The most common visual that comes to mind when we mention panhandling is the homeless person with a cardboard sign asking for money. However, we have many forms of panhandling in our community.
Our politicians panhandle for votes when they stand on the corners holding their cardboard signs on Election Day. Our firefighters panhandle aggressively during the "boot" campaign for muscular dystrophy as they walk in traffic knocking on car windows asking for money. Children hold cardboard signs on street corners with the inscription "car wash" collecting money for their church or soccer league. Which cause is more "worthy"? And who gets to decide?
I began to wonder. When did panhandling become synonymous with homeless indigents? The definition of panhandling in the dictionary is "to beg money from strangers," "to get by begging" or "to ask people that you do not know for money, especially in a public place." All these definitions certainly apply to my presentation and the examples noted above. I was interested to note that none of these definitions implied judgment on the act or the person asking.
I looked up the word "begging." I came up with a multitude of words that suggested a desperate plea; suppliant, pleading, beseeching, imploring, entreating, prayerful and petitioning. Hmm.
Clearly the act of begging was not negative.
Who panhandles? You do. I do. As Alaskans, we panhandle for public money on a consistent basis, yet we judge our poor with intolerance when they panhandle.
In 1997 the Alaska Legislature passed S.B. 24, an act that prohibits doctors from performing abortions on unemancipated women under seventeen years of age without parental consent or judicial authorization [Fn. 1] and that subjects doctors to criminal penalties for knowingly performing abortions on minors without the required consent or authorization. [Fn. 2] The act'sconsent requirement can be met by written consent from a parent orguardian or by a court order bypassing consent. [Fn. 3] To obtaina judicial bypass order, a minor must file a complaint in superior court and establish by clear and convincing evidence either that she is "sufficiently mature and well enough informed to decide intelligently whether to have an abortion without the consent of aparent, guardian, or custodian" or that parental consent would notbe in her best interests. [Fn. 4] The superior court must appointcounsel for minors who are unrepresented, [Fn. 5] and judicial bypass proceedings are confidential. [Fn. 6] If the court fails to hear a complaint within five days after filing, the court's inaction constructively authorizes the minor to consent for herself. [Fn. 7]
Soon after the legislature enacted this parental consent or judicial authorization requirement, Planned Parenthood of Alaska and Drs. Jan Whitefield and Robert Klem filed an action in superior court, claiming that the act is void because it violates the Alaska Constitution's guarantees of privacy, equal protection, freedom from discrimination based on sex, and due process. They later moved for summary judgment. The superior court granted their motion, concluding that the act violates equal protection byrequiring consent or judicial authorization for pregnant minors who choose abortion, but not for those who choose to give birth.
All of our reproductive health care services are confidential. The only services we offer that require parental consent are non-reproductive health care services. Treatment of illnesses such as upper respiratory illnesses, minor gastrointestinal disorders and allergies, or the treatment of problems like acne are the services that require parental consent. These services fall under the limited family practice category. If you have any questions regarding confidentiality, please call the clinic nearest you. We'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.As you can see the political creature abortion rights has become. A medical procedure is a medical procedure period.
GREETINGS ... Gov. Murkowski's Christmas card is one of 37 governor's cards that does not mention Christmas, according to a report by the Pew Research Center. He and Nancy opted for the politically correct "Happy Holidays." It's a nice card, though. Check it out at www.stateline.org.
ON THE MOVE ... Mike Doogan, former ADN columnist and current press secretary for the legislative Democrats, is leaving that job at the end of the month. His replacement is Frank Amedure, who starts on Jan. 4. Frank is a former editor of the Frontiersman and was most recently a PIO for the Mat-Su Borough.
Ear asked Doogan whether this is a prelude to filing for Eric Croft's seat in the state House. He said: "Sorry, gotta go. Got a call on the other line."
Or words to that effect.
In January, schools in Cobb County in suburban Atlanta were forced to peel off the disclaimers when a federal judge said they were an endorsement of religion. The ruling was appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which will hear arguments on Thursday.
Advocates on both sides say the appeals court's decision will go a long way toward shaping a debate between science and religion that has cropped up in various forms around the country.
