It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Megan Fox in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude.
Well, at least he wasn’t trying to get into the women’s bathroom!
By Sam Pazzano, Toronto Sun | First posted: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 02:22 PM EST | Updated: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 06:49 PM EST
TORONTO – A sexual predator who falsely claimed to be transgender and preyed on women at two Toronto shelters was jailed indefinitely on Wednesday.Justice John McMahon declared Christopher Hambrook — who claimed to be a transgender woman named Jessica — was a dangerous offender.
The judge said he imposed the indefinite prison sentence because there’s a great risk that Hambrook will commit more sex crimes and require strict supervision if he returns to the community.
“I am satisfied there is no reasonable expectation that a lesser measure would adequately protect the public from Christopher Hambrook,” said McMahon.
He noted the Montreal man, 37, attacked four vulnerable females between the ages of five and 53 in Montreal and Toronto over the past 12 years.
“He has demonstrated from the age of 12 until the present an inability to control his sexual impulses,” said McMahon.
Hambrook served four years in prison for sexually abusing a five-year-old girl and while on bail for that crime, raping a 27-year-old intellectually-challenged woman in Montreal.
There’s more at the link, but here are the last two paragraphs:
Defence lawyer Stephanie Heyens said Hambrook has “gone down from committing egregious crimes to touching people without their consent.”
While she conceded his actions were “disgusting and criminal,” Heyens questioned whether his behaviour merited “spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars to jail him for the rest of his life.”
I suppose that depends upon whom you ask, Miss Heyens. If you ask someone living safely on a ranch in Saskatchewan, perhaps he’d rather save the money for holding this deviant in prison. If, on the other hand, you ask a woman in Montreal or Toronto whom he might rape if he were let back out on the streets, the answer might be somewhat different.
Of course, Miss Heyens was simply doing her job, representing her client and his interests as best she could. Other lawyers would do the same thing:
By Liz Kreutz | June 20, 2014, 2:20 PM ET | via GOOD MORNING AMERICA, THIS WEEK, WORLD NEWS
Hillary Clinton’s successful 1975 legal defense of an accused rapist has surfaced again with the victim, angered over a tape of Clinton chuckling over her courtroom tactics in the case, lashing out at the potential Democratic presidential candidate.
“Hillary Clinton took me through hell,” the victim told the Daily Beast in an emotional interview published today. The woman said that if she saw Clinton today she would say, “I realize the truth now, the heart of what you’ve done to me. And you are supposed to be for women? You call that [being] for women, what you done to me? And I heard you on tape laughing.”
The name of the woman, who is now 52, was withheld for privacy reasons. She decided to speak out after hearing never-before-heard audio tapes released by the Washington Free Beacon earlier this week of Hillary Clinton talking about the trial. In the recordings, dubbed the “Hillary Tapes,” Clinton is heard laughing as she describes how she succeeded at getting her client a lighter sentence, despite suggesting she knew he was guilty.
“He took a lie-detector test! I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” Clinton said about her client on the tapes, which were initially recorded, but never used, in the early 1980s.
The rape case has been investigated more than once, but with Clinton considering a presidential run, it is again commanding headlines.
Here are some questions and answers about why the 1975 trial is in the news again, details of the case and what it could mean for Clinton:
How did this all start?
Clinton graduated from Yale Law School in 1973. The following year she moved with her then-boyfriend Bill Clinton to Little Rock, Ark., where she took a job at the University of Arkansas Law School. In 1975, at the age of 27, she took the case representing Thomas Alfred Taylor, 41, who was accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. Taylor, who was charged with first degree rape, had requested a female attorney. Hillary Clinton defended him and got him a lesser charge of unlawful fondling of a minor under the age of 14. According to a Newsday investigation, what should have been a five-year sentence, was reduced to four years of probation and a year in county jail, with two months taken off for time he had already served.
What has Hillary Clinton said about the trial?
Hillary Clinton wrote about the trial in her 2003 autobiography, “Living History.” In the book, Clinton defended taking on the client, saying that while at first she “didn’t feel comfortable,” she realized that as an attorney she had “an ethical and legal obligation to defend him to the fullest extent of the law.” She described how as his lawyer she was able to hire a New York-based forensics expert who “cast doubt on the evidentiary value of semen and blood samples collected by the sheriff’s office.” Clinton wrote that her experience from the trial is what led her to set up Arkansas’ first rape hotline.
