issues in a detailed manner in our next meeting. As we proceed, we may seek the support of our respective experts and the U.N.
We may not have a common understanding on all issues but the process of consultation has to continue so that through dialogue and interaction we may be able to tackle the content and find a way forward.
The ideas I have put forward constitute a new pattern of relationship. I believe that our objective is to leave to future generations a Cyprus on which the two peoples could live in prosperity, security and cooperate on the basis of equality.
Turkish Daily News (5/12/01) reports that opposition True Path Party (DYP) group deputy leader Nevzat Ercan, said at a press conference in Parliament that the government was in a weak position over Cyprus and the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) and that it was unable to formulate national policy to counter impositions. "This government stood by and watched as provisions over Cyprus were included in the Helsinki Final Declaration. It can only oppose impositions to make a present of Cyprus to Greece via the EU with jingoism and crocodile tears," he said.
Ercan said this 'government of weakness' was a long way from representing a national political will and from developing policies. He said the 1960 agreements prohibited the Republic of Cyprus as it was known then from entering a union which both Greece and Turkey were not members of. "In this situation, we have to ask the EU the following question: Does it recognize the agreements as a necessity of international law, or doesn't it? If it does, then it must not make Cyprus a member. If it does not, then international law has to be questioned," he said and added it was impossible for the DYP to accept TUSIAD's views on Cyprus, which ran counter to all traditional politics.
Ercan said Turkey had been left in the position of having to give concessions over the ESDP and added: "The government has never used the opportunities properly when they presented themselves. It has had to let the European Army be formed without Turkey being a part of it. This is very much counter to our country's interests. This government is weak and pitiful." He called on the government to resign.
10. Reactions to Yesterday's Meeting Between President Clerides and Turkish Cypriot Leader Denktas
All the local Turkish Cypriot newspapers (5/12/01) report about yesterday's
face-to-face meeting between President Clerides and Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas, as follows:
KIBRIS: "Historical Step"
ORTAM: "A Good Start"
VATAN: "Clerides is coming to TRNC for a dinner"
YENI DEMOKRAT: "Historical Step"
YENIDUZEN: "At Last!"
AVRUPA: "To your honour"
BIRLIK: "Denktas: A New Process is starting"
KIBRISLI :"Garniyarik" (An eggplant food well known to Greek and Turkish cuisine''
HALKIN SESI :'' Hope Evil Eye Will Not Affect''
All the papers report the meeting in a reserved optimism and quote what Denktas said during the press conference. Yeniduzen reports the protest
march organised by the'' This Country Is Ours Platform'', where the marchers demanded a solution and accession to the EU.
The papers also report about the dinner to be hosted by Denktas and President Clerides' acceptance to attend the dinner.
Under the above title Mehmet Ali Birand, writing in his regular column "Opinion" of Turkish Daily News (05/12/01) says the following:
"I am sure that no one has properly understood the "fight" taking place on the issue of the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) commonly called the European Army.
Since we talk by using slogans, for a long time we failed to understand exactly what the bargaining was about.
In this article I will try to explain the meaning of the talks being held in Ankara with U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell today and the bargaining process that will continue between Athens, Brussels and Ankara during the coming days.
The European Union (EU) in founding its own army which will become operative as of 2003. The final decision on this issue will be taken at a summit meeting on Dec. 14-15 in Laeken, Belgium.
The decision has been delayed until now because of the objections raised by Turkey.
The EU army will function in two ways:
1. If and when the EU takes a decision to intervene in a certain spot and if that decision gets approved by the nonmember NATO countries such as the
United States, Canada and Turkey, the EU army will make use of all NATO facilities, benefiting from NATO planning, intelligence-gathering satellites, bases and troops.
Turkey does not have a problem in this respect. This is because, as a NATO member, it has veto rights. It can block the path of the EU army any time it wants.
2. Problems arise on the issue of what happens when the EU decides to stage an autonomous military operation on its own without making NATO join the loop.
In such a case, the EU would be able to stage an operation without seeking NATO's approval and without making use of the NATO facilities. In other words, Turkey would have no tool to block any such thing.
Why is Ankara upset? Turkey is trying to place this issue on a sound basis with misgivings of the following kind: "You can never tell. The situation may change in the future."
Ankara's misgivings stem from a certain scenario:
One day Greece may decide to expand to 12 miles its territorial waters in the Aegean and considering this a cause for war, Turkey may stage an operation against that. In such a case Greece may ask the EU to intervene and thus confront Turkey in the Aegean with the EU on its side. Or, in the future, the Southern Cyprus may start making an excessive military buildup. It may buy weapons systems -- such as S-300s -- capable of hitting Anatolia. In that case too Turkey may decide to intervene. Since Southern Cyprus would have become a full member of the EU, it can mobilize the EU against Turkey, confronting Turkey with the EU army.
Ankara is, mainly, trying to kill these two possibilities though it has some other concerns as well.
And, to achieve that, it has, to date, focused on two potential measures:
1. If the European Army decides to stage an "autonomous" intervention in a place situated in the region where Turkey is, Turkey should be able to take part in that operation. And this point should be accepted as early as now.
2. It must be guaranteed that the EU Army would not intervene in the disputes among the NATO members, meaning the Aegean and Cyprus without exactly saying so.
The latest agreement reached in Ankara will now be reviewed in Athens and Brussels and then finalized at the EU's Laeken summit.
And the Greeks are refusing to budge from their decision to veto that agreement.
If there was a 'package' involving both the Aegean and Cyprus...
The only trump card Turkey has in its hands is the current opportunity to veto the EU's "intra-NATO" operations now, and thus force the EU to create its own army itself by undertaking the enormous cost that would entail.
However, the United States opposes that.
The United States does not want the European Army to be in a position where it would be able to act on its own. It wants the European Army to remain within the NATO framework. It wants to maintain a certain control over that army.
Now you may ask:
a.. Why should Greece take the 12-mile decision in the current climate, knowing very well that this would be a cause for war?
* Would not the EU countries prevent Greece from expanding its territorial waters in the Aegean to 12 miles rather than going to war with Turkey?
* Would not the EU bring to a halt -- before we would -- any folly in which Cyprus might engage?
* Assuming that Greece and Cyprus really engaged in such a folly and Turkey decided to give an armed response. What purpose would the agreement to be signed now would serve in that case? If the EU intends to confront Turkey, would an agreement cause it to change its mind?
Frankly, these are extremely justified questions.
However, the answers to be given to these questions would be as theoretical as the scenarios on the Aegean and Cyprus.
And states feel the need to take measures in advance against "assumptions" however illogical these may be.
The U.S. must now join the loop and bring about a 'package agreement' At this moment there is a major opportunity to bring long-term tranquillity to the region.
A solution is called for in Cyprus. This is because the EU had decided to admit Cyprus as a full member and thus solve the problem.
The European Army issue has to be resolved. This is because the EU had changed its mind, deciding against giving Turkey the position agreed upon in Washington.
All these issues have formed a knot -- which can be untied at the EU.
And the resolution of both issues is related to the "12 miles in the Aegean" issue, that is, on future developments in the Turkey-Greece-Cyprus triangle.
Ankara believes that the EU will take Cyprus as well under its protective wing by making it a full member -- just as it has done in the case of Greece -- and that afterwards it would protect Greece and Cyprus with its own army.
And these worries must be taken into consideration.
Be it in on the Cyprus problem, the European Army issue or the Aegean disputes, why not think big and put forth a "package" that would bring peace and tranquillity to the region rather than engaging in an exasperating bargaining process?
The most important factor that would give Turkey relief, would be for the EU to announce a definite date on which it would start accession talks with Turkey -- provided that Turkey complies with the EU's Copenhagen criteria. That would ease Ankara's worries regarding Cyprus and the Aegean. Then Turkey would view the developments in a new light.
Such a "package agreement" would give relief to everyone, especially to the region in question.
And only the United States can ensure that.
It must not be forgotten that as long as Turkey is not a full member of the EU, tranquillity can hardly be achieved in the region. The more Cyprus and Greece, having become EU members, put pressure on Ankara with the EU support, the more Turkey would give hell not only to those two countries but to the EU as well.
Since it is obvious that it is not possible to force Ankara to accept anything through economic-political blackmail, would it not be better to adopt a new approach without losing time?
This is what we expect from the United States which, unlike the EU, does not think small or in a disorganized manner".
KV/M.Pat.
tcpr2html v1.00 run on Wednesday, 5 December 2001 - 17:31:09 UTC


