The Baltimore and Indianapolis Colts have a rich tradition and it's reflected when ranking the best players in franchise history

Colts legend Robert Mathis rebuilt Kemoko Turay into a tactical, calculated missile instead of a grenade lobbed into the dark.

According to report from Front Office Sports, former Colts punter Pat McAfee may be a candidate to join the "Monday Night Football" broadcast.

"Every team in this league has holes."

Indianapolis Colts legend Peyton Manning reveals one of his favorite wins came in one of the crazier comebacks you'll ever see.

Indianapolis Colts tight end Jack Doyle discusses the challenges of working out during the pandemic.

Safety Malik Hooker now only under contract with the Colts through 2020 season

When the Chargers legend isn't carrying a team on his back, Rivers has been far more efficient.

Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson are playing for COVID-19 relief on May 24.

Frank Reich has worked hard to find ways to teach the Colts virtually, including bringing in an NBA legend to inspire the team.

Leonard has made 284 tackles, 12 sacks and seven interceptions in his first two years, but says he only met 3 or 4 of his 15 goals last year.

Jack Doyle can't get on the field with his new teammates but that hasn't stopped him from forging relationships.

प्रदूषण का स्तर पहले से भी ज़्यादा बढ़ सकता है. ख़तरा भी जाने कैसे, देखिए कवर स्टोरी में

Christi Gibson June 23, 2017 CEDAR RAPIDS- On Wednesday, June 21, 2017, President Donald J Trump visited Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, to address his efforts to foster agriculture innovation. The audience consisted of over 200 dignitaries, farmers, and industrial businessmen within Iowa and other states. He spoke […]

Iowa Statesman, I was happy to hear the joint statement on tax reform from the US Congress, The White House and others in Washington. It’s about time. Our current tax code is severely dated, complex and debunked. Our tax code has not been updated since Reagan was in office and […]

2020-03-23 -

2020-04-07 -

2020-04-08 -

İngilizce'de kesme işareti en fazla hata yapılan noktalama işaretlerinden birisi. Bu yeni oyunda amacınız, size verilen ifadeleri, sürenz dolmadan kesme işaretini doğru şekilde kullanarak kısaltabilmek.

BBC, kurumsal değerlerinin temelini oluşturan yayın ilkelerini kamuoyuyla Türkçe olarak paylaşmak için 'BBC Yayın İlkeleri Kılavuzu – BBC'nin Değerleri ve Standartları' adıyla yayınladı.

Dünyanın dört bir yanında, habercilerin, muhabirlerin objektiflerine yansıyan görüntülerden derlediğimiz, haberi bir adım öteye götüren, fotoğraf albümlerini görmek için tıklayın.

Türkiye'yle ilgili yorum yazısına ''Atalarının Rüyaları'' başlığını atan Economist, eski Osmanlı topraklarında nüfuzunu artırmak isteyen bir Türkiye'ye mercek tutuyor.

Iraklı Kürtler, özerk Kürt bölgesine yeni bir başkan ve parlamento seçmek üzere yarın sandık başına gidiyor. Irak Cumhurbaşkanı Celal Talabani seçimlere ilişkin BBC'nin sorularını yanıtladı.

Avrupa Birliği, geçen hafta resmen tam üyelik başvurusunda bulunan İzlanda'nın birliğe katılımını onaylama sürecinde ilk adımını bugün attı.

İnsanoğlunun Ay'a ayak basışının 40. yıl dönümü ABD'de bir dizi etkinlikle kutlanıyor. Ay'a ayak basan ilk insan olan Neil Armstrong, 'Bir insan için küçük, insanlık için dev bir adım' demişti.

BM'nin iklim değişikliğinden sorumlu başmüzakerecesi Yvo de Boer, zengin ülkelerin iklim değişikliğiyle mücadele için gelişmekte olan ülkelere en az 10 milyar dolar kaynak aktarmasını istedi.

İngiltere'de ekonominin yılın 2. çeyreğinde de binde 8 küçülmesi, resesyondan çabuk çıkılabileceğine yönelik umutları azalttı. Almanya'nın ise resesyondan çıkma yolunda olduğu belirtiliyor.

