tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post8898649947289395244..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: Sunday News and Noteskcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-12002998672308207082007-03-10T18:25:00.000-05:002007-03-10T18:25:00.000-05:00I still don't understand how ALL OF YOU seem to ru...I still don't understand how ALL OF YOU seem to run together in your opinions. <BR/><BR/>You've seen my posts in KC's archives.<BR/><BR/>Does ANYBODY here understand that the perpetrator responsible for gang-raping me in 1962 would NOT have gotten away with it "today"?!<BR/><BR/>Now what would you attribute that to? I thank God that "feminists" exist today. Unfortunately, for me, women had NO voice in 1962. <BR/><BR/>Do any of you care?E-mail:https://www.blogger.com/profile/05104865182873148411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-4217810907457209822006-10-16T04:14:00.000-04:002006-10-16T04:14:00.000-04:0010:17 PM, what is the basis for your conclusion th...10:17 PM, what is the basis for your conclusion that Duke violated federal law when it refused to allow DSED to conduct voter registration activities at the football game and that it does not matter whether the activities occurred on public property or on private property? Are you an attorney with expertise in the area of federal election law? Have you reviewed all of the statutes, regulations, and federal court decisions bearing on this issue? If so, perhaps you could explain them to us so that we can all get up to speed on the issue. Also, what is the basis for your statement that the Justice Department and the FBI are investigating Duke? Do you play golf with Alberto Gonzales and Robert Mueller?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-3179759240882418402006-10-16T03:39:00.000-04:002006-10-16T03:39:00.000-04:00To 11:46 PM, thank your for your comments on my po...To 11:46 PM, thank your for your comments on my post. I did not attend the game, so I do not have first hand information about what happened on that day. I am relying on the information contained in Professor Johnson’s article of October 1 called Black Panthers Welcome, Duke Students Not? Based upon the two updates which appear at the end of the article, it is my understanding that DSED did not follow the correct procedures for obtaining permission to conduct voter registration activities at the game and that apparently is why they were not allowed to set up their booth at the game. However, they have been conducting voter registration activities on campus for several weeks including at the BBQ on Thursday, so it simply is not accurate to suggest that the Duke Administration has been conspiring to prevent them from signing students up to vote.<br /><br />To 12:06 AM, I have to admit that I have mixed feelings about the appointment of Karla Holloway as head of the Campus Culture Initiative. I think it is a judgment call which can be argued both ways. The argument against it is that she simply may not have been the best choice from the standpoint of temperament or intelligence or perspective on the issues and that perhaps her involvement with the group of 88 should have disqualified her for the position. The argument in favor is that the committee is charged with looking at issues such as the relationships among the different races at Duke and the relationship between the sexes and that by appointing a black woman to head the committee, Brodhead has sent a message to the women on campus and the black students and other minority students on campus that their views will be fully and fairly represented on the committee. You should note that just because she is the chairman of the committee does not necessarily mean that the committee is going to issue a report which embraces a radical perspective on the issues because the committee includes several members who have differing points of view, and even if the committee did issue a report that reflected a radical perspective, no action can be taken on its recommendations until the report is approved by the Duke Administration and the board of trustees.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-13652758480865866872006-10-16T00:46:00.000-04:002006-10-16T00:46:00.000-04:00KC didn't read anything into Mr. Bennett's stateme...KC didn't read anything into Mr. Bennett's statement at all. Mr. Bennett said it all by himself. He EVEN felt funny about saying what he did and that is obviously why he added what he did at the end of this statement. It just shows more of the picture of what is going on in Durham. It is so off base of the basic facts of this case: whether or not these 3 boys brutally raped and beat up, and tried to strangle this girl while 46 other boys sat right outside of this bathroom and did nothing. IT IS RIDICULOUS!!!! And our Duke president says on national television tonight that he was quick to judge because an elected official told him that was what happened. FRIGHTENING!!