text:
Vive la différence? Humanitarian and political approaches to engaging armed groups
How to respond to non-state armed groups is often an area of controversy and confusion. But there are many examples of dialogue and negotiation with armed groups that we can learn from. This Accord combines the voices of armed groups, governments and negotiators to highlight the opportunities and challenges of engagement.
Issue EditorRobert Ricigliano
Choosing To Engage Armed Groups And Peace Processes Accord Issue 16.pdf (2MB) Choosing To Engage Armed Groups And Peace Processes Accord Policy Brief Issue 16.pdf (109KB)
Introduction: Engaging armed groups in peace processes
The case for engagement: An interview with President Carter
Assessing groups and opportunities: A former government minister's perspective: Mo Mowlam interview
Attempting to understand: An intermediary's perspective: Terry Waite interview
Chechen resistance: Myth and reality
From armed struggle to political negotiation: Why? When? How?
The Salvadorean insurgency: Why choose peace?
Choosing to engage: Strategic considerations for the Karen National Union
The struggle against landmines: An opening for peace talks in Colombia
Operation Lifeline Sudan
The relationship between track one and track two diplomacy
Negotiating a ceasefire between Mayi-mayi militias and the Congolese Rally for Democracy
Engaging the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone: An insider's perspective
Engaging armed groups: The challenge of asymmetries
Facilitating dialogue with armed insurgents in the Philippines: The Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees
In search of respect at the table
Asymmetries in the peace process: The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
Engaging armed groups in peace processes: Lessons for effective third-party practice
Key texts and agreements: Accord Armed Groups
Further reading: Accord Armed Groups
AuthorsDavid Petrasek
David Petrasek explores the relationship between humanitarian initiatives focused on preventing and mitigating the consequences of war and political initiatives focused on ending war, recognising that in practice each impinges upon the other but there are dangers in relating the two.
David Petrasek explores the relationship between humanitarian initiatives focused on preventing and mitigating the consequences of war and political initiatives focused on ending war, recognising that in practice each impinges upon the other. Lessons from humanitarian engagements are identified, the potential for humanitarian engagement to be a 'door-opener' is explored, and examples cited of humanitarian agreements that led to discussions of ceasefires, security and political issues. Problems include humanitarian talks being used as an easy means of gaining legitimacy or to postpone serious negotiations aimed at ending the conflict, or humanitarian space in which suffering can be mitigated being sacrificed for the sake of negotiation strategy – with bad consequences if talks fail.
It is not always easy in practice to separate humanitarian and political approaches to armed groups. Such groups are more likely than states to view all international agencies as related, and will not easily appreciate the difference between, for example, the UN's relief arm and its mediators.
David Petrasek
Vive la différence?
Humanitarians working to mitigate the consequences of war and to prevent needless suffering must engage with armed groups just as mediators seeking a political settlement must engage with armed groups. What is the relationship between humanitarian and political engagement?
By 'humanitarian engagement' is meant efforts to persuade armed groups to respect humanitarian and human rights principles, including in particular:
to respect civilian life and property, and to refrain from attacking civilians;
to treat captured combatants and others hors de combat humanely, without discrimination and with respect for their rights;
to ensure civilians and victims of war have adequate medical care, food and shelter, and to allow humanitarian agencies access for this purpose; and
to ensure insofar as possible the material and social well-being of civilians within areas they control.
By 'political engagement' is meant efforts to persuade armed groups to negotiate a peaceful resolution of the armed conflict, including facilitating their participation in processes to this end. Presented in this way, there appears a tidy distinction between these types of activities, whereby humanitarian initiatives focus on preventing and mitigating the consequences of war, and political initiatives focus on ending the conflict.
In practice, the distinctions between the two are not so clear. Humanitarian issues will often include prominent political aspects. For example, if the purpose of a conflict appears precisely to terrorise civilians of one ethnic group, then humanitarian negotiations to protect those civilians necessarily challenge the underlying rationale for the conflict. At the same time, negotiations aimed at ending conflict may begin by discussing the delivery of relief supplies. It is also the case that multi-tasked organisations, like the UN, often engage simultaneously in humanitarian and conflict-resolution efforts, and some (though by no means all) humanitarian organisations believe that ending war is a legitimate humanitarian endeavour. In short, distinctions are not so clear-cut and this is one of the reasons for exploring the relationship between humanitarian and political engagement.
This article will look at three issues:
Lessons from humanitarian engagement. Humanitarian workers regularly engage in the field with all parties to armed conflict. They have, therefore, a good deal of experience in dealing and negotiating with non-state armed groups. What lessons drawn from this experience are relevant for peacemaking efforts?
Humanitarian issues as door-openers. Humanitarian issues are often easier to discuss than issues related to a resolution of the conflict. In what ways can humanitarian engagement with armed groups open the door for discussion of political issues?
Differences and risks. While there are similarities in the two approaches, key differences remain and in some situations there might well be good reasons for keeping approaches distinct. What are the risks involved in blurring humanitarian and political approaches to armed groups? How can these be avoided in practice?
Is ending war a humanitarian objective?
Humanitarian action has never been precisely defined, and 'humanitarianism' is notoriously ambiguous. Perhaps it is best summed up as a concern to respond without bias to those in need. There are, nevertheless, some clear currents amid the muddy waters. One such current, drawn along by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), holds that humanitarian action should focus solely on the consequences of war, and not aim to resolve conflict. To enter the realm of conflict resolution is, in this view, to stray into fundamentally political questions, which will inevitably compromise the ability to mitigate suffering.
This distinction is not merely abstract philosophy. It finds concrete expression in the international legal regime concerning armed conflict. Legal rules fall into two distinct baskets: ius in bello (the law regulating the conduct of war) and ius ad bellum (the law determining whether a resort to armed force is justified). The ICRC, and the many humanitarian agencies that look to it for inspiration and guidance, have long maintained that they are only concerned with the former. The four Geneva Conventions and their protocols – the foundation for much humanitarian work – are silent on questions of whether or not any war is justified, dealing only with rules for its conduct.
On the other hand, the ambiguity of humanitarianism, and the real-life demands of modern warfare, have permitted (some would say demanded) the emergence of humanitarian action that is committed not only to relieving suffering but also to addressing its underlying causes. Many humanitarians today embrace human rights norms as a basis for their work, inevitably forcing them to examine systemic causes and the unequal power relations underlying conflict. Further, many accept that their work may have political impacts, and endeavour to 'do no harm' through their interventions.
There is no easy answer to these problems. Agencies which choose to retain a pure humanitarianism, and steadfastly refuse to be drawn into efforts to end war are certainly entitled to do so. At the same time, one cannot deny that a modern understanding of humanitarian action could include the notion of ending war. There is no universal agreement on this point, and the result is a continuing tension concerning humanitarian efforts to end war.
Lessons from humanitarian engagement
There are differences and tensions, but also similarities and synergies between humanitarian and peacemaking approaches to armed groups. Studies of humanitarian and human rights approaches to armed groups have made a number of suggestions that might also be considered by those engaged in peacemaking:
Understand the armed group. Before engaging an armed group on humanitarian issues, it is vital to understand the group's political, social and economic motivations. Key issues include the group's leadership, its ideological motivation, its state and non-state sponsors, and the group's constituency.
Know thyself! A wide variety of actors engage armed groups on humanitarian issues – local NGOs, international relief NGOs, UN agencies, diplomats, religious leaders, etc. Many of them have learned that effective engagement requires a proper understanding of their own strengths and weaknesses as an interlocutor, on a particular issue and vis-à-vis a particular group. International actors often carry more leverage; local actors often know better where to find points of leverage.
Factor in state behaviour. Though it seems obvious, those engaging armed groups need constantly to bear in mind the degree to which an armed group's decisions are influenced by its state (or other non-state) adversaries. For example, the group's willingness to respect humanitarian and human rights norms will be influenced by the state's own record in this respect. Less obvious is the fact that state's attitude towards engagement will play a big role. In many cases, in fact, state hostility to outside actors engaging armed groups on humanitarian issues means such engagement never gets off the ground.
In their engagement with armed groups, humanitarian actors also encounter many of the same dilemmas faced by those mediating armed conflicts. Questions of conferring undue legitimacy, of unwittingly empowering the wrong group, and problems of identifying the correct interlocutors abound.
One lesson humanitarian actors have learned, though not always acted on, is that it is crucial that there be co-ordination between different actors working with similar groups or on similar issues. When a variety of relief agencies enter into uncoordinated discussions with an armed group they may not only confuse the group but jeopardise each other's efforts to get the group to agree on particular issues.
The humanitarian entrée
Beyond efforts to reduce immediate suffering, humanitarian engagement can act as a door-opener or 'entrée' that allows the parties to meet and build confidence and trust. This may eventually create an environment conducive to discussion of security and political issues. This case is grounded in the notions that:
there is likely to be greater common ground on humanitarian issues – all should be able to agree, irrespective of their view on the war, that waging it should be done in ways that are minimally destructive;
humanitarian norms are universal, based in internationally accepted treaties or customary law and not open to serious dispute; and
in many cases, there need be no loss of military advantage in accepting humanitarian constraints, provided both parties agree and respect the same humanitarian commitments.
While each of these points might be challenged, in practice there are numerous examples where governments and armed groups have initially reached agreement on humanitarian provisions, and only later moved on to discuss ceasefires, security and political issues. In El Salvador in 1991, initial agreement on human rights was widely credited with creating the necessary confidence for political talks. In Aceh, Indonesia, agreement on a 'humanitarian pause' (2001-2002) was a useful prelude that created the basis for eventual ceasefire (though this did not hold). In Darfur, Sudan in 2003 belligerents signed two agreements on humanitarian issues before being able to open talks on security and political issues.
There are also situations, described below, where armed groups used agreements on humanitarian issues to win legitimacy while they stalled on political talks. That said, humanitarian issues are usually easier to discuss, and if only for this fact necessarily play a role in building (or undermining) confidence.
As noted above, humanitarianism is a broad concept, and covers a vast range of issues. Some of these will be relatively easier to discuss, and this will vary depending on the nature of the armed conflict. It is, therefore, also important to carefully consider which 'humanitarian' issue might best serve as a door-opener or confidence builder. A discussion on securing medicine for children will usually be easier to broach than one on prisoner exchanges, for example, though the particular context will be crucial.
One step forward or two steps backwards?
While humanitarian engagement may create space for peacemaking, this is by no means assured. There are tensions between a humanitarian approach and political engagement, and experience shows that belligerents might well use humanitarian engagement as a means of putting off discussion on political issues. Armed groups might, for example, agree to discuss access for aid workers and relief supplies to show they are responding to international demands, but do so only to postpone serious negotiations aimed at ending the conflict. Such behaviour can be encouraged by unwary outside governments and intergovernmental organisations under pressure to show they are doing something to address the conflict. This was the criticism levelled by humanitarian agencies in the Bosnia war, when the European Union, UN and others entered into numerous humanitarian agreements with the various warring factions, requiring these agencies to carry out various functions but postponing any serious pressure to end the conflict.
A key tension between the different approaches is the worry that a blurring of approaches will compromise the ability of humanitarian agencies to carry out their activities. Where actors with explicitly political or conflict resolution approaches are seen to manipulate humanitarian concerns for the sake of a negotiation strategy, relief workers fear that this will rebound negatively on their work. They will insist on a humanitarian 'space', free from the parties' short-term political interests where the sole concern is to tend to the needs of the war's victims in an impartial way. Though at times arguments defending this space may have an excessively 'purist' or unrealistic quality (given that humanitarian issues themselves are so often deeply politicised), it is important for those working to end the conflict to be attentive to the general point.
A related issue is that armed groups are alert to the fact that beginning a discussion on humanitarian issues may draw them towards political negotiation: where they are reluctant to proceed so far, this wariness may in fact create a block to solving humanitarian matters.
Ending conflicts is a difficult, long-term task. It would be unwise for its practitioners to gamble too carelessly with the short-term humanitarian goals of mitigating suffering. Using humanitarian issues as an entrée, therefore, must be done carefully and due recognition given to the fact that humanitarian principles are important in their own right. They cannot be simply subsumed, in a purely instrumental way, to the goal of resolving the conflict.
Key risks that arise, therefore, include:
armed groups may use negotiations on humanitarian issues as an easy means of gaining legitimacy and delaying progress on substantive political issues;
humanitarian principles may get subordinated to political ends, and if means to achieve those ends fail the conflict may continue with even less respect for those principles;
armed groups win the legitimacy conferred by international engagement, without being forced to give anything in return.
A further set of issues concerns the universality of humanitarian principles. Governments and their military forces must show at least rhetorical commitment to international humanitarian law (IHL), because virtually all governments have ratified the core IHL treaties. Armed groups no doubt gain international legitimacy when they make a similar commitment, but only from the particular perspective of a state-centred world governed by a set of international norms of behaviour, regulated by state-dominated institutions. If an armed group's constituency and/or ideology expressly rejects or pays little heed to such a world then it may show little inclination to abide by its rules of behaviour.
In other words, when dealing with armed groups one cannot assume there is agreement on key humanitarian principles, even at a purely rhetorical level. Anarchists, fundamentalists of all stripes, new religious movements and others may indeed refuse to stand on the shared platform that allows for a discussion on means to enhance civilian protection or ensure access to medical supplies.
Opening the door to considering how humanitarian and political engagement can relate to each other in a positive way may entail some risks to the strict humanitarian ethic. On the other hand, whether we like it or not, the door relating humanitarian and political engagement may already be open. It is not always easy in practice to separate humanitarian and political approaches to armed groups. Such groups are more likely than states to view all international agencies as related, and will not easily appreciate the difference between, for example, the UN's relief arm and its mediators. Humanitarian issues are often easier issues on which to open dialogue. Reaching agreement on the delivery of relief supplies, respect for civilian property, or the fair treatment of prisoners may build trust between combatants and open the door to discussions leading to a resolution of the conflict.
Humanitarian agencies and political actors need to be wary of the potential downsides of relating humanitarian and political engagement. Armed groups, no less than state belligerents, may use humanitarian discussions as a means of gaining legitimacy while stalling on addressing security and political issues. Humanitarian agreements can be a fig leaf hiding naked political disagreement. Armed groups, unlike recognised states, are not bound to show commitment to humanitarian principles. Though they often do so (not least to gain legitimacy), their tactics will be driven by their ideologies and constituencies, either or both of which may reject such principles. Finally, political actors must be careful in manipulating humanitarian issues. Ensuring respect for humanitarian principles is an end in itself; agreements towards this end cannot simply be instrumentalised and used willy-nilly as tools or inducements in a peace process.
Issue editor
Robert Ricigliano
Rob Ricigliano is the Director of Institute of World Affairs at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. He is the former Executive Director of the Conflict Management Group and Associate Director of the Harvard Negotiation Project.
Read more from Rob:
Accord Issue 16: Engaging armed groups
Accord Issue 22: Cross-border peacebuilding
President Jimmy Carter
Marjorie (Mo) Mowlam
Terry Waite
Ilyas Akhmadov
Clem McCartney
Joaquín Villalobos
Saw David Taw
Elisabeth Reusse-Decrey
Lam Akol
Julian Thomas Hottinger
Steven A. Smith
Rashid Sandi
Frances Fortune
Liz Philipson
Rene V. Sarmiento
Alastair Crooke
Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran
Nicholas (Fink) Haysom
Accord Issue 16


