Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Dmitry Gubin
[REGNUM] In December, 18-year-old Russian schoolgirl Ekaterina Burnashkina will be tried in Turkey. The question of extradition is not on the table until the trial is completed, her lawyer recently told TASS. The news of what Ekaterina did "blew up" the media space of Russia and Turkey in mid-October: the young woman became pregnant out of wedlock, gave birth in the toilet of the Antalya airport and tried to drown the child in the toilet.
Let's be honest, Burnashkina faces a serious sentence in Turkey. If the newborn girl had not survived, it could well have been a life sentence, without any options (Article 82, paragraph 1. i of the Criminal Code of the Turkish Republic). But, fortunately, the baby was lucky not to choke, which means there is a chance to get less.
In Russia, Burnashkina faces a maximum of four years in prison for leaving a child in danger. And even then, only if an attempt on the baby's life is proven. By the way, the baby has already received confirmation of Russian citizenship at the consulate.
The severity of the punishment prescribed in the Turkish criminal code can be explained by practical considerations. The Turks are clearly not interested in cases like the incident at Antalya airport becoming a precedent. As previously noted by the Regnum news agency, abandoned newborns are a rarity in Turkey.
The severity of local laws is also a consequence of the historically established attitude towards children's lives as a special value. For Turkey, as a Muslim country, the issue of infanticide is absolutely clear, because the Koran says: "Do not kill your children for fear of poverty, for We provide for them and for you. Indeed, killing children is a grave sin."
Of course, the Russian Orthodox Church, as well as other Christian denominations, also views the attack on the life of a child in the same ethically unambiguous way—as the gravest mortal sin.
Another thing is that historically, in the “lower classes” of society, among the peasant class, there were frequent cases of the murder of newborn babies born out of wedlock.
"A woman or a girl will give birth somewhere in a cage alone, then strangle the baby with her hands and throw it either into the water (with a stone on its neck), or into thick hemp, or in the yard, or bury it somewhere in a pig's sack... The matter remained "without consequences. Peasants do not like inquiries and criminality," wrote the researcher of peasant life Olga Semenova-Tyan-Shanskaya at the beginning of the 20th century. But at the same time, "walking girls" in general and child killers in particular were unequivocally condemned by the peasant "world".
But the written "sovereign" law treated such crimes differently, and in certain periods strangely softly, almost like the current Russian Criminal Code. For example, the Cathedral Code of 1649, adopted under Peter I's father, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, stated :
“And if a father or mother kills a son or daughter to death, then they are to be put in prison for a year, and after serving a year in prison, they are to come to the church of God and announce that sin to all the people.”
Severe punishment under this code was only given to a woman who "began to live a lewd and vile life" and got rid of a child born in sin. In essence, it was not so much infanticide that was punished, but, as they would say now, extramarital sex.
But the attitude clearly changed under Peter the Great. The "Military Article" of 1715 made no distinction between legitimate children and bastards: "If someone... brazenly kills a child in infancy," the criminal was to be punished in the most severe manner possible - by breaking on the wheel. Legal historians write: Peter's law was perhaps the first to equate the taking of children's lives with "aggravated murder."
Peter, who executed his adult son, Tsarevich Alexei, for treason, sharply increased penalties for the deaths of young children.
It is quite possible that this - ethically more than adequate - decision of the tsar-reformer, which determined the laws of the Russian Empire for centuries, was a consequence of certain circumstances in Peter's personal life. And these circumstances, we note, vividly recall the story of Ekaterina Burnashkina.
Two years before the adoption of the "Article of War", in 1713, Pyotr Alekseevich, so to speak, became closely acquainted with the maid of honor of Tsarina Catherine, the maid Maria Hamilton (or, as she was called in palace documents, Marya Danilovna Gamontova).
If the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the name "Hamilton" is Admiral Horatio Nelson's mistress, that's not entirely true. Lady Emma Hamilton, born Amy Lyon, is only indirectly related to the noble Scottish family. But our Marya Danilovna is the most direct. Her ancestor, Thomas Hamilton, came to Russia during the reign of Ivan the Terrible. During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, Maria Danilovna's cousin married the all-powerful head of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, Artamon Matveyev.
