Receive email alerts News NepalAsia – Pacific June 8, 2020 Find out more RSF_en Four months after King Gyanendra declared a State of Emergency on 26 November 2001, at the recommendation of Sher Bahadur Deuba’s government, a high price has already been paid in terms of press freedom violations. Security forces have arrested more than 100 journalists, and at least 30 reporters and media contributors are still being detained. Worse still, at least three journalists have been tortured by security forces while in custody. Despite these events, the country’s private newspapers and radio stations are still being permitted to keep the public informed. Articles exposing government corruption continue to appear in one of Nepal’s biggest daily newspapers. Restricted access to information and, most importantly self-censorship, only apply to military operations against Maoist forces.A Reporters without Borders’ fact-finding team stayed in Kathmandu from 10 to 13 March 2002, where it was able to meet with journalists, managing editors, human rights activists, and lawyers and families of imprisoned journalists. On 12 March, Head of Asia-Pacific Desk Vincent Brossel, Reporters without Borders’ correspondent in Nepal, and two members of the Center for Human Rights and Democratic Studies (CEHURDES), a Nepalese organization defending freedom of the press, were received by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba.Thirty journalists and media contributors are currently being held for alleged acts of terrorism by virtue of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Ordinance (TADO), a bill yet to be passed by Parliament. None of them has been sentenced, and the security forces are blocking any habeas corpus procedure initiated by certain families. Considering that the authorities have not produced enough evidence to prove that the imprisoned journalists belong to the Maoist Party, an armed movement that has committed war crimes, Reporters without Borders is demanding their release. In response to a request from the Reporters without Borders’ representative for the release of the imprisoned journalists, Nepal’s Prime Minister affirmed that the “investigations were making progress.” He added, “If any errors have been made, the individuals concerned will be freed and compensated.”Individuals interviewed by Reporters without Borders—particularly those who have publicly opposed the state of emergency, confirmed that they now live in a climate of fear. “Who will be next?” a journalist wondered after the arrest of Gopal Budhathoki, Sanghu’s Editor. “The litany of deaths announced daily in the press and the presence of military patrols in the streets of Kathmandu have created an atmosphere of war that we have never experienced before,” explained another Kathmandu journalist. Human rights organization officials, overwhelmed by the exponential number of exactions in Nepal, fear that the fight against the Maoist rebels will become militarized. “The troops do as they please. They completely violate the laws by arresting, questioning, torturing and detaining suspects, especially journalists,” claimed Subodh Raj Pyakurel, General Secretary of the human rights organization, INSEC. Reactions to this degrading situation are limited. The Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist, main parliamentary opposition faction), human rights organizations and journalists’ associations are putting their own welfare at risk in an attempt to break the silence over the exactions committed within the context of this fight against “Maoist terrorism.”Over 100 journalists arrested within four monthsOn 26 November 2001, the very day that the state of emergency was declared, security forces searched the offices of allegedly “Maoist” publications. Police officers seized computer equipment and documents. The journalists and colleagues found on the premises were arrested, while others were questioned in their homes, and another dozen went underground. Within just a few hours, the Janadesh weekly’s Govinda Acharya (Editor-in-Chief), Khil Bahadur Bhandari (Managing Editor), Deepak Sapkota (a reporter), Dipendra Rokaya (a computer operator), Manarishi Dhital, (an employee), and Ram Bhakta Maharjan (a computer operator), were arrested and detained in an unknown location. Ishwor Chandra Gyawali, Managing Editor of the Dishabodh monthly, was also questioned. The night before, the Kathmandu police had arrested Nim Bahadur Budhatoki, Dishabodh’s computer operator. Om Sharma, Janadisha daily’s Editor-in-Chief and Deepak Mainali, a computer operator, were arrested by security forces. The journalists were held in solitary confinement for 26 days before being transferred to Bhadragol Prison (in Kathmandu), where their families were finally able to visit them. Chandra Man Shrestha, a Managing Editor at Janadisha, was arrested on 27 December 2001. Authorities have provided no information about his case. It should be noted that Amar Budha, a journalist with the pro-Maoist publication Yojana, has been in custody since 9 April 1999, supposedly in Tulsipur Prison.As a result of this dragnet, half a dozen publications more or less closely linked with the Nepalese-Maoist Communist Party that began its revolt in February 1996—namely Janadisha, Dishabodh, Yojana, Jana Aahwan and Janadesh—have been closed down. The