So You Wanna Get A Dog?
When people told me getting a puppy would be stressful, I almost laughed out loud. Really? Like parenting a little guy with autism kind of stressful? Needless to say, I took their warnings with a pinch. The hard part, admittedly, is managing both the boy and the pup together.
Even while dictated by common sense, the decision not to have more babies was a tough one. On one hand, I wanted the chance to do it all again. I also wanted a ready-made friend for my son, someone to be there for him, especially later in life. But I wasn't naive, either. I realized the emotional cost of another sibling would be crippling. And what if that child also had developmental challenges?
Our compromise—if you can call it that—was a dog. After all, pets are therapeutic. They make lovable and loyal family members. For a time we considered a service dog. However, the wait was too long, the process too onerous. Then we found the perfect sister for our son: an Olde English Bulldogge (picture the standard bulldog, only taller and healthier).
Though people tend not to think beyond Labradors and Poodles for children with special needs, they should. Far from what their name would suggest, Bullies are an incredibly affectionate and tolerant breed, if stubborn.
We welcomed Rosey into the mix just before Christmas, after much planning and research. The first few days were spent getting to know each other, forming bonds. It didn't take long.
My son loves nothing more than nuzzling her on the sofa. She calms and comforts him. For the most part he is gentle, and we are teaching him to tune in to her needs. He likes feeding her snacks and greeting her first thing in the morning. He is learning to play fetch and tug-of-war.
Of course puppy life is not without its trials. My son dislikes being licked, which is kind of unavoidable with a canine. We remind him that this is how she shows her love. Equally, her whimper—her way of communicating that she is hurt—upsets him.
The real chaos comes when he is distressed. His shrieks tend to excite her. His movements are unpredictable. In his volatile state, she should stay back. Instead she chases after him, causing him to freak out even more.
I won't lie. There have been moments when I've put them both in 'time out'. And though they annoy each other sometimes, they are developing the sibling relationship I'd hoped they would.
It's true she won't be there for him forever, but for now she is teaching us all valuable lessons in love and understanding.
And they called it puppy love... Pictures of these napping 'siblings' will melt your heart.