Maria Hamilton was not distinguished by strict morals, in the spirit of the times, which was later described by Prince Mikhail Shcherbatov : "The passion of love, previously almost unknown in coarse morals, began to take possession of sensitive hearts... Wives, previously not feeling their beauty, began to know its power." It is not surprising that "Lady Mary" was among the so-called mistresses of the Tsar of all Russia.
In the year of the adoption of the "Military Articles", in 1715, the famous turner Andrei Nartov, who helped Peter in his passion for crafts, wrote in his diary:
“Hamilton, a close confidant of the Empress, was admitted to His Majesty’s turnery; he embraced her, patted her on the shoulder, and said: “It’s good to love girls, but not always, otherwise, Andrei, let’s forget the craft.”
It is known that Peter married his mistresses to his orderlies, and they gave birth to very worthy sons. For example, Artamon Matveyev's granddaughter Maria Andreyevna gave birth to Field Marshal Pyotr Rumyantsev-Zadunaisky, and Avdotya Ivanovna Rzhevskaya gave birth to two Field Marshals and one actual privy councilor.
With Maria Hamilton, things turned out differently.
When the Tsar cooled towards her, "Marya Gamontova" began to live with Peter the Great's orderly, the nobleman Ivan Mikhailovich Orlov, uncle of the Orlov brothers, who "roared" during the reign of Catherine II. In 1716, this stormy romance developed, but soon Orlov got tired of Hamilton and consoled himself with the already mentioned Avdotya Chernysheva, née Rzhevskaya.
In November 1717, unmarried Marya Danilovna Gamontova gave birth to a child from an unknown father. And she hurried to get rid of the baby.
Later, during the investigation, the maid Maria Terpovskaya reported how the infanticide took place. And its terrible details are painfully reminiscent of the story of Ekaterina Burnashkina.
“First Mary came to her chamber, where she lived and pretended to be ill, and first lay down on the bed, and then soon ordered me to lock the doors and began to suffer for her family; and soon getting up from the bed, sat down on the bedpan and, sitting, lowered the baby into the bedpan. And I then stood near her and heard that there was a knock on the bedpan and the baby cried out... Then, standing and turning to the bedpan, Mary with her hands put her finger in the baby's mouth and began to press, and lifted the baby and pressed it down."
Then, in the palace outhouse, they found the body of a baby wrapped in a palace napkin. An investigation began, led by the Tsar himself. The investigative documents recorded that Ivan Orlov, being beaten with a whip, confirmed in writing that it was he, Orlov, who was the father of several children, who had been born out of fornication and killed by their mother.
Peter signed the sentence: “The girl Marya Gamontova, who lived promiscuously with Ivan Orlov and was pregnant by him three times and killed two children with medicines, and strangled and abandoned the third, for such murder... is to be executed.”
On March 14, 1719, Maria Hamilton was beheaded on Trinity Square in St. Petersburg. The servant Terpovskaya was sentenced to be flogged and sent to a spinning yard. But the nobleman Ivan Orlov was simply ordered to be "released" after he testified.
The historical legend says that Peter, supposedly, could suspect that the "girl Maria" had "children" from him, Peter, just like other mistresses. And Orlov only took upon himself the "guilt" of fatherhood and therefore was released. This, let us note once again, is a legend. But there is another piece of evidence.
A number of authors, including the 19th-century historian Mikhail Semevsky, mention reports that at the end of the reign of Catherine II, Princess Ekaterina Dashkova, looking through the accounts of the Russian Academy of Sciences, came across a large consumption of alcohol. And she found out: the liquid was used to change the solution in large glass vessels containing two severed human heads - a man's and a woman's - stored in the basement of the Kunstkamera for more than 50 years.
They raised archives from the time of Peter the Great, and it turned out that the preserved heads belonged to Maria Hamilton and Willim Mons, the brother of another of Peter the Great’s mistresses, Anna Mons, who was executed because he was in favor with Catherine I.
If we assume that this version is true, then the sharp increase in punishment for infanticide under Peter I has an additional justification.
Another interesting coincidence: there is a famous Scottish ballad Mary Hamilton, known among others by Joan Baez. The work is usually attributed to the 16th century, but the plot of one of the versions of the ballad - coincidentally or not - is very reminiscent of the drama of our, Russian Bloody Mary. According to the plot, the maid of honor Mary Hamilton, who was in favor with the king, once said she was ill ("just a stomach ache "), and then the queen learned that Mary had given birth and drowned her baby. As a result, the girl Hamilton is executed.
