Words II: Bramare

Bramare, is an Italian word meaning to yearn. The word denotes and connotes a deep seeded desire or longing. In recent months I have found that this word has developed a greater degree of power in my life.

I find myself sorely unfulfilled. I am lacking fulfillment in the sense that I desire to be both productively employed, and I desire with an equal measure of conviction to take Jennifer in my arms and to hold her without needing to send her home to her parents. To a certain degree I find myself looking to tomorrow because, I am reminded of the words of the poet Kalidasa

Listen to the Exhortation of the Dawn!
Look to this Day!For it is Life, the very Life of Life.
In its brief course lie all the Verities and Realities of your
Existence.
The Bliss of Growth,
The Glory of Action,
The Splendor of Beauty;
For Yesterday is but a Dream,
And Tomorrow is only a Vision;
But To-day well lived makes Every Yesterday a Dream of Happiness,
And every Tomorrow a Vision of Hope.
Look well therefore to this Day!
Such is the Salutation of the Dawn!

It is in the light of the morrow that lies my hope for an enduring marriage founded on love and respect. Like the character of Frances in the film adaptation of Under the Tuscan Sun I hold the hope that the future will bring love, peace and contentment.

Words: La Verdadera Destreza

La verdadera destreza is the term used to describe the school of swordsmanship founded by Don Jerónimo Sánchez de Carranza in 1569 expanded upon by his students over the next three hundred years. The term "La verdadera destreza" does not translate literally from Castillian Spanish into English. Roughly translated the term means the true skill.

Advocates like fencers engage in duels with their enemies and opponents, the only difference being the nature and the style of the combat. Fencers convey their skill and knowledge through their demonstrable mastery of their weapons. Conversely, the duels engaged in by advocates are primarily mental duels with the spoken and written word serving as the weapons of advocates. The mastery and skill of advocates are demonstrated by the artfulness with which, they construct their arguments and their ability to sway or persuade the populace of the veracity of their positions.

In my recent employment I found that my employer was adept at swaying and swaying people to the truth of his positions, even if the adoption of such a position resulted in people regardless of whether the opponent was an opposing counsel, a client, or an employee, ending up in final position that was more detrimental than their starting position.

Indeed I was initally affected by the siren song of my employers words much to my deteriment. I only rgained my senses after my second salary check was not honored because, my employer possessed insufficient funds to pay my salary. I allowed myself to be gulled into lowering my guard and allowed my self to be wounded wounded through his skillful use of words

Plutoids: The continuing saga of Pluto

Two years ago the International Astronomical Union (IAU) after a heated debate decided to reclassify Pluto as a dwarf planet, and a trans-Neptunian dwarf-planet altering its original designation as a planet, a designation that Pluto had held since, its discovery in 1930. www.iau2006.org/mirror/www.iau.org/iau0603/index.

Today the IAU announced that it had adopted the term Plutoids to describe Trans-Neptunian celestial objects that meet the definition of dwarf planets adopted two years ago:

Plutoids are celestial bodies in orbit around the Sun at a distance greater than that of Neptune that have sufficient mass for their self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that they assume a hydrostatic equilibrium (near-spherical) shape, and that have not cleared the neighbourhood around their orbit. The two known and named plutoids are Pluto and Eris. It is expected that more plutoids will be named as science progresses and new discoveries are made.
http://www.iau.org/public_press/news/release/iau0804/

The current definiton used by the IAU means that only Pluto and Eris are classified as plutoids, excluding Charon, which the IAU holds is merely a satellite of Pluto. Although, there is a minority of astronomers that have adopted the view that Pluto and Charon constitute a double dwarf planet. If this view ultimately prevails they would be the only double planetary system within the solar system

Update a third celestial body has been classified as both a dwarf planet and a Plutoid, it is named Makemake and is found in the Kuiper Belt.

Ordination of Women

One of the titles given to Mary Magdalene in the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches in communion with Rome is Iσαπόστολος, isapostolos in Greek, aequalis apostolis in Latin, which, translates into English as Equal to the Apostles.

Another case and point is Saint Phoebe (1st century) who was a deaconess of the Church. She was commended to the congregation of Rome by St. Paul, who praised her for her assistance to him and who according to tradition delivered the Epistle to Romans to the congregation Her feast day is 3 September

I would humbly assert that Mary's designation and Phoebe's role in the early church are sufficient reasons to permit and work toward the full ordination and participation of women within the Ministry. Furthermore, I would argue that this position is consistent with the Jewish traditions that were the foundation for Christianity that affirmed the feminine aspect of the Divine Presence exemplified by the Shekhinah.

Update The Vatican just announced that women who are ordained and the bishops that ordain them would be excommunicated. So on issue of equality the Church remains in the Dark and Middle ages.

Life Themes within Prince Caspian A Revision

RAF, aka little Trumpkin posited a question to me regarding the fact that I did not address themes related to life and the affirmation of life in previous post. In the film during a respite in his duel with Miraz, Peter asks Edmund:

What do you think happens at home if you die
here?

In the novels The Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe, Prince Caspian and the films adaptations of the novels I noted the following formula Right Attitude + Right Action = Salvation

Right Attitude, the first part of the equation is a composite, which, requires that the faith of individuals be informed by reason and that reason of an individual complement, the faith of individuals enabling humankind to harmoniously balance faith and reason in a peaceful coexistence.

I would assert that the right attitude according to a Lewisian viewpoint would be akin to Eli's instructions to Samuel on how respond to G-D when G-D calls. Speak LORD thy servant is listening as illustrated by Aslan's chastisement of Lucy for neglecting her duties to the people and placing her own desires above the good of the people.