text:
Foghat Introduce 'Slow Ride' Condoms
Martin Kielty Published: January 26, 2018
Foghat have launched their own branded condoms, named after their 1975 signature track "Slow Ride" and designed, they say, to help fans continue to enjoy the song safely.
The band also pointed out that the novelty item had been put on sale just in time for Valentine's Day. The Twitter announcement was accompanied by an e-card that shows a girl telling a younger boy that "Mommy and Daddy listened to 'Slow Ride' … and then you happened."
"We have heard stories of how so many of you were conceived to 'Slow Ride,'" Foghat wrote. "That's great! But if you are not yet ready for parenthood, we are here to help." The band noted that the condoms "are ready to rock any time you are." They're available now, costing $15 for a pack of six.
In a 2016 interview with BestClassicBands.com, bassist Craig McGregor said of "Slow Ride," "What's really cool is when you'll be talking to somebody, and you'll have people say they don't remember the name or aren't familiar with it. And someone will say, have you heard 'Slow Ride'? And immediately: Oh, 'Slow ride/Take it easy … .' It blows my mind how many people know that. It's a very rewarding feeling to know that it has been out there for so long, yet everybody knows it. That's a pretty impressive thing, it really is for us."
"One of the really nice things about it is that you'll be out having dinner and it comes up with somebody, or you'll be in a bar, and they'll say, 'Can I buy you a drink?'" drummer Roger Earl added. "You've got to be careful when you go out or you'll end up getting smashed."
Foghat's next run of tour dates begins on Feb. 3 with appearances booked until February 2019.
Next: Foghat's 'Slow Ride' in UCR's Top 100 Classic Rock Songs
Source: Foghat Introduce 'Slow Ride' Condoms
Filed Under: Foghat
Foghat Bassist Craig MacGregor Dies
Foghat Announce 'Under the Influence' Vinyl Release
Listen to Foghat's 'Under the Influence': Exclusive Premiere
Foghat Announce New Album, 'Under the Influence'
40 Years Ago: Foghat Releases 'Energized'
Foghat Collaborate With Fan on New Single
"What's Their Name?" THEY'RE COMING! – Red River Valley Fair 2023
In Mandan – A Well-Known Bar Could Be Making A Comeback
Do You Agree? Bismarck Named One Of America's Most Affordable Places To Live