text:
In Era of #MeToo, Majority of Employees Say Their Employers Fail to Take New Steps Addressing Sexual Harassment
15 May 2018 9:21 AM | Deleted user
Increased efforts to prevent harassment linked to better employee and organizational outcomes, survey says
WASHINGTON -- The spotlight on workplace sexual harassment since fall 2017 has led to high-profile resignations, terminations and lawsuits. And while the revelations and consequences have prompted ongoing, national conversations about appropriate behavior, only 32 percent of working Americans said that their employer has taken new steps to prevent and address sexual harassment in the workplace, according to a survey by the American Psychological Association.
According to employees, the most common action taken was simply reminding employees of existing sexual harassment training or resources (18 percent).
Workplace Sexual Harassment: Are Employers Actually Responding? (PDF, 778KB) from APA's Center for Organizational Excellence was conducted online by Harris Poll from Feb. 15-March 1, 2018, among 1,512 U.S. adults who are employed full-time, part-time or self-employed. The data were collected as part of APA's 2018 Work and Well-Being Survey.
While the lack of meaningful change is not entirely surprising, it is disappointing, said David W. Ballard, PsyD, MBA, director of APA's Center for Organizational Excellence.
"The #MeToo movement has given business leaders an opportunity to finally take real action addressing a complex problem that has been pervasive for generations," Ballard said. "Our survey – as well as anecdotal reports – shows that too few employers are making comprehensive efforts that can have significant impact. Avoiding the issue is bad for employee well-being and business, but so, too, is a narrow, compliance-based approach. We know from psychological science that relying solely on mandated training designed primarily to limit the organization's legal liability is unlikely to be effective."
Only 10 percent of U.S. workers said their employer has added more training or resources related to sexual harassment since the recent increased media and public attention on this serious workplace problem. Just 8 percent said their employer implemented a more stringent policy related to sexual harassment, and only 7 percent reported that their employer hosted an all-staff meeting or town hall to discuss sexual harassment.
Research has shown training to recognize and report sexual harassment isn't enough to change employee behavior or a workplace culture where harassment is more likely to occur. Instead, psychologists recommend a comprehensive approach that incorporates fair policies that are clearly communicated, ongoing training, leadership support of a civil and respectful culture, and the hiring and promotion of women into senior leadership roles.
The survey showed the difference when women have representation in upper management. Employees in organizations that have women in senior leadership roles said they were more likely to report sexual harassment at work if they experienced it (56 percent) or witnessed it (55 percent), and confront a coworker who is engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior at work (53 percent), compared with employees in organizations that don't have women in senior leadership roles (39 percent, 41 percent and 34 percent, respectively).
The survey also found links between increased efforts to prevent and address workplace sexual harassment and better employee and organizational outcomes more broadly. When new steps had been taken, employees were more likely to say they were in good psychological health (90 percent vs. 79 percent) and that their employer provides the necessary resources to help employees meet their mental health needs (76 percent vs. 36 percent) and manage their stress (63 percent vs. 31 percent). They also reported higher job satisfaction (86 percent vs. 60 percent) and motivation to do their best at work (89 percent vs. 64 percent) and were more likely to say they'd recommend their organization as a good place to work (79 percent vs. 51 percent), than those who said their employer had not taken any new steps.
"Sexual harassment at work occurs within a broader context," Ballard said. "For training to produce long-term changes, the organization's workplace practices need to align with and support the individual attitudes and behaviors it's trying to promote. Leaders in a psychologically healthy workplace model civility, respect, fairness and trust. In an organizational culture where every employee feels safe, supported and included, people can be their best, and that's good for people and profits."
While most employers have been slow in taking new steps to address harassment, the ongoing headlines and resulting conversations may be encouraging individual employees to take action. About half of U.S. workers say they are now more likely to report workplace sexual harassment if they experience it (50 percent) or witness it (51 percent), and that they are more likely to confront a coworker who is engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior at work (47 percent).
About the Center for Organizational Excellence
APA's Center for Organizational Excellence works to enhance the functioning of individuals, groups, organizations and communities through the application of psychology to a broad range of workplace issues. The center houses the Psychologically Healthy Workplace Program, a public education initiative designed to engage the employer community, raise public awareness about the value psychology brings to the workplace and promote programs and policies that enhance employee well-being and organizational performance.
About the Survey
The survey was conducted online within the United States by The Harris Poll on behalf of the American Psychological Association between Feb. 15 and March 1, 2018, among a nationally representative sample of 1,512 adults age 18 and older who reside in the U.S. and were employed full time, part time or self-employed. Data are weighted where necessary to bring them in line with their actual proportions in the population. A full methodology is available upon request.
About The Harris Poll
The Harris Poll is one of the longest running surveys in the U.S. tracking public opinion, motivations and social sentiment since 1963 that is now part of Harris Insights & Analytics, a global consulting and market research firm that delivers social intelligence for transformational times.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Access request parameter in function callback jquery get Is it possible to access request parameters in function callback of jquery get
 function doSomething() {
     var level;
     $.get('http://example.com/getLevel', {
         'login': user
     },

     function (resp) {
         //any way to access user or assign resp to level here?
         level = resp; //does not work here.
     });

     //at this point level is still undefined.
 }

Thanks

A: Ajax is asynchronous which is the reason why level is undefined at the commented point in your code.  If you need to assign the response to level and use that variable you must include that code within the success handler.
Currently the code that attempts to use level (code written after the ajax call) is executed prior to the ajax call returning a response.  This causes level to be undefined.
     function doSomething() {
           var level;
           var data = {'login':user}; //assigning data outside of get invocation
           $.get('http://example.com/getLevel', data,function(resp){
               //any way to access user or assign resp to level here?
               level = resp; //does not work here.
                //at this point level is defined and should be used in the code.
            });
            //data could now be used here
      }

A: How to return the response from an AJAX call will give you idea of what I am talking here.Please check comments inline
function doSomething() {
    var level;
    var data = {
        'login': user
    };

    $.get('http://example.com/getLevel', data, function (resp) { // js dont wait (Thats why called  Asynchronous JavaScript and XML) for this request to complete and  immediately executed next line of code.This is called callback function where your code gets executed after you receice responce from AJAX call.
        level = resp;
        // you can use level here
        callback(resp);            // // Or use callback function and pass it response once you receive it.
    });
    // Here it could be possible that your your response is no yet received so your level variable still undefined.
}

function callback(level) {
    // use level here
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Prof. Apollo Nsibambi has been discharged from Mulago Hospital where he has been undergoing treatment after the Monday helicopter crash in Bugiri District. The Prime Minister was from Bududa District after receiving relief supplies for the Bududa Victims who survived the landslide that left over 90 dead and 300 unaccounted for.
The pilot forced the choper down after it developed mechanical problems. It hit a tree near Bugiri Hospital where the occupants were admitted briefly before they were transferred to Mulago Hospital by another helicopter that was dispatched by his Excellency the President.
The Other occupants who included the Permanent secretary Pius Bigirimana, the ADC to the Prime Minister, two press men and the co-pilot have all been discharged. The pilot is still admitted. Meanwhile, a team headed by Chris Mudoola has been put in place to investigate the mishap a return with a report of their findings in two weeks.
The doctors have given the Prime Minister six weeks to rest.