This is what they did in the Scottish and English kingdoms, and this is what they had to do, by law, in the Russian Empire after the reforms of Peter the Great (which, it is possible, were influenced by the case of Maria Danilovna Hamilton).
Severe punishment, already by virtue of Turkish legal and religious tradition, also threatens Ekaterina Burnashkina, who unknowingly, but down to the details, repeated the crime of Peter the Great’s maid of honor.
[Asia Times] Marco Rubio will be the next Secretary of State in the second Trump administration, according to media reports.
The senior senator from Florida presents as a vociferous China hawk, like the whole of his Republican party, but with a key distinction: In September, Rubio published a 60-page report, "The World China Made," with a comprehensive and painstakingly researched analysis of China’s economic success.
Some commentators already speculate that the selection of a bona fide China hawk like Rubio might prepare a grand bargain with China, like Nixon’s 1972 China trip.
A credible anti-Communist like Nixon could make a deal with China without accusations of selling out, and Secretary of State Rubio could repeat the exercise, according to this line of thinking. Without second-guessing the incoming president’s negotiating strategy with China, Rubio’s published thoughts about China speak for themselves.
Full disclosure: the report cites Asia Times and this writer in particular, including our groundbreaking analysis of China’s export success in the Global South. By building factories in third countries, China circumvented the Trump and Biden tariffs by building supply chains for Vietnam, Mexico, India and other countries to export to the United States.
A bright line divides realists from Utopians among Washington’s China hawks. Neo-conservatives like Dan Blumenthal, popular publicists like Gordon Chang and Peter Zeihan, and true believers like former Secretary of State and CIA director Michael Pompeo believe that China is about to collapse and that the United States should hasten the fall by confronting China militarily and economically.
A senior official of the first Trump administration told this writer in 2018 that the then-president erred by striking a deal with China’s number two telecom equipment company, ZTE; if the US had shut it down, he averred, mobs of unemployed engineers would have marched on Beijing and overthrown Xi Jinping.
On the other side are realists who may detest China and accuse it of nefarious behavior but nonetheless recognize that China has made remarkable accomplishments in high-tech industry at home and in global trade. Rubio is the best-informed among the realists and he dismisses the Utopian vision in the conclusion of his report:
Commentary on China’s economy swings wildly between extremes. On the one hand, the Chinese economy is often portrayed as deeply troubled, perhaps even on the verge of collapse. Stories in this vein emphasize China’s very high debt burden, slowing growth, distressed real-estate sector, and aging population—all real problems. President Joe Biden repeated a version of this argument in an interview with Time magazine in June, where he stated that China’s economy is ’on the brink.’...
It may be the case that China’s export- and manufacturing-oriented development model has been successful enough to propel China to the technology frontier in the short term, but not successful enough to help the country outrun its structural problems in the long term. This is certainly the narrative that many in Washington prefer, as it recalls our victory in the Cold War.
Then, an innovative, dynamic, and capitalist United States triumphed over an adversary with a gerontocratic and dysfunctional political class and a communist economic model incapable of managing the transition to the information age. It is tempting to believe that a similar triumph is now assured because our nation has been so successful in the past. We win, they lose. But an invincible belief in one’s own success is a recipe for complacency. And increasingly, this belief is at odds with the evidence in front of our faces.
If this report conveys any message, let it be that the United States cannot be complacent about Communist China. Think-tank scholars and economists may bank on China’s coming collapse. Beijing is taking the other side of that wager. It believes that manufacturing, exports, and ’new quality productive forces’ are the keys to regime survival and indeed to the "great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation." It believes that technology and production will enable it to preserve its communist system while becoming a rich country.
So far, it has succeeded in blazing this alternative development path. But suppose today is the high-water mark of China’s power. Even in such an optimistic scenario, the CCP will still present a real, existential threat to American industry and workers for years to come. And Communist China will still be a more formidable adversary than any the United States has faced in living memory. At this point, the burden of proof should be on the critics who insist the CCP’s project is doomed to fail."
Some highlights from Rubio’s report include:
China leads the world in installations of industrial robots and installed more robots in 2022 than the rest of the world did combined.