İngiliz petrol devi BP, yılın 2. çeyreğinde kârının, geçen yılın aynı dönemine kıyasla yüzde 53 azaldığını duyurdu. BP, bu duruma gerekçe olarak, petrol fiyatlarının düşük olmasını gösterdi.

Muhabirimiz Martin Buckley 1980'lerde adı Bombayken çalışıp yaşadığı Mumbai'ye uzun süre sonra bir kez daha gitti, kentin değişen ve değişmeyen yönlerini anlamaya çalıştı.

Yeni Zelanda'da bir yüzücü, oynadıkları oyuna devam etmek isteyen fazla dost canlısı bir yunusun kıyıya dönüşünü engellemesi nedeniyle sıkıntılı anlar yaşadı.

Nijerya'da İslamcı militanlarla yaşanan ve en az 39 kişinin öldüğü dünkü çatışmaların ardından, ülkenin kuzeyindeki iki kentte daha şiddet olayları yaşandığı bildiriliyor.

ABD Savunma Bakanı Robert Gates, sürpriz Irak ziyareti sırasında ABD birliklerinin muharip görevi geçen ay Irak güçlerine bırakması sonrası ülkede güvenlik koşullarındaki düzelmeyi övdü.

Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nin Kuzey Carolina eyaletinde altısı ABD vatandaşı yedi kişiye aralarında İsrail ve Ürdün'ün de bulunduğu bazı ülkelerde terör saldırısı planlama suçlaması yöneltildi.

Yunanistan güvenlik güçlerinin, gözaltına aldıkları sığınmacıları Türkiye sınırına doğru sürdükleri ve Meriç nehrinden Türkiye'ye geçmeye zorladıkları iddia edildi.

İngiltere'de insan hakları eylemcileri, CIA'in 'olağanüstü nakil' olarak bilinen uygulamasında İngiliz hükümetinin oynadığı iddia edilen rolün açıklanması için mahkemeye gitti.

Japonya hükümeti, Uygurlu Türklerin sürgündeki lideri Rabiya Kadir'in Tokyo ziyaretine mesafeli yaklaştı. Çin, Kadir'e vize verilmesinden rahatsızlık duyduğunu ifade etmişti.

Venezuela lideri Hugo Chavez, sınır komşusu Kolombiya'daki büyükelçisini geri çekeceğini ve iki ülke arasındaki ilişkilerin dondurulacağını açıkladı. Kolombiya, Caracas'ı FARC'a silah temin etmekle suçlamıştı.

Dünya Gündemi'ni Çarşamba ve Cuma günleri 10:30'da, Cumartesi günleri 20:30'da NTV'de izleyebilirsiniz.

Orta Doğu'da barış sürecini canlandırmak için diplomasi atağı başlatan ABD son olarak da Başkan Barack Obama'nın ulusal güvenlik danışmanı James Jones'u bölgeye gönderdi.

Nijerya, ülkenin kuzeyinde hafta sonu başlayan ve 100 kişinin ölümüne neden olan isyan hareketini bastırmaya çalışıyor. Ordu, radikal İslamcıların üslendiği Maiduguri kentini topçu ateşine tuttu.

President Barack Obama tonight makes a speech he'd rather not be making: Explaining to his country, proud of its military but weary of war, why he has decided to bomb the armed forces of another Middle Eastern country.

TV networks are gearing up for live coverage. Mr Obama doesn't want to be a foreign policy president when most Americans are far more interested in the state of the economy, but he may not be able to avoid that fate.

The networks wouldn't dream of breaking into normal programming for one of his frequent economic speeches, so it is as though he never made them. This, on the other hand, could be a defining moment.

Some think it is too late. One usually supportive commentator writes: "This is really, truly unbelievable to me, and the worst thing Obama has done as president."

The man who speaks for House Republicans, John Boehner wrote a letter listing a series of worries, concluding, "all of these concerns point to a fundamental question: what is your benchmark for success in Libya?"

The president has made his task more difficult with an approach that is either sophisticated or confused, depending on your take.

He has to tell America why it is worth taking action. He also has to explain why he doesn't want the US to be in the lead or in charge. It took more than a week of wrangling before Nato agreed to take full control.