"If it's unconstitutional to tell students to study evolution with an open mind, then what's not unconstitutional?" said John West, a senior fellow with the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank that supports intelligent design, the belief that the universe is so complex it must have been created by a higher power. "The judge is basically trying to make it unconstitutional for anyone to have a divergent view, and we think that has a chilling effect on free speech."
Opponents of the sticker campaign see it as a backdoor attempt to introduce the biblical story of creation into the public schools _ something the U.S. Supreme Court disallowed in a 1987 case from Louisiana.
"The anti-evolution forces have been searching for a new strategy that would accomplish the same end," said Kenneth Miller, a professor of biology at Brown University and co-author of the science book that was stickered. "That purpose is, if not to get evolution out of the schools altogether, then at least undermine it as much as possible in the minds of students."
The disclaimers were placed in the books in 2002 by school officials in Cobb County, a suburb of about 650,000 people. The stickers were printed up after more than 2,000 parents complained that science texts presented evolution as a fact, with no mention of other theories.
The stickers read: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
The school board called the stickers "a reasonable and evenhanded guide to science instruction" that encourages students to be critical thinkers.
Some parents, along with the American Civil Liberties Union, sued, claiming the stickers violated the constitutional separation of church and state.
U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper ruled that the sticker "conveys an impermissible message of endorsement and tells some citizens that they are political outsiders while telling others they are political insiders."
In Pennsylvania, a federal judge has yet to decide whether the Dover Area School District can require ninth-grade biology students to learn about intelligent design. A few days after the trial ended earlier this fall, Dover voters ousted eight of the nine school board members who adopted the policy.
The same week, state education officials in Kansas adopted new classroom science standards that call the theory of evolution into question.
In 2004, Georgia's school superintendent proposed a statewide science curriculum that dropped the word "evolution" in favor of "changes over time." That plan was soon scrapped amid protests from teachers.
The theory of evolution, formalized by Charles Darwin, is as much theory as is the theory of gravity, or the theory of relativity. Unlike theories of physics, biological theories, and especially evolution, have been argued long and hard in socio-political arenas. Even today, evolution is not often taught in primary schools. However, evolution is the binding force of all biological research. It is the unifying theme. In paleontology, evolution gives workers a powerful way to organize the remains of past life and better understand the one history of life. The history of thought about evolution in general and paleontological contributions specifically are often useful to the workers of today. Science, like any iterative process, draws heavily from its history.http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topicbrowse2.php?topic_id=48
What is the history of evolutionary theory?
Resources:
Adaptation: The case of penguins
The process of natural selection produces stunning adaptations. Learn about the history of this concept, while you explore the incredible adaptations that penguins have evolved, allowing them to survive and reproduce in a climate that reaches -60°C!
This article appears at Visionlearning.
Darwin and Wallace: Natural selection
Darwin and Wallace came up with the idea of natural selection, but their idea of how evolution occurs was not without predecessors.
This article is located within History of Evolutionary Thought.
History of evolutionary thought
In this section, you will see how study in four disciplinary areas — Earth's history, life's history, mechanisms of evolution, and development and genetics — has contributed to our current understanding of evolution.
Jean Baptiste Lamarck: Early concepts of evolution
Darwin was not the first to propose that life evolves; Lamarck and naturalists before him also considered the possibility that species change over time.
This article is located within History of Evolutionary Thought.
On the Origin of Species
This online book includes the complete text of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, in which Darwin lays out his conception of natural selection and surveys the evidence that supports the theory of evolution.
This book appears at Literature.org.
Species, speciation and the environment
Niles Eldredge gives a historical overview of scientists' thinking on the process of speciation, along with modern perspectives on this issue.
This article appears at ActionBioscience.org.
By Doug Gross
ASSOCIATED PRESS
3:43 p.m. December 15, 2005
ATLANTA – A federal appeals panel Thursday questioned the accuracy of a judge's ruling that a disclaimer in school textbooks describing evolution as "a theory, not a fact" represents an endorsement of religion.
"I don't think you all can contest any of the sentences" on the disclaimer sticker, Judge Ed Carnes of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals told an attorney arguing for parents who sued.