China’s robot density surpassed the United States’ in 2021, a striking feat given the size of China’s manufacturing workforce and wage levels relative to our own.
Chinese smart manufacturing is enabled by its vast 5G telecommunications network, composed of more than 3.5 million 5G base stations.
Homegrown Chinese firms are helping China break its dependence on imported robots and machine tools. Despite record installations, China’s imports of industrial robots have declined the past two years. This is due to the steadily increasing business of Chinese firms, which had an estimated 35.5% domestic market. share in 2022, up from 17.5% a decade ago. China’s position in the highly fragmented machine-tool market is even stronger, with Chinese producers accounting for nearly a third of global production in 2022.
Chinese companies are establishing global value chains, which include sophisticated factories that will allow them to enter foreign markets and tamp down criticism about export practices.
Rubio’s message is that the United States has to make extraordinary efforts to stay ahead of China and should not delude itself that a stroke of the pen can hold back this technological behemoth.
The foreign policy conclusions that suggest themselves on the strength of this analysis are not hard to deduce.
[Federalist] News broke Tuesday that President-elect Donald Trump picked South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem to lead the Department of Homeland Security, a key cabinet post for the incoming administration.
Conservatives are unhappy about the possibility — and rightly so. Noem is a terrible choice for any post in the Trump administration.
Trump won in part because he stood against the transgender agenda and pushed back against gender-confused boys competing in girls’ sports. Noem backed down from protecting girls in her state when the trans lobby came calling, then lied about it, then whined about conservative "cancel culture" when she was called out. She’s a coward and liar, and should be the last in line for a big cabinet post.
Noem was also one of the first governors in 2020 to accept Somali and other refugees without proper vetting, hardly a choice that recommends her to head up DHS. And, for what it’s worth, she awkwardly lied about having met North Korean dictator King Jong Un and about canceling a scheduled meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron.
All that said, the debate over whether Noem or someone else should run DHS is missing the forest for the trees. No one should run DHS because the entire department should be abolished. Trump rightly pledged to abolish the Department of Education in part because it’s been a failure. Well, not only has the Department of Homeland Security been a failure, it’s been worse than a failure. DHS was created after 9/11 for the explicit purpose of making Americans safe from foreign terrorist attacks, but it has turned out to be an instrument of domestic tyranny, a giant panopticon of surveillance trained on American citizens that serves no purpose except to censor, spy, and propagandize the very people it was meant to protect.
#1
Someone needs to run it during the abolishment phase.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
11/13/2024 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
IIRC DHS was implemented after Jamie Gorelick (D-POS) installed a firewall between the FBI and CIA under the Clinton admin, leading to 9/11. Clearly, the FBI and CIA are domestically/politically buddy-buddy and all-too-willing to crush Americans rather than do their assigned jobs
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/13/2024 10:27 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Gov. Noem controls an invasion of 1 million bikers every August.
#4
DHS is a 10 year old FIAT. It sounded like a good purchase after 9-11. It has not solved any of the previous problems and has caused new ones.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/13/2024 12:20 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Lest we forget, before 9-11, the CIA, FBI, DIA, and NSA were for the most part compartmentalized, sitting on their own 'goose eggs' of coveted info! That's why the Islamic perpetrators of the hijacks were missed along with the flight trainings they achieved and the tip off snubs by the 3 female FBI field agents of their movements!
#6
/\ Islamic perpetrators of the hijacks were missed along with the flight trainings they achieved and the tip off snubs by the 3 female FBI field agents of their movements!
FBI Agent reporting ignored. No one fired or disciplined. How convenient.
#7
DHS, ODNI, and the Entire State Fusion Center programs were all purported solutions to the "Chinese Wall" Jaime Gorelick highlighted in post 9/11 testimony. As a founding State Homeland Security Intel official, the whole context of our efforts was to at last integrate the granularity and breadth of local/state LE criminal intelligence files nationwide with the deep, worldwide awareness of the IC/DOD and its OCONUS database matched with the domestic, federal FBI/DEA/DOJ/IRS systems. In theory, search linkages and third and fourth order link analysis would give far improved pattern analysis, predictive surveillance and targeting and nexus locations. The goal was a truly universal, single-step system interrogative that touched that entire assemblage.