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-61952643344717882702006-10-16T00:45:00.000-04:002006-10-16T00:45:00.000-04:00Of course leader of DSED is happy they were able t...Of course leader of DSED is happy they were able to register a lot of students. And they could have registered more if they were allowed to register students at the game. And what if Brodhead apologized (and of course there is nothing to indicate he did apologize). The deadline to register students to vote is over. How is the apology going to change anything?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-63948501853874453802006-10-16T00:07:00.000-04:002006-10-16T00:07:00.000-04:00To 11:07 PM
I am not a Duke parent or a Duke stude...To 11:07 PM<br />I am not a Duke parent or a Duke student or otherwise affiliated with Duke. I think Broadhead is a weasel and it didn't take KC to convince me of that. There are quite a few people that agree. It has to do with more than what you mentioned as reasons in your post. It has to do with putting people like Professor Holloway and Sterns from the group of 88 on committees created in response to everything that has happened. Broadhead has not openly said that what the group of 88 did was wrong. By putting them on committees he has given tacit approval of their previous actions. If I had a child at Duke I would worry that a professor might make some public statements like the group of 88 did about the LAX players. What they did was wrong. Their continued commentary shows obvious biases against the LAX team. <br /><br />(Hopefully I got those professors names right. It is late and I didn't go look them up.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-27996924453829933642006-10-15T23:46:00.000-04:002006-10-15T23:46:00.000-04:0011:07 I am not the person you are responding to. I...11:07 I am not the person you are responding to. I just happened to be reading the comments under this thread and came across your comment above. I am compelled to ask you a question. What makes you so sure that you know the facts? Couldn’t there be any room for doubt? Did you investigate what happened that day at the football game, were you there, did you talk with the administration and get an explanation from them? Did you talk to the DSED team and get an explanation for them? <br /><br />If you have done these things and you are basing your opinions on these facts, I will understand it. But if are you only speculating about could have happened, perhaps you are not being open-minded. When the facts come out, and they will eventually, you may be proven wrong. You may well have a positive opinion of Brodhead and his administration, and that is admirable, but this does not change any of the facts. I suggest you check your facts carefully before jumping to defend anyone, for your own sake. <br /><br />What if (and I am being genuine here) Brodhead and his administration already acknowledged wrongdoing on the matter and apologized. What if the apology was offered in private and the ongoing effort is to get a public apology? How are you going to feel about that? I am not saying this is the case. All I am saying is don’t presume to know unless you have all the facts. And, if you have the facts, please share them with us so we can buy your argument.<br /><br />Sorry for jumping in but I just had to ask this question.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-27263941084526172272006-10-15T23:07:00.000-04:002006-10-15T23:07:00.000-04:006:24 PM, before responding to your post, I want to...6:24 PM, before responding to your post, I want to clarify two things. First, I am the poster who has been talking about the voter registration issue (1:31 AM and 3:06 PM above), but I am not the person who has been calling people cool aid groupies. Second, you should not refer to me as the poster who chooses not to view Duke, Nifong, etc., in a negative light. I believe that Nifong has engaged in massive violations of the rules of legal ethics and should be disbarred. However, I support the manner in which President Brodhead and the Duke Administration have handled the LAX situation. Unfortunately, this website has polarized those who support the LAX players by dividing them into those who support Brodhead and those who are critical of him. I support him, and I believe that most of the criticism of him on this website is completely unfounded.