All Global News on One Page

I wrote in July about a misguided federal agency plan to transfer about 200 government-owned chimpanzees from a warehouse facility in New Mexico to an active research laboratory in Texas — and now I can convey some good news on this front. Rene Romo of the Albuquerque Journal broke the story on New Year’s Eve that the National Institutes of Health had placed the chimp transfer on hold, and instead would wait for a National Academy of Sciences review of policies related to chimps in research.
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who had been advocating for the protection of these animals and urging the agency to convert the Alamogordo facility to a permanent chimp sanctuary, received the welcome word on his last day in office. “This is great news for the chimpanzees and the people of Alamogordo,” he said. “I have worked hard to stop the transfer of the chimpanzees, and I am pleased that one of the last phone calls I received as governor was the NIH letting me know that they have agreed to this study.”
NIH confirmed the decision in a statement yesterday, noting that “Alamogordo chimpanzees will not be used in invasive research” during the time of the NAS study. It’s a new year, and hopefully a course correction for an agency that has long held fast to the outdated and costly use of chimps in invasive research. The U.S. and Gabon are the only remaining nations to do so.
The federal government has paid a private company $42 million to warehouse the Alamogordo chimps for the past ten years, and millions more to renovate the facility, which is located on an Air Force base. In total, NIH annually spends an estimated $63 million on chimpanzee research and maintenance, keeping these highly intelligent and social creatures in barren but costly laboratory cages. Few of these animals are used in active research, since chimpanzees have largely failed as a research model. Beyond those costs, another $6 million has gone toward breeding chimps since 2002, despite a prohibition against such breeding. Every federally owned chimp born into the system is a $1 million dollar commitment by the government — with an average cost of $20,000 per chimp annually, and chimps living up to 60 years. It makes financial and moral sense to stop this breeding once and for all and retire chimps to sanctuaries where they live together in natural settings rather than being warehoused.
U.S. Senators Tom Udall, D-N.M., Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, and Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., had also written to NAS in December and requested “assistance in determining the extent of the continued need for invasive research on chimpanzees and the merits of alternative methods.” We are grateful to these lawmakers for weighing in on the issue, and we expect members of Congress to soon reintroduce the Great Ape Protection Act. This measure to phase out invasive research on chimps had the strong bipartisan support of 161 House and six Senate cosponsors in the last session. At a time when Washington is looking to cut fiscally wasteful programs, here’s an opportunity to save chimps and tax dollars.

Follow Michael Markarian on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/mmarkarian