The existence of a right attitude endows humankind with the tools necessary to undertake the second part of the salvation equation which, is right action. The fact that a person has the proper attitude does not necessarily always result in the person undertaking righteous actions because, G-D granted to humankind the free will to make choices, and among the choices each human has to make is the choice to do good works for the betterment of humanity or evil works that harm humans.

For example after the disastrous raid on Miraz's castle and the loss of so many men both Caspian and Peter are tempted to a degree to call upon the White Witch and make a deal with the devil, but, Edmund's inherent faith in Aslan and his inherent reason accomplished the right action that saved both Caspian and Peter both of whom were blinded by their pride.


So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead. Indeed someone
might say, "You have faith and I have works." Demonstrate your faith to me
without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works. You believe
that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.
Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless? Was
not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the
altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was
completed by the works. Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham
believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called
"the friend of God." See how a person is justified by works and not by faith
alone. And in the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works
when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by a different route? For
just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.
James 2:17-26

In answer to the question What do you think happens at home if you die here? The answer depends on the righteousness or lack thereof, but as to what will ultimately happen when an individual dies only G-D has the answer to that question. I have experienced first hand what death is and it is beyond my capacity to describe it.

Thoughts on Themes

The movie Prince Caspian illustrates a variety of themes that are important for both children and adults to take to heart.

First, the movie illustrates the need to work as team and the importance of community as Queen Lucy demonstrates this principle when she reminds High King Peter to remember who actually defeated Jadis. King Edmund further reinforces this need later in the film when he destroyed the conjured image of Jadis.

Second, the film reminds viewers that wisdom often comes in surprising guises and from unexpected sources. The tome also recalls that even the youngest of individuals can exhibit a level of maturity in their faith, reason and strength that can equal or surpass those qualities in adults as Lucy and Edmund illustrate through their words and conduct.

Third, the movie serves a metaphor for crises of faith as demonstrated by Peter, Susan, and Caspian X, highlights the need to work through them because, this results in a heightened understanding of self and the individual responsibility that every human being bears.

Fourth, the adaptation calls the veiwer to examine the secular roles that every person possesses and to insure that the people are fulfilling both their secular and religious duties to the best of their abilities.

Last, the tale reinforces the need for parents and adults to take an active role in the development of children if they are expected become healthy vibrant adults.

OLLU Fire Update

The San Antonio Business Journal is reporting that the cause of the fire was not an arson but, was an electrical short that occurred in the attic of the Old Main. This fact does not surprise me considering the age and condition of the building

Our Lady of the Lake

Has anyone ever been moved by the sheer beauty of a building? I am curious because, one of the most beautiful buildings in the whole of San Antonio is rapidly being consumed by a raging fire.

The main building of Our Lady of the Lake University is being consumed by an inferno that is believed to have started as an electrical fire. I was only in the building once as young child but, to this day I remember the beauty of the building and the splendor of its architecture. I also recall the joy and happiness my grandfather derived from showing me the building.

The only portion of the main building still untouched by fire is the university chapel. The university has connections with my family dating back several generations. My parents attended the university and were married in the chapel. My grandfather and his brothers were involved in renovating the chapel in the 1960's

Fortunately the building was largely empty and the members of the cleaning crew who were inside were able to escape the fire.

The Four Pevensies and My Faith Journey

In re-reading The Chronicles of Narnia series I find that the characters of the four Pevensie children reflect to a degree the evolution of my faith. The four Pevensie's represent several metaphors: First, they symbolize the evolutionary nature of my faith. Lucy and Susan represent the ideas of pure faith and pure reason Second, Edmund serves as a metaphor for the potential for the harmonious coexistence of faith and reason. Peter serves as the realization of the ideal harmonious coexistence of faith amd reason.

A Lay Person View of Blanchard v. Morton School District

The case of Blanchard v. Morton School District, docket number 07-825 revisits the question of whether the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act can be enforced using 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The stated purpose of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, is to serve as a means of instituting a corrective civil action to provide a means of redress for the deprivation of the rights of individuals.

Section 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to
be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought
against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity,
injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

The heart of the debate turns on the question of whether or not 42 U.S.C. § 1983 can be utilized as a remedy for violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or whether the text of the Individual with Disabilities Education Act contains a remedial statute, in the form of
20 U.S.C. § 1415.