Nepalese Prime Minister has assured Reporters without Borders that this wave of arrests and publication closings were intended “put an end to terrorist propaganda once and for all.” And, he added, “From now on, no one will be permitted to incite violence.”But this wave of repressive actions did not end with allegedly pro-Maoist publications. Dozens of journalists, particularly in the districts affected by Maoist guerrilla warfare, have been arrested, interrogated, and ordered to reveal to the police and army the names of their contacts within the Maoist Party. “Some local journalists were forced to name one or two Maoist militants every day. Some officers threatened to execute them if they would not meet their quota of Maoists,” testified one member of CEHURDES, a Nepal-based human rights NGO working for press freedom. “Security forces, conducting an extensive raid that lasted several weeks, during which they arrested thousands of people, have obviously committed as many abuses as mistakes,” commented one INSEC officer.On 29 November 2001, a new raid took place in the country. In the Rupandehi district, nearly 40 journalists were arrested and held for three days by security forces. Basant Pokhrel, a Jana Sangharsha reporter in Rupandehi, was only released on 17 December. Sitaram Shaha and Pawan Shreshta, two reporters working with Janakpur Awaj in the Siraha district, were also imprisoned. They were released five days later. In the Uydapur district (in western Nepal), Baikuntha Dahal, a freelance journalist, has apparently been in custody since 29 November 2001.On 2 December 2001, Shankar Khanal, a correspondent who worked with the state owned radio station Radio Nepal and the Space Time daily, was arrested along with Ganga Bista, a correspondent with the Nepalese state owned television and local newspaper Chautari Times, and Indra Giri, a Nepal Samacharpatra correspondent in the Sankhuwasabha district (in eastern Nepal). The latter was freed four days later. During their interrogations, the two young journalists were tortured. The security forces were trying to make them reveal the names of their Maoist contacts in the district. They considered that the two journalists, who covered the rebels’ demonstrations on several occasions, should be able to give them some of the militants’ names and contacts. After members of the National Human Rights Commission visited the Sankhuwasabha district, Shankar Khanal was released on 2 March; however, as of 15 March 2002, Ganga Bista remains in custody. Speaking to Reporters without Borders, one Commission member described the prison’s living conditions as “inhuman” and the treatments inflicted by the security forces as “degrading.”On 5 December, Bin Bahadur Kunwar, a journalist with Janarajya was arrested. On that same day, Anjan Kumar Himali, a reporter working for Janagunasho was arrested. As of 10 March 2002, they are apparently still in custody, although no one knows what charges may be brought against them.On 6 December, Sama Thapa, Editor of the local weekly Yugayan, was arrested in Tikapur (Kailai district). At the same time, Chitra Chaudhari, the Assistant Managing Editor of the local weekly Nawacharcha (published in Tikapur) and former Editor-in-Chief of Yugayan, was arrested by security forces. After being interrogated by police for several days, Mr. Chaudhari was jailed in an army barracks, while Mr. Thapa was held in the police force’s Regional Unit building.On 13 December, Rupahendi district police arrested Dil Sahani, a journalist and member of the Federation of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ). As of 10 March 2002, he was still being detained.On 21 December, Kamal Baral, Editor of the Swaviman weekly, published in Pokhara, was arrested by members of the security forces at his home in Kaski. Several days later, soldiers arrested Janardan Biyogi, Swaviman’s Assistant Managing Editor, in Pokhara. A third Swaviman contributor, Bishwaprakash Lamichane, was arrested a few days later. As of 10 March 2002, it is believed that all three of them were still being held by Nepalese armed forces in this western district.In the Surkhet district, two journalists were arrested at the end of December 2001. They were supposedly still in custody as of 10 March 2002. They are: Bishnu Khanal and Liladhar Gautam, reporters for Surkhet Post, a local publication. Reporters without Borders does not yet know why they are being held.On 26 December 2001, Badri Prasad Sharma, Editor of the local weekly Baglung, was arrested in his Baglung home. Officially indicted on 18 January 2002, he has been in solitary confinement in the district prison ever since.On 3 January 2002, security forces members questioned Hari Baral of the Bijayapur daily, published in Dharan. More than two months after his arrest, the journalist is still in jail. Bhawani Baral, who is also with Bijayapur, went underground to avoid being arrested.On 5 January 2002, Kamal Mishra, a freelance journalist, was arrested by Indian police 40 kilometres from the border. He is presently being held by police in Siliguri (West Bengal) but no reason has been given for his imprisonment.On 9 January 2002, Bijay Raj Acharya, Director of the private publishing house Sirjanshil Prakashan, was “abducted” by security forces and later tortured during his detention. He