Loving vs Virginia – Being Allowed To Marry The One You Love

What if you were not able to marry the person you love?

Are you in a mixed race marriage? Do you know of a mixed race couple?

Prior to June 12th, 1967 it was illegal for a man and a women who were not of the same race to marry in the United States. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) , was a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, declared Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute, the “Racial Integrity Act of 1924“, unconstitutional, thereby overturning Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.

Richard and Mildred Loving
Richard and Mildred Loving

Today many gay couples know that pain of not being allowed to marry the one they love because it is illegal in the state where they live. Because of this gay partners are not allowed to have any of the benefits that a married spouse would have in the eyes of the law, employer or even by the medical professionals if only “a spouse or family” are allowed to visit with a patient, or receive death benefits allotted to a spouse.


❤️❤️❤️

One day everyone will be allowed
to marry the one they love.

 ❤️❤️❤️

High court strikes down federal marriage provision

6/26/13 By MARK SHERMAN | Associated Press – 3 mins 4 secs ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that legally married same-sex couples should get the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples.

The court invalidated a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that has prevented married gay couples from receiving a range of tax, health and retirement benefits that are generally available to married people. The vote was 5-4.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion.

Same-sex marriage has been adopted by 12 states and the District of Columbia. Another 18,000 couples were married in California during a brief period when same-sex unions were legal there.

The court has yet to release its decision on California’s ban on same-sex marriage.

“Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways,” Kennedy said.

“DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal,” he said.

He was joined by the court’s four liberal justices.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.

For more: http://news.yahoo.com/high-court-strikes-down-federal-marriage-provision-140557846.html

.

June 28, 2013

Statement by the President on the Extension of Federal Employee Benefits

Today my Administration announced that, for the first time in history, we will be making important federal employee benefits, including healthcare and retirement benefits, available to eligible married gay and lesbian couples and their families.

This is a critical first step toward implementing this week’s landmark Supreme Court decision declaring that all married couples –gay and straight — should be treated equally under federal law. Thousands of gays and lesbians serve our country every day in the federal government. They, and their spouses and children, deserve the same respect and protection as every other family.

Under the leadership of Attorney General Holder, we will continue to move as quickly as possible to fully implement the Court’s decision.

Rainbow spectrum

.US LGBT Rights Timeline 1903-2016  (ProPresObama.org Civil Rights Timelines ™)

FACT SHEET: Obama Administration’s Record and the LGBT Community

 White House – LGBT

LGBT Democrats Facebook

Forward For Equality_sml

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “Loving vs Virginia – Being Allowed To Marry The One You Love

  1. WH

    Sunday, June 12, 2011

    All Times Eastern

    President Obama receives the presidential daily briefing

    7:00 AM
    8:00 AM
    9:00 AM
    10:00 AM
    11:00 AM
    12:00 PM
    1:00 PM
    2:00 PM
    3:00 PM
    4:00 PM
    5:00 PM
    6:00 PM
    7:00 PM
    8:00 PM
    9:00 PM
    10:00 PM

  2. Loving vs Virginia

    Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, declared Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute, the “Racial Integrity Act of 1924”, unconstitutional, thereby overturning Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.

    Decision

    The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the convictions in a unanimous decision, dismissing the Commonwealth of Virginia’s argument that a law forbidding both white and black persons from marrying persons of another race, and providing identical penalties to white and black violators, could not be construed as racially discriminatory. The court ruled that Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute violated both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In its decision, the court wrote:

    “ Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”

    The Supreme Court concluded that anti-miscegenation laws were racist and had been enacted to perpetuate white supremacy:

    “ There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy. ”

    For the entire article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

    • Why Prop 8 must fall: Civil rights

      6/13/11 Julie Bond – USAToday

      This Sunday we celebrate the 44th anniversary of Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court decision that struck down anti-miscegenation laws that forbade African Americans and whites from marrying.

      In the Loving case, a unanimous court held that marriage is “one of the basic civil rights of man…fundamental to our very existence and survival.” The court also held that “under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not to marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.”

      The Loving decision, which was a watershed moment in the civil rights movement, has deep implications today for gay and lesbian couples who want that essential freedom: to marry.

      My wife, Pamela Horowitz, and I were married in Virginia in 1990. Prior to the Loving decision, we could have been sentenced to time in prison for that loving act — committed in the state that likes to claim it “is for lovers.”
      Of course, prior to the Loving decision, the parents of the current president of the United States would have been committing a felony had they lived in Virginia.