Section 1415. Procedural safeguards
(a) Establishment of procedures
Any State educational agency, State agency, or local educational agency that receives assistance under this subchapter shall establish and maintain procedures in accordance with this section to ensure that children with disabilities and their parents are guaranteed procedural safeguards with respect to the provision of free appropriate public education by such agencies.
(b) Types of procedures
The procedures required by this section shall include -
(1) an opportunity for the parents of a child with a disability to examine all records relating to such child and to participate in meetings with respect to the identification, evaluation, and educational placement of the child, and the provision of a free appropriate public education to such child, and to obtain an independent educational evaluation of the child;
(2) procedures to protect the rights of the child whenever the parents of the child are not known, the agency cannot, after reasonable efforts, locate the parents, or the child is a ward of the State, including the assignment of an individual (who shall not be an employee of the State educational agency, the local educational agency, or any other agency that is involved in the education or care of the child) to act as a surrogate for the parents;
(3) written prior notice to the parents of the child whenever such agency -
(A) proposes to initiate or change; or
(B) refuses to initiate or change; the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, in accordance with subsection (c) of this section, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to the child;
(4) procedures designed to ensure that the notice required by paragraph (3) is in the native language of the parents, unless it clearly is not feasible to do so;
(5) an opportunity for mediation in accordance with subsection (e) of this section;
(6) an opportunity to present complaints with respect to any matter relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to such child;
(7) procedures that require the parent of a child with a disability, or the attorney representing the child, to provide notice (which shall remain confidential) -
(A) to the State educational agency or local educational agency, as the case may be, in the complaint filed under paragraph (6); and
(B) that shall include -
(i) the name of the child, the address of the residence of the child, and the name of the school the child is attending;
(ii) a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to such proposed initiation or change, including facts relating to such problem; and
(iii) a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent known and available to the parents at the time; and
(8) procedures that require the State educational agency to develop a model form to assist parents in filing a complaint in accordance with paragraph (7).
(c) Content of prior written notice
The notice required by subsection (b)(3) of this section shall include -
(1) a description of the action proposed or refused by the agency;
(2) an explanation of why the agency proposes or refuses to take the action;
(3) a description of any other options that the agency considered and the reasons why those options were rejected;
(4) a description of each evaluation procedure, test, record, or report the agency used as a basis for the proposed or refused action;
(5) a description of any other factors that are relevant to the agency's proposal or refusal;
(6) a statement that the parents of a child with a disability have protection under the procedural safeguards of this subchapter and, if this notice is not an initial referral for evaluation, the means by which a copy of a description of the procedural safeguards can be obtained; and
(7) sources for parents to contact to obtain assistance in understanding the provisions of this subchapter.
(d) Procedural safeguards notice
(1) In general
A copy of the procedural safeguards available to the parents of a child with a disability shall be given to the parents, at a minimum -
(A) upon initial referral for evaluation;
(B) upon each notification of an individualized education program meeting and upon reevaluation of the child; and
(C) upon registration of a complaint under subsection (b)(6) of this section.
(2) Contents
The procedural safeguards notice shall include a full explanation of the procedural safeguards, written in the native language of the parents, unless it clearly is not feasible to do so, and written in an easily understandable manner, available under this section and under regulations promulgated by the
Secretary relating to -
(A) independent educational evaluation;
(B) prior written notice;
(C) parental consent;
(D) access to educational records;
(E) opportunity to present complaints;
(F) the child's placement during pendency of due process proceedings;
(G) procedures for students who are subject to placement in an interim alternative educational setting;
(H) requirements for unilateral placement by parents of children in private schools at public expense;
(I) mediation;
(J) due process hearings, including requirements for disclosure of evaluation results and recommendations;
(K) State-level appeals (if applicable in that State);
(L) civil actions; and
(M) attorneys' fees.
(e) Mediation
(1) In general
Any State educational agency or local educational agency that receives assistance under this subchapter shall ensure that procedures are established and implemented to allow parties to disputes involving any matter described in subsection (b)(6) of this section to resolve such disputes through a mediation process which, at a minimum, shall be available whenever a hearing is requested under subsection (f ) or (k) of this section.
(2) Requirements
Such procedures shall meet the following requirements:
(A) The procedures shall ensure that the mediation process -
(i) is voluntary on the part of the parties;
(ii) is not used to deny or delay a parent's right to a due process hearing under subsection (f) of this section, or to deny any other rights afforded under this subchapter; and
(iii) is conducted by a qualified and impartial mediator who is trained in effective mediation techniques.
(B) A local educational agency or a State agency may establish procedures to require parents who choose not to use the mediation process to meet, at a time and location convenient to the parents, with a disinterested party who is under contract with -
(i) a parent training and information center or community parent resource center in the State established under section 1482 or 1483 of this title; or
(ii) an appropriate alternative dispute resolution entity; to encourage the use, and explain the benefits, of the mediation process to the parents.
(C) The State shall maintain a list of individuals who are qualified mediators and knowledgeable in laws and regulations relating to the provision of special education and related services.
(D) The State shall bear the cost of the mediation process, including the costs of meetings described in subparagraph (B).
(E) Each session in the mediation process shall be scheduled in a timely manner and shall be held in a location that is convenient to the parties to the dispute.
(F) An agreement reached by the parties to the dispute in the mediation process shall be set forth in a written mediation agreement.
(G) Discussions that occur during the mediation process shall be confidential and may not be used as evidence in any subsequent due process hearings or civil proceedings and the parties to the mediation process may be required to sign a confidentiality pledge prior to the commencement of such process.
(f) Impartial due process hearing
(1) In general
Whenever a complaint has been received under subsection (b)(6) or (k) of this section, the parents involved in such complaint shall have an opportunity for an impartial due process hearing, which shall be conducted by the State educational agency or by the local educational agency, as determined by State law or by the State educational agency.
(2) Disclosure of evaluations and recommendations
(A) In general
At least 5 business days prior to a hearing conducted pursuant to paragraph (1), each party shall disclose to all other parties all evaluations completed by that date and recommendations based on the offering party's evaluations that the party intends to use at the hearing.