was freed on 19 March but must report to the police once a week.On 23 January 2002, a journalists’ organization reported the arrest of Bishwa Raj Poudel, a Chure Sandesh journalist accused of supporting the Maoists. Since that date, authorities have disclosed no information about his case. In the evening of 3 March 2002, a dozen individuals abducted Gopal Budhathoki, Editor of the Nepalese-language weekly Sanghu, while he was returning to his home on a motorcycle. According to several eyewitnesses, the journalist was stopped by army vehicles, despite the Prime Minister’s statement to Reporters without Borders that the armed forces had not been involved. On 6 March 2002, the Prime Minister announced that the journalist had been arrested because the newspaper had repeatedly published “fabricated” articles about the security forces for the sole purpose of “spreading rumours and demoralizing the army.” According to Sanghu’s Assistant Director, interviewed by Reporters without Borders, Gopal Budhathoki had published articles about some financial irregularities related to helicopter purchases made by the Nepalese Army. The Prime Minister stated that “publishing information of this kind is equivalent to directly collaborating with the terrorists.” Gopal Budhathoki, who had already been arrested by security forces on 17 December 2001, was questioned and then released 24 hours later. As of 15 March 2002, after being jailed for over 20 days (probably in an army barracks), the journalist has still not been permitted to see his wife, Ram Kala Budhathoki. On 11 March, the latter informed Reporters without Borders: “I filed a writ of habeas corpus with the Supreme Court but now we need the support of the international community to prevent other journalists from being abducted in the middle of the street by the military, like my husband was.”On 16 March 2002, Shyam Shrestha, Managing Editor of Mulyankan, a far-Left monthly, was arrested at Kathmandu International Airport while getting ready to board a flight to New Delhi, where he planned to attend a seminar. The journalist was arrested by security forces along with two human rights activists. According to the Kantipur newspaper, the journalist and his companions are now being held in solitary confinement in the capital’s Bhadrakali military camp. Mulyankan, known for publishing articles critical of the government, had been targeted by security forces for several months. The journalist’s wife has publicly denounced this State-executed “abduction.”Soldiers arrested Kumar Rawat, managing editor of the Nepalese-language monthly Mul Prabaha and the weekly Mahima, on 24 March at his home in Katmandu. Rawat is also an adviser to the Federation of Nepalese Journalists.Another striking fact about the last four months is the growing number of raids that have been made by the police and army on local publications’ newsrooms. For example, on 16 March, the newsroom of the Naya Yugbodh daily, published in the Dang district (in western Nepal), was raided by plainclothes police. Narayan Prasad Sharma, an experienced journalist, was arrested and interrogated for an hour in an army barracks, in violation of the law prohibiting the military from participating in a civilian’s arrest or interrogation. Arrest of twelve “Maoist” publication journalists”My husband was just a journalist doing his job. He would leave early in the morning and work late at the office. He was never involved in politics,” protested the wife of Janadisha’s Editor, Om Sharma. However, the twelve journalists and media contributors in custody, accused by the government of being Maoists, work for publications whose links with the Maoist Party are well-known. “These newspapers were nothing but mouthpieces for Maoist leaders. What they printed was pure propaganda and I am certain that they are all Maoists,” accused one reporter with the Kantipur daily, who wished to remain anonymous, like many others whom we interviewed. On 28 November, an Associated Press news story specified: “For years, Nepal’s far-Left publications have been mistaking fiction for facts, rumours for truth and ideology for journalism.” Other observers contend that these journalists’ pro-Maoist leanings did not automatically imply that they were party members. As one BBC stringer explained, “Some were even clandestinely criticizing the Party’s decisions. They were nonetheless very useful intermediaries for anyone needing to gain access to certain Maoist leaders.” In any event, the police have so far produced no substantial proof that these 12 individuals are actually members of the Maoist Party, which has been outlawed since 1996. According to Bishwa Kant Mainali, a lawyer who works closely with the families of imprisoned journalists, the police will settle for submitting to the special court judge a letter in which it will be stipulated that this or that individual is “guilty of terrorist activities.” Explained Bishwa Kant Mainali, “Under the anti-terrorist law, we can expect every imaginable violation of legal procedures. This extraordinary legislation will preclude any normal judicial process that would permit the Court to distinguish between real Maoists and those who are innocent.”In early March of this year, 10 relatives of journalists and employees with Janadesh, Dishabodh and Janadisha confined in the same