"It is a theory, not a fact; the book supports that," Carnes said.
The lower court in January ordered a suburban Atlanta school district to remove the stickers. The judge, Clarence Cooper, wrote the disclaimer "conveys an impermissible message of endorsement and tells some citizens that they are political outsiders while telling others they are political insiders."
Cobb County schools attorney Linwood Gunn argued Thursday that Cooper misconstrued the school board's intention, which he said was to allay community concerns while teaching good science.
"There's nothing religious in the case except constituents' beliefs or presumed beliefs," Gunn said.
Jeffrey Bramlett, arguing for the American Civil Liberties Union and parents, cited the book's author, Kenneth Miller, who testified it would be misleading to say evolution is not a fact.
That sticker "was like a cigarette warning to kids, singling out this one thing from everything in the entire book," ACLU Georgia legal director Gerry Weber said outside court.
Carnes, considered one of the court's most conservative members, was joined on the panel by Judge Frank Hull, a Clinton appointee, and Judge William Pryor, a controversial appointment last year by President Bush.
The panel did not indicate when it would rule.
The stickers were placed on about 35,000 books in suburban Cobb County in 2002 and read: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
The Cobb County case is one of several that have pushed the teaching of evolution into the national spotlight.
In Pennsylvania, a federal judge has yet to decide whether Dover schools may require "intelligent design" be taught in ninth-grade biology classes.
In Kansas, state education officials recently cleared the way for schools to teach "intelligent design," which says the universe is so complex it must have been created by a higher power. Critics say it's creationism disguised as science.
Last year, Georgia's state schools superintendent proposed a statewide science curriculum that dropped the word "evolution" in favor of "changes over time," but the plan was quickly scrapped amid protests by teachers.
Judge Edward E. Carnes, joined by Judges Frank M. Hull and William H. Pryor Jr., led sharp questioning of Jeffrey O. Bramlett, who represented the challengers of the sticker and had to defend the January ruling of U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper.
Just recently the Anchorage Daily News editorial staff published an opinion on Judge Roy Moore and the Ten Commandments.
First, to back up Judge Moore's opinion on the matter, the editorial staff should read the Affidavit in Support of the Ten Commandments
Then the editorial staff should familiarize itself with the opinion from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The idea that displaying the Ten Commandments violates the separation of church and state, ignores the historical relevance the Commandments played in law, both good and bad.
It would have been an entertaining argument to hear the ACLU argue before the U.S. Supreme Court that the tablets being displayed in a public building violates the separation of church and state, when Moses and/or the 10 Commandments appear three times in the architectural embellishment of the U.S. Supreme Court building.
There is no place in separating a part of our history by taking it away or hiding it from our knowledge. Moreover, the Ten Commandments where placed back in the Alabama Court rotunda.
In effect, Judge Roy Moore ( an elected Judge), was vindicated regardless of what those opposed to Judge Moore say.
Only one of the nine justices voted differently in the two cases. Justice Stephen Breyer, considered a moderate liberal, voted against the displays in Kentucky but in favor of the one in Texas.
The key difference, Breyer said, was that the Kentucky displays stemmed from a governmental effort "substantially to promote religion," and the Texas display served a "mixed but primarily non-religious purpose."
After reading Andrew Halcro's commentary on Domestic Violence, one can see his bias and his shortsightedness.
He tells only part of the story. Nationwide statistics show up in Alaska.
Nationwide, in 81% of the cases of child abuse, at least one parent was the person responsible for child maltreatment. 58% of perpetrators were female.
Sexual abuse was far more likely when the perpetrator was an unmarried partner. Sources: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2004). Child Maltreatment 2002.U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002). National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System.
Mr. Halcro, review the Duffus case where a known convicted child molester, unattended, watched his girlfriend's children. The Alaska Supreme Court at the time, determined that the children were in no danger.
Then a seven year old was sexually assaulted by a man who had sex with the mother in the same bed.
Then we read about a Judge who orders joint custody and the mother kills herself and the children. Pile of Evidence Pointed To Murder Anchorage Daily News January 16, 2005
This month, a very biased, agenda driven and highly inaccurate program called "Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories" aired this month attacking fathers.