      Today, we look at anti-miscegenation laws as a stain on our history and an affront to our beliefs as Americans. In this country, we do not create separate classes of Americans based upon inherent characteristics. Sexual orientation is immutable and unchangeable. It is as much a part of our DNA as our race.
      Because I have spent my life fighting to make ours a more just society for all Americans, I’m a supporter of marriage equality. I believe this to be a fight for civil rights.

      Fourteen times, the U.S. Supreme Court has said that marriage is a fundamental human right. In Loving v. Virginia, the justices guaranteed that right could not be taken away because of the way we’re born. Yet that’s exactly what happened when California passed Proposition 8, which declared marriage valid only when between a man and a woman.

      For the entire article: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-06-10-In-wake-of-Loving-decision-Prop-8-cannot-stand_n.htm?csp=34news

    • President Obama Supports the Respect for Marriage Act

      Posted by Colleen Curtis on July 19, 2011

      President Obama is proud to support the Respect for Marriage Act, which is being introduced by Senator Feinstein and Congressman Nadler in the Senate on July 20. This legislation would uphold the principle that the federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections as straight couples.

      The President has long called for a legislative repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which continues to have a real impact on the lives of real people — our families, friends and neighbors.

      Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/07/19/president-obama-supports-respect-marriage-act

      • Obama endorses same-sex marriage

        5/9/12 2:57 PM EDT POLITICO44

        President Obama endorses same-sex marriage in an interview with ABC News:

        “I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married,”

        • Obama declaration “icing on the cake” of gay rights legacy – The Rachel Maddow Show (May 9th,

          Published on May 10, 2012 by Panzerfaust04

          Rachel Maddow emphasizes that policy is more important than personal views by politicians on gay rights and lists President Obama’s achievements in helping to secure rights for gay Americans. Past presidents have asserted their personal friendship or sympathy for gay people while hurting them with bad policy and associating themselves with anti-gay hatemongers. From the May 9th, 2012 edition of The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC.

      • 10-Year-Old Gives Gay Marriage Speech Before NYC City Council

        7/26/12 By Mia Trovato | Trending Now – 11 hrs ago

        Two months ago, fifth-grader Kameron Slade wrote a speech for a school competition that his principal forbid him from delivering. The topic was gay marriage. His mother, April Grantham-Slade, told the New York Times that her son wanted to address a subject that hadn’t been talked about much. Local media outlets heard about Kameron’s predicament, and the 10-year-old was invited to deliver his words for the cameras of TV station NY1. The video of Kameron’s speech received more than 600,000 views on YouTube, and he was ultimately allowed to speak at a special school assembly.

        Yesterday City Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn — who married her partner, Kim M. Catullo, in May — gave Kameron an even bigger platform when she asked him to deliver the speech in the council chambers. Kameron, who arrived with his parents and grandfather, looked stylish and self-assured in a gray suit. He said he felt “honored.” I’m thinking his what-I-did-with-my-summer-vacation essays will be pretty interesting to read.

        What did you think of Kameron Slade’s speech and the invitation from the City Council? Let us know on Facebook or by following us @YahooTrending.

        ——

        USA: Young School Kid, who was banned from giving a speech coming @Out4Marriage “like

        Published on Jun 15, 2012 by Out4Marriage

        A fifth-grade student in New York who wanted to deliver a speech for marriage equality had his opportunity censored, but later reinstated at a different session due to immediate backlash, US media organisations report.

        Kameron Slade, a student at a local school in Queens won a school-wide competition to deliver a speech, but upon discovering that his topic was marriage between same-sex couples, his principal threatened to remove him from the contest if he did not change the topic.

        For more ways to get involved in the campaign visit http://www.Out4Marriage.org
        Fan us on Facebook http://www.FB.com/Out4Marriage
        Follow us on twitter @Out4Marriage

    • Mildred Loving, 40 Years Later

      JUN 18 2007, 9:07 AM ET

      She was the woman who had to fight for her right to marry a man of a different race in, yes, Virginia – in my lifetime. She won the case forty years ago, in the historic decision “Loving vs. Virginia.” She has just issued a public statement on the anniversary of this act of “judicial tyranny” against the clear wishes of a large majority in Virginia. Here it is in full (hat tip: Jonathan), continued after the jump:

      When my late husband, Richard, and I got married in Washington, DC in 1958, it wasn’t to make a political statement or start a fight. We were in love, and we wanted to be married.