The Sun Dome at the University of South Florida (USF) is typically filled with basketball fans and shouts of "Go Bulls!" But on the Sunday before the Republican National Convention, it hosted a different sort of enthusiast: libertarians yelling, "End the Fed!" As they did in 2008, dutiful supporters of presidential contender Ron Paul rallied to celebrate their hero before the official GOP gathering. About 11 miles from the hall where Mitt Romney is expected to accept the Republican presidential nomination on Thursday, the Congressman's constituency made its voice heard.
Paul took the stage after almost five hours of other speakers, montage videos and musical acts. He spoke for more than an hour, criticizing the Federal Reserve, calling for an end to overseas wars and praising the virtues of individual liberty and small government. Paul also alluded to grudges with Republican National Committee members and Romney backers who had worked to keep Paul out of the spotlight. "We'll get into the tent," Paul told his supporters at the rally, "because we will become the tent eventually." On Saturday, the 12-term Congressman and three-time presidential candidate told the New York Times that he had been offered a chance to speak at the convention — if the Romney team were allowed to vet his remarks and if Paul would unconditionally endorse the presumptive nominee. He didn't agree.
Despite the bitter feelings, Paul's rally was in many ways cathartic. Delegates who will vote for Paul, with no hope of him becoming the nominee, stood and pumped their fists while the crowd cheered them on. They booed government restrictions on raw milk, cheered for obscure economists and scoffed at zinc pennies. Carol Paul, Ron's wife for 55 years, was given a "first lady of liberty" award. Barry Goldwater Jr. told everyone that he takes life with a grain of salt "and a shot of tequila." Blues Traveler's John Popper raged on his harmonica and Jimmy Vaughan picked his guitar.


text:
In the wake of 2018's BRICS summit, where do emerging nations stand on crypto?
While the BRICS 2018 summit saw emerging nations discuss preparations for Industry 4.0, where does each member stand on crypto? We explore Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa's stances on digital currencies.
Written by Bryan Smith Published on July 27, 2018
Comprised of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, world leaders from emerging economies gathered this Thursday in Johannesburg, South Africa to attend the 2018 BRICS summit.
An association of emerging national economies, BRICS member-nations meet annually at summits and collectively represent over 3.1 billion people. Each summit sees member-states co-operatively discuss mutual development and themes from emerging market spaces – and as such, the Fourth Industrial Revolution (or Industry 4.0) weighed highly on this year's agenda.
Industry 4.0 itself is a loose term denoting automative trends defined by the Internet of Things, cloud and cognitive computing, and cyber-physical stems. More broadly, the term has also recently enjoyed connotations with blockchain technology – which has been thought to be the genesis of faster, more trustworthy, reliable, and low-cost settlements and transactions.
Speaking at the summit, South Africa's President Cyril Ramaphosa urged BRICS countries to develop new policies to deal with the fourth industrial revolution – saying "by working together, I am certain that we will be able to confront the challenges and seize the opportunities that this new of development presents."
While Ramaphosa has previously issued his optimism on the creation of unilateral – and potentially digital – currencies, not all of the BRICS nations have been aligned to the idea of supporting cryptocurrencies, or much less developing national digital currencies.
In April this year, the Brazilian Association of Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain launched in São Paulo with the view of fostering the growth and adoption of digital currencies while in dialogue with local governement.
Despite the organization's founding, the Brazilian Central Bank has previously played a cautious role in raising concerns around a potential 'Bitcoin bubble'.
The Association of Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain has largely lobbied for the rapid drafting and adoption of sufficient legislation to accelerate the use of cryptocurrencies within the region.
Brazil's Securities and Exchange Commission previously banned registered investment funds from investing in cryptocurrencies – though, interestingly, the Commission has allowed Brazilians to take indirect ownership of cryptocurrencies by investing in funds that themselves had stakes in funds that were invested in cryptocurrencies.
Presently, the Commission has a working group to develop new regulations fro crypto-assets, while the Brazilian education system has benefitted from the first Master's degree in Cryptofinance offered by Fundação Getúlio Vargas.
While Russian government and President Vladimir Putin himself has remained skeptical of cryptocurrencies in general, the Russian Central Bank has both mulled the creation of a state-backed digital currency.
Recently, two of Russia's largest banks – Alfa-Bank and Sberbank – have trialed cryptocurrencies within regulatory sandboxes
At the time, Anton Rakhmanov – the man responsible for managing the development of the product offer of the Alfa-Bank's "Private Wealth Management" division – elaborated on his opinion that virtual currencies will be included sooner or later in the global economy and it would be unwise to ignore them.
While six cryptocurrencies have been trialed, only four have been named to the public – specifically, Bitcoin, Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash, and Litecoin.
In May this year, a Russian arbitration court of appeals recognized cryptocurrency as a property with value – while earlier in March President Putin confirmed that cryptocurrencies would ultimately be regulated under the Digital Assets Regulation Bill.
Perhaps the most stony-faced BRICS member, India's Reserve Bank moved to cull support for both persons or businesses that deal in cryptocurrencies in April this year.
Previously, India's Finance Ministry had limited the functionality of cryptocurrency exchange accounts after criticizing Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies for having a 'lack of basic utility'.
In a move that would later prompt outcry from local cryptocurrency communities, the Reserve Bank wrote that "In view of the associated risks, it has been decided that, with immediate effect, entities regulated by RBI shall not deal with or provide services to any individual or business entities dealing with or settling VCs. Regulated entities which already provide such services shall exit the relationship within a specified time."
Ultimately, a petition against the Reserve Bank's decision was brought to bear – over 18,000 signatures, directed to the Reserve Bank as well as the Prime Minister of India, called for a for a cryptocurrency-friendly framework and identifies the 'hypocrisy' of the Reserve Bank's bid for its own digital currency.
The Reserve Bank has not, however, outright dismissed the idea of a national cryptocurrency. Elaborating on its interest in digital currencies and their underlying foundation, the Reserve Bank has noted its interest in the "rapid changes in the landscape of the payments industry along with factors such as emergence of private digital tokens and the rising costs of managing fiat paper/metallic money."
More recently, a new legal report revealed that Indian lawmakers have mulled legalizing the country's sports betting industry, and would be prepared to accept cryptocurrencies as legal payment methods.
While China shocked cryptocurrency markets in 2017 with a spot decision to ban several international cryptocurrency and ICO websites behind the so-called 'Great Firewall', the nation has instead seemingly committed its efforts to developing a number of technical improvements to blockchain technology itself.
In March this year, a new report from the head of China's Banknote Blockchain Research Center claimed that the development of a state digital currency is underway.
The Banknote Blockchain Research Center is a subsidiary of the People's Bank of China through both the China Banknote Credit Card Industry Development and the China Banknote Printing and Minting Corporation.
Previously, People's Bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan claimed that the development of a state-backed digital currency is "inevitable".
In the mean-time, the Blockchain Research Institute division at the China Electronic Information Industry Development has continued to release evaluations of leading cryptocurrencies – with June's report outlining that EOS is the most convincing cryptocurrency network.
Among technical improvements, Chinese researchers have further gathered to develop blockchain-as-a-service (BaaS) platforms, as well as new blockchain scaling solutions.
South Africa's President Cyril Rampahosa set tongues wagging earlier this year with the proposition for a single and potentially digital African currency, South African efforts have largely focused on launching new FinTech programs for blockchain technology as well as clarifying legal stances.
In February, the South African Reserve Bank announced a new FinTech programme which will seek to evaluate assess the impact – and potential regulatory requirements – of newer financial technologies such as cryptocurrencies.
According to the Reserve Bank, the programme will launch with three objectives; the first will see the review of private cryptocurrencies, which will, in turn, inform 'an appropriate policy framework and regulatory regime'.
Secondly, the Reserve Bank aims to investigate the 'applicability' of innovation facilitators such as hubs and accelerators, and finally aims to facilitate 'Project Khoka' – a new initiative which will experiment with distributed ledger technologies.
In April, the South African Revenue Service outlined that it will continue to apply "normal" income tax rules to cryptocurrencies where taxpayers will need to declare their according gains or losses as part of their taxable income.
Written by Bryan Smith
South African technology journalist, podcaster, photographer and filmmaker. Hodling - BTC, NEO, ETH.@bryansmithsa