Did Clinton take the case voluntarily or was she appointed by the court?
In “Living History,” Clinton wrote that the criminal court judge appointed her, and that she “couldn’t very well refuse the judge’s request.” The 2008 Newsday story quotes then-Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson who refers to her as being “appointed by the Circuit Court of Washington County.” However, in the newly-released audio tapes Clinton says a prosecutor for the case asked to take the case “as a favor to him.”
There is nothing about which Hillary Clinton will not lie.
Now, she did give her client the best defense she possibly could, and got him off as lightly as was possible. That’s what a defense attorney is supposed to do. But any attorney with anything even remotely resembling a conscience wouldn’t have laughed about it; any attorney with any sense of decency would have gone home and immediately taken a shower to wash the scum off of himself.
But, but, but, Mrs Clinton has a vagina, and therefore she’s pro-woman, and therefore everyone has to vote for her as President!
And now, on to the blogroll!
- Donald Douglas on American Power: #ResistCapitalism
— Countermoonbat (@CounterMoonbat) April 9, 2016
He even crosses his legs like a girl.
- Shane Vander Hart on Caffeinated Thoughts: Ted Cruz Avoids the Contraceptives Trap
- Rovin on Camped on the Right: How the Media’s Still Failing The American Public In This Election Cycle
- Hube on The Colossus of Rhodey: Gee, I wonder why?
- Foxfier Sailorette on Head Noises: The North Carolina Bathroom Law
- Fuzzy Slippers on Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion: 22 women to join Army’s infantry, armor branches as officers
- Karen on The Lonely Conservative: Nets Ignore Threats But Give Plenty Of Air Time To Trump Whining
StaceyStacy McCain on The Other McCain: The Queering of Feminism and the Silencing of Heterosexual Masculinity
- The better-looking Dana on Patterico’s Pontifications: Donald Trump and a license for vengeance
- William Teach on The Pirate’s Cove: Bernie Sanders, Who Is Thrilled By Higher Taxes, Pays Low Effective Tax Rate
- Jeff Goldstein returns to Protein Wisdom! Hi. It’s me, Jeff. And I have something to say.
- Jennifer Davis on The Victory Girls: Perhaps Pope Francis Isn’t #FeelingTheBern After All
A letter from my site hosting service:
The domain name registration for gapbridging.com expires in 29 days.
To avoid any downtime or loss of ownership, you will need to log into your account and manually renew your domain name at least 7 days prior to expiration; otherwise your domain will be allowed to expire on 2016-05-14.
An expired domain will enter the redemption period after approximately 30 days. This holding period lasts an additional 45 – 60 days, during which the domain will become available to be redeemed by the current registrant for an additional fee, or be purchased by a third party for auction. If the domain is not redeemed or acquired within the redemption period, it will be submitted to the Registry for deletion and will be unrecoverable until it is released for anyone to register.
The last entry on Bridging the Gap by Perry was on December 14, 2014; he seems to have abandoned the site. The sitemeter indicates an average of one visitor per day. I see no reason to pay for and maintain the site, and am going to let the domain expire.
I know that Perry is still alive; he made a posting on his Facebook page today. But if he isn’t going to use the site, there’s no reason for me to keep paying for it.
Coal company’s filing includes most of U.S. activities, excludes Australian operations
By John W. Miller and Matt Jarzemsky | Updated April 13, 2016 3:36 p.m. ET
The bankruptcy of the St. Louis-based company came after similar filings by Arch Coal Inc., Alpha Natural Resources, Inc., Patriot Coal Corp. and Walter Energy, Inc., all of whom have also recently sought chapter 11 protection.
Chief Executive Glenn Kellow called the current coal market “historically challenged” and said the filing was “an in-court solution to Peabody’s substantial debt burden.”
No large publicly listed U.S. coal miner has been spared by the forces crushing the coal industry, which include new environmental regulations, the decline of steel production, and the conversion of coal-fired power plants to natural gas, which has become a cheap and abundant source of fuel thanks to the shale boom.