cell of Bhadragol Prison in Kathmandu, filed a writ of habeas corpus with the Supreme Court of Nepal. Assisted by a group of lawyers, the detainees’ wives, fathers and brothers demanded, as provided for under this procedure based on Anglo-Saxon law, that their relative be brought before a judge. This first legal initiative was not carried out without difficulty. First, at the end of December, the police refused to bring the Janadesh contributor, Deepak Mainali, before the court, despite the writ of habeas corpus filed on his behalf. Moreover, some relatives were subjected to actual harassment on the part of security forces and—what is even worse—Sabitree Acharya, wife of Govinda Acharya, the Janadesh journalist, was arrested by the Army in February 2002, after having filed her complaint. As of 15 March 2002, no one has had any news of her. According to lawyer Bishwa Mainali, Sabitree Acharya demonstrated “too much zeal, from the authorities’ point of view, in defending her husband’s case.”The relatives and families dread the 25th of March—the date on which Supreme Court judges are scheduled to render their verdict. On several occasions in the last few years, the police have engineered “fake releases.” Following a Supreme Court ruling, prison authorities would release the prisoner, who would be taken back into custody. Furthermore, Ramnath Mainali, a lawyer working on behalf of the Janadesh weekly, was arrested in his Kathmandu home on the morning of 14 March by a dozen plainclothes members of the security force. According to Amnesty International, this lawyer, who has close ties to the Maoists, earned his reputation by successively defending Krishna Sen and Govinda Acharya, Janadesh Editors. As a result of a 2001 Supreme Court decision, Ramnath Mainali had won Krishna Sen’s release after the former had been in custody for two years. Recently, the lawyer had filed a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of Govinda Acharya, who was arrested on 26 November 2001. The soldiers who arrested Ramnath Mainali informed his relatives that he was being held at the Singha Durbar army barracks in Kathmandu.Until such time that competent authorities have proven that these incarcerated journalists and media contributors are directly affiliated with the Maoist Party, an armed movement that has perpetrated massive violations of human rights, Reporters without Borders deems that they are being held on the grounds that they exercised their right to inform the public. Nepal, with at least 30 media professionals locked behind bars, is, without a doubt, the largest journalist jail in the world.Torture and abusive treatment”The police forced them to take off their clothes—then struck them and splashed them, first with hot water, then with cold water. And they did this several times a day,” affirms Subodh Raj Pyakurel, General Secretary of the INSEC human rights organization, referring to the treatment of Shankar Khanal and Ganga Bista, two journalists from the Sankhuwasabha district. The wife of journalist Bijaya Raj Acharya also said: “My husband was tortured during the first two or three days of his confinement in the Balaju army barracks. His hands and feet were bound and he was given electric shocks.” The police accuse the journalist of contributing to the clandestine publication of the Janadesh pro-Maoist weekly, while his relatives maintain that he only published magazines for children, primarily Srijanashil Prakashan, and far-Left literature.Their relatives, as well as human rights activists, report that most of the journalists accused of pro-Maoist tendencies have been tortured. INSEC has compiled various testimonies from individuals tortured by the police or the military. This organization claims that the prisoners are being held in rooms that can accommodate as many as 50 men and women. Suspects must keep their head down all day long and are interrogated once a day, preferably one-by-one. They are forced to undress, after which an officer—usually a captain—is assigned to hit them with a cosh and iron bars. To make them admit that they are members of the Maoist Party, the suspects are also splashed with water. Finally, those lucky enough to be released are told that they will be killed if they testify to any of the abusive treatments that they endured in prison.Journalists have apparently been subjected to the same treatment. For example, in early March, three journalists of allegedly “Maoist” publications were transferred for three days from their Bhadragol prison cell to a military detention centre. A fellow prisoner stated that they were “totally exhausted” when they returned. Testimonies on the subject are still somewhat vague because of the systematic restrictions imposed by prison authorities on family visits with political prisoners. The wife of one such prisoner reported that she has to fill out the same identification form three times in succession, while families of prisoners jailed for common-law offences are entitled to totally unsupervised visits with their loved one. “Military and secret service personnel listen to our conversations. My husband can say nothing to me in our short, 5- to 10-minute visits,” concluded this mother of two children, who has been left without financial resources.In addition, virtually all of the questionings were made under