      We didn’t get married in Washington because we wanted to marry there. We did it there because the government wouldn’t allow us to marry back home in Virginia where we grew up, where we met, where we fell in love, and where we wanted to be together and build our family. You see, I am a woman of color and Richard was white, and at that time people believed it was okay to keep us from marrying because of their ideas of who should marry whom.

      When Richard and I came back to our home in Virginia, happily married, we had no intention of battling over the law. We made a commitment to each other in our love and lives, and now had the legal commitment, called marriage, to match. Isn’t that what marriage is?

      Not long after our wedding, we were awakened in the middle of the night in our own bedroom by deputy sheriffs and actually arrested for the “crime” of marrying the wrong kind of person.

      Our marriage certificate was hanging on the wall above the bed. The state prosecuted Richard and me, and after we were found guilty, the judge declared: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” He sentenced us to a year in prison, but offered to suspend the sentence if we left our home in Virginia for 25 years exile.

      We left, and got a lawyer. Richard and I had to fight, but still were not fighting for a cause. We were fighting for our love.

      Though it turned out we had to fight, happily Richard and I didn’t have to fight alone. Thanks to groups like the ACLU and the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, and so many good people around the country willing to speak up, we took our case for the freedom to marry all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And on June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that, “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men,” a “basic civil right.”

      My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God’s plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation’s fears and prejudices have given way, and today’s young people realize that if someone loves someone they have a right to marry.

      Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the “wrong kind of person” for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.

      I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.

      Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2007/06/mildred-loving-40-years-later/227582/

    • Gay couple uses tribal law to marry in Oklahoma

      10/22/13 By Liz Goodwin- Yahoo News

      A same-sex couple successfully applied for a marriage license in Oklahoma despite the state’s strict rules against gay marriage. The pair used a legal loophole to get the license last Friday under tribal law, which doesn’t fall under the state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as occurring only between a man and a woman. They plan to wed Oct. 31.

      Darren Black Bear, a member of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, was able to get a marriage license to wed his partner of nine years, Jason Pickel, because the tribe’s legal system does not specify two people must be of different genders to be wed.

      Rosemary Stephens, the editor in chief of the tribes’ Tribal Tribune, told Yahoo News another gay couple in the tribe wed in December 2012 under the law, but did not make their union public. At least one person in the couple must be an enrolled member of the tribe in order to get a marriage license, however.

      Stephens said no one in the tribe has raised any objections to the practice of giving out marriage licenses to both straight and gay couples. “They’re held in high esteem,” Stephens said of Black Bear and Pickel.

      While Oklahoma won’t recognize the marriage, the federal government most likely will, thanks to last June’s Supreme Court decision that struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The court said the federal government must recognize same-sex marriages, but said states are free to ignore and prohibit them if they want.

      For more: http://news.yahoo.com/gay-couple-uses-tribal-law-to-marry-in-oklahoma-184155790.html

    • Release No: NR-272-15

      July 13, 2015 dod.gov

      Statement by Secretary of Defense Ash Carter on DOD Transgender Policy

      Over the last fourteen years of conflict, the Department of Defense has proven itself to be a learning organization. This is true in war, where we have adapted to counterinsurgency, unmanned systems, and new battlefield requirements such as MRAPs. It is also true with respect to institutional activities, where we have learned from how we repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” from our efforts to eliminate sexual assault in the military, and from our work to open up ground combat positions to women. Throughout this time, transgender men and women in uniform have been there with us, even as they often had to serve in silence alongside their fellow comrades in arms.

      The Defense Department’s current regulations regarding transgender service members are outdated and are causing uncertainty that distracts commanders from our core missions. At a time when our troops have learned from experience that the most important qualification for service members should be whether they’re able and willing to do their job, our officers and enlisted personnel are faced with certain rules that tell them the opposite. Moreover, we have transgender soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines – real, patriotic Americans – who I know are being hurt by an outdated, confusing, inconsistent approach that’s contrary to our value of service and individual merit.

      Today, I am issuing two directives to deal with this matter. First, DoD will create a working group to study over the next six months the policy and readiness implications of welcoming transgender persons to serve openly. Led by (Acting) Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Brad Carson, and composed of military and civilian personnel representing all the military services and the Joint Staff, this working group will report to Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work. At my direction, the working group will start with the presumption that transgender persons can serve openly without adverse impact on military effectiveness and readiness, unless and except where objective, practical impediments are identified. Second, I am directing that decision authority in all administrative discharges for those diagnosed with gender dysphoria or who identify themselves as transgender be elevated to Under Secretary Carson, who will make determinations on all potential separations.