text:
Tax Court stops taxpayers from avoiding 40% penalty by conceding on alternative grounds
BY SALLY P. SCHREIBER, J.D.
In a big win for the IRS, the Tax Court refused to grant partial summary judgment to a partner who had conceded his tax shelter case on grounds other than valuation in an attempt to avoid the 40% gross valuation misstatement penalty under Sec. 6662(a) ( AHG Investments, LLC, 140 T.C. No. 7 (2013)). This has been a common method used by taxpayers who have invested in tax shelters, in an attempt to avoid the draconian 40% penalty.
The IRS issued a final partnership administrative adjustment (FPAA) for AHG that disallowed more than $10 million in losses to Alan Ginsburg, a partner, for 2001 and 2002. The FPAA contained 14 alternative grounds for the disallowance, and Ginsburg conceded that the adjustments were correct, claiming that the disallowance was not due to a valuation understatement but to his not being at risk under Sec. 465 and the transaction's not having substantial economic effect under Regs. Sec. 1.704-1(b). (Both of those grounds were included in the 14 grounds in the FPAA.) Ginsburg then sought partial summary judgment that the IRS could not apply the 40% penalty.
In determining whether to grant Ginsburg's request, the court was faced with its own precedents in McCrary, 92 T.C. 827 (1989), and Todd, 89 T.C. 912 (1987) (Todd I), as well as a case from the Ninth Circuit (Gainer, 893 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1990)) and the Fifth Circuit's affirmance of Todd I, 862 F.2d 540 (5th Cir. 1988) (Todd II)). These cases held that the legislative history of Sec. 6662(a) supported the interpretation that, when a taxpayer conceded a case on grounds other than a valuation understatement, the 40% penalty could not apply.
Before deciding to reject the reasoning in McCrary, Todd, and Gainer, the Tax Court noted that the majority of appeals courts have held that that interpretation of the legislative history is incorrect and that even the Fifth and Ninth Circuits have suggested the majority rule is correct, while continuing to follow the minority rule. The Tax Court also noted that stare decisis (the doctrine that court precedent generally must be followed) should not apply when there is ample evidence that its earlier decisions were wrong.
The court also noted that taxpayers had abused the ruling to avoid the 40% penalty. One justification the court had originally used for adopting the rule, that it would encourage taxpayers to settle cases and not burden the courts with difficult valuation issues, was also found to be unpersuasive, as the Tax Court now found that the same goal of judicial economy could be better achieved by discouraging taxpayers from engaging in tax-avoidance practices in the first place.
A final consideration before overruling its own earlier decisions was to ensure that it would not conflict with the case law in the Fifth and Ninth circuits (Todd II and Gainer, respectively). To do so, the court had to determine which circuit's law would apply to Ginsburg's case. There was no evidence where the partnership (which might not have still been in existence when the petition to the Tax Court was filed) had its principal place of business, which would normally be the jurisdiction for FPAA appeals. Where no jurisdiction can be determined and the parties have not stipulated to where the appeal would lie, the D.C. Circuit hears the case, and the Tax Court determined that that circuit had not ruled on the 40% penalty issue.
Having decided to overrule its earlier decisions in McCrary and Todd I, the Tax Court held that Ginsburg could not avoid the penalty by conceding on alternative grounds and denied his motion for partial summary judgment.
— Sally P. Schreiber ( sschreiber@aicpa.org ) is a JofA senior editor.


Bergen Linen Party Rentals - Planning a party? Bergen Linen is here to help.
Life's special moments require the proper celebration. Whether you are planning an event or are a professional planner, Bergen Linen is here to assist you with your party rentals. We welcome all festivities including corporate, private dinner parties, sweet sixteens, weddings and anniversaries.
Each party has its own 'personality'. While table linens may be overlooked by some, they truly are an intricate element. Crisp white linens may be the perfect detail in an elegant tables cape. Other settings may require rich colors and textures. Seasonal and other custom options are also available. Do you already know what you would like to order? Then try our handy Party Rental Request form.
If time allows, we do suggest you take a moment to meet with a Bergen Linen team representative. Clients often find browsing through our swatches useful in testing out ideas. Please feel free to visit our Bergen Linen FAQs page as well.
While it is suggested that linens be ordered about three weeks prior, we do our best to accommodate rush orders as well. Why not follow us on Pinterest for a little party rental inspiration? Planning a wedding? Bergen Linen stays on top of the latest party linen trends. And for our corporate event planners, we didn't forget you. Allow Bergen Linen to provide some help event planning tips!


text:
Bagung Lane Naming Ceremony – Sunday 22 April 2018
BAGUNG LANE NAMING CEREMONY
at the PRINCES HILL COMMUNITY CENTRE
The PHCC Committee is excited to announce that the lane between Macpherson and Richardson Streets outside our building has received the name 'Bagung', honouring the Indigenous traditional owners.
'Bagung' is the Wurundjeri word meaning 'meeting place'.
Trevor Huggard, who is recognised as a 'Moogji' (meaning 'good mate' or 'special friend') by the Koorie Heritage Trust Moogji Club, will be conducting the ceremony. The event will include the displaying of the Aboriginal and Australian flags.
The Princes Hill Community Centre, also known as 'One C One', will receive the new address of 5 Bagung Lane.
Thank you to all who attended this event on Sunday 22 April, with special mention to Cr Jackie Fristacky and Adam Bandt MP for their support.
Event Background
In 2017, a request was submitted to City of Yarra Council to assign a name to the east-side lane running north between Macpherson and Pigdon Streets. This was to ensure the building could be located more easily in street directories and GPS systems and by PHCC attendees.
Following due process and referral to the Wurundjeri Tribal Council, the submission for a preferred Aboriginal name was approved.
Also whilst we are changing our address from Rear 270 Macpherson Street, other property owners on the lane have the choice of retaining their existing address or using 'Bagung Lane'.
The Princes Hill Community Centre, also known as 'One C One', is now known as 5 Bagung Lane.
The Bagung Lane Naming Ceremony
On the afternoon of Sunday 22 April, the new streets signs were revealed by Trevor Huggard, who for over 40 years was involved with PHCC, many as Committee President.
Trevor Huggard, who is recognised as a 'Moogji' (meaning 'good mate' or 'special friend') by the Koorie Heritage Trust Moogji Club, conducted the ceremony. The event included the displaying of the Aboriginal and Australian flags, and was attended by many local residents.
Below is the speech Trevor prepared, although on the day he gave an abridged version to those present. The speech is recommended reading and reflects Trevor's depth of knowledge of the area and its history, both of the Indigenous people and the European settlement.
Wominjeka Wurundjeri balluk yearmman koondee bik –
meaning – Welcome to the land of the Wurundjeri people
Princes Hill has a remarkable uniqueness, not only as the smallest recorded suburb of the Metropolitan area of Melbourne but also because it was carefully planned, with generous wide lanes wide enough for two trucks to pass in a Hoddle grid pattern, unlike other inner suburban areas with torturous narrow winding lanes to allow for night soil removal.
This foresight of the likes of Cr. John Pigdon, Lord Mayor of Melbourne, who had strict subdivision criteria rigidly adhered to, such as requiring a streetscape façade permit required to be obtained prior to being allowed to purchase the land to build ensured that Princes Hill was built to a very high standard of amenity rare in Melbourne.
The insistence of Pigdon to a new Town Planning Standard is most obvious at the intersection of Pigdon and Lygon Streets where a narrow Pigdon Street, East of Lygon Street, expands out to a tree lined avenue of a wide median strip of alternating Plantanus and Palm trees in a wide garden setting.
The laneways were grander in scale than many of the main streets of the crowded and meanly developed lanes controlled by money hungry developers of the times. However, lanes were not named.
The main streets were restricted to residential addresses and businesses were on 'Island' titles separated from the residents such as Evan Evans, Dye Works nearby and the family residence at 12 Wilson Street an easy walking distance up the rear lane.
It was a Utopian view of work and residence to walk to work. We wish! So too did the PHCC Community Centre, a previous factory and store, get built on an isolated island site with laneways on all four sides of the building.
(The west side has been acquired in more recent times by adverse possession.) This peculiar circumstance has left the PHCC building without an address and not a good look for a Community Centre that wants to be easily found! It has temporarily used the address Rear 270 McPherson Street for the last 130 years waiting to resolve the problem.
The PHCC has struggled to be found by many frustrated attendees over the years. Thankfully this will now not continue. Combining this with the oversight of recognition of our history of the area only recording the past 180 years or so of European settlement and not recording the in excess of 40,000 years or so by our first Australians was to ignore our history and continue to promote the cultural divide..
Munnering Lane where I have resided for the past 46 years was the first attempt to right the omission of acknowledging the original occupants of the area and I was delighted when this decision was made after a campaign to acknowledge in some small way the original custodians of the area.
Thank you to the City of Yarra for its pioneering initiative in recognising our pre-contact history. Does this gesture matter in the bigger picture of acknowledgement and reconciliation?
Yes it does! The importance of every small step towards appropriate acknowledgement and recognition is vital and important, as it is many small steps that ultimately add up to correcting the bigger step to full recognition, which won't happen overnight.
I remember being quite impressed by a very talented young singer playing in the backyard of the Café Paradiso, a well-known café and coffee shop/restaurant in the 70's in Lygon Street backing onto the former Pram Factory.
After introducing myself to him after his performance, the young man agreed to come down to our PHCC building known as a legendary music venue as the 1C1 club and play a few songs for us and for him to be included in our community. He was pleased to be asked and included in the community as an equal.
Some of you may have heard of him, as he has kicked on a bit since then – Paul Kelly! He later wrote a song called to celebrate the Mabo decision that I worked on as part of our Koori Heritage Trust campaign, 'From Little Things, Big Things Grow'!
Each and every small step in acknowledgement and recognition is important to the Koori community and we are a better community as a whole recognising that.
The motto of the K.H.T. is GNOKAN DANNA MURRA KER KI; "Give me your hand, my friend, and bridge the cultural gap".
We seem to forget or even recognise that where we live in greatest numbers – on the green fertile river valleys and coastal plains and mountain ranges with plentiful food, is exactly where our pre-contact Indigenous communities lived in great numbers, not the typical red dust arid desert country so typically depicted in our stereotype images of Aboriginal existence.
So Melbourne and the Yarra River Valley was what they loved and thrived in most in pre-European occupation. They were not nomadic, as they had plentiful food, fish, shellfish, fruit and vegetables, water and game with no need to move on in the land of plenty.
The camp fires of Royal Park were extinguished by the new graziers and their sheep but not the Koori desire to be recognised as part of our community.
The coming of the white man to Port Phillip proved to be an unmitigated disaster for the Wurundjeri, as they were regarded as a serious nuisance to the important business of sheep to the pastoralists!
The early existence of the 'Çollingwood Stockade' (where the Lee Street Primary School is today) did not encourage the Wurundjeri to loiter. The sight of men in leg irons breaking basalt rock all day for our lanes would have been terrifying, as would the armed warders and ritual floggings they observed. If this is how they treat their own, what hope do we have?
The Wurundjeri and Bunurong reacted by refusing to rear children to suffer needlessly in this white man's world.
A Wurundjeri elder known as Billibillary confided to the authorities that the reasoning for choosing to practice the desperate action of infanticide was, "Black Lubras say now no good children, black fellow say no country now for them, very good we kill and no more come up piccaninny".
Billibillary had been one of those Koori elders who had earlier signed an unrecognised 'treaty' in good faith, with Batman ceding lands to Batman's invading pastoral party from Van Dieman's Land.
There are many recorded stories of the Royal Park area being a scene of hundreds of twinkling evening campfires for Indigenous peoples here like a starlit night until they were progressively moved away to make way for the sheep of the powerful pastoralists.
The road known as Boundary Road in North Melbourne meant this is a new boundary for Indigenous community to have to be removed from to make way for sheep!
Go to your Melways and ponder why we have 78 Boundary Roads in Melbourne. Each Boundary Road was the new 'line in the sand' for the Aboriginal communities to be legally banned from further occupation – a terrible historic legacy.
We can rightly ask is naming a lane helpful to finally recognise the Indigenous involvement as a vital part of our collective history?
Certainly the forceful removal of the Indigenous community occurred in this area, and nothing can change that, but the ongoing shame is the proactive campaign to remove them from the recorded history of our area could and should be stopped and corrected with events such as this to record our true history wherever possible.
This naming of the lane, unlike our European traditions is not named after a person, but of an important community activity, a 'Meeting Place'.
Naming places after people can often be controversial or disputed over time requiring it to be changed depending on people's preferences. Carlton has had many street names changed over time as a result.
It is highly appropriate that our community's Community Centre will continue the 40,000-year-old tradition of being a Meeting Place.
I think it is a wonderful fit! Continuity of purpose bridging the cultural gap and sharing an historic use such as this. On all three counts, it is a great outcome!
Bagung can be celebrated as a happy event that we can all be proud of, as a progressive and welcoming step.
Trevor Huggard AM, Moogji' member, 'Koorie Heritage Trust.