circumstances that were degrading for the “suspects” and were very much like actual “abductions.” For example, Anuradha Poudel, a woman journalist with the daily Space Time, was arrested in her home in the night of 19 January 2002. Policemen and soldiers tied her hands and blindfolded her, and then led her away to a police station while her husband and son watched. The journalist, an expert on environmental issues, endured several interrogations that night before the police realized that they had arrested the wrong person. Likewise, Kishor Shreshtha, Managing Editor of the Jana Aastha weekly, was subjected to intense psychological pressures by the police officers who interrogated him for more than 20 hours on 29 January 2002.However, lawyer Bishwa Mainali reminded Reporters without Borders that journalists and lawyers are treated much more favourably than other terrorist suspects: “When a lawyer is arrested, his colleagues protest. When a journalist is arrested, the news circulates within press circles and such international organizations as Reporters without Borders. They are protected from extra-judicial executions and disappearances. But who will defend a poor peasant or provincial school teacher?”Next page With at least 30 journalists and assistants in jail, Nepal is now the world’s biggest prison for the media. Since last November, over 100 journalists have been arrested and accused of backing Maoist rebels, often without any evidence being offered. Nepalese journalists threatened, attacked and censored over Covid-19 coverage Help by sharing this information NepalAsia – Pacific Nepal: RSF’s recommendations to amend controversial Media Council Bill to go further News May 29, 2019 Find out more Organisation Follow the news on Nepal March 26, 2002 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Torture, Arbitrary Detention and Self-Censorship Reports News Under Chinese pressure, Nepal sanctions three journalists over Dalai Lama story May 17, 2019 Find out more
WhatsApp Print Linkedin Advertisement OVER the last three years, water rates have been continuously increasing, claims Margaret Morrisey, local business woman.She said that the water bills she has been paying had jumped from 135 euro per year, to 65 euro per quarter, which makes this year’s bill 260 euro. Ms Morrisey said that her usage at her business address has not varied at all over the last three years, as she only holds a toilet and water basin on the premises.Sign up for the weekly Limerick Post newsletter Sign Up She was told by the City Council that the charges were this high due to a metre they put on the property to measure usage, which they claimed is an EU directive. It is allege that a staff member from City Hall first told her that the metres cost a lot of money and that everyone in the building has to pay towards it, but then was informed that as all the other spaces in the building are domestic and she is commercial, she is actually the only person paying for it. She assured the Post that she was never notified of this change in cost.With the bad weather at the moment, Limerick is suffering. Ms Morrisey, like a lot of other business owners at this time, is trying to save every penny, in order for her establishment to survive. “I am not refusing to pay, I have never missed a payment,” she said “I just think fair is fair and what I’m being charged is not right”. Twitter Facebook Email NewsLocal NewsBusinesswoman critical of water ratesBy admin – February 6, 2009 522 Previous articleEmpty houses open invitation to gangs – LeddinNext articleSomething for the weekend February 7/8 admin
Accurate dynamical models of the Antarctic ice sheet with carefully specified initial conditions and well-calibrated rheological parameters are needed to forecast global sea level. By adapting an inverse method previously used in electric impedance tomography, we infer present-day flow speeds within the ice sheet. This inversion uses satellite observations of surface velocity, snow accumulation rate, and rate of change of surface elevation to estimate the basal drag coefficient and an ice stiffness parameter that influences viscosity. We represent interior ice motion using a vertically integrated approximation to incompressible Stokes flow. This model represents vertical shearing within the ice and membrane stresses caused by horizontal stretching and shearing. Combining observations and model, we recover marked geographical variations in the basal drag coefficient. Relative changes in basal shear stress are smaller. No simple sliding law adequately represents basal shear stress as a function of sliding speed. Low basal shear stress predominates in central East Antarctica, where thick insulating ice allows liquid water at the base to lubricate sliding. Higher shear stress occurs in coastal East Antarctica, where a frozen bed is more likely. Examining Thwaites glacier in more detail shows that the slowest sliding often coincides with elevated basal topography. Differences between our results and a similar adjoint-based inversion suggest that inversion or regularization methods can influence recovered parameters for slow sliding and finer scales; on broader scales we recover a similar pattern of low basal drag underneath major ice streams and extensive regions in East Antarctica that move by basal sliding.