Donald Rumsfeld made the point the coalition should be defined by it aims, not the aims by the coalition. This is a real philosophical difference: politics as the art of the possible or an act of will.

America's low profile may be genuine or just spin, smoke and mirrors to disguise America's real role, but either way it is hardly heroic.

But it may be this tepid message reflects the American public's own lukewarm enthusiasm. A Gallup poll finds 74% back action, much lower than support for the Iraq war or Afghanistan at the time.

If I was Mr Obama that wouldn't worry me too much. He doesn't want to be in Libya in 10 years.

Indeed, explaining why this is not a long-term commitment like Iraq or Afghanistan has to be an important part of the message. So does being explicit about the goals. A lot of people have trouble getting their heads around his repeated contention that a Libya without Gaddafi is a political goal of the US but not a military one. The military goal is to protect civilians. The lines may indeed be blurring as the armed rebels advance on cities where some civilians may support Gaddafi.

We will be getting briefings throughout the day, so I will update, but I expect he will start with the latest "good" news.

He will stress that the US is acting as part of an international coalition, with Arab backing, and that the US's aims and commitment are limited. And he'll throw in some stirring rhetoric about the Arab Spring and universal human rights.

I doubt that he will address what to me are the fascinating contradictions at the heart of Obama's dilemma.

• The tug between not wanting to be the world's policeman and being the only guy with the gun and the muscle to stop a murder.
• The whole-hearted desire to act in concert with other countries, and the realisation that implies going along with stuff they want to do and you don't. (Being dragged into a war by the French, imagine.)
• Not wanting to be out front when many world structures are designed in the expectation that like it or not, America will lead.
• Intellectual appreciation that the ghost of Western colonialism is a powerful spirit never exorcised, and frustration that an untainted liberal interventionism hasn't grown in other countries.

He said he had ordered military action in Libya to prevent a massacre that would have "stained the conscience of the world", and would have meant "the democratic impulses that are dawning across the region would be eclipsed by the darkest form of dictatorship, as repressive leaders concluded that violence is the best strategy to cling to power".

He said that that "would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action."

Having dealt with critics who say he's gone too far, Mr Obama turned to those who say he hasn't gone far enough.

He said the world would be a better place without Col Muammar Gaddaffi, but to widen military aims to get rid of him would have splintered the coalition and meant American boots on the ground.

"To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq. Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our troops and the determination of our diplomats, we are hopeful about Iraq's future. But regime change there took eight years, thousands of American and Iraqi lives, and nearly a trillion dollars. That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya."

In this, he is preparing people for what may be quite a messy period, and he warned that Libya will remain dangerous until Col Gaddafi goes, that the Libyan leader may cling to power for a while, but that his people had been given "time and space" to decide their own destiny.

This is one question hanging in the air. How far is the coalition acting as the rebel air force? It may not be targeting the top man, but is it intent on destroying his military force? How thin is the line between driving off an army that may attack civilians and destroying that army in case they do?

The other question left hanging was whether there was such a thing as an "Obama doctrine", or at least a consistent approach to intervention. On the one hand, he seemed to argue against those who said America should not police the world: "There will be times, though, when our safety is not directly threatened, but our interests and values are."

However, he accepted that didn't mean action in every case. "It is true that America cannot use our military wherever repression occurs. And given the costs and risks of intervention, we must always measure our interests against the need for action. But that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what's right."

So he seems to be saying, sometimes you do, sometimes you don't, take each case on its merit.

But what struck me most forcibly was the determined, confident tone of the speech. Every single news conference, sound bite or statement so far by Mr Obama has stressed that the UK and France were in the lead, the Arabs were supporting, the US was just part of a broad coalition. They've been thoughtful and a little hesitant. Those were the "on the road" snapshots. This was the air-brushed studio portrait.

Now Mr Obama repeatedly talked of the decisions he took, his leadership, his reasoning for taking firm action. The fact that the US mission is winding down and that it is handing over control to Nato was in there, but it wasn't the emphasis. Now it seems as if the action has worked, Mr Obama is claiming credit. The "I" word was to the fore, and I don't just mean Iraq.

