i believe sue clausen would like to speak because she has a meeting. so if you don't mind. >> i'm sue clausen, i chair the coalition for a better north beach library. we have partnered with groups throughout san francisco, including all the preservation groups to ask that the e.i.r. be ignored and that the current north beach library be preserved and that we have a park on the triangle instead of a large out-of-character library. the problem with the e.i.r. is that it lacks balance. it is a sales pitch for the program that the library wants to enunciate. and it doesn't really address the issues of eminent domain, which you know about. doesn't address the issues of the open space sun being used to buy the land that is on this triangle. it doesn't speak to prop m priority policies, which are being violated, in particular the ones about neighborhood character and the ones about preservation of historic buildings. also, they seem to try to make you believe that the current library could not be expanded or renovated. the original plan was to renovate the li

gold in the russian premier league is unfolding as new boys vulgar of meat from fellow promoted side clausen about to go talk with a three one win across the earth we've still got your hijabs but the visitors ahead on the stroke of off time on phones casual but how did this start. shortly after the break the sun just throws him off maybe three nil with fifteen minutes to go i said quote unquote police i called back but it was a mixed day he was sent off with eight minutes to go by his ball the side still don't stop start to ache and force by should have been missed the trials to play in first place after they were helped with goal destroy the start of the string the bow seeing red for the exam start with sudden minutes to go well as in eight could also retain top spot if they think they stuffed and finally spot moscow one going on as their three not just walk in luton instead of in the last game of the day. oh on saturday new boys class have garbage temporarily talk after that one away i'm caught visiting the net in my state hence i believe in first half in the last however the midfielder di

clausen we have something of a sense that because the goal of the u.s. effort is supposed to be stability operations and stability soon enough we can turn over security in 2014 and pull the troops out, 2015, we're being told capacity building is going to go so fast the timetable is possible. do you have some sense that timetable is realistic? >> it's most certainly unrealistic because it is tied to different agendas and not so much of the agenda of the right institutions handling that type of handoff. for instance if you look at the telecom industry in afghanistan which is most parts private sector led that doesn't require a lot of intervention from the assistance community so clearly there are in the private sector can lead it should lead and where the government should regulate it should. on some of the signature project, because the design was initially done in the fold of the confusion on when and how long we should be there often they are -- the exit strategy is poorly conceived. >> i would say i think capacity building needs to be evidence based an

clausen, are you pretty much on the -- pretty much on the same page? >> let me add two points. one, although we keep our distance from the military on the ground, we don't keep our distance from the afghan government. last year, for example, there were some flooding and humanitarian disasters. those the ngo community communicates closely. i mean, we do want to be coordinated. and i think the second point that -- and i wasn't in afghanistan prior to 2001 and, certainly, agree with mr. bowers on many of his points -- is that, also, i think the availability of resources for us to do development work has expanded considerably during that period, and that's something that's enabled us to do more work in the communities. but we, again, to gain access to communities our security's very much based on acceptance. it's not based on deterrence or prevention, and that requires us not to be seen as sort of the vanguard of a military force. >> mr. mcgarry? >> yes. at crs we established a permanent office presence in 2002, so your point's well taken. to us, similar to the other organizations,