Peabody’s bankruptcy sets the stage for a potentially bitter fight among creditors for its assets, which include massive open-pit complexes in Wyoming and Australia and underground mines in Illinois.
America may never again see a coal company as big as Peabody. Founded in 1883 by Francis Peabody with $100, a wagon and two mules, according to the company’s corporate history, Peabody grew into a juggernaut, producing coal for customers in 25 countries and employing 7,600 people.
But its decline has been precipitous in recent years. In 2011, Peabody’s value on the stock market briefly touched $20 billion. It is now worth $38 million.
There’s more at the original.
From John Prine:
The refrain is that song goes:
And daddy won’t you take me back to Muhlenberg County
Down by the Green River where Paradise lay
Well, I’m sorry my son, but you’re too late in asking
Mister Peabody’s coal train has hauled it away
Kentucky is a poor state, made poorer yet by the collapse of the coal industry; Owsley County, in eastern Kentucky, just two counties away from where we bought our retirement home, has often been ranked as the poorest county in America, though that list tends to fluctuate a bit. Other fuel sources have been replacing coal.
Economics has done this to the coal counties of Kentucky and West Virginia, and if Obama Administration polices have possibly exacerbated the problems, they didn’t create them, but (perhaps) sped them up a bit. This is what the people William Teach calls the “Warmists” need to realize: the policies they advocate to eliminate fossil fuel use are policies which will impoverish a lot of people.
The coal miners of Kentucky didn’t just move into other jobs when their industry tailed off; many of them moved into long-term poverty, having no other salable skills and too much age on them to compete for good jobs in other fields.
There is a human cost to the policies advocated by the environmentalists, but I suppose to many of them, that doesn’t really matter: as long as the liberals have their jobs, who cares what happens to a bunch of backwoods rubes in Lee County?
Related Articles from The Wall Street Journal.
- U.S. Coal Sector Faces Reckoning (March 16, 2016)
- Opinion: Obama’s Coal Last Rites (January 22, 2016)
- Moneybeat Blog: Arch Coal’s Bankruptcy Drags Down Mining Stocks (January 11, 2016)
Advances Used by the Military for Increased Security
Technological advancements are important to the U.S. military, as they provide competitive edges along with increased safety for soldiers. The military has incorporated many different types of technology to meet the nation’s goals. With the often unpredictable actions of terrorists, the implementation of technology is increasingly important, which is why companies like Gibraltar work to develop anti-terrorism barriers and other such protections needed to keep people safe. Here is a look at several advances currently being developed or used by the U.S. Armed Forces, some of which also have real-world applications.
Technology for Helmets
One technology used by the military is the placement of sensors on helmets worn by soldiers. These sensors are designed to measure the force of a blow to the head, a problem sometimes faced by soldiers. The military also uses pads lining the inside of the helmets to absorb shock, and they are working to develop a newer shell material, including a specialized thermoplastic, which is light while also being much stronger than steel. The developments by the military regarding helmets and head protection have caught the interest of the National Football League, leading the organization to work closely with the military in order to improve the helmets worn by its players.
Bullet-proof and Fast Power Boats
In development for the past couple of years, the new coastal patrol boats would travel at up to 35 knots, be able to endure continuously for 24 hours and be fully bullet-proof. They would carry up to six troops and have three cannons mounted on them. The combination of the ballistic protection and the speed and agility of the boats will allow them to quickly get in and out of dangerous places in order to carry out needed missions.
Use of Drones
Many people have probably read about the military’s use of unmanned drones. These light aircraft have been used to film terrorist and other enemy camps, relay the information back to the military, record locations and even to be sent on strikes. They are controlled from a distance and have the ability to give targeted precision without risking the lives of soldiers. Drones have the ability to fire missiles directly into the heart of an identified target, and they are considered to be indispensable in the U.S. war against terrorist activities.
An interesting technological advance being developed for military use is a new, experimental plane. This plane will be able to hover, take off vertically instead of at an angle and also to land vertically. These features could help the plane take off and land even in tight spots. Unmanned, it will also help protect U.S. soldiers from the risks involved in aerial warfare, spying and taking out targets.