Rice-bowl, compatibility, procedural/legal limitations, and turf issues made much of the dream a bridge-too-far from the get go. Unwinding the pieces will be a challenge as they have fused with older, far deeper institutions I suspect.
[Daily Mail, where America gets its news] Betsy DeVos, former Secretary of the Department of Education during President Donald Trump's first term, is making recommendations for how he can tear apart the agency.
Trump promised to end the Department of Education during his campaign, a concept that drew wild applause from his supporters but will face staunch opposition from the bureaucrats and teachers unions. Who put their own power over the interests they purport to oversee
‘We’re going to end education coming out of Washington D.C., we’re going to close it up all those buildings all over the place, and you have people in many cases who hate our children, we’re going to send it all back to the states,’ Trump said in a video issued to his supporters.
DeVos, who resigned in protest over Trump's leadership on January 6 but is back in Trump's fold, detailed to DailyMail.com ways he could realize his goal of fully dismantling the organization.
‘He has doubled down on his attention to the issues with education and I am very optimistic that he is going to make education and the reforms necessary a high priority in his second administration,’ she said to DailyMail.com.
The bloated agency has spent over a trillion dollars since its conception in 1979 during President Jimmy Carter's administration and now fills three different buildings in Washington, D.C., with over 4,000 employees.
DeVos said the Department of Education was created by Carter as a payoff to the teacher’s unions, and the entire department was filled with bureaucrats whose goals prioritized the the unions, not America’s children.
‘There are many ways to de-power the Department of Education and I am very optimistic that president trump in his second term is going to put the muscle behind seeing that happen,’ DeVos said.
She proposed that Trump should first pass federal tax credits to help parents pay for school choice, fueling education freedom across the country. She also proposed the federal government begin offering block funding grants to the states.
Title IX, she explained, would have to be clarified and fixed after the Biden administration tried to use it to enact a very controversial agenda around transgender students. DeVos proposed sending the enforcement of Title IX to the Justice Department.
She also criticized the Biden administration for ‘trying to buy votes’ by forgiving federal college student loans. She proposed sending the he Free Application for Federal Student Aid program to the Department of Treasury or moving to a private program.
DeVos was appointed the Secretary of Education during Trump’s first term, which drew sharp opposition from teacher’s unions for her views on freeing education policy from federal control and offering more opportunities for school choice.
She warned that the same political forces would fight Trump and whoever he chose to take the position as Secretary of Education in his second term.
‘The status quo is not going to back down at all and they’re not going to get quieter. Whomever is there is going to if they are standing up to the status quo they’re going to get all the protests and all the stuff the same way because they are fighting for power and control,’ she said.
DeVos resigned from her position after the January 6th riots on Capitol Hill in protest of President Joe Biden’s election certification, citing the importance of the ‘peaceful transfer of power.’
But she said that she had spoken to Trump since that day ‘very recently’ about his proposed education reforms and was enthusiastic about the possibilities.
She explained that the window of opportunity for dramatic reform was possible, citing the growing number of American parents realizing that the teachers unions were not prioritizing their children.
‘The status quo and the unions have overplayed their hands through the whole covid experience, it has opened families eyes, grandparents, communities, it has opened everyone’s eyes to how much control and influence and power these teacher unions have had and I think there is backlash against that today,’ she said.
DeVos did not rule out returning to the position, if Trump asked, and said there were a number of good people who could serve in the role.
She said the only way she would return was if Trump was serious about closing down the department and if Republicans were serious about passing a tax credit for educational freedom.
‘I want to help accomplish those goals in any way, I want nothing more than for him to be successful in seeing these policies through,’ she said.
#3
Take the current federal dept of education budget, cut it by 75%, take the 25%, divide by number of tax filing parents in America with school age children, send that amount as a school voucher.
#5
Eliminate the Dept of Indoctrination and est. an Eduction Commission, which would simply allocate funds to states for math, science and classical litature.
Posted by: Jack Salami ||
11/13/2024 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Raise it. Salt the Earth.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/13/2024 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Use the money to buy school supplies for the students!
Useful for the list and descriptions. A basic map and a few photos can be seen at the link.
[DW] Newly appointed Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz has said the time is right for launching military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.
Israel's new defense minister said on Monday that Iran was "more exposed than ever to strikes on its nuclear facilities."