(B) Failure to disclose
A hearing officer may bar any party that fails to comply with subparagraph (A) from introducing the relevant evaluation or recommendation at the hearing without the consent of the other party.
(3) Limitation on conduct of hearing
A hearing conducted pursuant to paragraph (1) may not be conducted by an employee of the State educational agency or the local educational agency involved in the education or care of the child.
(g) Appeal
If the hearing required by subsection (f) of this section is conducted by a local educational agency, any party aggrieved by the findings and decision rendered in such a hearing may appeal such findings and decision to the State educational agency. Such agency shall conduct an impartial review of such decision. The officer conducting such review shall make an independent decision upon completion of such review.
(h) Safeguards
Any party to a hearing conducted pursuant to subsection (f) or (k) of this section, or an appeal conducted pursuant to subsection (g) of this section, shall be accorded -
(1) the right to be accompanied and advised by counsel and by individuals with special knowledge or training with respect to the problems of children with disabilities;
(2) the right to present evidence and confront, cross-examine, and compel the attendance of witnesses;
(3) the right to a written, or, at the option of the parents, electronic verbatim record of such hearing; and

(4) the right to written, or, at the option of the parents, electronic findings of fact and decisions (which findings and decisions shall be made available to the public consistent with the requirements of section 1417(c) of this title (relating to the confidentiality of data, information, and records) and shall also be transmitted to the advisory panel established pursuant to section 1412(a)(21) of this title).
(i) Administrative procedures
(1) In general
(A) Decision made in hearing
A decision made in a hearing conducted pursuant to subsection (f) or (k) of this section shall be final, except that any party involved in such hearing may appeal such decision under the provisions of subsection (g) of this section and paragraph (2) of this subsection.
(B) Decision made at appeal
A decision made under subsection (g) of this section shall be final, except that any party may bring an action under paragraph (2) of this subsection.
(2) Right to bring civil action
(A) In general
Any party aggrieved by the findings and decision made under subsection (f) or (k) of this section who does not have the right to an appeal under subsection (g) of this section, and any party aggrieved by the findings and decision under this subsection, shall have the right to bring a civil action with respect to the complaint presented pursuant to this section, which action may be brought in any State court of competent jurisdiction or in a district court of the United States without regard to the amount in controversy.
(B) Additional requirements
In any action brought under this paragraph, the court -
(i) shall receive the records of the administrative proceedings;
(ii) shall hear additional evidence at the request of a party; and
(iii) basing its decision on the preponderance of the evidence, shall grant such relief as the court determines is appropriate.
(3) Jurisdiction of district courts; attorneys' fees
(A) In general
The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this section without regard to the amount in controversy.
(B) Award of attorneys' fees
In any action or proceeding brought under this section, the court, in its discretion, may award reasonable attorneys' fees as part of the costs to the parents of a child with a disability who is the prevailing party.
(C) Determination of amount of attorneys' fees
Fees awarded under this paragraph shall be based on rates prevailing in the community in which the action or proceeding arose for the kind and quality of services furnished. No bonus or multiplier may be used in calculating the fees awarded under this subsection.
(D) Prohibition of attorneys' fees and related costs for certain services
(i) Attorneys' fees may not be awarded and related costs may not be reimbursed in any action or proceeding under this section for services performed subsequent to the time of a written offer of settlement to a parent if -
(I) the offer is made within the time prescribed by Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or, in the case of an administrative proceeding, at any time more than 10 days before the proceeding begins;
(II) the offer is not accepted within 10 days; and
(III) the court or administrative hearing officer finds that the relief finally obtained by the parents is not more favorable to the parents than the offer of settlement.
(ii) Attorneys' fees may not be awarded relating to any meeting of the IEP Team unless such meeting is convened as a result of an administrative proceeding or judicial action, or, at the discretion of the State, for a mediation described in subsection (e) of this section that is conducted prior to the filing of a complaint under subsection (b)(6) or (k) of this section.

(E) Exception to prohibition on attorneys' fees and related costs.

Notwithstanding subparagraph (D), an award of attorneys' fees and related costs may be made to a parent who is the prevailing party and who was substantially justified in rejecting the settlement offer.