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
HOME ABOUT PEOPLE CONTACT NEWS
Martin Dusinberre
James Jack
Hilmi Johandi
Anthony Medrano
Collier Nogues
Siddharta Perez
Aki Sasamoto
Naoko Shimazu
Lawrence Ypil
Martin Dusinberre teaches at the University of Zurich. His research focuses on the history of Japan's engagement with the Pacific world from the mid-19th to mid-20th centuries. In the last decade he has published on the history of transpacific migration, shipping, sugar plantation labour and Japanese conceptions of the 'Pacific age'. He is currently completing his second monograph, on the constitution of 'the' archive in an age of global history. He has co-edited special issues of The Journal of Global History (2016), Historische Anthropologie (2019) and the Historical Journal (2021), and since 2020 he has been on the Editorial Board of Past & Present.
James Jack is an American Asian artist based in Japan who engages layered histories of place to achieve positive change through community-led initiatives. His works have been exhibited at Honolulu Museum of Art, Setouchi International Art Festival, Busan Biennale Sea Art Festival, Tokyo Metropolitan Museum of Art, Centre for Contemporary Art Singapore, and writings by him appear in publications by Shima, Art & Society Research Center Tokyo, The Contemporary Museum of Hawai'i, Blum & Poe Gallery and Satoshi Koyama Gallery. He was a Crown Prince Akihito Scholar, artist fellow at Social Art Lab in Fukuoka, Georgette Chen Fellow and completed a doctorate at Tokyo University of the Arts.
jamesjack.org
Work produced with DOCUMENT: A short history of losing access to the Sea / Rhizomatic Thinking / Repairing Nets of Knowledge
Hilmi Johandi works primarily with painting and has seen developing an expanded field of the medium to dwell with drawing, video, digital imaging and installation. He revises images from film, archival footage and photographs into a fragmented montage that hints at the social effects of rapid development. Beyond the reflection of nostalgia in Hilmi's work is a subtle portrayal of a society that encourages the viewer to critically rethink existing historical narratives, within the context of Singapore and Southeast Asia.
Trained in History and Asian studies, Anthony Medrano teaches ocean-related modules in the Environmental Studies program at Yale-NUS College. In line with his teaching and advising, his research interests center around the history and legacy of human interactions with marine environments in South and Southeast Asia. He has a particular affection for fish—and the study of fish—as archive, story, image, art, science, technology, and culture. Prior to joining Yale-NUS College, he was a Ziff Environmental Fellow at Harvard University. He is completing his first book manuscript titled The Edible Ocean: Science, Industry, and the Rise of Urban Southeast Asia, which is under contract with Yale University Press.
Collier Nogues writes at the intersection of digital and documentary poetics, with an emphasis on making connections across decolonization and demilitarization movements in the U.S. and in the Pacific. Her poetry collections are the hybrid print/interactive The Ground I Stand On Is Not My Ground (Drunken Boat, 2015) and On the Other Side, Blue (Four Way, 2011). Her work has been supported by fellowships from the MacDowell Colony, the Ucross Foundation, Vermont Studio Center, and Lingnan University, and her writing has appeared in Jacket2, ASAP/J, The Volta, At Length, Jubilat, Pleiades, Massachusetts Review, the Academy of American Poets' Poem-A-Day Project, and elsewhere. Collier holds a PhD from the University of Hong Kong and an MFA from the University of California, Irvine. She teaches creative writing at the University of Hong Kong and edits poetry for Juked.
colliernogues.com
Work produced with DOCUMENT: History Is Knowing / Groundwater / Across the Sea / Hog Simulation
Siddharta Perez is a curator. Their practice is parented by independent communities in Manila and the regions surrounding the Philippines, chiselled by museum employment and softened by peers who, like them, contend with oblique prompts on public histories and think about the rehabilitation of personal legacies. Sidd is currently affiliated with the National University of Singapore Museum where she facilitates the circulation, education and other curatorial expressions of contemporary projects and the Museum's Southeast Asia Collection.
Aki Sasamoto works in sculpture, performance, video, and more. In her installation/performance works, Aki moves and talks inside the careful arrangements of sculpturally altered objects, activating bizarre emotions behind daily life. Her works appear in gallery spaces, theater spaces, and odd sites. Her works were shown at SculptureCenter, the Kitchen, Chocolate Factory Theater, Whitney Biennial 2010, MOMA-PS1, New York; National Museum of Art-Osaka, Yokohama Triennale 2008, Japan; Gwangju Biennial 2012, South Korea; Shanghai Biennale 2016, China; Kochi-Muziris Biennale 2016, India.
Naoko Shimazu is Professor of Humanities (History) and Associate Dean of Faculty at Yale-NUS College, and Professor at the Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore. Her major publications include Imagining Japan in Post-war East Asia (co-editor, Routledge, 2013), Japanese Society at War: Death, Memory and the Russo-Japanese War (Cambridge University Press, 2009), Nationalisms in Japan (editor, Routledge, 2006), Japan, Race and Equality: Racial Equality Proposal of 1919 (Routledge, 1998). She is currently working on the cultural history of diplomacy, focusing on the Bandung Conference of 1955, as well as exploring methodological issues.
Lawrence Lacambra Ypil is a poet and essayist whose work explores the intersection of text and image, and the role of material culture in the construction of cultural identity.In 2020, he was a finalist for the Lambda Literary Awards and on the longlist for The Believer Book Awards for The Experiment of the Tropics. His first book, The Highest Hiding Place received the Madrigal-Gonzalez best first book award. Lawrence has received MFAs from Washington University in St. Louis and from the Nonfiction Writing Program of the University of Iowa. He teaches creative writing at Yale-NUS College.
lawrenceypil.com