The program was silent on the child abuse committed by mothers and their boyfriends.
Mr. Halcro did you cite these statistics? No, you were silent. One can only wonder why.
Dear Representative Croft,
I am enclosing a link to a recent study that was done by the New Hampshire legislature. It was a study done on the status of men in the state of New Hampshire. http://www.nh.gov/csm/downloads/nh_status_of_men_2005.pdf
In it, you will find some enlightening statistics that prove that the states are not balanced in their laws when it comes to family issues.
As you know I have sent you my brief that is before the Alaska Supreme Court and many of the statistics that show up in New Hampshire are reflected nationwide and show up here in Alaska.
It is unfortunate that you have ignored my concerns on the matter. And as such, the laws that deal with family matters will become an election issue this coming November of 2006.
As many who know me through school board races, I will raise issues that need to be corrected and my stance has been proven right by the outcomes.
Just recently, we have seen biased opinions on family matters published on air in both the print media and televised media.
Case in point was Mr. Andrew Halcro's biased opinion in the Anchorage Daily News on domestic violence. And then on PBS a program titled Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories which was aired, is patently false on the assertion that Parental Alienation Syndrome is junk science and that most dads who seek custody of their kids are abusers.
Since it has aired, there has been great criticism towards PBS in choosing to show the program.
The results can be seen here. http://www.cpb.org/ombudsmen/051129bode.html
I am sending this e-mail to you and other legislators and various news media to bring more awareness to the matter.
If you decide to run in the House election, and if I am the Republican candidate, I will look forward to debating the issue with you this November of 2006.
Sincerely,
Tom Lamb
http://www.hss.state.ak.us/ocs/Statistics/Graphs/chart11.gif
Over 2/3 of the child abuse committed by a parent is committed by the mother.(4)
Mothers (55%) are more likely the fathers (45%) to murder their children.(5)
Mothers kill sons (64%) more often than daughters (36%) and 78% of the child victims are under age 11.(6)
4) Data provided by the Child Protective Service agencies of Virginia (67% mothers, 33% fathers), New Jersey (70% mothers, 30% fathers), Texas (68% mothers, 32% fathers), and Minnesota (62% mothers, 38% fathers) , and Alaska (67% mothers, 33% fathers).
5) Bureau of Justice, "Murder in Families", NCJ-143498.
6) Ibid.
The president claims his critics are trying to rewrite the history of how the war started. His charge is ironic, as it perfectly describes what he himself is doing. He convinced the nation that war was essential to protect Americans against Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and was justified as retaliation against a regime that was connected to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Both rationales for war proved false.
President Bush defends the way things turned out, claiming his critics had the same intelligence he did about Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction. That's simply not true. As The Washington Post reported, "Bush and his aides had access to much more voluminous intelligence information than did lawmakers, who were dependent on the administration to provide the material."
President Bush claims that he didn't manipulate pre-war intelligence to steer the nation to war in Iraq, citing the findings of a commission he appointed. The Robb-Silberman Commission concluded that intelligence analysts didn't change their reports because of pressure from within the Bush administration.
However, "Our executive order did not direct us to deal with the use of intelligence by policymakers," said commission co-chair Laurence Silberman. As The New York Times noted, "What Mr. Bush left unaddressed was the question of how his administration used that intelligence, which was full of caveats, subtleties and contradiction."
The Bush administration faced a problem making the case for war. "Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran," according to the "Downing Street memo," a confidential British foreign service summary of discussions with the Bush administration in the summer before Congress voted to authorize the war. "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action," the memo said. "The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
Unfortunately, it should have been the other way around, with the policy based on the facts.
U.S. forces never found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And that wouldn't surprise anyone who listened to United Nations weapons inspectors.
As Scott Ritter, an inspector and former U.S. Marine officer who served under Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf in the first gulf war, recently stated: "We were monitoring Iraq ... with the most intrusive, technologically advanced, on-site inspection program in the history of arms control. ... We were unable to detect any evidence of either a retained capability or a reconstituted capability in weapons of mass destruction."