      As I’ve said before, we must ensure that everyone who’s able and willing to serve has the full and equal opportunity to do so, and we must treat all our people with the dignity and respect they deserve. Going forward, the Department of Defense must and will continue to improve how we do both. Our military’s future strength depends on it.

  3. Sunday talk show tip sheet

    6/10/11 By ZACK HALE -POLITICO

    This Sunday’s television talk shows feature a rare debate between the two newly minted national party leaders, with Democratic National Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus facing off on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

    The Florida congresswoman and the former Wisconsin state GOP chairman will discuss the intensifying 2012 campaign cycle and the prospects for their parties. Later, on the same show, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum discusses his bid for the Republican presidential nomination.

    “Fox News Sunday,” has another GOP presidential contender, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

    CNN’s “State of the Union” dials in Monday’s New Hampshire Republican presidential debate, which it’s co-sponsoring. Host Candy Crowley visits with a handful of current and former Republican New Hampshire pols: freshman Sen. Kelly Ayotte; Rep. Charlie Bass; former Gov. John H. Sununu and his son, former Sen. John E. Sununu.

    CBS,s “Face the Nation” hosts House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
    And ABC’s “This Week” has Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican on the Senate Banking Committee; former Democratic New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine; and Robert Reich, who was secretary of labor in the Clinton administration.

    Meanwhile, top White House economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, who’s leaving to return to teaching at the University of Chicago, makes a pair of appearances – on Bloomberg TV’s “Political Capital” and on TV One’s “Washington Watch.”

    Finally, Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, is the guest on C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers,” interviewed by Julie Hirschfeld Davis of Bloomberg News and Joe Schatz of Congressional Quarterly.

  4. Goolsbee bullish on deficit deal, warns not to cut investments

    6/11/11 By Ben Geman – TheHill

    Top White House economist Austan Goolsbee said he believes the Obama administration and Republicans will strike a deal that will enable passage of legislation to raise the nation’s debt ceiling.

    Vice President Joe Biden is leading high-stakes talks with a handful of Capitol Hill Democrats and Republicans aimed at forging an agreement to raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling and reduce long-term deficits.

    “I’m kind of encouraged, if you look on both sides – you’ve got leaders on both sides of the aisle saying they don’t want to push it all the way to August,” said Goolsbee, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, on Bloomberg’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt.”
    “They want to do it by July 4th. And so I think … the negotiations are going reasonably well. I think we’ll find a solution to that,” he added on the program airing this weekend, according to a transcript.

    The Treasury Department has set an Aug. 2 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, and says the nation will suffer a “catastrophic” default if action is not taken by that date.

    Goolsbee warned that the talks should not extend into the eleventh hour. “I really think it’s a bad idea to push it right up to the Aug. 2 deadline. That really plays with fire,” he said.

    Republicans are pushing for steep spending cuts, but Goolsbee warned that sacrificing certain White House priorities would be harmful. He cautioned not to “skimp on the growth strategy.”

    “In the short term, if we cut education and training, if we cut R&D and innovation spending, if we’re cutting the kinds of investments that we need to make for us to grow, we’re making a mistake,” Goolsbee said.

    Goolsbee is leaving the White House this summer to return to teaching at the University of Chicago.

  5. Latest developments in Arab world’s unrest

    6/13/11 By The Associated Press – 4 mins ago

    SYRIA
    Elite Syrian troops backed by helicopters and tanks regain control of a town where police and soldiers joined forces with the protesters they were ordered to shoot. Troops led by the president’s brother shell Jisr al-Shughour as the gunships hover overhead, clearing the way for scores of tanks and armored personnel carriers to roll in from two directions. The developments, and actions by opponents of the Syrian government, mark a major departure from what had been a largely peaceful protest movement. Among them: the discovery of a mass grave filled with uniformed bodies and the increasing willingness of mutineers and outgunned residents to fight back.
    ___

    LIBYA
    Resurgent rebel forces fight street by street to retake the Mediterranean port city of Zawiya, a prize that would put them within striking distance of the capital and cut off one of Moammar Gadhafi’s last supply routes from Tunisia. It appears the rebels may have been coordinating attacks on several fronts nationwide but poor communications make it impossible to confirm such reports from opposition voices outside Libya. The United Arab Emirates says it has recognized the Libyan rebels’ political group as the sole representatives for the country. The UAE moves comes just three days after hosting an international gathering on ways to aid the rebels and their Transitional National Council based in eastern Libya.
    ___

    EGYPT
    Egyptian authorities detain an alleged Israeli agent and are interrogating him on suspicion of spying and trying to influence protesters during the popular uprising that toppled President Hosni Mubarak, a court official and the prosecution spokesman say. The prosecution spokesman says the suspect is being interrogated by the state security prosecution. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor says he is “totally unfamiliar” with the report.
    ___

    BAHRAIN
    A 20-year-old woman who recited poems critical of Bahrain’s rulers and later claimed she was beaten in jail is sentenced to a year in prison as part of the kingdom’s crackdown on Shiite protesters calling for greater rights. The ruling by a special security tribunal sends a strong message that Bahrain’s Sunni monarchy is not easing off on punishments linked to the unrest, despite appeals for talks with Shiite groups in the strategic Gulf island nation, which is home to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet.
    ___

    JORDAN
    Jordan’s king bows to popular demands for elected Cabinets but gives no timetable, saying that sudden change could lead to “chaos and unrest” in this country that has averted the turmoil seen in other Arab nations. It’s the first time that King Abdullah II has made such a concession to Jordanians, who have taken to the streets during six months of pro-democracy protests to demand a greater political say in this key U.S. Arab ally. Many Jordanians want the king to loosen his absolute grip on power, which includes appointing prime ministers and Cabinets.

    • I’m waiting for the day when King Abdullah II becomes a real leader in the change going on in the Middle East … since I have always greatly admired him, and think his heart is in the right place. Apparently, the Jordanians also admire their king, and he needs to return the civility they show him … a little quicker than he has.

  6. Panetta: Military healthcare costs are on my radar in efforts to save money

    6/12/11 By John T. Bennett – TheHill

    President Obama’s nominee to lead the Pentagon has made it clear military personnel programs, once considered sacrosanct, will be scrutinized as the administration looks for spending cuts.

    In written answers to advance policy questions posed by the Senate Armed Services Committee prior to his confirmation hearing, Leon Panetta endorsed proposals put forward by the Pentagon in its 2012 budget plan.

    “I believe that the proposed healthcare efficiencies are sensible efforts to control DOD’s health care costs while maintaining the same level of care,” Panetta wrote. “I also believe the modest increases in beneficiaries’ costs are reasonable.”

    For the entire article: http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/defense-homeland-security/165929-panetta-military-healthcare-costs-are-on-my-radar

    • Blasts kills 34 in Pakistan, as CIA chief visits

      6/12/11 By RIAZ KHAN and KIMBERLY DOZIER, Associated Press –

      PESHAWAR, Pakistan – Two explosions went off minutes apart in the northwest Pakistani city of Peshawar, killing 34 people and injuring more than 100 in one of the deadliest attacks since the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden last month, officials said.

      The blasts, one of which was caused by a suicide bomber, occurred just after midnight Sunday in an area of the city that is home to political offices and army housing.

      The attack took place as CIA Director Leon Panetta and Afghan President Hamid Karzai visited Islamabad, 95 miles (150 kilometers) to the east, to speak separately with senior Pakistani officials about intelligence sharing and efforts to reconcile with the Taliban.

      The first explosion was relatively small and drew police and rescue workers to the site, said Dost Mohammed, a senior local police official. A large explosion rocked the area a few minutes later, causing the fatalities and wounding 108 people, 18 critically, said Rahim Jan, a senior doctor at a local hospital.

      The second blast was caused by a suicide bomber riding a motorcycle packed with 22 pounds (10 kilograms) of explosives, said Ejaz Khan, a senior police official. The source of the first explosion was unknown.

      No group claimed responsibility, but the Pakistani Taliban have pledged to carry out attacks in retaliation for the covert U.S. Navy SEAL raid that killed bin Laden in an army town outside Islamabad on May 2.

      For the entire article: http://goo.gl/GACgW

  7. Hi guys. Can you please call or email the Tide Loads of Hope Program so we can get them to come up when needed to help the folks of the Wallow Fire. Their clothing, bedding everything is going to smell of smoke and Tide will help with soap donations or laundry services free to the people of the community.

    Please cross post this to everyone you know.

    http://www.tide.com/en-US/loads-of-hope/index.jspx

    Talk to Tide
    Toll-free at 1-800-879-8433
    Monday through Friday, 9:00AM to 6:00PM EST

    THANK YOU!!

  8. *********************
    THIS POST IS NOW CLOSED

    NBLB Come on over to my newest post

    titled: “ Building the 21st Century Grid ”
    **********************

    To get to newest post click on “HOME” at the top of the page and click on the title of the newest post

Comments are closed.