text:
Around the year 1995, Ron's and his fiancé were talking about their future together, when she asked, "What do you really want to do in life?" While he didn't know at the time, his response would be the foundation of what would become his life's work.
He answered – "I want to help people."
What he realized back then was that he wanted to help people and he enjoyed working with money. Looking back that was an influential time that started a journey to begin Bare Wealth Advisors. He is thankful for that question from his fiancé – who is now his wife of over 22 years – that helped him determine part of his life's purpose.
Helping people is the core of who Bare Wealth Advisors is today. Sometimes financial decision making is difficult and we need advisors to make wise decisions that will make a difference. Our mission statement says "We advise clients to intentionally manage wealth in a way that aligns with their God-Given purpose." Through careful listening and relationships built on trust Bare Wealth Advisors is now helping over 370 families align wealth with their God-Given purpose.
Set-up an Exploratory Meeting


text:
https://apnews.com/article/2b55984fccd6d9f03b8ae65e73a81a61
Princess Di's Ex-Bodyguard Disputes Claim
November 30, 2004 GMT
LONDON (AP) _ A former bodyguard of Princess Diana on Tuesday dismissed her claim that one of her lovers was ``bumped off.″
Ken Wharfe said he believed there was no truth in Diana's suggestion that Barry Mannakee, a policeman assigned to protect her, was killed after their affair was discovered.
``Of course I don't think he was killed, there was no reason for him to be killed,″ Wharfe told ITV television.
``He died tragically in a road traffic accident.″
Wharfe wrote a book about his years guarding the princess and her sons entitled ``Diana: Closely Guarded Secret.″
``Diana sadly was prone to listen to all the sycophantics (sic) that existed and juggle with other methods like tarot cards,″ he told ITV.
Diana made the claim about Mannakee in a tape broadcast Monday in the United States. The recording was made in 1992 by Peter Settelen, who worked with the princess to improve her public speaking.
``It was all found out and he was chucked out. And then he was killed,″ Diana says on the tape, broadcast by the NBC network.
``And I think he was bumped off. But, um, there we are. ... We'll never know. He was greatest fella I've ever had.″
Mannakee died in a motorcycle accident in 1987, after being transferred from his post as Diana's guard.
Reports that Diana had an affair with Mannakee surfaced in Britain in 1998.
Diana died in a car crash in Paris in 1997.


We all get impatient at times, especially in our fast-paced world.
In fact, new neuro-scientific evidence proves that the hurried, multi-tasking world we interact within has fundamentally rewired our brains to expect instant gratification, or at least quick results.
This means that patience is becoming less the norm.
Our brains were originally wired to keep moving so that we weren't in danger of being eaten by larger mammals. Our fight or flight response served us well in prehistoric times.
But now, our brains have rewired themselves to expect things and people to move even faster…and not for important reasons like survival.
Now, we want to do everything as quickly as possible so that we can keep up with the Jones, stay ahead at work, get as much done as possible each day…and then drop into our beds, exhausted.
This lifestyle not only kills our peace of mind, it also negatively impacts our physical health, spiritual health and relationships. We have less time for our families, so we put high demands on them to hurry them along.
But instead of doing that, it seems to make things worse–they slow down. But is this only our perception?
When we are impatient, we tend to overdramatize the importance of whatever event or location we are rushing to.
We blow things out of proportion.
put the importance of getting, doing and having above that of our loved ones.
We judge people who "stop and smell the roses" as wimps who can't take the pressure of the modern world or as lazy because they aren't struggling and doing, doing, doing like everyone else.
What does impatience get us?
Impatience causes stress. Now, stress is a part of life that we can't get away from. And, believe it or not, some stress is healthy for us. We all get stressed out.
What's important is how we deal with that stress that matters.
Do we come home and yell at the kids because our boss has been breathing down our neck at work?
Whether we kick the dog because our kid didn't take out the trash…again?
Do we drive too close to the car in front of us because we have so much to do at the office that we are trying to get in early?
Impatience has been linked to high blood pressure, artery plaque buildup, heart disease and heart attacks. It can cause anxiety. It can break down relationships.
It can cause people to avoid us because they get tired of being ridiculed when our expectations not being met. All in all, our hyper-paced world isn't as great as we have built it up to be.
No one is always patient. We all have things that trigger us to lose our patience from time to time. It may be technology that doesn't work as it should, inconsiderate drivers or our kids who piddle around and make us late for work on a regular basis.
But, patience is a skill you can develop if you want to live a happier, more peaceful life. The first step is to notice what triggers your impatience and to begin to notice how it causes you to react. These techniques can help you start to recognize what triggers your impatience.
Keep a journal or a simple list of all the times you get impatient over a few days.
Notice if you tend to get more impatient when there are physical issues such as being hungry, thirsty or sleep deprived. These are things that can be easily remedied to prevent a lot of impatient behavior.
Ask your friends and family what they notice about what triggers your impatience. If you are around them a lot, they will probably be able to list off things you hadn't considered.
Notice how you feel the next time you are impatient. More than likely, you're not going to feel great. You might feel anxiety or angry. Your heart may race, your temperature may rise and your breath become shallow, for example.
Once you have a better understanding of what makes you feel impatient and how you feel when you are, you can start to take action to improve your patience and your life.
Sometimes, in order to understand one thing, it helps to understand the opposite. So, in order to understand patience it helps to understand impatience.
there's a believe, or hope, we know what's best.
we exaggerate the importance of too many things.
explaining how their impatience affects you.
When we practice patience with ourselves, we allow ourselves the space and time needed to learn and grow into our potential without beating ourselves up. We understand we don't have to rush everywhere all the time–we eat when we are hungry, rest when we are tired, and take care of our emotions instead of rushing through life.
When we take the time needed to ponder our options, we make better, more informed decisions. We don't just jump to conclusion and accept whatever option presents itself first. We consider the big picture instead of what will make us happy immediately.
When we take the time to tap into the natural, innate wisdom we have within us, we can more easily receive the messages it is there to communicate to us. This makes for a more joyful, peaceful life…one with fewer regrets.
When we practice patience with those in our lives, we demonstrate our love and appreciation for them. When we let impatience rule our lives, we are irritable and hard to please, which leaves others feeling hurt and taken advantage of. Practicing patience helps us nurture our relationships with family, friends, coworkers, children and romantic partners.
When we slow down to the speed of life, we enjoy things more. It's hard to enjoy the small, meaningful things in life when you are always rushing by them. Taking the time to enjoy each day and what it has to offer makes the journey to our destination–whatever that might be–more joyful and peaceful.