text:
Specialty: Multispecialty
News > Medscape Medical News
Many MIPS Measures Not Valid, ACP Finds
Kerry Dooley Young
An analysis performed by an influential physicians' group found that many components of Medicare's Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) fall short of the goal of improving patient care, with some of these metrics even raising potential risks for older patients.
This new research from the American College of Physicians (ACP) may bolster the arguments of MIPS critics, who want the program delayed or scrapped. MIPS is slated to affect 2019 Medicare reimbursement for many physicians. However, writing in an article published online April 18 in the New England Journal of Medicine, members of the ACP's Performance Measurement Committee present an unfavorable assessment of many of the measures included in the MIPS/Quality Payment Program.
The authors, led by Catherine H. MacLean, MD, PhD, from the Center for the Advancement of Value in Musculoskeletal Care at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City, report that well over half of measures considered relevant to general ambulatory medicine were either not valid or of uncertain validity.
They raise concerns, for example, about a MIPS measure for high blood pressure that requires a that blood pressure of 140/90 mm Hg or lower be achieved in the clinic setting for all patients. "Forcing blood pressure down to this threshold could harm frail elderly adults and patients with certain coexisting conditions," they write.
MacLean and colleagues also said a MIPS measure on pain management might unintentionally promote overuse of opioid therapy.
Of 271 measures in the 2017 Quality Payment Program measures list, the ACP committee identified and rated 86 as relevant to ambulatory general internal medicine. Of those, they rated just 32 (37%) as valid. In contrast, they rated 30 (35%) as not valid and 24 (28%) as being of uncertain validity.
MacLean and colleagues called for "a time-out" to allow revisions to physician performance measurement.
"The fact that only 37% of measures proposed for a national value-based purchasing program were found to be valid with a standardized method has implications for physician-level performance measurement," they wrote.
The new Medicare requirements are only part of a maze of quality measures that physicians have faced in recent years, with other insurers also using their own sets of metrics. MacLean and colleagues note that 63% of physicians in a recent survey said these kinds of measures do not properly assess the quality of the care that physicians provide. Yet, the cost of reporting data needed for these measurements has been pegged at about $15.4 billion each year, or about $40,000 per physician.
To assess MIPS measures, MacLean and colleagues used a modified version of a method developed at RAND and the University of California, Los Angeles, for evaluating the benefits and harms of medical intervention. The ACP committee hypothesized that physicians would have more confidence in the system's ability to improve the health of patients if most of the MIPS/Quality Payment Program measures assessed were deemed valid using this process. But if a substantial proportion of the measures failed to prove valid, that would be a signal to consider changes to the new system, the authors write.
Another example of a MIPS measure that failed to be seen as valid is related to elder maltreatment screening and follow-up. The US Preventive Services Task Force has found insufficient evidence to warrant routine screening, MacLean and colleagues note.
"We believe the substantial resources required to screen large populations of elderly patients for maltreatment and to track follow-up would be better directed at care processes whose link to improved health is supported by more robust evidence," they wrote.
The newly published findings may add to the doubts about MIPS, said Paul B. Ginsburg, PhD, a researcher affiliated with the Brookings Institution. He reviewed the New England Journal of Medicine paper at the request of Medscape Medical News, complimenting the ACP committee on its work. The ACP paper highlights, for example, that the measurement cited on high blood pressure is "too crude" and could result in harm to patients, he said.
"This actually now makes us much less confident in what the quality measures might be accomplishing," Ginsburg told Medscape Medical News.
Ginsburg also serves on the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, which in March made a formal recommendation to Congress that it scrap this system.
In an April 19 letter to top congressional lawmakers, ACP's president, Jack Ende, MD, said the organization continues to "support the original goals of" the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 that mandated creation of MIPS. He then flagged for the lawmakers the newly published ACP research and asked that Congress continue to "exercise its oversight authority" in pressing for changes in MIPS.
"We believe that physicians should not be penalized based on poorly designed measures," Ende wrote.
With MIPS, federal officials have created a system that largely will test how well physicians have learned to respond to CMS' payment incentive, and will not serve as a true reflection of the quality of their work, Robert A. Berenson, MD, a fellow with the Urban Institute, told Medscape Medical News in an interview.
Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services likely will find ways to soften the financial blow of MIPS on physicians, but lawmakers may not be anxious to soon make major changes in the program, he said. Many members of both parties still cite the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 as a rare recent example of productive relations between Democrats and Republicans. With MIPS, they wanted to build a pay-for-performance aspect into Medicare as they got rid of an older budget-control mechanism, known as the sustainable growth rate.
"It was bipartisan and it was bipartisanly wrong," Berenson said.
On coauthor reports personal fees from Academy Health/PCORI and Altarum Institute/RWJF outside the submitted work, and serving as the Immediate Past Chair of the Performance Measurement Committee for ACP. The other authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
N Engl J Med. Published online April 19, 2017. Full text
For more news, join us on Facebook and Twitter
Medscape Medical News © 2018 WebMD, LLC
Send comments and news tips to news@medscape.net.
Cite this: Many MIPS Measures Not Valid, ACP Finds - Medscape - Apr 23, 2018.
GE HealthCare Expects 5%-7% Organic Revenue Growth in 2023 on Strong Demand
Staffing Woes Set to Weigh on Hospital Operator's Profits
AbbVie, Eli Lilly Exit UK Drug Pricing Agreement
News GE HealthCare Expects 5%-7% Organic Revenue Growth in 2023 on Strong Demand
News Staffing Woes Set to Weigh on Hospital Operator's Profits
News AbbVie, Eli Lilly Exit UK Drug Pricing Agreement
Some New Year's Resolutions for Your Medical Practice
Medscape Female Physician Compensation Report 2017
ED Doctors Call Private Equity Staffing Practices Illegal and Seek to Ban Them
Battle of the Scrubs: Popular Upstart Defeats Competitor in Court but Faces New Investor Scrutiny
MIPS Could Slow the Move Away From Fee-for-Service Pay, Panel Says
Medicare Advisers Urge Quick Action on MIPS Replacement Plan
Quality Reporting Costs $40,000 per Physician per Year
b:curatedcuratedHasData : true


24. Carrie Davis Agency, Inc.
Do You Have an Ugly Tub? WE CAN FIX IT. Contact Us today.
Get everything in writing. I recently worked with them on two houses. The first house was a fully furnished house that the previous owners dog had urinated all over it and the answer I got from them was they could do nothing while we lived there so we simply needed to avoid that room. On the second house I went in their office and asked them specifically how much of my deposit I would get back after cleaning charges came out. They either have selective memory, or they quote things without checking. The bill was way over what they quoted and the best part was they charged me for painting walls that were damaged when I moved in. There response time and customer service are very poor as well.


Stroke is the third leading cause of death and leading cause of adult disability worldwide. While a degree of spontaneous recovery occurs after stroke, over 80% of stroke patients still suffer from long-lasting impairments that affect their ability to perform daily activities.
Brain injuries such as stroke strongly activate inflammatory pathways. While inflammation can help resolve injury, prolonged inflammation hinders tissue repair and ultimately prognosis. Our laboratory has investigated whether pharmacological agents can reduce brain inflammation, promote repair and improve recovery after experimental stroke.
We have shown that delayed administration of the SSRI, citalopram and the nicotinic agonist varenicline produce long lasting improvements in functional performance in our stroke model. These functional improvement are accompanied by reduced brain inflammation.
The next step in developing our stroke work is to align our experimental studies with clinical reality and establish parallel endpoints. The development of non-invasive imaging modalities to detect and characterise neuroplasticity after experimental stroke is critical to the development of potential neurorestorative therapies and their application in the clinic.
Mr Siyi (Robert) Chen is a Visiting PhD Candidate at CAI from the School of Pharmacy & Center for Brain Research, University of Auckland, New Zealand.