The U.S. Armed Forces are constantly working to develop and implement many different technological advances in order to provide the best in protection, agility and security for the troops as well as for sensitive civilian facilities. Some of these technologies have also provided important advances put into use for other purposes as well. Technology has clearly become one of the drivers in transforming the U.S. military into a highly agile, protected and intelligent force in order to keep the country safe in the face of all sorts of dangers.
From The Philadelphia Inquirer:
by Michaelle Bond, Staff Writer | Updated: April 11, 2016 — 1:07 AM EDT
The crime was horrific: LaQuanta Chapman fatally shot his teenage neighbor, then dismembered him with a chainsaw.
The Chester County District Attorney’s Office promised it would seek the death penalty – and it delivered.
Chapman was sent to death row in December 2012. But he remains very much alive, and two weeks ago the state Supreme Court reversed his death sentence, citing prosecutorial error.
Chapman is just the latest example of a death-row inmate spared execution.
In fact, no one has been executed in Pennsylvania since Philadelphia torturer-murderer Gary Heidnik in 1999. And he requested it. He is one of only three prisoners put to death since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976.
The Inquirer story doesn’t tell you the whole truth: of the three condemned men actually executed, all three voluntarily dropped their appeals. Since the reinstitution of capital punishment in the Keystone State, not one prisoner, not a single one, has been put to death against his wishes.
District Attorneys like the death penalty, because it makes them look tough on crime, but they all know that the odds that a capital sentence will actually be carried out are very low.
“Let’s face it, how many people actually get put to death?” said G. Terry Madonna of Franklin and Marshall College, calling the death penalty “virtually nonoperative” in Pennsylvania. “In many states, it’s a dead letter.”
Gov. Wolf last year imposed a moratorium on executions pending a bipartisan committee’s report on the commonwealth’s use of capital punishment. The report, more than two years overdue, is looking at costs, fairness, effectiveness, alternatives, public opinion, and other issues.
The committee, formed in 2011 during Gov. Tom Corbett’s administration, has been collecting data with Pennsylvania State University’s Justice Center for Research, which has just begun to analyze the information. The basis for the center’s death-penalty analysis will be 1,106 first-degree murder cases completed between 2000 and 2010, said Jeff Ulmer, a Pennsylvania State University professor working on the analysis.
The committee’s report should follow before the end of the year, said Glenn Pasewicz, executive director of the state commission that oversees the committee.
Read more here.
Governor Tom Wolfe (D-PA) may have imposed a moratorium, but it really doesn’t matter. His predecessor, Governor Tom Corbett (R-PA) signed 48 death warrants during his four year term, but not a single execution was carried out.
The death penalty is a waste of time and money: we spend gobs of extra money for a capital punishment case, and then spend millions more not only prosecuting through the condemned men’s various appeals, but also have to pay for their appeals, and still nobody is ever executed. What the death penalty means in Pennsylvania is that we house the condemned men differently, but we don’t actually execute them.
As for the “study” ordered by former Governor Corbett, in 2011, and due for report by the end of this year? How much did it cost the Commonwealth to tell us what I have been telling everybody, for free, for years and years? If the committee report, “more than two years overdue,” is considering “effectiveness” among other things, then there is only one possible conclusion: a system which sentences people to death but never actually executes anyone is as ineffective as it is possible to be; the efficiency rate is zero, zilch, nada.
Mr Wolfe will be our Governor for another 2½ years, and we already know that there will be no executions carried out for the remainder of his term. Then, even if he loses his re-election campaign, and is succeeded by a Republican who supports capital punishment, Pennsylvania, with a huge death row, will have gone from 1999 to 2019, twenty straight years, without executing anybody.
Well, you know what? My taxes are too high, and the Commonwealth is wasting money, at both the county and state levels, pursuing capital punishment when it is never carried out. Why should we waste taxpayers’ dollars for this? Why not admit that we will never execute anyone, and simply abolish capital punishment, period. That way the murderers will be sentenced to what they actually get, life in prison without parole.
Cross-posted on RedState.
From The Wall Street Journal:
Outrage has put German Chancellor Angela Merkel in difficult position
By Andrea Thomas | Updated April 11, 2016 4:33 p.m. ET
BERLIN—Turkey formally requested that Germany investigate a television sketch that ridiculed the Turkish president, setting up a legal and diplomatic battle that pits relations between the two countries against Germany’s freedom-of-expression laws.