The New York Times wrote in an editorial: "It's obvious that the Bush administration misled Americans about Mr. Hussein's weapons and his terrorist connections. We need to know how that happened and why."
Now those pressing for a long overdue explanation are irresponsible?
The critics, and all Americans, including the brave service men and women on the front lines, deserve better.
BOTTOM LINE: President Bush insults the nation and the troops fighting and dying in Iraq when he questions the patriotism of those who question his leadership.
When did President Bush get first elected to the office? And when did 9/11 happen? The idea that an incoming president would have the intelligence needed to know what is now being alleged against the president is assinine.Saddam Hussein's regime has opened talks with Osama bin Laden, bringing closer the threat of a terrorist attack using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, according to US intelligence sources and Iraqi opposition officials.
The key meeting took place in the Afghan mountains near Kandahar in late December. The Iraqi delegation was led by Farouk Hijazi, Baghdad's ambassador in Turkey and one of Saddam's most powerful secret policemen, who is thought to have offered Bin Laden asylum in Iraq.
The Saudi-born fundamentalist's response is unknown. He is thought to have rejected earlier Iraqi advances, disapproving of the Saddam Hussein's secular Baathist regime. But analysts believe that Bin Laden's bolthole in Afghanistan, where he has lived for the past three years, is now in doubt as a result of increasing US and Saudi government pressure.
News of the negotiations emerged in a week when the US attorney general, Janet Reno, warned the Senate that a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction was a growing concern. "There's a threat, and it's real," Ms Reno said, adding that such weapons "are being considered for use."
US embassies around the world are on heightened alert as a result of threats believed to emanate from followers of Bin Laden, who has been indicted by a US court for orchestrating the bombing last August of embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, in which 259 people died. US delegations in Africa and the Gulf have been shut down in recent weeks after credible threats were received.
In this year's budget, President Clinton called for an additional $2 billion to spend on counter-terrorist measures, including extra guards for US embassies around the world and funds for executive jets to fly rapid response investigative teams to terrorist incidents around the world.Since RAF bombers took part in air raids on Iraq in December, Bin Laden declared that he considered British citizens to be justifiable targets. Vincent Cannistraro, former chief of CIA counter-terrorist operations, said: "Hijazi went to Afghanistan in December and met with Osama, with the knowledge of the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar. We are sure about that. What is the source of some speculation is what transpired."
An acting US counter-intelligence official confirmed the report. "Our understanding over what happened matches your account, but there's no one here who is going to comment on it."Ahmed Allawi, a senior member of the opposition Iraqi National Congress (INC), based in London, said he had heard reports of the December meeting which he believed to be accurate. "There is a long history of contacts between Mukhabarat [Iraqi secret service] and Osama bin Laden," he said. Mr Hijazi, formerly director of external operations for Iraqi intelligence, was "the perfect man to send to Afghanistan".
Analysts believe that Mr Hijazi offered Mr bin Laden asylum in Iraq, most likely in return for co-operation in launching attacks on US and Saudi targets. Iraqi agents are believed to have made a similar offer to the Saudi maverick leader in the early 1990s when he was based in Sudan.
Iraqi intelligence documents discovered in Baghdad by The Telegraph have provided the first evidence of a direct link between Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'eda terrorist network and Saddam Hussein's regime.
Papers found yesterday in the bombed headquarters of the Mukhabarat, Iraq's intelligence service, reveal that an al-Qa'eda envoy was invited clandestinely to Baghdad in March 1998.The documents show that the purpose of the meeting was to establish a relationship between Baghdad and al-Qa'eda based on their mutual hatred of America and Saudi Arabia. The meeting apparently went so well that it was extended by a week and ended with arrangements being discussed for bin Laden to visit Baghdad.
The papers will be seized on by Washington as the first proof of what the United States has long alleged - that, despite denials by both sides, Saddam's regime had a close relationship with al-Qa'eda.
The Telegraph found the file on bin Laden inside a folder lying in the rubble of one of the rooms of the destroyed intelligence HQ. There are three pages, stapled together; two are on paper headed with the insignia and lettering of the Mukhabarat.