<br /><br />You say that because Duke accepts federal funds, it is prohibited from engaging in discrimination. That is absolutely true, and as I am sure you are aware, Duke does not discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin, which is what the prohibition on discrimination means. However, the fact that Duke is prohibited from engaging in discrimination does not mean that Duke has no power to regulate the time or place of voter registration activities occurring on its campus. In this case, I gather from the reports I have seen that Duke did not allow DSED to conduct a voter registration event at the football game because DSED did not obtain permission to do so in advance of the game. However, Duke has obviously given DSED other opportunities to conduct voter registration events on campus, as evidenced by the big BBQ / voter registration event held on West Campus last Thursday. As a result, it is clear that Duke has not discriminated against DSED or prevented them from registering students to vote. The fact that there were more students at the football game than at the BBQ is irrelevant.<br /><br />I should say that I find it amusing that at the very same moment that you and Professor Johnson are trying to argue that Duke has discriminated against DSED and violated the civil rights laws, the leader of DSED is being quoted by The Chronicle as saying how happy she is about the number of students they have been able to register. What this tells me is that you and Professor Johnson are not providing your readers with an objective analysis of the voter registration issue. Instead, you are pushing an agenda, and you are trying to distort the facts to fit the agenda. The agenda is that the LAX team parents are mad at Brodhead for canceling the LAX season and refusing to meet with them and not speaking out more aggressively on behalf of their sons, they have decided to seek revenge by posting anonymous negative comments about him on this website, Professor Johnson has decided to assist them in this effort because he apparently has become friendly with some of the LAX team families, he saw an opportunity to take some shots at Brodhead when DSED was not allowed to register voters at the football game, so he decided to tear into him and the rest of the Duke Administration and suggest that they are engaged in some sort of conspiracy to prevent the students from exercising their right to vote. For all of the reasons set forth above and in my prior posts, this is complete nonsense and just constitutes one more example of the overheated rhetoric that permeates this website.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-52319756872108757762006-10-15T22:44:00.000-04:002006-10-15T22:44:00.000-04:00"Duke should have moved when they had the chance."..."Duke should have moved when they had the chance."<br /><br />Dunno what you are specifically referring to, but duke HAS moved already (from original site to present site) when it took over Trinity College in 1924.<br /><br />there is no need for duke to move anywhere. racial animosity, unethical and overzealous prosecutors, shoddy and mismanaged city officails are not limited to durham. w-s is no peach either (although a helluva lot better than durham). <br /><br />my prediction? (1) the case will go away, one way or another, with the kids not convicted, but many in the durham community unconvinced; (2) duke will see a pretty nice dent in its annual fund for 2006-07 fiscal year due to the terrible approach to this case of the admin, especially broadhead; (3) broadhead will be on a much tighter leash and expect him to attempt to engage and "make up" for his earlier stance by trying to support the team or athletics in general (maybe bball?); and (4) life will return to "normal" - probably never for the accused guys and their families, but for the tenuous relationship between duke and durham.<br /><br />but i will certainly not have as much fun reading as i do now when i pop open KC's blog every day.Daddyx4https://www.blogger.com/profile/17394221481565818109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-70289162394862965802006-10-15T22:33:00.000-04:002006-10-15T22:33:00.000-04:00Anonymous at 7:37 p.m.: Not chagrined, disgruntled...Anonymous at 7:37 p.m.: Not chagrined, disgruntled or perturbed. My diagnosis was spot on. Maybe the next time you want to start trouble and insult people, you'll find the courage to do so in your own name. Or, since you are an anonymous coward, maybe not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-43843174673080510562006-10-15T22:17:00.000-04:002006-10-15T22:17:00.000-04:00KC keep up the great work. To the anonymous blogg...KC keep up the great work. To the anonymous blogger who seems critical of KC, the American public will not let Duke off the hook on stopping the voting registration. Federal laws were broken, it doesn't matter if it is public or private. The Justice Department in conjunction with FBI Department of Public Integrity are investigating the Duke Hoax, the DA's office, the Durham Police Department and Duke University. Thousands and thousands of letters have flooded their offices. Special agents have been assigned. They are professionals and know the guidelines of the Constitution and Bill or Rights, therefore they will not give 70 interviews before investigating. They will not alert bloggers or the press of their movements. The breath and scope of this case is wide and the corruption in Durham is deep. It will take time for a complete investigation. But mark my words....justice for the Duke three will be served, justice for the Duke students who have been profiled by the DPD will be served. In essence the FEDs will disinfect Durham of the Nifungus and his band of thugs, Crystal will be forced to take the lie detector test Nifong never gave her. Duke University will be held accountable for their actions. The Duke 88 will be questioned.