Beneath that bland obfuscation, the momentum is all in one direction. The speed of decision making is seriously slowed by the friction of several concerns.

Some are worried about the legality of an apparent breach of an arms embargo. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton isn't one of them. She says a transfer of arms would be legal.

With "flickers" of intelligence that the rebels may contain al-Qaeda supporters come deep concerns that Nato would be arming the enemy.

You don't have to be the CIA or SIS to know this is likely to be true. Libyan al-Qaeda fighters were active in Iraq, and the closely linked Islamic Fighting Group has been active in the past.

Defence Secretary Robert Gates may have some doubts about this path.

After all, he was one of the CIA officers involved in arming the mujahideen in the 1980s. That's right: the guys who became the Taliban, whom the Americans are fighting to this day.

But most of the discussion is missing a much bigger point.

"Arming the rebels" is a convenient shorthand, but anyone who thinks it is that simple is living in an exciting Boy's Own world of adventure that bears little relationship to real military conflict.

Former CIA officer Bruce Riedel, who chaired Mr Obama's review of Afghanistan and Pakistan policy, told me: "This is more complex than flying planes over and throwing AK-47s on the ground."

The sort of heavy weapons that would make the difference require months of intense training. But Mr Riedel thinks the path is set.

We are past the Rubicon. Barring a miracle, the situation looks like a stalemate. If we don't want to live with that, it means boots on the ground.

He says that as America boots are politically out of the question, that means the rebel forces will have to defeat Col Gaddafi. My BBC colleagues on the front line say while the rebels lack serious weaponry, what they lack even more is a coherent plan.

Mr Riedel says as well as training in specific weapons they need "organisation and discipline".

"It is about turning a rabble into an army," he says.

It seems to me that this is a slippery slope. You provide weapons, so you provide trainers. The trainers need protecting. The protectors needs supply lines. The supply lines need protecting. Before you know it there are more than just a few foreign boots on the ground.

Mr Riedel again:

Mission creep is inevitable. That is why you saw such an anguished debate. Those most reluctant, like the defence secretary, know that and will want a clarity of mission and more troops. The uniformed military have understood from the beginning once you start these things they snowball.

America does have experience in this field. There was another conflict where it sent a few people to oversee the supply of military equipment to local fighters and the French. That expanded to a few hundred advisers, to supply a little guidance and little training at a distance. Before long some more troops were sent. That's when it became known as the Vietnam War.

President Obama said he wanted an answer on a budget deal by the morning. That deadline has passed. The talking goes on but the blame game is on in earnest. If there is a shutdown it will do deep damage to the image of one or both parties. The two sides can't even agree what it is they disagree about.

The Democrats are doing a better job of setting the narrative. John Boehner made a mistake allowing the president to speak for him last night and issuing a joint statement with Harry Reid. He is not doing a good job of setting the narrative.

The Republicans insist the argument is about the size of cuts. The Democrats say it is about ideology. Harry Reid's case is that the remaining issue is a Republican demand to take funds away from Planned Parenthood. Although this is a group that funds abortions he says it is illegal for federal money to go towards this. As far as I can see he is factually correct.

So Mr Reid argues the Republicans are holding up the budget because they want to attack cancer screening for women. He says if that sounds ridiculous, it is because it is ridiculous.

By contrast John Boehner, tense and strained before the microphones says it is about the size of the cuts. He says few policy issues remain. But he won't answer the question whether Planned Parenthood is one of them. He is not trying hard to set out his side of the story. I am not arguing that the Republicans don't have a case. But they are not making it with any verve or enthusiasm. Mr Boehner's lack of fighting spirit suggests that he accepts he will get the blame for a shut down.

The US has had agonised debates about the wars it has been involved in and its role on the world stage. The American reaction to Bin Laden's crimes, the invasion of Afghanistan, the Iraq War, have riven the nation. But most will see the killing of Bin Laden very simply, as an act without shades of ambiguity. The good guys shot the bad guy dead. Mr Obama is trying to use it to repeat one of his main messages: how the country should come together.

"Today we are reminded that as a nation there's nothing we can't do when we put our shoulders to the wheel, when we work together, when we remember the sense of unity that defines us as Americans."