Looking for more information about Sunshine Coast?
The Duck Lake Protected Area offers undeveloped opportunities for hiking, fishing and birdwatching. Duck Lake Protected Area is located 5 km east of Powell River.


text:
Music: Spring Hoots
Nick Lyons takes in a Sunday tradition
In the beginning was the Word: Hootenanny. The Word was coined by a couple o' hillbillies from the Appalachian Mountain region of the United States of America. It was a catch-all, used in place of those words that only make it as far as the tip of one's tongue: synonymous with "whaddyacallit?" or "thingy."
Eventually, the word morphed and was used to describe a party and then, more specifically, a musical party. Pete Seeger first heard the word just across the water from us, in Seattle, at Hugh DeLacey's New Deal Political Club, in reference to the monthly musical fundraisers they had over there.
Eventually, "Hootenanny" spread back across the continent to New York, where it was adopted by Greenwich Village folk musicians such as Joan Baez and Bob Dylan, both of whom were regulars at the Bitter End Club, which hosted hootenannies every Tuesday night. Baez aptly described Hootenannies as Folk music's version of a jam session. The first time I ever heard the word was on Dylan's live in '64 bootleg; I had no idea what he was talking about.
Victoria's Hootenanny has its own long and complex history; it too has criss-crossed the continent. It began here in Victoria as Miss Carolyn Mark's brainchild though, at the time, it was not held at her beloved Logan's Pub. While on tour, Mark met up with Luther Wright and, over a veggie dog, they decided to give the hoot a go in Ontario— Kingston, more specifically. The Eastern incarnation of the Hootenanny featured N.Q. Arbuckle, Sarah Harmer, Oh! Susanna, Jenny Whiteley, Luther Wright and, of course, Carolyn Mark. It was a smashing success, on land and on water.
One of the few constants in Mark's Hootenanny's varied history is the famous quilt, which provides a homey, warm backdrop for the many performers who take the stage. The quilt was designed by local musician and artist J. Mclaughlin. If you survey the fabrics of the quilt closely, you can see the blood-red-brown evidence of her drunken needle.
Mclaughlin's quilt is a perfect symbolical representation of the Hootenanny. It takes various styles, colours and textures of fabric; unifying them into a singular entity. Similarly, the Hootenanny went through many incarnations as it travelled through Ontario and Quebec, then back west, where it picked up future fixtures such as Shuyler Jansen and Hank and Lily. This is to say nothing, of course, of the various local talent from all over who were fortunate enough to sing in front of the quilt's sacred thread.
This past Sunday, Carolyn Mark was noticeably absent from the Hoot as she was busy playing at the SXSW in Texas (lucky lady). In her stead stood the venerable Grayson Walker, who played master of ceremonies at the first Hootenanny of spring. Walker started at the piano before picking up his accordion and leading the crowd through strange, haunting renditions of AC DC and Queen classics. He wore big, black boots, a striped shirt and black vest, as did the drummer, "Rad Juli" who, miraculously, stayed sober enough to sit in on drums throughout the afternoon and early evening. I wondered if their matching clothes were coincidental or not.
While Mark wasn't there, her guitar was and it was soon caressed by "Hart" who, in a style many people at my table described as Cornellian, belted out a number of ballads before giving up his spot on the stage to Hoot-regular Wes Borg.
According to urban legend, Borg used to live in a van. Recently, his mobile home burned to the asphalt which prompted a fundraiser in his honor, to get him back on wheels again. Hopefully everything turned out ok because, by the end of the set, it was apparent that Borg is one of the brightest of the many jewels in the Hootenanny Crown. He sang impassioned songs of hatred against Edmonton with a mysterious, side-burned guitar player at his side: "Get me the fuck out of Edmonton, before I lose my fuckin' mind". As a former resident of Alberta, alls I can say is amen, and amen.
Next up was James Bay's own Timothy. Tim, as many call him, sang a number of sad ballads after struggling with Carolyn's hoot-strap and procuring a pick from the crowd. The highlight of Tim's set was his mournful rendition of a Big Star standard; fitting, in the wake of Alex Chilton's death early this week. Tim is not a Hootenanny regular, but his performance rose to the high standard of those who played before him. Either that or I was just high on the Meat Poutine (a Logan's specialty) I tackled for the entirety of his set.
Then things got a little bit Shitty (McGee). Clad in a toque, suitjacket, cords and a big black beard, Shitty turned up the heat. He began with a falsetto-style ballad reminiscent of Jack Johnson (though much, much better). Local talent scouts scratched their ears and knees as Shitty then proposed a fundraiser in which he would charge $45.00 at the door to watch him recite the entire New Testament (King James Version) to the tune of "Old MacDonald Had A Farm (in G#)"… I would pay to hear that for sure. I believe that Shitty is a regular at the Hoot; you all owe it to yourselves to see him in person. He doesn't live up to his name.
After that, things started to get blurry for me (the Rainier Beer at Logan's is less than $5.00 a pint). I heard Neil Young (as interpreted by Jacob) and I saw Joni Mitchell too (in Veronica-skin). Blue Rodeo and CCR started to echo off the mid-ranged, red walls and chalk boards of Logan's Pub. It was then that I broke the seal and, much to my surprise, discovered that Logan had recently repainted the walls of the washrooms… I was happy to see that he painted around immortal inscriptions of vandals such as "If my dick was that small, I'd be lookin' up here too", that had been scrawled into the walls above the urinals several years prior.
Upon returning from the bathroom, I was blessed by the sounds of Pink Floyd (Ummagumma and Dark Side of the Moon era alike) which were played with such love and respect that I was forced to question as to whether or not they had been written by Dilan and Sasha… brilliant.
After Grayson played the last songs of the evening, the place emptied as quickly as the glass sleeves. We stuck around for a while before heading over to Pizza Zone and then to Big Bad John's and then to James Bay, where we climbed (and fell out of) trees for a while before going home. We were all energized by the day of music we had enjoyed for absolutely free.
Unlike the Bleaker Street version of the Hootenanny, Mark's Hoot happens on Sunday, the Lord's day. It often came to mind as I saw the variety of folk come streaming in throughout the day. I saw a lot of wheelchairs there, and crutches too. Were people coming for a healing? Maybe not, in the physical sense, but we were all healed. We were all cured from the notion that Home Depot is the best place to spend a Sunday afternoon. We were all saved from the clutches of a tyrannical and oppressive capitalist worldview that suggests, no, screams, that to have fun, a guy, or girl's, gotta spend some money. Did I mention that there is no cover at the Hoot?
All of this begs the question: why isn't Logan's packed every Sunday afternoon? Why is half the pub shrouded in a darkness as black and as terrifying as the eye sockets of the Satan skull above the bourbon at the bar? Why isn't there a line-up to get in the faux-tree-flanked doors of the pub? Who knows: I would gladly spend $10 to see any of the musicians who performed there Sunday afternoon. But perhaps this is a Gnostic tradition. I hope that I am still welcomed back next Sunday, having spread the word a little bit with these scratchings and scrawlings.
— Nick Lyons
Look for upcoming reviews from Nick Lyons here at the Monday Mag blog and on our mondaymag.com website. You can read his blog at milkandhoney2009.wordpress.com/
« Get a Life: March 18- 24 Gigs: David "Honeyboy" Edwards »
Tags: nick lyons
Spring Hoots « Milk and Honey 2009 (17:03:13) :
[…] https://mondaymagazine.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/spring-hoots/ […]
Frog Communications Newsletter: March, 2010 « Frog Communications Victoria (00:09:30) :
[…] be providing updates on when his articles are featured. So far, he has written articles on the Hootenanny and on the Bonfire Ball. He's got his fingers crossed for Charlotte Gainsborg in a couple […]
Now Working Alongside Nick Lyons! « Frog Communications Victoria (11:17:32) :
[…] has also been a very effective outlet for Nick's writing career. His current position with Monday Magazine began as a conversation with Monday Magazine's social media coordinator. Nick has found […]
The Hootenany: Six Years Later | Analogue magazine online (15:10:01) :
[…] Six years ago, Monday Magazine published a piece by a young writer who boldly attempted to capture the essence, and history of a long-standing musical tradition. In the minds of many Victorians, the subject the writer wrestles with in his piece verges on sacrament. His story is too wordy, however, and the language engaged often gets in the way of the lofty sentiments he obviously feels, yet fails to express concisely. From the vantage point of my new-found Editorial perspective, I would give the piece a B—I may have published the review, but I certainly wouldn't have drawn attention to it via social media. The writer of said piece is me, and the subject, of course, is Carolyn Mark's World Famous Hootena… […]
Winners announced for inaugural Victoria Arts Council/Monday poetry contest dlvr.it/RNGD2J 5 hours ago
Dance Victoria: The Trocks are in town! dlvr.it/RNFBdK 13 hours ago
Fashion Fridays: Look your best this year dlvr.it/RNDPl0 17 hours ago
Costumers for 'Riverdale,' 'The Handmaid's Tale' net award nominations dlvr.it/RN9NlT 1 day ago
Canadian polar bears' 'ingenious' survival seen in BBC Earth series dlvr.it/RN6vZ4 2 days ago