The Turkish government has expressed outrage over a poem recited by German comedy host Jan Böhmermann that made crude sexual jokes about President Tayyip Recep Erdogan. The spat comes at a critical time in German-Turkish relations, as Berlin is leaning on Mr. Erdogan to stem the flow of migrants and refugees who have been streaming for months through Turkey toward Germany.
The Turkish request “and the way forward will now be carefully examined by the government,” Chancellor Angela Merkel’s spokesman Steffen Seibert said Monday. “I can’t and don’t want to anticipate the results of this examination.”
In a separate move, Mr. Erdogan has filed a defamation complaint against Mr. Böhmermann with the public prosecutor in the city of Mainz, the prosecutor said in a statement Monday.
Mr. Erdogan’s complaint will be examined as part of the ongoing investigation into allegations of offending a foreign head of state.
Under German criminal code, offending a foreign leader is punishable by up to three years in prison. To convict someone, the court must find that the alleged offense meets the legal criteria of being defamatory. For a probe to proceed, a foreign state has to formally request an investigation and the German government must allow it to move forward. Mr. Seibert stressed that Ms. Merkel regarded freedom of expression and press as key elements of Germany’s constitution. “Freedom of expression, art and science is of course treasured by the chancellor and nonnegotiable at home and abroad,” he said.
That decision will be made “within the next days, not weeks,” Mr. Seibert said.
There’s more in the original article.
I wonder: would Germany have considered allowing such charges to proceed had President Bush complained about all of the satire aimed at him, some of which emanated from Germany?
But this points out just how good we have it in the United States. For all of our faults, we still have the protection of our Constitution, the First Amendment of which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Nevertheless, we are continually having to fight against the left and their efforts to criminalize speech. William Teach pointed out how the Attorney General of the Virgin Islands is going after a private think tank, for speech that the Attorney General does not like, and 17 state Attorneys General, 16 Democrats and one independent, have formed AGs United for Clean Power, planning to pursue criminal charges against businesses which deny the existence of global warming climate change. Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) even states, in his published platform, that he will, if elected, “Bring climate deniers to justice so we can aggressively tackle climate change.”
We have to remain vigilant, because the left and the Democratic Party do not like the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution. They’d scrap the Second Amendment in a heartbeat if they could, and the Democrats are constantly trying to push more and more legislation to slowly restrict our right to keep and bear arms. The left want to penalize the free exercise of religion by those who do not believe in same-sex “marriage,” and use the law to punish people who decline to provide services for same-sex “marriage” ceremonies and receptions. The Obama Administration wants to force the Little Sisters of the Poor, a group of Catholic Nuns, to provide contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act, even though — really, especially because — the Catholic Church is opposed to the use of artificial contraception. The left want to throw out the right to privacy when it comes to public restrooms and locker rooms, by requiring then to be open to members of the opposite sex if they claim that their ‘gender identity’ is different from their biological sex. The left favor freedom of choice on exactly one thing; other than abortion, the left are very much in favor of having the power of government force people to behave as the left want them to behave.
There was a time when the libertarians, including the official Libertarian Party, were considered to be primarily liberal; the libertarians wanted the government to simply stay out of people’s lives and businesses, and to interfere only when someone else’s rights were violated. But now, the libertarians are considered to be mostly conservatives, because they are resisting the ever-increasing encroachment on our lives and our businesses and our choices by the left. There is a reason that the only libertarians elected to Congress did so running as Republicans.
Cross-posted on RedState.
Get Professional Legal Help For Your Spinal Injury In Toronto
If you have suffered a serious or permanent spinal injury as the result of an accident for which you were not the cause, you don’t need to be told just how drastically your life may have changed. You have certainly suffered grievous injuries, accompanied by not only physical pain but also the anguish of wondering how you are going to meet your ever increasing medical bills. Losing your mobility for a long period of time, or on a permanent basis, is also a cause for extreme concern. If you have suffered such agonizing injuries, you deserve to be compensated in a fair and just manner.