He praised the people who celebrated.

"We've seen that spirit, that patriotism in the crowds that have gathered here outside the White House, at Ground Zero in New York, and across the country, people holding candles, waving the flag, singing the national anthem, people proud to live in the United States of America."

But there is an interesting word of warning in a thoughtful article for NPR by Foreign Policy writer David Rothkopf. The author reflects: "Sept 11 was not Pearl Harbor. Al-Qaida was not and is not a historic enemy like World War II's Axis powers. Bin Laden is not Hitler."

It is a point worth making. Bin Laden could create terrible suffering and appalling disruption, but he could never actually have won. If World War II had gone a different way, Hitler or his henchmen could have ruled from Downing Street. There was never any danger of Bin Laden taking over the White House.

America has had its moment of justice. Maybe it is a moment of closure too.

Obama got Osama.

That's what some people chanted when the news of Osama Bin Laden's killing broke. But will it have any impact on the President Barack Obama's politics and popularity?

Mr Obama has gone out of his way to stress that "get Bin Laden" was his direct instruction and that the arch villain's death is, in part, his victory. White House officials are doing all they can to capitalise on what looks like a mood of nationwide elation.

Any president who "got" Bin Laden would benefit. Former President Bill Clinton's efforts were mocked by George W Bush. Then he failed too, losing Bin Laden in the caves along the border land, as US soldiers stood by.

But perhaps Mr Obama will benefit more than most. His style of decision making is to take time, to deliberate, to chew over every option. His critics call it dithering. There are now some excellent "tick tocks" as they are called here - blow by blow accounts of the decision making process. But you always have to remember all sources are in the circle, and liable to portray the president positively. It sounds as if Mr Obama gave this decision as much time and thought as all the others but away from the public gaze.

Not only did Mr Obama's security advisor John Brennan praise him, but Republicans have even called his decision "gutsy". He did not simply go for bombs or drones but rather a helicopter raid. One insider is quoted as saying that Black Hawk Down was mentioned a few times in the discussions. When that helicopter did go down, Mr Obama surely thought of Jimmy Carter and Iran.

So he's a risk taker, too. It also makes him look focused on what is truly in the US's national interest. You can argue Iraq wasn't, Libya wasn't, even Afghanistan no longer is. But getting the head of al-Qaeda clearly was a number one priority in the minds of many Americans, and Mr Obama decided it was his as well.

Even habitual enemies, indeed even Rush Limbaugh, have praised him. At a reception for Republicans and Democrats last night, he got a standing ovation.

So the wind is behind him. Whence will he sail? At a White House dinner for members of Congress, he used Bin Laden's killing as a call for unity.

He said: "We were reminded again that there is a pride in what this nation stands for, and what we can achieve, that runs far deeper than party, far deeper than politics."

From Bin Laden, he moved effortlessly to domestic public enemy number one, the deficit. "It is my fervent hope that we can harness some of that unity and some of that pride to confront the many challenges that we still face," Mr Obama said.

On Thursday, Mr Obama will travel to New York City to remember those who died in Bin Laden's assault on America. I expect more talk of unity but perhaps some big foreign policy themes as well. There are those who think the halo of success makes it easier for the president to confront a military that wants July's Afghanistan wind-down to be small and fairly insignificant. Others, however, think the momentum runs the other way, and that it gives all the more reason to stay and finish the job.

So the killing sends waves that will wash against these shores and those of a wider world. Some are saying this moment assures Mr Obama's re-election. It assures no such thing.
Apart from the obvious point that there can be many other unexpected events that will have an impact, positive or negative, It just doesn't work like that. However huge this event snow seems, wait a couple of months. In the relentless frenzy of the 24-hour media cycle, it will probably be half forgotten by the the time of the election.

This far out, only events that mean change to people's lives on a day-to-day basis have that sort of game changing impact. But image is important. The president has burnished his in the eyes of many Americans and looks like a resolute commander-in-chief. He knows it, and intends to milk the moment for all it is worth.

NFL draft analyst Scott Wright takes a closer look at the Fighting Irish roster and 2021 draft hopefuls.

McGraw, a three-star defensive end, announced his decision Sunday via Twitter.