Central Vermont Medical Center (CVMC) and Fletcher Allen Health Care, now affiliated as Fletcher Allen Partners (FAP), recently made a significant step in sharing resources while improving patient care without the need for transporting the patient to Burlington. Intensivists, Dr. Gil Allen and Dr. Ryan Clouser, located at Fletcher Allen in Burlington, were able to consult with Dr. Craig from The Health Center in Plainfield while he was at the bedside of a patient in CVMC’s intensive care unit by means of a roving telemedicine unit. Intensivists are physicians with specialized training in critical-care medicine who care for patients in intensive care units.Via telemedicine, CVMC physician Dr. Philip Brown (foreground), talks with colleagues at Fletcher Allen in Burlington (from left) Ryan Clouser, M.D., intensivist, Allen Mead (dark suit) faculty practice director, Steve Leffler, M.D., chief medical officer, Anne Dixon, MD division chief, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, and Gilman Allen, MD intensivist. The roving unit is basically a computer monitor mounted on a cart with a camera on top that can transmit images and sound securely from one hospital to another. The camera at CVMC is remotely controlled from Fletcher Allen and can pan the area and focus in on the patient or the physician. According to Dr. Phil Brown, CVMC vice president of medical affairs, the roving unit is easily moved and ‘we expect to use it in the ICU and the Emergency Department to help [Fletcher Allen physicians] evaluate patients [at CVMC].’Dr. Craig was able to present the case of a patient with multiple medical problems, providing background, current test results and the current status of the patient. The intensivists, in turn, asked questions and recommended next steps. The patient enthusiastically participated in the interview with Fletcher Allen intensivists and Dr. Craig. CVMC hospitalists and ICU nursing staff were also present. Hospitalists are physicians who specialize in caring for hospitalized patients, particularly those with complicated illnesses, on a daily basis. Dr. Sarah Swift, medical director of CVMC’s hospitalists, said ‘I am excited about this new capability. It gives our hospitalists the capability to communicate more directly with Fletcher Allen’s intensivists to consult on our more difficult cases. This will enable us to provide more care locally rather than transfer the patient.’ In the fall of 2011, CVMC entered into a formal affiliation agreement with Fletcher Allen to help develop a coordinated health system in Vermont that will build on our joint efforts to deliver high-quality care to Vermonters as efficiently as possible. This agreement closely aligns the two organizations with state and federal health care reform agendas that promote enhanced integration.Implementing the roving telemedicine unit is part of an ICU improvement initiative, which is one of two quality improvement initiatives chosen by the FAP Quality Council for the upcoming year.CVMC 12.9.2011
Susan E. Bowles Lancaster, 48 of Sunman, IN passed away Thursday July 26, 2018 at U.C. Medical Hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio. She was born Tuesday December 16, 1969 in Orange County, CA; the daughter of Jerry and Glenda (Duckett) Bowles. Susan worked as a clerk for Meduit in Greensburg. Susan was a member of the Milan Ladies Auxiliary Post #235. Susan was a BIG avid fan of the Alabama Football-Crimson Tide-. She enjoyed motorcycle rides and hanging out with her family and friends. She will be missed by many; especially her two dogs: Coco and Molly. Susan was an organ donor and by doing so she helped out three families.Susan is survived by father: Jerry Bowles and step-mother: Mary Ann Bowles of Sarasota; FL; best friend/boyfriend: John Brown of Sunman; brother: Matthew (Donna) Bowles of Cumming, GA; sisters: Christina Kremer of Cumming, GA; Catherine Fellarth of Covington, Ky. She was preceded in death by her mother: Glenda Bowles.Memorial Services will be held at 5 p.m. Thursday August 9, 2018 at Laws-Carr-Moore Funeral Home in Milan with Pastor Harris Long officiating. Visitation will be Thursday 3-5 p.m. also at the funeral home. Burial will take place at Green Hills Cemetery in Ashville, NC. Memorials may be given to the Milan Ladies Auxiliary Post #235. Laws-Carr-Moore Funeral Home entrusted with arrangements, 707 South Main Street, Box 243 Milan, In 47031. (812)654-2141, Milan, Indiana 47031. Go to www.lawscarrmoore.com to leave an online condolence message for the family.
Close Forgot password? Please put in your email: Send me my password! Close message Login This blog post All blog posts Subscribe to this blog post’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Subscribe to this blog’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Follow the discussion Comments (19) Logging you in… Close Login to IntenseDebate Or create an account Username or Email: Password: Forgot login? Cancel Login Close WordPress.com Username or Email: Password: Lost your password? Cancel Login Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout Logged in as Admin Options Disable comments for this page Save Settings Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity Loading comments… You are about to flag this comment as being inappropriate. Please explain why you are flagging this comment in the text box below and submit your report. The blog admin will be notified. Thank you for your input. +13 Vote up Vote down Home Town Boy · 269 weeks ago All this and we still have not learned a thing. Guess our City board continues to do the opposite of what the public wants. Report Reply 0 replies · active 269 weeks ago +26 Vote up Vote down anonymous · 269 weeks ago Amen. Bravo, Mr. BUELLESFELD. Thank you for the column and the voice of sanity. The people of Wellington have repeatedly spoken and repeatedly been ignored by those we have trusted to *not* ignore us. The good ‘ol boy system cannot continue. Report Reply 0 replies · active 269 weeks ago +23 Vote up Vote down lucky · 269 weeks ago so it looks like the ole’ buddy system is still in tacted some things just dont change. thanks for the info JP Report Reply 0 replies · active 269 weeks ago +23 Vote up Vote down Hmmm….. · 269 weeks ago I like reading JP’s editorials he always states the facts first then gives his honest opinion, even if you figure out later it’s about something totally different then you thought. It provokes thought. Some journalist could take pointers. Just saying….. Report Reply 0 replies · active 269 weeks ago +20 Vote up Vote down Robert ****son · 269 weeks ago Took some reading J.P. but you are good at bringing out the facts._Thanks. Report Reply 0 replies · active 269 weeks ago +2 Vote