1There is something else terribly unfair, and it troubles everyone on earth. 2God may give you everything you want—money, property, and wealth. Then God doesn't let you enjoy it, and someone you don't even know gets it all. That's senseless and terribly unfair!
3You may live a long time and have a hundred children. But a child born dead is better off than you, unless you enjoy life and have a decent burial. 4-5That child will never live to see the sun or to have a name, and it will go straight to the world of darkness. But it will still find more rest than you, 6even if you live two thousand years and don't enjoy life. As you know, we all end up in the same place.
7We struggle just to have enough to eat, but we are never satisfied. 8We may be sensible, yet we are no better off than a fool. And if we are poor, it still doesn't do us any good to try to live right. 9It's better to enjoy what we have than always to want something else, because that makes no more sense than chasing the wind.6.9 chasing the wind: See the note at 1.14.
10Everything that happens was decided long ago. We humans know what we are like, and we can't argue with God, because he is6.10 with God, because he is: Or "with anyone who is". too strong for us. 11The more we talk, the less sense we make, so what good does it do to talk? 12Life is short and meaningless, and it fades away like a shadow. Who knows what is best for us? Who knows what will happen after we are gone?


text:
Z15 Erich Steinbrinck – niemiecki niszczyciel typu 1934A (Leberecht Maass) z okresu przedwojennego i II wojny światowej. Po wojnie do 1949 służył w marynarce ZSRR jako Pyłkij.

Budowa

Zamówiony 19 stycznia 1935, położenie stępki – 30 maja 1935, wodowanie – 24 września 1936, wejście do służby – 31 maja 1938. Zbudowany w stoczni Blohm und Voss w Hamburgu (numer stoczniowy B503). W systemie oznaczeń niemieckich niszczycieli miał przydzielony numer Z15 (rzadko używany oficjalnie). Nosił numery burtowe: 31, następnie 32 (usunięte 9 listopada 1939). Koszt budowy wyniósł 14,1 miliona Reichsmark.

Nazwę nadano mu na cześć niemieckiego kapitana marynarki Ericha Steinbrincka, dowódcy niszczyciela V29, poległego wraz z okrętem w bitwie jutlandzkiej 31 maja 1916.

Służba w Niemczech
Przed wojną uczestniczył m.in. w rewii floty przed Hitlerem i węgierskim regentem Horthym (19 sierpnia 1938), a następnie w rejsie niszczycieli na wody Hiszpanii i Maroka (kwiecień – maj 1939).

Bałtyk i Morze Północne 1939-1940
Po wybuchu II wojny światowej brał udział w kampanii wrześniowej 1939 roku (wraz z "Friedrich Ihn" i "Friedrich Eckoldt" wchodził w skład 3 Dywizjonu Niszczycieli). 2 września 1939, według relacji niemieckich, o godz. 13.11 został nieskutecznie zaatakowany torpedą z polskiego okrętu podwodnego(być może "Wilk", który próbował podejść do ataku; jednakże jego dowódca nie potwierdza wystrzelenia torpedy – "Wilk" później był atakowany bombami głębinowymi, które spowodowały lekkie uszkodzenia). Od 4 września "Steinbrinck" działał na Morzu Północnym i w Cieśninach Duńskich, m.in. osłaniając stawianie obronnej zagrody minowej "Martha" na Morzu Północnym 15 września 1939. W dniach 7-9 października 1939 uczestniczył w bezskutecznej operacji przechwytywania brytyjskich statków między Szwecją a Wielką Brytanią.