text:
Carrington College is a network of for-profit private colleges with its headquarters in Sacramento, California and 17 locations throughout the Western United States. Established in 1967, it has a student enrollment of over 5,200 and 132,000 alumni.

Carrington College offers career training in the medical, dental, veterinary, criminal justice, and industrial trade fields. The company is owned by San Joaquin Valley College, Inc.

History
The institution was founded in 1967 in Sacramento, California, as the Northwest College of Medical Assistants and Dental Assistants. The college was established to meet the education needs of the local healthcare community.

In 1969, the college was purchased and underwent its first name change, to Western College of Allied Health Careers – A Bryman School". The Education Corporation of America ("EdCOA, Inc.") purchased the college in 1983 and changed its name to Western Career College (WCC). In 1986, WCC opened a second campus in the Bayfair Center in San Leandro, California. The third campus opened in 1997 in Pleasant Hill, California.

WCC earned regional accreditation by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges in June 2001.

In December 2003, U.S. Education Corporation, a California-based company, acquired Western Career College. The U.S. Education Corporation also acquired Apollo College, which was founded by Margaret M Carlson in 1975 in Phoenix, Arizona, to prepare graduates for careers in skilled professions. The U.S. Education Corporation was led by president and chief executive officer George Montgomery from 2002 to 2011. The college expanded in August 2005 by incorporating the operations and programs of Silicon Valley College (SVC).

In September 2008, U.S. Education Corporation became a division of DeVry, Inc. In 2010, Western Career College changed its name to Carrington College California and Apollo College changed its name to Carrington College.  The name Carrington College was chosen after a year of extensive research and testing with current and potential students, and staff focus groups. "The fact that the name contains the word 'caring' connotes the care and dedication faculty and staff take to help students achieve their career goals and aspirations," said George Montgomery, president of U.S. Education, the parent organization for both colleges. "It also coincides with the schools' emphasis on health care programs."

Montgomery retired at the end of 2011 and was succeeded as president of the group by Robert Paul, DeVry University's vice president for metro operations. In 2012, under Paul's leadership, the institution's mascots, Blue and Goldie, were developed. In 2014, Paul succeeded David Pauldine as president of DeVry University and was succeeded as president of Carrington College Group by Jeff Akens. Previously, Akens had served as president of Carrington College California from 2007 to 2014 and had been with the institution since 1993. In 2016, Donna M. Lorraine was appointed president of Carrington College, after Akens' retirement.

In 2014, Carrington College California received approval under the ACCJC/WASC accreditation to add the Carrington College campuses to its existing network, resulting in one consolidated institution called Carrington College.

In December 2018, Carrington College was sold by Adtalem Global Education group (formerly the DeVry Education Group) to San Joaquin Valley College, Inc.

Carrington's Trades Education Center was introduced in 2020 in Phoenix, AZ.

Academics
Carrington College campuses offer programs that lead to a Certificate of Achievement or Associate of Science Degree. Carrington College provides employment-focused, outcome-based, postsecondary education and training with a focus in the healthcare industry, in areas including medical, dental, administrative, veterinary and health studies programs.

Curriculum
Carrington College offers 26 programs through five areas of focus including medicine, health studies, dentistry, administration, or veterinary medicine. Some of the programs include health care administration, pharmacy technology, practical nursing, criminal justice: corrections, veterinary assisting, and dental assisting.

Accreditation
Carrington College is regionally accredited by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. Additionally, many of the programs at Carrington College are accredited by specialized accrediting bodies, which focus on specific occupational fields such as the Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP), the American Society of Health System Pharmacists, and the American Veterinary Medical Association.

Campuses and centers
Carrington College is based in Sacramento, California. The college has 17 campuses and centers in seven states including California, Arizona, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.

Carrington College campuses and center locations include:
Glendale, Arizona
Mesa, Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona
Tucson, Arizona
Citrus Heights, California
Pleasant Hill, California
Sacramento, California
San Jose, California (including North San Jose)
San Leandro, California
Stockton, California
Boise, Idaho
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Las Vegas, Nevada
Reno, Nevada
Portland, Oregon
Spokane Valley, Washington

References

External links

Private universities and colleges in Arizona
For-profit universities and colleges in the United States
Educational institutions established in 1967
1967 establishments in Arizona