up Vote down Sally · 269 weeks ago Did Mr Buellesfeld really earn his bachelors degree and masters degree by age 19? I know that his brother is a Harvard Graduate. Report Reply 1 reply · active 269 weeks ago -18 Vote up Vote down RGDG · 269 weeks ago Hey JP, it.’s your opinion, that’s it. Just because you are a self proclaimed genius doesn’t mean the city needs to change its policies. They have the ability to appoint who they want to the council and that is important. You are one voice of the community, quit trying to be THE voice of the community. Report Reply 2 replies · active 269 weeks ago +9 Vote up Vote down concerned aunt · 269 weeks ago In my opinion the city council does exactly what they want to do. I am not speaking about Jim Valentine. Mr.Valentine stands with and for the people of Wellington. Yes I do believe that the “good ole boy” system has and is being used in a lot of circumstances. Let’s all remember what has happened come “voting” time. Report Reply 0 replies · active 269 weeks ago +1 Vote up Vote down SuCoPride · 269 weeks ago Each of these examples are unique, as the vacancy in office occurs very shortly following an election. What happens when the vacancy occurs 18 months, or more, from the most recent election? What if the next highest vote-getter no longer wants the office? What if the only person who does apply received a very small amount of votes in the previous election? There are so many different possible scenarios that it would be very difficult to write a proper appointment code that could cover them all. It’s possible to word it in something similar to this: “In the event that a vacancy in office occurs within 120 days of the most recent election, the applicant with the highest vote total in the previous election shall be given preference for appointment”. You have to provide some sort of leeway in the decision making process to the governing body. That is the job they were elected to do. I’m sure there is some middle ground here, and I would encourage the Council to consider the appointment process in other Cities of the Second Class, but I don’t think that the most recent election should be the ONLY determining factor. Report Reply 3 replies · active 269 weeks ago +9 Vote up Vote down mom2mykids · 269 weeks ago We need more intelligent individuals as Mr. Buellesfeld involved….This town has often made decisions on their own and not following the right way…It is the good ol’ boys club in everything here and its sad… this town needs a clean sweep of all offices….and ran by the books… Get rid of the employee’s not doing their jobs correctly and bring new in to change things because the people who have been here forever, don’t make a difference because you aren’t heard. Report Reply 0 replies · active 269 weeks ago 12Next » Post a new comment Enter text right here! Comment as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new comments Comments by IntenseDebate Enter text right here! Reply as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Cancel Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new comments Guest editorial by J.P. Buellesfeld â€”Â On April 6,1999, Jim Chisham was elected to a two-year term as Mayor of City of Wellington.Mr. Chisham then immediately resigned from his current position as a City Council Third Ward representative and the two year term that ended on April 18, 2000.J.P. BuellesfeldAlso on April 6, 1999, Larry Shimer defeated Mitchell McComb by only 2 votes for a Third Ward Position on the City Council. Mr. McComb requested that he be appointed to the City Council to serve out the last year of the term that was open due to Mayor Chisham’s resignation. Mr. McComb felt that since many citizens of Third Ward had voted for him only days before he was the best choice.On April 20, 1999, the City Council appointed Nel Holmes to the open City Council position. Nel Holmes had never ran for an elected office in her lifetime. On July 6, 1999, Nel Holmes resigned from the City Council. Mitchell McComb again requested to be appointed to the City Council Third Ward position. The City Council appointed no one and decided to leave the position open for 9 months until the next election on April 4, 2000. On that date, Mr. McComb defeated Jon Holmes and was elected to the Third Ward City Council position for a full 2 year term. Mr. Holmes was elected 7 times to the City Council. His only defeat was to Mr. McComb. Based on these results, it is probably reasonable to assume that the voters really wanted Mr. McComb to serve on the City Council and the Councilâ€™s decision not to appoint Mr. McComb was not what the community wanted to happen.On April 5, 2005, Stan Gilliland was elected to a 2 year term as Mayor of City of Wellington. He defeated then Mayor Richard Granger. Mr. Gilliland immediately resigned from his current position as a City Council First Ward representative and the two year term that ended on April 19, 2006. Mr. Granger requested that he be appointed to the City Council to serve out the last year of the term that was open due to Mayor Gillilandâ€™s resignation. Mr. Granger felt that since many citizens had voted for him only days before for Mayor he was the best choice.On May 3, 2005, the City Council appointed Harley Freeman to the open City Council position. Mr. Freeman had never ran for an elected office. On April 2, 2008, Mr. Granger defeated 3 other men & was elected to the City Council First Ward position that had previously been filled by Mr. Freeman in May 2005. Based on these results, it is probably reasonable to assume that the voters really wanted Mr. Granger to serve on the City Council and the Councilâ€™s decision not to appoint Mr. Granger was not what the community wanted to happen.On April 2, 2013, BJ Tracy was elected to a 4 year term as an At Large City Council member. Mr. Tracy resigned on May 11, 2015 from this position. The City Council appointed Bill Butts on June 2,2015 to serve out the rest of Mr. Tracyâ€™s 4 year term which ends on January 11, 2018. Mr. Butts had not ran for an elected office for many years. The City Council had 6 other qualified applicants. Cindy Antonich made the argument that she should have been chosen for this appointment. Mrs. Antonich ran in the April 7, 2015 election receiving 535 votes and was the highest vote getter to not be elected.The city council has now faced controversy three times in appointing individuals over other applicants who had recently ran for an elected office and received a significant amount of votes. The city Â councilÂ needs to review its City council member at Large Appointment Policy.*JP Buellesfeld was an adjunct Teacher of State and Local Government college classes for the State of Kansas for 19 years.Follow us on Twitter.