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-11683931238931062172006-10-15T21:46:00.000-04:002006-10-15T21:46:00.000-04:00KC: What is the likelihood that this case is going...KC: What is the likelihood that this case is going to trial? On an unrelated note, what repercussions should Mike Nifong face for having deviated so drastically from ethical and procedural regularities? Should he lose his job? his license? more? What say you? <br /> Not Exactly RLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-51704421998579473212006-10-15T19:37:00.000-04:002006-10-15T19:37:00.000-04:00Settle down Mr. Luker. You're a little more disgr...Settle down Mr. Luker. You're a little more disgruntled then I presumed. In any event, your misdiagnosis is amusing and delectable. Thanks for the chuckles! RM PAMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-72526980570219815872006-10-15T18:30:00.000-04:002006-10-15T18:30:00.000-04:00"Am I "forgetting" something? Not to my knowledge,..."Am I "forgetting" something? Not to my knowledge, no."<br /><br />KC,<br />Although I doubt Nifong posts (but does read the blogs as he has admitted) I do wonder who some of the posters here are. The 'forgetting' poster is also the 'koolaid' poster and prior to that the poster whose posts you deleted (which apparently upset said poster).<br /><br />At least the poster now acknowledges, to a degree, that a university accepting any form of federal funds is subject to federal anti-discrimination law. Unfortunately the poster believes that the students who attended the BBQ were the same students who attended the game @ the stadium and were denied the right to register to vote. That is certainly not the case - not all the students in the student section went to the BBQ meaning that some were disenfranchised which you could address...apparently the poster believes that a person is motivated to register to vote. In my experience students have to be given a form mostly because many are unaware that they are able to vote or are unable to find the form (which are kept in the library usually - or online for mail in).<br /><br />Addressing the poster is probably a good idea, given that the individual has chosen to actually engage in a debate. <br /><br />It is, however, quite unfortunate that IP logging is not enabled.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-27622136070767736732006-10-15T18:24:00.000-04:002006-10-15T18:24:00.000-04:00I am glad to see that the poster who chooses not t...I am glad to see that the poster who chooses not to view Duke,nifong,etc in a negative light decided to engage in a substantive debate. The poster has progressed greatly and I was pleasantly surprised not to see 'koolaid' within the post.<br /><br />I will begin by saying that I have no problem with a voter registration drive at a stadium IF it is outside, ie, not people going around the student section of the stadium (student seating). That's because I find such things to be distracting but if it did occur I could deal with it easily. My understanding is that the drive was outside the entrance to the student section. There are quite a few vendors, program people, charities, etc that are allowed to be there. The students themselves are allowed to be there. If Durham was sponsoring a voter drive I would imagine it would have been okay with the staff. Of course Durham makes ZERO effort to register Duke students because the electorate is not so happy with students voting (because students are from out of state, etc and will probably vote for higher taxes that do not have an impact on them). The Nifong issue is just a further incentive not to come.