(F) Reduction in amount of attorneys' fees

Except as provided in subparagraph (G), whenever the court
finds that -
(i) the parent, during the course of the action or proceeding, unreasonably protracted the final resolution of the controversy;
(ii) the amount of the attorneys' fees otherwise authorized to be awarded unreasonably exceeds the hourly rate prevailing in the community for similar services by attorneys of reasonably comparable skill, reputation, and experience;
(iii) the time spent and legal services furnished were excessive considering the nature of the action or proceeding; or
(iv) the attorney representing the parent did not provide to the school district the appropriate information in the due process complaint in accordance with subsection (b)(7) of this section; the court shall reduce, accordingly, the amount of the attorneys' fees awarded under this section.
(G) Exception to reduction in amount of attorneys' fees
The provisions of subparagraph (F) shall not apply in any action or proceeding if the court finds that the State or local educational agency unreasonably protracted the final resolution of the action or proceeding or there was a violation of this section.
(j) Maintenance of current educational placement
Except as provided in subsection (k)(7) of this section, duringthe pendency of any proceedings conducted pursuant to this section, unless the State or local educational agency and the parents otherwise agree, the child shall remain in the then-current educational placement of such child, or, if applying for initial admission to a public school, shall, with the consent of the parents, be placed in the public school program until all such proceedings have been completed.
(k) Placement in alternative educational setting
(1) Authority of school personnel
(A) School personnel under this section may order a change in the placement of a child with a disability -
(i) to an appropriate interim alternative educational setting, another setting, or suspension, for not more than 10 school days (to the extent such alternatives would be applied to children without disabilities); and
(ii) to an appropriate interim alternative educational setting for the same amount of time that a child without a disability would be subject to discipline, but for not more than 45 days if -
(I) the child carries or possesses a weapon to or at school, on school premises, or to or at a school function under the jurisdiction of a State or a local educational agency; or
(II) the child knowingly possesses or uses illegal drugs or sells or solicits the sale of a controlled substance while at school or a school function under the jurisdiction of a State or local educational agency.
(B) Either before or not later than 10 days after taking a disciplinary action described in subparagraph (A) -
(i) if the local educational agency did not conduct a functional behavioral assessment and implement a behavioral intervention plan for such child before the behavior that resulted in the suspension described in subparagraph (A), the agency shall convene an IEP meeting to develop an assessment plan to address that behavior; or
(ii) if the child already has a behavioral intervention plan, the IEP Team shall review the plan and modify it, as necessary, to address the behavior.
(2) Authority of hearing officer
A hearing officer under this section may order a change in the placement of a child with a disability to an appropriate interim alternative educational setting for not more than 45 days if the hearing officer -
(A) determines that the public agency has demonstrated by substantial evidence that maintaining the current placement of such child is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or to others;
(B) considers the appropriateness of the child's current placement;
(C) considers whether the public agency has made reasonable efforts to minimize the risk of harm in the child's current placement, including the use of supplementary aids and services; and
(D) determines that the interim alternative educational setting meets the requirements of paragraph (3)(B).
(3) Determination of setting
(A) In general
The alternative educational setting described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii) shall be determined by the IEP Team.
(B) Additional requirements
Any interim alternative educational setting in which a child is placed under paragraph (1) or (2) shall -
(i) be selected so as to enable the child to continue to participate in the general curriculum, although in another setting, and to continue to receive those services and modifications, including those described in the child's current IEP, that will enable the child to meet the goals set out in that IEP; and
(ii) include services and modifications designed to address the behavior described in paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) so that it does not recur.
(4) Manifestation determination review
(A) In general
If a disciplinary action is contemplated as described in paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) for a behavior of a child with a disability described in either of those paragraphs, or if a disciplinary action involving a change of placement for more than 10 days is contemplated for a child with a disability who has engaged in other behavior that violated any rule or code of conduct of the local educational agency that applies to all children -
(i) not later than the date on which the decision to take that action is made, the parents shall be notified of that decision and of all procedural safeguards accorded under this section; and
(ii) immediately, if possible, but in no case later than 10 school days after the date on which the decision to take that action is made, a review shall be conducted of the relationship between the child's disability and the behavior subject to the disciplinary action.
(B) Individuals to carry out review
A review described in subparagraph (A) shall be conducted by the IEP Team and other qualified personnel.
(C) Conduct of review
In carrying out a review described in subparagraph (A), the IEP Team may determine that the behavior of the child was not a manifestation of such child's disability only if the IEP Team -

(i) first considers, in terms of the behavior subject to disciplinary action, all relevant information, including -
(I) evaluation and diagnostic results, including such results or other relevant information supplied by the parents of the child;
(II) observations of the child; and
(III) the child's IEP and placement; and
(ii) then determines that -
(I) in relationship to the behavior subject to disciplinary action, the child's IEP and placement were appropriate and the special education services, supplementary aids and services, and behavior intervention strategies were provided consistent with the child's IEP and placement;
(II) the child's disability did not impair the ability of the child to understand the impact and consequences of the behavior subject to disciplinary action; and