"We have the opportunity to achieve our most important goal — to thwart and eliminate the existential threat to the State of Israel," Defense Minister Israel Katz wrote on X.
Tensions between Israel and Iran are running high after both sides traded tit-for-tat missiles strikes, sparking fears of a wider Middle East war.
Israel has for years accused Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons.
According to recent reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran is rapidly advancing its atomic program, enriching uranium up to 60%, just 30% below the grade needed for atomic weapons.
Iran has repeatedly denied the claims that it is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.
Katz replaced Yoav Gallant as Israel's defense minister last week after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired Gallant, citing disagreements over domestic political issues as well as the military campaign in Gaza.
Iran has spread its nuclear facilities over a number of sites and built some in underground bunkers, making it more difficult to destroy them completely.
Here's an overview of Iran's nuclear facilities.
NATANZ
Located around 300 kilometers (180 miles) south of Tehran in the province of Isfahan, Natanz is the main center for uranium enrichment in Iran. It's here that the nuclear program operates centrifuges that enrich uranium for civilian and, potentially, military purposes.
The facility is housed in underground bunkers to protect it from airstrikes. Natanz has been the target of several acts of sabotage attributed to Israel, including the use of the Stuxnet virus, explosions and power outages. The facility's air defense system was reportedly disabled in April.
ISFAHAN
The Nuclear Technology Center in the city of Isfahan is a uranium processing plant that prepares the radioactive material for enrichment. Here, uranium oxide, also known as yellowcake, is converted into uranium tetrafluoride (UF4) and uranium hexafluoride (UF6). This chemical compound is used in centrifuges for uranium enrichment.
SAGHAND
This uranium mine is located in the desert region of Yazd province, around 200 kilometers northeast of the city of Yazd. The mine is one of the few known uranium mining sites in Iran and supplies the raw uranium that is used for the country's nuclear program.
BUSHEHR
Iran's first civilian nuclear power plant is located on the coast of the Persian Gulf in southern Iran,and is used to generate electricity. It is not used for military purposes.
TEHRAN
The Tehran Research Reactor is a research facility in Tehran, mainly used for the production of medical radioisotopes which are used in cancer treatment and nuclear medicine diagnostics.
The Tehran Research Reactor played a central role during the negotiations on the 2015 nuclear agreement, as it could be used not only for medical purposes but also potentially for military applications if highly enriched uranium were used.
PARCHIN
This facility, about 30 kilometers southeast of Tehran, officially serves as a test site for conventional weapons and missiles. However, there are reports suggesting that activities related to the development of nuclear weapons may also be taking place in Parchin.
KARAJ
A research center for nuclear technologies in the fields of agriculture and medicine is located near the city of Karaj, about 40 kilometers west of Tehran. According to reports, this facility could also be used for the production and development of centrifuges for uranium enrichment.
In June 2021, the facility was the target of a sabotage attempt, which, according to Iranian sources, was unsuccessful.
QOM
The Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant is located around 160 kilometers south of Tehran, near the city of Qom. It's housed in a mountain to protect it from air attacks. This site produces highly enriched uranium.
ARAK
A heavy water reactor in the city of Arak, around 240 kilometers west of Tehran, has the potential to produce plutonium suitable for the construction of nuclear weapons.
However, following the 2015 nuclear agreement, the reactor was modified to rule out this possibility.
Posted by: trailing wife ||
11/13/2024 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11145 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
Ah'm late.
[Daily Mail, where America gets its news] A dementia expert has revealed the precise age you should put aside beer, wine and spirits with the aim of warding off Alzheimer's in later life.
American neurologist Dr Richard Restak has advised individuals to become complete teetotallers from the age of 65 onwards.
Even just one or two alcoholic drinks every few weeks is said to accelerate age-related damage in nerve cells in our brain.
'Alcohol is a very, very weak neurotoxin – it’s not good for nerve cells,' writes Dr Restak in his book, The Complete Guide to Memory: The Science of Strengthening Your Mind.
'It is essential to abstain from alcohol at a stage in life where preserving neurons is crucial.
'I strongly suggest that if you are 65 years old or older, that you completely and permanently eliminate alcohol from your diet.'
Dr Restak, who is past president of the American Neuropsychiatric Association, pinpointed 65 because the risk of dementia jumps five-fold — and continues to every five years.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