<br /><br />I'd contrast that with NC PUBLIC SCHOOLS where the ELECTION OFFICE REGISTERS STUDENTS TO VOTE (ie 18 and older). They do it during school time which takes away from class time which is a major disturbance. <br /><br />I happen to live in NC and feel that Durham is making North Carolina looks like a joke - as if 'southern justice' still existed (in reverse). It's certainly true to an extent but most DAs are not as blatant as Nifong even during re-elections (elections for Nifong technically). <br /><br />Duke should have moved when they had the chance - I am quite glad that Wake did so as Wake Forest, NC is nothing like it used to be, ie, before they moved to W-S. <br /><br />"Also, you seem to be forgetting the front page story in The Chronicle this past Friday which described the big BBQ / voter registration event on West Campus organized by DSED and the LAX players and the statement by one of the organizers of DSED talking about how pleased she was at the number of students they had been able to register, all of which runs directly contrary to your suggestion that Duke has been engaged in some sort of evil conspiracy to prevent students from registering to vote."<br /><br />You apparently are completely unaware that if a given university accepts federal funding INDIRECTLY OR DIRECTLY they are no longer free to discriminate as private institutions are. Perhaps you would like to know what 'federal aid' is - it can be federal loans that students receive, federal loans that are partially guaranteed by the federal government (PLUS loans), federal grants to students, federal grants to a university, direct funding of programs at a university, research grants, etc.<br /><br />Almost every university accepts federal funding. One reason that women have sports teams with equal funding of their male counterparts is due to federal intervention. <br /><br />Anyway you can choose to believe the Feds won't do anything and you're probably right. It would take too much time to investigate and Duke can claim 'safety' issues, etc which would serve to justify their actions.<br /><br />You apparently approve of the supression of voter registration per your post as long as students are able to register at another time. The reason why that is not acceptable is because a person at the stadium MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AT THE BBQ. That is why people are supposed to be free to register to vote AT ANY TIME. Perhaps had they been allowed to continue their registration more voters would have been registered. Even if it was 1 more it is unethical. <br /><br />Perhaps you would be more concerned if Duke banned a voter registration drive during a community forum about the LAX case attended by African Americans. I imagine that the Feds would be quite interested. <br /><br />As for the BBQ Duke was unable to assert a safety issue. Apparently you don't 'get' how events on campus 'run' or choose to ignore it. The BBQ was entirely student run while the stadium is run by paid staff. If Duke attempted to halt a voter registration drive during a BBQ they would have no justification to do so and would definately be investigated by the AG. Obtaining a BBQ permit is quite easy - and often not necessary - and in doing so you also obtain the right to run a voter registration drive (although it is not a political protest permit which can be obtained for partisan affairs).<br /><br />Registering to vote is not partisan. Registering to vote is a right and responsibility. Duke students probably will vote against Nifong (and for Cheek) as a whole but there will likely be a sizeable majority that do not.<br /><br />Also: the voter drive did not pre-screen people at the stadium but the BBQ probably would (b/c it was known to be sponsored by them presumably the protestors from last semester would not have attended). <br /><br />Apparently you don't 'get' football either: Sports events at Duke and Wake ARE HEAVILY ATTENDED. MUCH MORE SO THAN BBQs. Hence it is quite likely that students who may have registered at the game did not due to the staffs' decision to remove the voter drive people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-7188853157450516932006-10-15T18:07:00.000-04:002006-10-15T18:07:00.000-04:00Anonymous at 1:46 p.m.: You either don't bother to...Anonymous at 1:46 p.m.: You either don't bother to read <a href="http://hnn.us/blogs/2.html">Cliopatria</a> before making a fool of yourself in public or you are delusional. Just scroll through the backfiles. You'll find plenty of credits, tributes or whatever you think is missing there. KC does his research. You don't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-11850404400296893092006-10-15T17:53:00.000-04:002006-10-15T17:53:00.000-04:00I hope that when this is over, KC, that you will c...I hope that when this is over, KC, that you will compile the pages and pages of facts and research that have appeared on this blog into a book. Your writing has been exceptional and accurate throughout. The prosecutorial abuses and misinformation need to be documented lest they happen again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-57224599545413752112006-10-15T15:06:00.000-04:002006-10-15T15:06:00.000-04:00To Jason Trumpbour: Thank you for taking the time...To Jason Trumpbour: Thank you for taking the time to quote the federal statute. However, the fact that the statute, or at least the portion of the statute quoted in your post, does not create an exception for activities occurring on private property is not the end of the analysis. If it were, then I would presumably be free to come over to your house and hold a voter registration event for Mike Nifong. If I were to do this and you were to tell me to get lost, do you think that the Justice Department would intervene on my behalf or that a federal court would send you to prison for 5 years?