(III) the child's disability did not impair the ability of the child to control the behavior subject to disciplinary action.
(5) Determination that behavior was not manifestation of disability
(A) In general
If the result of the review described in paragraph (4) is a determination, consistent with paragraph (4)(C), that the behavior of the child with a disability was not a manifestation of the child's disability, the relevant disciplinary procedures applicable to children without disabilities may be applied to the child in the same manner in which they would be applied to children without disabilities, except as provided in section 1412(a)(1) of this title.
(B) Additional requirement
If the public agency initiates disciplinary procedures applicable to all children, the agency shall ensure that the special education and disciplinary records of the child with a disability are transmitted for consideration by the person or persons making the final determination regarding the disciplinary action.
(6) Parent appeal
(A) In general
(i) If the child's parent disagrees with a determination that the child's behavior was not a manifestation of the child's disability or with any decision regarding placement, the parent may request a hearing.
(ii) The State or local educational agency shall arrange for an expedited hearing in any case described in this subsection when requested by a parent.
(B) Review of decision
(i) In reviewing a decision with respect to the manifestation determination, the hearing officer shall determine whether the public agency has demonstrated that the child's behavior was not a manifestation of such child's disability consistent with the requirements of paragraph (4)(C).
(ii) In reviewing a decision under paragraph (1)(A)(ii) to place the child in an interim alternative educational setting, the hearing officer shall apply the standards set out in paragraph (2).
(7) Placement during appeals
(A) In general
When a parent requests a hearing regarding a disciplinary action described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii) or paragraph (2) to challenge the interim alternative educational setting or the manifestation determination, the child shall remain in the interim alternative educational setting pending the decision of the hearing officer or until the expiration of the time period provided for in paragraph (1)(A)(ii) or paragraph (2), whichever occurs first, unless the parent and the State or local educational agency agree otherwise.
(B) Current placement
If a child is placed in an interim alternative educational setting pursuant to paragraph (1)(A)(ii) or paragraph (2) and school personnel propose to change the child's placement after expiration of the interim alternative placement, during the pendency of any proceeding to challenge the proposed change in placement, the child shall remain in the current placement (the child's placement prior to the interim alternative educational setting), except as provided in subparagraph (C).
(C) Expedited hearing
(i) If school personnel maintain that it is dangerous for the child to be in the current placement (placement prior to removal to the interim alternative education setting) during the pendency of the due process proceedings, the local educational agency may request an expedited hearing.
(ii) In determining whether the child may be placed in the alternative educational setting or in another appropriate placement ordered by the hearing officer, the hearing officer shall apply the standards set out in paragraph (2).
(8) Protections for children not yet eligible for special education and related services
(A) In general
A child who has not been determined to be eligible for special education and related services under this subchapter and who has engaged in behavior that violated any rule or code of conduct of the local educational agency, including any behavior described in paragraph (1), may assert any of the protections provided for in this subchapter if the local educational agency had knowledge (as determined in accordance with this paragraph) that the child was a child with a disability before the behavior that precipitated the disciplinary action occurred.
(B) Basis of knowledge
A local educational agency shall be deemed to have knowledge that a child is a child with a disability if -
(i) the parent of the child has expressed concern in writing (unless the parent is illiterate or has a disability that prevents compliance with the requirements contained in this clause) to personnel of the appropriate educational agency that the child is in need of special education and related services;
(ii) the behavior or performance of the child demonstrates the need for such services;
(iii) the parent of the child has requested an evaluation of the child pursuant to section 1414 of this title; or
(iv) the teacher of the child, or other personnel of the local educational agency, has expressed concern about the behavior or performance of the child to the director of special education of such agency or to other personnel of the agency.
(C) Conditions that apply if no basis of knowledge
(i) In general
If a local educational agency does not have knowledge that a child is a child with a disability (in accordance with subparagraph (B)) prior to taking disciplinary measures against the child, the child may be subjected to the same disciplinary measures as measures applied to children without disabilities who engaged in comparable behaviors consistent with clause (ii).
(ii) Limitations
If a request is made for an evaluation of a child during the time period in which the child is subjected to disciplinary measures under paragraph (1) or (2), the evaluation shall be conducted in an expedited manner. If the child is determined to be a child with a disability, taking into consideration information from the evaluation conducted by the agency and information provided by the parents, the agency shall provide special education and related services in accordance with the provisions of this subchapter, except that, pending the results of the evaluation, the child shall remain in the educational placement determined by school authorities.
(9) Referral to and action by law enforcement and judicial authorities
(A) Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to prohibit an agency from reporting a crime committed by a child with a disability to appropriate authorities or to prevent State law enforcement and judicial authorities from exercising their responsibilities with regard to the application of Federal and State law to crimes committed by a child with a disability.
(B) An agency reporting a crime committed by a child with a disability shall ensure that copies of the special education and disciplinary records of the child are transmitted for consideration by the appropriate authorities to whom it reports the crime.
(10) Definitions
For purposes of this subsection, the following definitions apply:
(A) Controlled substance
The term "controlled substance" means a drug or other substance identified under schedules I, II, III, IV, or V in section 202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812(c)).
(B) Illegal drug
The term "illegal drug" -
(i) means a controlled substance; but
(ii) does not include such a substance that is legally possessed or used under the supervision of a licensed health-care professional or that is legally possessed or used under any other authority under that Act [21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.] or under any other provision of Federal law.
(C) Substantial evidence
The term "substantial evidence" means beyond a preponderance of the evidence.
(D) Weapon
The term "weapon" has the meaning given the term "dangerous weapon" under paragraph (2) of the first subsection (g) of section 930 of title 18.
(l) Rule of construction
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to restrict or limit the rights, procedures, and remedies available under the Constitution, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 [42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.], title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 [29 U.S.C. 790 et seq.], or other Federal laws protecting the rights of children with disabilities, except that before the filing of a civil action under such laws seeking relief that is also available under this subchapter, the procedures under subsections (f) and (g) of this section shall be exhausted to the same extent as would be required had the action been brought under this subchapter.
(m) Transfer of parental rights at age of majority
(1) In general
A State that receives amounts from a grant under this subchapter may provide that, when a child with a disability reaches the age of majority under State law (except for a child with a disability who has been determined to be incompetent under State law)-
(A) the public agency shall provide any notice required by this section to both the individual and the parents;
(B) all other rights accorded to parents under this subchapter transfer to the child;
(C) the agency shall notify the individual and the parents of the transfer of rights; and
(D) all rights accorded to parents under this subchapter transfer to children who are incarcerated in an adult or juvenile Federal, State, or local correctional institution.
(2) Special rule
If, under State law, a child with a disability who has reached the age of majority under State law, who has not been determined to be incompetent, but who is determined not to have the ability to provide informed consent with respect to the educational program of the child, the State shall establish procedures for appointing the parent of the child, or if the parent is not available, another appropriate individual, to represent the educational interests of the child throughout the period of eligibility of the child under this subchapter.
(n) Electronic mail A parent of a child with a disability may elect
to receive notices required under this section by an electronic mail
(e-mail) communication, if the agency makes such option
available.
(o) Separate complaint Nothing in this section shall be
construed to preclude a parent from filing a separate due process complaint
on an issue separate from a due process complaint already filed.

In addition to the aforementioned question of whether or not Section 1983 can be utilized as
the basis of a c ause of action demanding redress for violations if the IDEA, the Court has also been asked to determine whether or n0t the the parents of disabled students having the necessary standing to claim and can be awarded damages based on these claims.

I would argue that the decision of whether or not section 1983 will rest largely on the legislative intent because, the case law on the issue is divided. On the issue of damages I would argue that damages should be awarded if the purpose of the award is to provide compensation for the loss of salary accrued as the result of caring for a disabled dependent.

Addendum

The Supreme Court denied certiorari and refused to review of a claim that parents be allowed to sue for damages under the Civil Rights Act of 1867 to enforce their right to a free public education for their disabled child. So the holding of the Ninth Circuit stands.

A Study on religion

A new report from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life demonstrated that of all of the Christian faiths, the Roman Catholic Church has experienced greatest loss of adherents. I would argue that the losses suffered by the Roman Catholic Church due to affiliation changes are due to the following factors:

1. The position of the church taken on homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgenderism.

2. The positions taken by the Church on the role of homosexuals, bisexuals, and the transgendered in the spiritual and secular life of the community.

3. The position of the church taken on the role of women in the spiritual and secular life of the community.

4. The position of the church taken on the use of contraceptives and abortion.

5. The position of the church taken towards other faiths.

6. The position of the church taken on certain theological points that are secondary to the core beliefs of the church such as the Desponyi, the prepetual virginity of Mary, and the filioque.

An Interesting Conundrum: Which Ceiling to Break

The presence of an African American and a woman as equally viable Democratic candidates each of whom represent groups, which, have been shackled and confined to roles as minorities in the political life of the nation since the inception of the Republic raises a conundrum.

The election of either candidate to the Office of the President would in effect overcome a barrier. the conundrum for Democrats iles in the decision as to which barrier should be broken first?

An Illustration of Depravity

The use by al-Qaeda in Iraq of two women with Down's Syndrome demonstrates the heretical nature of the organization because, the possibility exists that they lacked mental capacity necessary to make an informed decision about their fate.

Suicide Bombers throughout history have embarked on their course of action as the result of making a conscious and informed decision about their ultimate fate, however in the case of thse women who have Down's Syndrome it is likely that they did not understand and comprehend what they were being asked to do, and that they only participated out of a desire to please others and that their inherently facile nature allowed for the planners of the attack to manipulate the women.

The use of individuals with disabilities that are accompanied by a mental affect further reinforces the inherent depravity and lack of humanity that characterizes al-Qaeda and its satellites.

Bobby Fischer

Robert James Fischer, the highly controversial International Grandmaster of Chess who defeated Boris Spassky in 1972 to become World Chess Champion only to default the title three years later, died today at the age of 64.

Fischer although brilliant on the chessboard left much to be desired as a person in this way he was very similar to Grandmaster Alekhine and Joseph Henry Blackburne in the sense that their prejudice and anti Semitism tarnished their accomplisments.

My Thoughts on Papal Primacy

The Pope's reaffirmation of the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church as the only true church will undermine all future attempts toward reconcillation with the Orthodox churches because the Othrodox hold that the twenty-eighth canon from the Council of Chalcedon which reads as follows:

Canon XXVIII.
Following in all things the decisions of the holy Fathers,
and acknowledging the canon, which has been just read, of the One Hundred and
Fifty Bishops beloved-of-God (who assembled in the imperial city of
Constantinople, which is New Rome, in the time of the Emperor Theodosius of
happy memory), we also do enact and decree the same things concerning the
privileges of the most holy Church of Constantinople, which is New Rome.
For the Fathers rightly granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it
was the royal city. And the One Hundred and Fifty most religious Bishops,
actuated by the same consideration, gave equal privileges (ἴσα πρεσβεῖα) to the
most holy throne of New Rome, justly judging that the city which is honoured
with the Sovereignty and the Senate, and enjoys equal privileges with the old
imperial Rome, should in ecclesiastical matters also be magnified as she is, and
rank next after her; so that, in the Pontic, the Asian, and the Thracian
dioceses, the metropolitans only and such bishops also of the Dioceses aforesaid
as are among the barbarians, should be ordained by the aforesaid most holy
throne of the most holy Church of Constantinople; every metropolitan of the
aforesaid dioceses, together with the bishops of his province, ordaining his own
provincial bishops, as has been declared by the divine canons; but that, as has
been above said, the metropolitans of the aforesaid Dioceses should be ordained
by the archbishop of Constantinople, after the proper elections have been held
according to custom and have been reported to him.

Notes.
Ancient Epitome
of Canon XXVIII.
The bishop of New Rome shall enjoy the same honour as the
bishop of Old Rome, on account of the removal of the Empire. For this
reason the [metropolitans] of Pontus, of Asia, and of Thrace, as well as the
Barbarian bishops shall be ordained by the bishop of Constantinople. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xi.xviii.xxviii.html

This canon and the canons of the Council of Trullo were protested by Leo I and his immediate successors although, some documentary evidence exists to indicate that Pope Ardian I ratified them in 787:

Nearly a century later Pope Hadrian I. distinctly recognizes all the
Trullan decrees in his letter to Tenasius of Constantinople and attributes them
to the Sixth Synod. “All the holy six synods I receive with all their
canons, which rightly and divinely were promulgated by them, among which is
contained that in which reference is made to a Lamb being pointed to by the
Precursor as being found in certain of the venerable images.” Here the
reference is unmistakably to the Trullan Canon LXXXII.
Hefele’s summing up of
the whole matter is as follows:
(Hefele, Hist. of the Councils, Vol. V., p. 242.)
That the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nice ascribed the Trullan canons
to the Sixth Ecumenical Council, and spoke of them entirely in the Greek spirit,
cannot astonish us, as it was attended almost solely by Greeks. They
specially pronounced the recognition of the canons in question in their own
first canon; but their own canons have never received the ratification of the
Holy See. 358Thus far Hefele, but it seems that Gratian’s statement on the
subject in the Decretum should not be omitted here. (Pars I. Dist. XVI., c. v.)
“Canon V. The Sixth Synod is confirmed by the authority of
Hadrian.
“I receive the Sixth Synod with all its canons. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.ii.html

The fact that the Papal legates were absent from the vote on the twenty-eighth canon of the Council of Chalcedon and from the Council at Trullo does not necessarily invalidate those canons as Pope Adrian I demonstrated.