Na przełomie 1939 i 1940 stawiał ofensywne zagrody minowe u wybrzeży Anglii w trzech nocnych operacjach: 18/19 listopada 1939 w ujściu Humber, pod flagą kmdra por. Beya (z "Hans Lody" i "Friedrich Eckoldt" – prawdopodobnie na tych minach zatonął MS "Piłsudski"), 12/13 grudnia 1939 pod Newcastle (z "Friedrich Ihn", "Bruno Heinemann", "Richard Beitzen" i "Hermann Künne") oraz 6/7 stycznia 1940 u ujścia Tamizy (z "Friedrich Eckoldt" i "Friedrich Ihn"). 23 grudnia 1939 został lekko uszkodzony w kolizji z "Hermann Schoemann" w rejonie Wilhelmshaven.

Od stycznia do kwietnia 1940 przebywał w remoncie. Nie brał udziału w ataku na Norwegię. Na początku czerwca 1940 wziął udział w operacji Juno – eskorcie pancerników "Scharnhorst" i "Gneisenau" i krążownika "Admiral Hipper" atakujących alianckie transporty z Norwegii (z niszczycielami "Hermann Schoemann", "Hans Lody" i "Karl Galster" oraz torpedowcami "Falke" i "Jaguar"). Później, w dniach 20-23 czerwca 1940, eskortował uszkodzonego podczas operacji "Scharnhorsta" do Kilonii (z "Schoemannem", "Lody" i dwoma torpedowcami). 1 września 1940 osłaniał operację stawiania zagrody minowej SW3 na Morzu Północnym.

Francja 1940-1941
Od 20 września do listopada 1940 "Steinbrinck" operował z Brestu w zachodniej Francji. Prawdopodobnie w tym okresie został wyposażony w radar. W nocy z 28 na 29 września 1940 stawiał ofensywną zagrodę minową na wodach angielskich – w Zatoce Falmouth (wraz z "Paul Jacobi", "Friedrich Ihn", "Karl Galster", "Hans Lody", pod osłoną "Friedrich Eckoldt" i "Theodor Riedel"; na minach tych zatonęło 5 statków). 10 października 1940 został lekko uszkodzony przez lotnictwo brytyjskie w Breście (1 zabity, 3 rannych). Podczas kolejnej akcji w Kanale Bristolskim w nocy z 17/18 października, wraz z "Lody", "Ihnem" i "Galsterem" wziął udział w pojedynku artyleryjskim z wspieranymi przez niszczyciele brytyjskimi krążownikami HMS "Newcastle" i "Emerald". Podczas tego pojedynku zaatakował bezskutecznie torpedami krążownik "Newcastle".

Od listopada 1940 do stycznia 1941 przebywał w remoncie, po czym od kwietnia 1941 ponownie działał z różnych portów francuskich w składzie 5. Flotylli, m.in. z La Pallice (wraz z "Friedrich Ihn" i "Bruno Heinemann"), eskortując głównie okręty w Zatoce Biskajskiej. 15 (lub 25) sierpnia 1941 został uszkodzony na mieliźnie w La Pallice. Wycofany 6 września do Niemiec, w remoncie od września do grudnia 1941, następnie pozostawał na Bałtyku. Około tego okresu otrzymał lekkie uzbrojenie plot wzmocnione do 9 działek 20 mm.

Północna Norwegia 1942-1943
Od sierpnia 1942 "Steinbrinck" operował z Norwegii, działając przeciw konwojom do ZRRR w Arktyce, jednak bez większych zdarzeń bojowych. 3 września 1942 lekko uszkodzony na skałach w rejonie Kirkenes, remontowany od września do grudnia 1942. Od lutego 1943 ponownie działał w północnej Norwegii. W marcu 1943, służąc jako cel dla szkolenia okrętów podwodnych, został lekko uszkodzony torpedą szkolną niemieckiego okrętu podwodnego U-703. 8 września 1943 wziął udział w operacji Zitronella – rajdzie niemieckich pancerników na Spitsbergen. 21 listopada 1943 lekko uszkodzony w kolizji z "Hans Lody", po czym 26 listopada 1943 uszkodzony w kolizji z norweskim parowcem "Samev". Od grudnia 1943 do stycznia 1944 w remoncie.

Cieśniny Duńskie 1944
Od stycznia do kwietnia 1944 działał w rejonie Cieśnin Duńskich, między innymi osłaniając kilkakrotnie operacje stawiania obronnych zagród minowych w lutym i kwietniu. Następnie, od maja 1944 przebywał w kapitalnym remoncie połączonym z modernizacją. Na skutek poważnych uszkodzeń podczas nalotów amerykańskich na Hamburg 18 czerwca 1944 i 4 listopada 1944, nie ukończono remontu do końca wojny. W toku remontu zamontowano na nim uzbrojenie przeciwlotnicze: 14 działek 37 mm i 10 x 20 mm kosztem zdemontowania jednego działa artylerii głównej. Zastosowano też wydłużony "atlantycki" dziób, zwiększając długość do 123 m i nieco poprawiając kiepskie własności morskie.

Dowódcy:
 kmdr por. (Fregattenkapitän) Rolf Johannesson (8 czerwca 1938 – 27 stycznia 1942)
 kmdr ppor. (Korvettenkapitän) Freiherr Heinrich Freytag von Loringhoven (27 stycznia 1942 – 29 grudnia 1942)
 kmdr por. Otto Teichmann (29 grudnia 1942 – 3 listopada 1944)
 kpt. mar. (Kapitänleutnant) Dietrich von Rödgisch-Ballas  (4 listopada 1944 – 14 listopada 1944)
 kmdr por. Werner Röver (15 listopada 1944 – 8 maja 1945)

Służba w ZSRR
Po wojnie w 1946 przekazany ZSRR i wcielony do służby pod nazwą "Pyłkij", lecz z uwagi na zły stan techniczny 16 listopada 1948 został wycofany do rezerwy, a 30 kwietnia 1949 przekształcony na hulk koszarowy PKZ-2. 19 lutego 1958 skreślony z listy floty i następnie złomowany.