<br /><br />To Professor Johnson: Interesting point about Title VI, but your post does not refer to anything specific in Title VI that would apply in this case. Are you aware of anything specific? If so, perhaps you could provide us with a link. However, the fact that the Justice Department is obviously blowing off the complaint from Walter Abbott tells me that there isn’t anything. Also, you seem to be forgetting the front page story in The Chronicle this past Friday which described the big BBQ / voter registration event on West Campus organized by DSED and the LAX players and the statement by one of the organizers of DSED talking about how pleased she was at the number of students they had been able to register, all of which runs directly contrary to your suggestion that Duke has been engaged in some sort of evil conspiracy to prevent students from registering to vote. Or is it your position that Duke has absolutely no power whatsoever to restrict the time and place of voter registration activities occurring on its private property? If so, then maybe DSED should have held one of its voter registration events in President Brodhead’s living room at two o’clock in the morning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-25446704039387517322006-10-15T13:46:00.000-04:002006-10-15T13:46:00.000-04:00Mr. Luker: It is good to know that “’a certain so...Mr. Luker: It is good to know that “’a certain someone over at Cliopatria’ is unperturbed and unchagrined.” I thought that little tribute that you posted on Cliopatria about KC was long overdue—and much appreciated. In any event, thanks for massaging and assuaging the faux pas. RM PAMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-75726582714508000992006-10-15T12:58:00.000-04:002006-10-15T12:58:00.000-04:00RM PAM, "a certain someone over at Cliopatria" is ...RM PAM, "a certain someone over at Cliopatria" is unperturbed and unchagrined.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-37674778825206818302006-10-15T12:34:00.000-04:002006-10-15T12:34:00.000-04:00To answer a few of the questions:
To the 2.27 am:...To answer a few of the questions:<br /><br />To the 2.27 am: I didn't "assume" John Bennett was black. He is black. A photo of him is here:<br />http://dwb.newsobserver.com/24hour/sports/other/story/3262545p-12046967c.html<br /><br />To the 2.23 am (the same person?): I didn't assume anything about his statement. Perhaps he was misquoted. I'll be waiting for a correction from Newsday on the misquote, and if one is given, I'll mention it.<br /><br />To the 1.31 am (the same person?): Jason Trumpbour quotes the relevant statute. While Duke is private, as an institution of higher education that accepts federal funds, its private-property freedoms are limited by Title VI.kcjohnson9https://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-36821728036591995942006-10-15T12:16:00.000-04:002006-10-15T12:16:00.000-04:00I interpreted Mr. Bennett's statements the same wa...I interpreted Mr. Bennett's statements the same way KC did. Especially considering Mr. Bennett was not happy Kim Roberts was interviewed, I presume because Kim’s statements did not support the accuser's story. It’s extremely peculiar that someone would object to Kim Roberts based on her inconsistencies, while the accuser who told wildly inconsistent stories apparently should be believed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-74591285679253605822006-10-15T11:20:00.000-04:002006-10-15T11:20:00.000-04:00I find it interesting that K.C. has become a targe...I find it interesting that K.C. has become a target since he has recently been mentioned in the media. Keep up the great work K.C.!<br />Texas MomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-86574435441848669192006-10-15T10:58:00.000-04:002006-10-15T10:58:00.000-04:00How can we hold the group of 88 professors account...How can we hold the group of 88 professors accountable?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-12374713657089774652006-10-15T10:54:00.000-04:002006-10-15T10:54:00.000-04:00If Nifong can do what he's done to these "rich" wh...If Nifong can do what he's done to these "rich" white boys in front of a national media spotlight, what makes Durham African-American voters think he won't (or hasn't) done worse to young black men of Durham?<br /><br />Can someone explain why this hasn't been addressed in this campaign?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com