I do not argue that the beliefs of the church are outdated. I argue simply that a return to the position taken by Pope Adrian I in 787 on these issues would be more beneficial to the church and would not necessarily alter fundamentally the belief of the church, this possition is illustrated by illustrated by the masses held by Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II celebrated with Eastern bishops they omitted the Filioque. Also the Dominus Iesus declaration signed by then Archbishop Bertone who was the Secretary of the Congreggation for the Doctrine of the Faith and then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who was then the Prefect of the Congregation. The Declaration was ratified by Pope John Paul II of 6 August 2000, the document omitted the filioque without comment.

Musing on the International Criminal Court

The development of an International Criminal Court are rooted in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal dated 8 August 1945 and Protocol Rectifying Discrepancy in the Charter dated 6 October 1945, Article six of the Charter broadly defined three classes of offenses prosecutable under internation law.

The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for which there shall be individual responsibility:

(a) CRIMES AGAINST PEACE: namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the
accomplishment of any of the foregoing;

(b) WAR CRIMES: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity;

(c)CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.

Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in
the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of
the foregoing crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan.

The text of article six provided the basis the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide adopted in 1948 and the Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal adopted two years later in 1950 reaffirmed the existence of classes of offenses that are anathemas to civilized societies founded on the rule of law

Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any
of the acts mentioned under (i).
(b) War crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war
include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or
ill-treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages,
plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or
villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on
political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such
persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connexion with any
crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII

Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a
crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under
international law.

Principles III and IV of the Principles ofInternational Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950 reaffirmed the doctrine of CommandResponsibility and the concept of agency flowing therefrom as outlined inArticles Seven and Eight of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal which read as follows:

Article 7.

The official position of derfendants, whether as Heads of State or responsible officials in Government Departments, shall not be considered as freeing them from responsibility or mitigating punishment.

Article 8.

The fact that the Defendant acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility, but may be considered in mitigation of punishment if the Tribunal determines that justice so requires.

The related doctrines of command responsibility and agency as outlined in the documents of the Tribunal are closely linked to the doctrine of Respondeat superior found in the common law.

I find it ironic, paradoxical and hypocritical that United States, the nation that advocated pushed hardest for command responsibility provisions in the Charters of the International Military Tribunal; the International Military Tribunal for the Far East; and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, refused to ratify the Charter for the international Criminal Court because, of fears that the Command Responsibility and Agency provisions could be utilized to prosecute Americans.


It seems to me that we Americans have forgotten these words:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

The American goverment seems to believe that their position endows them with the ability to act in a manner that to my mind is contrary to the Declaration of Independence of the United States, The Constitution of the United States and the obligations of the United States as member of the international community.

In my mind the ratification of the Statute of the International Criminal Court would serve as benefit to United States because the Statute provides a degree of protection not currently accessible to the American expatriates living abroad.

Musings on the United States

The United States of America stands now at a fork in the road of international diplomacy. There are two paths that stretch out before the United States and its people. One, is the path that leads ultimately to the United States remaining a relevant force on the international stage and retaining its leadership role within the community of nations. The second path leads down the road that will lead in the final analysis to irrelevance and result in the United States becoming a lesser power that longs for the glory, power, prestige, and honor of days forgotten in the mists of time.

Individuals may ask themselves what can be done to prevent the United States from sinking into total irrelevance. The answer my friends is very simple the United States must take the lead on issues where they have long been seen as neutral or acting contrary to the will of the international community.


There are at least four examples of actions that the United States Congress can readily and easily take without violating the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America

1. Ratify the Convention on the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities of 2006, and its Protocol A/RES/61/106 because, nothing within the text of the Convention in violates the Constitution or the laws of the United States. I would argue that words of the Declaration of Independence and those word inscribed on the Statute of Liberty demand that we the United States take a proactive stand to defend the rights of those who cannot defend themselves.


2. Ratify the 1971 Declaration on the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons, G.A. res. 2856 (XXVI), 26 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 29) at 93, U.N. Doc. A/8429 (1971), and the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illnesses and the Improvement of Mental Health Care, G.A. res. 46/119, 46 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 189, U.N. Doc. A/46/49 (1991) because, the protection of all individuals is enshrined within the Declaration of Independence

3. Ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, G.A. res. 34/180, 34 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 46) at 193, U.N. Doc. A/34/46, entered into force Sept. 3, 1981, and its Optional Protocol Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, G.A. res. 54/4, annex, 54 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 5, U.N. Doc. A/54/49 (Vol. I) (2000), entered into force Dec. 22, 2000 and the
Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women G.A. res. 48/104, 48 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 217, U.N. Doc. A/48/49 (1993). because, the principles contained therein are in accord with the First, Fourteenth, and Nineteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

4. Ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child, G.A. res. 44/25, annex, 44 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 167, U.N. Doc. A/44/49 (1989), entered into force Sept. 2 1990 because the Declaration of Independence is the heart of the Republic and it proclaims the right of all mankind to life liberty and the pursuit of happines and to rob children of the ability to pursue these goals in in my mind akin to crime against humanityand conscience.