Your Medical Condition Is Not The Only Thing To Worry Over
Perhaps the most unfair thing about having to spend weeks or months lying in a bed in a hospital while recovering from your spinal injuries is the fact that you were not even responsible for your own present state. But on top of the severe injustice you are feeling is another, even more crushing, disappointment. This comes when you realize that the bills are piling up without end, while your means of paying them are disappearing one by one. You may have been dismissed from your job because of your inability to report to work. And you may even be in danger of losing your home or your vehicle.
Legal Representation Is Your Best Bet For The Justice You Deserve
When it comes to getting the justice you desire and deserve for your injuries, getting top notch legal representation is your best bet. You will need to engage the services of a spinal injury lawyer in Toronto who is equipped to get you a fair hearing in court, followed by a settlement that will help you to regain not only your physical, but also your financial, independence. Hiring the right lawyer for your case is the first step toward beginning your long healing process. But in order to accomplish this goal, you will need to make a careful search for the right lawyer to help you win your case.
What Can A Toronto Lawyer Do To Help You Win Your Case?
There’s a reason that people have recourse to the hiring of a Toronto legal professional when pursuing their case in court. If you yourself are not a legal expert, you don’t stand much of a chance against the crack legal team that your opponent will almost certainly have on hand to defend them. More importantly, the insurance company that represents the person you are suing will go out of their way to paint your case as ill founded in order to get the charges dismissed or dropped. If you don’t know what you are doing, you can do serious damage to your credibility that will lose you the case.
This is exactly why your best bet is to hire a Toronto spinal cord injury lawyer. The sooner you get the fair settlement you require in order to settle your debts, the sooner you can concentrate fully on recovering from your purely physical injuries. A Toronto spine injury lawyer can help you get the justice you desire and deserve to help you focus on recovering from your accident and getting on with your life.
From the Lexington Herald-Leader:
Read more here.
- Oak, sycamore, walnut, cedar are among those planted
- Trees will buffer traffic noise from nearby Intestate 75
- Reintroduction of native species is a goal of the event
By Greg Kocher | email@example.com | April 9, 2016 5:09 PM
Ah, 36 degrees and a biting wind. What a day to plant trees!
And so it was for James Allen, an economist with the University of Kentucky College of Agriculture.
“I like to plant trees on any day,” Allen said. “It’s something I believe strongly in.”
Allen and his wife, Joy, were among hundreds of volunteers who attended Saturday’s annual Reforest the Bluegrass event. By 10 a.m., there were 200 people getting their hands dirty in the Deep Springs Greenway off Bryan Station Road.
“It’s great to see this many come out,” said John Saylor, program manager for resource operations with the city’s Division of Environmental Services. “It’s a testament to how successful this event has been for the city over the last 18 years.”
Saylor has coordinated Reforest for a decade and said Saturday was the coldest day for the event that he could remember.
The saplings were protected overnight so the roots wouldn’t freeze. But the colder temperatures shouldn’t hurt the young trees.
“As long as the ground is not frozen, you can plant year-round,” Saylor said.
Burr oak, swamp white oak, sycamore, walnut, black locust and cedar were among the 7,000 saplings available for planting. The trees help protect streams, reduce the need for mowing, improve air quality and, in those planted Saturday, buffer traffic noise from nearby Interstate 75.
Russell Hoff brought his wife and two grandchildren to the event. He’s planted 31 trees near his home on Lexington’s north side.
I’m not an environmentalist whacko, but I have planted trees on my property, eight of them, two dwarf Alberta Spruce, two weeping cherry trees (one of which failed), an arborvitae, a red sunset maple, a Japanese Maple, and a dogwood. Individually, these trees didn’t cost much, and I got the arborvitae for free. Homeowners can do things like this with their property fairly inexpensively, if they choose, although some planning is involved: you don’t want to plant a tree which will eventually grow into a problem for the house. While we’ve planted about as many trees as our current property can support, we’ll be planting a lot more when we move to our new Kentucky home.
The Herald-Leader article should have provided more information. It does not tell us who paid for the 7,000 saplings, whether there are any left over that individuals could take, with a promise to plant them, or whether there was a program to provide such trees at reduced or no cost for other volunteers to plant elsewhere.
Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Kate Bosworth in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude. Click any photo to enlarge.