JOCKEY Aaron Chatrie was yesterday hit hard by the stewards of the Jamaica Racing Commission for incidents on last Saturday’s racecard as well as a riding infringement the previous week aboard BOLD AVIATOR. Starting Saturday, the jockey will sit out 10 racedays for what the stewards last Saturday described as “ungentlemanly behaviour” after his mount, first-past-the-post WOMAN IS BOSS, was disqualified. Chatrie was also fined a total $20,000 – slapped with a pair of 10,000 fines – one for WOMAN IS BOSS and the other for the previous Saturday when he also had his number taken down after passing the post in front astride 9-1 outsider BOLD AVIATOR. Unless Chatrie wins an appeal, he will not return to the saddle until Heroes Day, Monday, October 19. A source close to the jockey said he had expected the worst. “I knew he would have got some days. I was 80 per cent sure, based on what I was hearing around the track,” he said. Chatrie was stood down from his last two mounts Saturday, deemed “a danger to himself and others” and “was in no condition to continue riding” for the remainder of the racemeet, the stewards reported. “We could not send him back out there,” said operation steward Eustace Williams, explaining the panel’s reason to stand him down for his two remaining rides on the 10-race card – SEEKING HOPE in the eighth event and STAMP OF AUTHORITY in the nightpan. “He was in no condition to continue riding,” steward Haldene Johansen added.
It gives Liverpool a nine point advantage over Tottenham Hotspur who surprisingly slipped up 3-1 at home to Wolverhampton Wanderers and 10 over champions Manchester City, who play Southampton on Sunday.Klopp, though, kept his feet firmly on the ground especially with a potentially title-defining clash away at Manchester City on Thursday.“All over it was a good performance against a good opponent and our reaction (to going behind to an early goal) was just brilliant,” he told BT Sport.Klopp said Tottenham’s loss had not affected his players at all.“For sure Tottenham’s result people out there reacted, but not inside the dressing room where they were completely concentrated on the match and not allowed to have that influence our game.“That is how I want the team to stay which is to be concentrated nothing else.”Liverpool’s outstanding central defender Virgil van Dijk, who has added the solidity to a defence which was once a real weakness in the side, said they were not the finished article yet but it was a good moment to be a member of the Liverpool squad.“We still need to improve a lot of things but we are very happy with where we are at the moment we have to keep intensity high and continue in this way,” the 27-year-old told BT Sport.“Anything is possible. We are in a good way, it’s tough but it’s a great time to be a Liverpool player.”Van Dijk’s fellow defender Scottish international full-back Andy Robertson said the City game had been on their minds but they had so far done the business without letting it distract them.“(Manchester City) is a huge one,” the 24-year-old told BT Sports.“Everyone in the squad has been looking at it.“But in December we’ve knocked the games off one by one and we’ve now got a healthy lead. We look forward to it.”0Shares0000(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today) 0Shares0000Jurgen Klopp says his Liverpool players must not get distracted by title talk after their 5-1 thrashing of Arsenal gave them a nine point lead © AFP / Paul ELLISLONDON, United Kingdom, Dec 29 – Jurgen Klopp refused to get carried away with the growing expectation that Liverpool can lift the league title for the first time in 29 years saying his players must stay focussed after they thrashed Arsenal 5-1 on Saturday.Roberto Firmino’s hat-trick — the first by a Liverpool player against the Gunners since Peter Crouch in 2007 — as well as a goal apiece by Mohamed Salah and Sadio Mane ensured Liverpool’s front three all scored in the same league game for the first time this season.