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
I had another topic in mind for this week's post but some big shit happened in the wider world last night. Ferguson, MO. I would imagine everyone who's anyone (ha ha) is familiar with the situation so I won't waste time restating the obvious. I abstained from jumping into the Facebook cesspool of vitriol and uninformed opinion and have opted to come here to share my vitriol and uninformed opinion.
This is a tough one for me. I think both sides are right. I am sympathetic to both of the opposing views and I don't see a clear course of action on how to proceed from here.
First and most important, yes. There is an epidemic of police violence towards young black males. There is a four hundred year legacy of institutional racism and oppression in this country, and no matter how hard we may want to wish it away or pretend like it does not still color much of modern American life, the fact is that it does. White privilege. Guess what? A very real thing. I can vouch for it. I'm a white male. I've felt it and witnessed it and I can list specific examples of it; some of them so blatant that it would sound like I either made it up or like I was a child of pre-civil rights era America.
What's not surprising is that there are so many of us white males who are oblivious to the existence of white privilege. Try telling a struggling father working three jobs and still coming up short on the bills that he is "privileged". You're liable to get punched square in the nose. I understand that.
I could explain the reality of white privilege but that's not what this is about. The point I want to make with it is that it is very easy for people in my demographic (white male) to be oblivious to our special position in society. It is VERY easy for us to sit back and ask smug questions like: Why are they so mad? What do they think they will accomplish by lighting cars on fire and throwing rocks at police? Why can't they see that justice was served and this cop was just doing his job?
You know what? If I limit my perspective to just my immediate experience, I could ask those same questions. But one thing I've learned as I've gotten older is that using my own personal experience as a guage for the state of society at large is a mistake.
That being said, I will now venture into murkier waters and explain why I think it's possible both sides are right here. Let's deal with the pro Darren Wilson side first. From what I've seen of the evidence released by the grand jury - and it must be stated that grand juries are not required to release any evidence and they usually don't - this police officer was defending himself and his actions were legitimate. I can just hear all of the boos and hisses but the evidence shows that this was a man being attacked by a much larger, more powerful individual, and cops carry guns for a reason. Namely, to keep themselves alive in these exact scenarios.
He (the cop) acted legally and rationally. Is it a devastating and heartbreaking tragedy that an unarmed teenager lost his life? Hell yeah it is. Nothing I say here is meant to detract from that. Have there been many cases, probably hundreds, of white police officers using excessive force and often killing unarmed black teens? Again, hell yeah. It is not even in dispute if you are willing to accept hard, empirical statistics that are publicly available. However, each case has to be looked at individually and decided based on the facts specific to that case.
You cannot simply convict one white cop who kills an unarmed black teen on the basis that there have been other white cops who have unjustifiably killed unarmed black teens. You can't do it even if you know by NOT doing it there will be riots and violence and old, deep wounds will be re-opened. It's too bad that this tragedy has to be judged through the lens of race, but that is America. That is our history. There's no escaping it, and the process of overcoming it has been and will continue to be incredibly difficult. And I think it will take at least another couple of generations to truly work itself out, assuming it's even possible to completely work out. The fact is, it's a scar that may never go away. Some don't.
Now for the other half of my argument. There is rioting and sadness and anger erupting as I type this. At least from what I've seen, if you are a black American, you are outraged and feel that a grievous injustice has been committed here. And I think you are wrong. In this one specific case, unless the three forensic pathologists reports are all inaccurate, and the eye witness testimony completely fabricated, I cannot see how this police officer could have been convicted for murdering Michael Brown.
But hear me out before you discount me as another privileged, out of touch white guy.
Just because I don't think this one specific incident was a miscarriage of justice, please understand that I will admit without hesitation that there have been thousands of miscarriages of justice. Thousands of cases of racially motivated police brutality and murder that went completely unpunished, unnoticed, not even considered noteworthy because hey, it's so normal it's not even news. That is where this country has been. It's still happening now.
It appears that our status quo is that it's open season on young black males if you are a white police officer and maybe even just a white guy in general. Black mothers and fathers have every reason to be terrified for the safety of their children. It is perhaps fair to say that the biggest physical threat they face - and in many neighborhoods they face many - comes from the very people who are supposed to be protecting them. What do you do if you are the parent of a black teenager? What do you tell them? I have no answers for that. Not even from my privileged perspective here outside of the perimeter of the dangerous zone that is ordinary life for millions of my fellow Americans.
I cannot pretend to relate to the frustrations and legitimate grievances held by the black community in the wake of yet another young black kid killed by the police. And forgive me if this is presumptuous to say, but I understand why you are feeling rage and probably even hopelessness at this time. Your reaction is justified and based on a reality that so many of your fellow Americans don't see or just flat out pretend doesn't exist. Your struggle is real. Know that some of 'us' know that.
I tried to explain this to a friend today and what I said was imagine that someone has punched you in the face 100 times and you have just sat there and taken it. Then the 101th punch is just a fake but you strike back on that one. It almost doesn't even matter that the punch was just a fake. You are bloodied and bruised and have been pushed to the limit of human tolerance and patience. At some point frustration and a basic survival instinct kick in. That's what we have here.
When I see the smug, condescending, and insensitive reactions from many of my white Facebook friends, I get pretty pissed off. It would be easy for me to just choose sides and say welcome to Amerikkka, and go on about how an injustice has taken place. But I can't do that if I'm honest. I can say injustice has been committed en masse, against blacks in America, by whites in America. There are massive double standards about what constitutes acceptable behavior between white teenagers (just being typical rowdy youngsters) and black teenagers (dangerous thugs). All of this shit is real. But one injustice cannot make up for another. Convicting a white cop just because it feels like that's what should have been done would not bring back Michael Brown and would not erase the disease of racism that's still flowing through the veins of America. It would just be another injustice.
I feel anger and sadness like any sane person should. To the white assholes on Facebook who are celebrating like it's a sport...congratulations on being insensitive assholes who fan the flames of racial resentment. And from your privileged, sheltered little perch at that. To the black people who had their minds made up about this case before they even bothered to see the evidence...well, I'm not sure exactly what to say to you. Who am I to say anything to you really? Everything in your own experience and history gives you a million reasons to pre-judge this case. Hell, you are prejudged every day, every where you go. I'd like to say, please give the facts a chance here. Please be reasonable and look at the evidence. Don't project all of the true injustice that's been committed against you onto this particular incident. I'd like to say that but damn I know that's asking a lot. Would I be so noble if I were in your shoes? I can't say. What I can say is that I'm angry and heart broken too.
Something Novel
Could there be anything more ridiculous than writing an essay about writing a novel when you haven't even written a novel? Ponder. And I shall do the same, sort of.
When I was a school boy there were multiple times when an elementary or middle school teacher would comment on my writing ability. It was good, they claimed. That, however, doesn't mean a damn thing because that's what school teachers do: encourage and inspire confidence in their students, especially the ones that demonstrate any remote interest or competence in a given subject. And that's about what I had...some small scrap of competence for stringing words together coherently. That probably stood out to the teachers because from what I observed at the time many of my peers were unable to grasp the basics of their native tongue. The bar was low.
Then came junior college English class, freshman year. We had to like, write stuff. I generally found it irritating but less irritating than some of my other classes. One of our first assignments was a "how to" essay. It could be about how to do anything. I wrote an essay on how to cruise the strip for girls in the small east Texas town where I went to high school. The teacher, bless her heart, really flipped for my essay. She pulled me aside after class, asked if she could save it and use it as an example for her future classes, told me I was really talented, and insisted that I sign up for the basic creative writing class there at the college. She was so emphatic about it that I agreed. It sounded like an easy credit.
The creative writing teacher was a more discerning and honest critic. She was, let's say, less than impressed with my verbal virtuosity. I did okay in the class but she made it clear that I should probably not count on becoming the next great American author. My feelings were not hurt because I didn't think of my self as a writer anyway. There were some actual serious writers in the class. People who wrote for the love of writing. People who were passionate about it and who had read great works of literature and actually knew what the hell they were doing. I, on the other hand, could only remember reading Charlotte's Web and The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe up to that point. Maybe the Scarlet Letter too, which I detested. And thinking about it I remember some Geoffrey Chaucer as well. But I had read very little, had little to no understanding what made good writing or a good story, and my very presence in that class was probably an affront to the other students who actually were serious and gave a damn. I was an immature, self-absorbed, very young man, going through the kinds of weird things 19 year old boys go through, and as far as school went I was just going through the motions. Now if she would have told me I was not a good basketball player, my fragile self-esteem might have crumbled irreversibly; but writing? Blah.
I say all of that to say this: I am not a gifted writer. Not then, not now. Despite some kind words from some well-meaning people, I recognize that there are people out there with a natural talent with words and story-telling and that I am not one of them.
However...
I'm an adult now. Within the last decade I've discovered a love for reading that was not there when I was in school. I've sought out good literature and devoured dozens (or more) of very fine novels. Now an avid reader does not a writer make. I get this. To think so would be like saying all you have to do to become a great basketball player is have a deep admiration for Lebron James. That's not at all how it works. To be great or even good at something requires a combination of natural talent and very hard work.
What piques my curiosity though is the possibility that if I do have some small level of competence with the written word, could that now combine with my more mature appreciation and understanding of good writing to form a potential that is worth exploring? Most likely not. But it would just be exploring, after all. Specifically, could I write a novel?
The reason I wonder aloud here about this is because there is a pattern I have noticed in my life. When something makes a big impression on me it's not enough for me to remain just an observer. I have to try it. That's why videos appear here from time to time with me trying to imitate a Jimi Hendrix guitar solo. I am so taken by something I ask myself "how in the hell do they do that?". And I have to find out for myself. I see the same thing beginning to happen with writing. I experience the genius of David Mitchell or Tom Robbins or Charles Dickens and it leaves me with that same "How the hell do they do that?" feeling that eventually leads to me trying it myself. It's wildly pretentious, laughably ambitious, and will probably amount to nothing more than a mountain of frustration. I'm still intrigued by the possibilities and the challenge of it though. There are worse things that I could waste my time on.
While I currently have zero plot ideas for a novel, I do think I have a good grasp of the elements that make a good novel. Of course, some of that is objective and everyone has different tastes. There are so many different genres and types of novels it would be hard to know where to start. I mentioned David Mitchell and Tom Robbins and what impresses me so much about them is that their work is really hard to put labels on. Anything can happen and there are no rules. For all I know that is probably the most difficult approach and one that only the most gifted can pull off, but it looks really fun.
Where will this lead? Maybe not even beyond this blog post. I honestly don't know. Just thinking aloud as it were.
Posted by Ben There at 7:32 PM No comments: