If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.
You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!
The Defense Ministry released an e-mail Tuesday from Sheehan, a former NATO commander who retired from the military in 1997, to retired Dutch Gen. Henk van den Breemen saying he is sorry for his statements to the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 18.
In the e-mail, Sheehan says the 1995 murder of some 8,000 Muslim men in Bosnia's Srebrenica enclave "was in no way the fault of individual soldiers."
The Religious Viewpoint
Plugin error: This URL is not valid for embedding: <iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" width="480px" height="270px" src="http://specials.washingtonpost.com/mv/embed/?title=The%20God%20Vote%3A%20conservative%20opposition%20to%20DADT&stillURL=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia3.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Fphoto%2F2010%2F11%2F17%2FPH2010111703362.jpg&flvURL=%2Fmedia%2F2010%2F11%2F17%2F11172010-22v.m4v&width=480&height=270&autoStart=false&clickThru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Fvideo%2F2010%2F11%2F17%2FVI2010111703355.html"></iframe>
Plugin error: This URL is not valid for embedding: <iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" width="480px" height="270px" src="http://specials.washingtonpost.com/mv/embed/?title=The%20God%20Vote%3A%20What%20is%20Obama%20thinking%20on%20DADT%3F&stillURL=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia3.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Fphoto%2F2010%2F11%2F17%2FPH2010111703558.jpg&flvURL=%2Fmedia%2F2010%2F11%2F17%2F11172010-29v.m4v&width=480&height=270&autoStart=false&clickThru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Fvideo%2F2010%2F11%2F17%2FVI2010111703544.html"></iframe>
Civilian Support & Satire
History
DADT Begins
Congress Votes to Repeal
The House of Representatives passes the DADT repeal provision
The Senate fails cloture vote to move forward on vote for DADT repeal provison
Those Affected
Plugin error: This URL is not valid for embedding: <iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/17009087" width="400" height="300" frameborder="0"></iframe><p><a href="http://vimeo.com/17009087">Proud to Serve, the Faces of Don't Ask, Don't Tell</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/joannsantangelo">Jo Ann Santangelo</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>
8. Belkin, Aaron. "New Study: Obama Can Halt Gay Discharges With Executive Order." Palm Center. 11 May 2009. Web. 13 Nov. 2010. <http://www.palmcenter.org/press/dadt/releases/New Study Says Obama Can Halt Gay Discharges With Executive Order>.
13. Kozloski, Michael J. (2010) 'Homosexual Moral Acceptance and Social Tolerance: Are the Effects of Education Changing?', Journal of Homosexuality, 57: 10, 1370 — 1383.
15. "History of US Military Policies, towards Gays from 1776 to 2009." ReligiousTolerance.org. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, 31 Jan. 2010. Web. 16 Nov. 2010. <http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_mili3.htm>.
24. "Supporting the 1993 Law That Supports Morale and Readiness." Flag & General Officers for the Military. Center for Military Readiness, 30 Mar. 2009. Web. 16 Nov. 2010. <http://www.flagandgeneralofficersforthemilitary.com/>.
The only problem I see with this so far, is you have wikipedia as a source - doesn't make quality basis for arguments. Try finding out where wikipedia found THEIR information and list that instead! :)
I understand you're comment, but I don't necessarily always agree. Pop culture and recent events can be dicey for sure. However, historical articles are normally heavily footnoted on the Wikipedia page itself. The information on the Wikipedia page is often aggregated and often difficult to pull an accurate footnote. I'm comfortable citing Wikipedia if the page is properly footnoted and I've verified the links or sources of those footnotes. The Wikipedia staff often polices such articles and will even flag it for further citation if they think it needs it. Encyclopedias, magazine articles, and books that cite other sources with footnotes are the same (but even more difficult to verify than Wikipedia since they're not online). I don't necessarily give more credence to information just because it's been printed to paper. The Wikipedia article I used is thoroughly cited (14 footnotes). I trust the information. My audience can choose to discredit it, but if they check the footnote, I think they'll see the information is credible. .... that said, I appreciate the feedback and I understand your intent is to ensure my sources are strong to strengthen my arguments. Thanks :-)
Comments (3)
Andrea said
at 6:34 pm on Nov 13, 2010
The only problem I see with this so far, is you have wikipedia as a source - doesn't make quality basis for arguments. Try finding out where wikipedia found THEIR information and list that instead! :)
Boda said
at 6:57 pm on Nov 13, 2010
I understand you're comment, but I don't necessarily always agree. Pop culture and recent events can be dicey for sure. However, historical articles are normally heavily footnoted on the Wikipedia page itself. The information on the Wikipedia page is often aggregated and often difficult to pull an accurate footnote. I'm comfortable citing Wikipedia if the page is properly footnoted and I've verified the links or sources of those footnotes. The Wikipedia staff often polices such articles and will even flag it for further citation if they think it needs it. Encyclopedias, magazine articles, and books that cite other sources with footnotes are the same (but even more difficult to verify than Wikipedia since they're not online). I don't necessarily give more credence to information just because it's been printed to paper. The Wikipedia article I used is thoroughly cited (14 footnotes). I trust the information. My audience can choose to discredit it, but if they check the footnote, I think they'll see the information is credible. .... that said, I appreciate the feedback and I understand your intent is to ensure my sources are strong to strengthen my arguments. Thanks :-)
Andrea said
at 7:06 pm on Nov 13, 2010
Yeah, I agree with you completely :) I just know what all my teachers in the past have hammered into my noggin :) I wikipedia everything so... :p
You don't have permission to comment on this page.