Historia konstrukcji i opis okrętu – w opisie niszczycieli Typu 1934.

Dane techniczne
 wyporność:
 standardowa: 2239 t
 pełna: 3165 t
 wymiary:
 długość: 121 m
 szerokość: 11,3 m
 zanurzenie: 3,8-4,3 m
 napęd: 2 turbiny parowe o mocy łącznej 70 000 KM, 6 kotłów parowych Bensona (ciśnienie pary 110 atm), 2 śruby
 prędkość maksymalna: 38 w.
 zasięg: 1530 mil morskich przy prędkości 19 w.
 zapas paliwa: 670 t. mazutu
 załoga: 325

Uzbrojenie:
 1938-1944:
 5 dział 127 mm SK C/34 w pojedynczych stanowiskach, osłoniętych maskami (5xI)
 długość lufy L/45 (45 kalibrów), donośność maksymalna 17.400 m, kąt podniesienia +30°, masa pocisku 28 kg, zapas amunicji – 120 na działo (rzeczywisty kaliber 128 mm).
 4 działka przeciwlotnicze 37 mm LC/30 podwójnie sprzężone (2xII)
 6-9 działek przeciwlotniczych 20 mm (6xI)
 8 wyrzutni torpedowych 533 mm (2xIV), 12-16 torped
 18 bomb głębinowych (zrzutnia bg, później 4 miotacze bg)
 możliwość zabrania 60 min morskich

 1945:
 4 działa 127 mm SK C/34 w pojedynczych stanowiskach, osłoniętych maskami (4xI)
 14 działek przeciwlotniczych 37 mm M/42 (7xII)
 10 działek przeciwlotniczych 20 mm (1xIV, 3xII)
 8 wyrzutni torpedowych 533 mm (2xIV), 12-16 torped
 bomby głębinowe (zrzutnia bg, 4 miotacze bg)
 możliwość zabrania 60 min morskich

Wyposażenie
 radar FuMo 21 (od 1941/42), FuMo 24/25 (od 1943)
 radar FuMo 63 (od 1944)
 szumonamiernik GHG (nie został wyposażony w hydrolokator S-Gerat)
 system kierowania ogniem artylerii głównej: dwa 4-metrowe dalmierze stereoskopowe (na nadbudówce dziobowej i śródokręciu), centrala artyleryjska C34/Z

Przypisy

Bibliografia
 S.W. Patjanin (С.В.Патянин): "Esmincy tipa Lebieriecht Maass" ("Эсминцы типа «Леберехт Маасс»"), seria Morskaja Kollekcja 5/2004
 http://www.german-navy.de/

Niszczyciele typu 1934 i 1934A
Niemieckie niszczyciele z okresu II wojny światowej
Radzieckie niszczyciele z okresu po 1945
Okręty zbudowane w Blohm + Voss

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Die Liste der Naturdenkmale in Groß Pankow (Prignitz) nennt die Naturdenkmale in Groß Pankow im Landkreis Prignitz in Brandenburg.

Groß Pankow

|}

Anmerkungen

Einzelnachweise

Gross Pankow (Prignitz)
!Naturdenkmale
GrossPankow


Lea Klibanoff-Ron is the director of the documentary film The Messiah Will Always Come and a fellow at the Pozen Foundation in Fiction Writing for 2013-2015. She is a graduate of the faculties of Law and Jewish Thought at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Ma'aleh Film School, and lives in Jerusalem.
Religious Jews, including those inclined toward the political left, fear that the leftist- Zionist-secular agenda excludes them.


text:
Community holds walk, family fun night honoring woman killed last month at First Friday
by: Zac Summers
Posted: Sep 6, 2019 / 10:42 PM CDT
Updated: Sep 6, 2019 / 10:42 PM CDT
KANSAS CITY, Mo. – As changes to the First Friday festival in the Crossroads went into place, two events were held to honor the life and memory of the woman whose death prompted them.
It's been more than a month since 25-year-old Erin Langhofer was killed when a gunman fired nine bullets into a First Friday crowd. The Crossroads Community Association announced changes to the monthly festival following her death, citing the loss of liability insurance.
On Friday, 100 or so people connected with Healing House, a recovery support service, walked in memory of Erin, who father holds Bible study sessions for the group.
Their message: Stop the violence, Kansas City.
"People aren't equipping their kids with the coping skills they need, and so they pull guns," said Bobbi Jo Reed, the founder and director of Healing House. "They`re not learning how to interact with people in dialogue and work problems out."
She said they don't want acts of violence to scare people from attending positive community events like First Friday.
"First Fridays is something good in our community, and we came down [with our] very bright orange shirts [because] we want to light up this area," she said.
Erin's family church, the Church of the Resurrection, held a family fun night at their downtown campus to also celebrate Erin's life.
"We want to show solidarity with our city, solidarity with people who have lost children and young adults to violence," senior pastor Adam Hamilton said.
Hamilton said instead of showing fear, he wanted his congregation to be present in the community.
"We love our city, and we`re going to show up and be there and show kindness," he said.
He said the Langhofer family is "standing strong," adding "they're asking how do we bring something good from this terrible tragedy?"
Two communities, touched by Erin's life, are taking a stand against fear and violence.
"We just need to show up and let people know this is our city and we`re not going to stand for it," Reed said.
An 18-year-old man has been charged in her murder.
Joe's Blog: The snow window is closing (MON-1/30)


Are you or do you know Malcolm Liddell?
Malcolm Liddell is a published author and an illustrator of children's books. Some of the published credits of Malcolm Liddell include The Tunnel (After Dark).
To edit or update the above biography on Malcolm Liddell, please Log In or Register.