They show correspondence between Mukhabarat agencies over preparations for the visit of al-Qa'eda's envoy, who traveled to Iraq from Sudan, where bin Laden had been based until 1996. They disclose what Baghdad hopes to achieve from the meeting, which took place less than five months before bin Laden was placed at the top of America's most wanted list following the bombing of two US embassies in east Africa.
Perhaps aware of the sensitivities of the subject matter, Iraqi agents at some point clumsily attempted to mask out all references to bin Laden, using white correcting fluid. The dried fluid was removed to reveal the clearly legible name three times in the documents.
One paper is marked "Top Secret and Urgent". It is signed "MDA", a codename believed to be the director of one of the intelligence sections within the Mukhabarat, and dated February 19, 1998. It refers to the planned trip from Sudan by bin Laden's unnamed envoy and refers to the arrangements for his visit.
A letter with this document says the envoy is a trusted confidant of bin Laden. It adds: "According to the above, we suggest permission to call the Khartoum station [Iraq's intelligence office in Sudan] to facilitate the travel arrangements for the above-mentioned person to Iraq. And that our body carry all the travel and hotel costs inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden."The letter refers to al-Qa'eda's leader as an opponent of the Saudi Arabian regime and says that the message to convey to him through the envoy "would relate to the future of our relationship with him, bin Laden, and to achieve a direct meeting with him."
According to handwritten notes at the bottom of the page, the letter was passed on through another director in the Mukhabarat and on to the deputy director general of the intelligence service.
It recommends that "the deputy director general bring the envoy to Iraq because we may find in this envoy a way to maintain contacts with bin Laden". The deputy director general has signed the document. All of the signatories use codenames.
The other documents then confirm that the envoy traveled from Khartoum to Baghdad in March 1998, staying at al-Mansour Melia, a first-class hotel. It mentions that his visit was extended by a week. In the notes in a margin, a name "Mohammed F. Mohammed Ahmed" is mentioned, but it is not clear whether this is the the envoy or an agent.
Intriguingly, the Iraqis talk about sending back an oral message to bin Laden, perhaps aware of the risk of a written message being intercepted. However, the documents do not mention if any meeting took place between bin Laden and Iraqi officials.
The file contradicts the claims of Baghdad, bin Laden and many critics of the coalition that there was no link between the Iraqi regime and al-Qa'eda. One Western intelligence official contacted last night described the file as "sensational", adding: "Baghdad clearly sought out the meeting. The regime would have wanted it to happen in the capital as it's only there they would feel safe from surveillance by Western intelligence."
Over the past three weeks, The Telegraph has discovered various other intelligence files in the wrecked Mukhabarat building, including documents revealing how Russia passed on to Iraq details of private conversations between Tony Blair and Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister, and how Germany held clandestine meetings with the regime.
A Downing Street spokesman said last night: "Since Saddam's fall a series of documents have come to light which will have to be fully assessed by the proper authorities over a period of time. We will certainly want to study these documents as part of that process to see if they shed new light on the relationship between Saddam's regime and al-Qa'eda.
Critics say this is a smoking gun, proving that the administration was simply pretending that war might be forestalled during the months prior to the actual invasion, and that it knowingly corrupted intelligence reports to back a policy that was foreordained.
Others have a different reading of this passage. The memo does not say specifically that Mr. Bush, or indeed any US official, saw war as inevitable. And at the time, the media was rife with commentary that war was most likely coming. If seen in that general sense, the conclusion was unsurprising.
Nor did the document offer details of what intelligence was being fixed around what policy. Over the last year, a series of US studies have offered scathing conclusions about the poor nature of prewar US intelligence, and its uses.
A second memo, published in the Times of London on June 12, concluded only that US government military planning for action against Iraq was "proceeding apace."
This memo, produced for British cabinet's consideration at a July 22, 2002, meeting, reiterated the point that the US appeared to have given little thought to a war's aftermath. "In particular, little thought has been given to creating the political conditions for military action, or the aftermath and how to shape it," concluded the memo's uncredited author.
Posts
All Comments