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Velzquez. “Philip IV,” probably 1624, Metropolitan Museum of Art
When is a rediscovered monumental royal portrait by a highly celebrated old master nothing to get very excited about?
When it’s dead on arrival.
I was sufficiently intrigued by the New York Times’ recent front-page treatment of the Metropolitan Museum’s second recently “rediscovered” Velzquez to rush right over to see it the very next day.
The rest of the world, apparently, was in no such hurry:
Velzquez’s “Philip IV,” installed to the left of the glass door
In fact, aside from handing the story to Carol Vogel of the Times, the Met itself seems to be in no great rush to tout its “vindicated Velzquez” (as the newspaper’s headline has dubbed it). No press release accompanied “Philip’s” ascension, and there are no in-gallery wall panels detailing the findings of the curator, the conservator and Velzquez expert Jonathan Brown (who gave the attribution his thumbs-up).
There’s a brief announcement and a detailed catalogue entry on the museum’s website, and this gallery label, to the right of the painting:
By contrast, last year’s reattribution to Velzquez of the Met’s “Portrait of a Man,” ca. 1630, was accompanied by an engrossing and convincing dossier exhibition. Unlike “Philip,” “Man” debuted with a press preview, where we got to hear directly from Brown and Keith Christiansen, chairman of the Met’s department of European paintings, about the reasoning and connoisseurship behind the upgraded authorship.
Having now viewed the royal youth (acquired in 1913 as a bequest from distinguished collector Benjamin Altman), I can understand why the Met might be low-keying it. While I was thoroughly won over by the Met’s much smaller-sized Velzquez portrait of an uncertain subject (which Christiansen likes to think could be the artist’s own self-portrait), “Philip” was, for me, a dud. I’ll accept that it may well be an “authentic” (and well documented) work by the artist. But to me, it lacked the vitality and painterly aplomb that we expect from the master.
It doesn’t help that the glare makes it hard to get a good look at Philip’s face (missing his left eye, until the Met’s chief paintings conservator, Michael Gallagher, restored it):
Here’s a close look, from the Met’s own website (much better than my amateur photography), of the faces of the Met’s two reattributed portraits:
The stiff appearance of “Philip” may be, in part, due to its being a formal royal portrait. But his lifelessness may also owe something to the canvas’ having been a near-cadaver. Its severely compromised condition may have drained the vigor out of its subject. The Times’ website (but, strangely, not the Met’s) has a nifty multimedia feature showing the painting’s condition before and after restoration. This reveals the extent of its serious losses. Both reattributed Velzquez portraits were messed with many decades ago by the renowned London-based art dealer Joseph Duveen, to make them more salable.
The best thing Philip has going for him right now is his right hand:
When I recently revisited the Met’s webpage devoted to the dossier exhibition for its prior Velzquez upgrade, I discovered, to my amusement, that the museum had devised a bit of interactive connoisseurship — a visitor poll (scroll down), consisting of six questions related to the identity of the painting’s sitter. (Brown disagrees with Christiansen’s self-portrait theory. The public gets to break the tie.)
The poll’s final question:
Of those surveyed, 73% responded “yes”; 27%, “no.” (I guess that settles it!)
Maybe the Met should devise a new survey, asking how many visitors believe that the restored version of “Philip IV” is (as its wall label asserts) “of exceptionally high quality.”

Follow Lee Rosenbaum on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/CultureGrrl

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

As reported here, Rear Admiral Lawrence Rice, the immediate superior of Captain Owen Honors at the time that Honors made and aired his lewd videos on board the U.S.S. Enterprise, is now the subject of a further investigation by the Navy into the videos.
And, what has Rear Admiral Rice been up to lately? Well, he was a speaker at Shirley Dobson’s big National Day of Prayer Task Force event on Capitol Hill last year, appearing in uniform, in violation of a number of military regulations.
In fact, this devout Christian officer appears to be pretty tight with the Dobsons, even flying them out to the Enterprise when he was the ship’s commander. Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, in his introduction of Rear Admiral Rice at the National Day of Prayer Task Force event, even recounted the story of how he first met Rice in 2007, when Rice flew him, his wife Shirley, and eight of their guests in a military jet to land on the Enterprise, a trip presumably taken at taxpayer expense.
Such a good Christian officer like Rear Admiral Rice couldn’t possibly have known about and allowed Captain Honors to show his raunchy, demeaning videos on board a ship under his command, could he?
Here’s the video from the National Day of Prayer. James Dobson’s introduction of Rear Admiral Rice begins at 4:13, and Rice’s speech begins at 6:00.

This Blogger’s Books from
Liars For Jesus: The Religious Right’s Alternate Version of American History Vol. 1
by Chris Rodda

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

By now you’ve surely heard of Ted Williams, the “golden-voiced” homeless guy plucked from the side of a Cleveland highway and rescued from poverty. Job offers, a place to live, even grocery money have all poured in for the guy who spent his days panhandling with a cardboard sign. On the evening news, he appears newly shaved and shorn in nice clothing – a far cry from the first images of him begging for money. He admits that he lost everything in a haze of drugs and alcohol but is ready to use his gift of a beautiful voice to begin recouping his losses. What’s wrong with this picture?
It’s not wrong that Williams has becoming an iconic figure, something out of a Frank Capra movie. Oh no, not at all. Our nation is built on second chances. It’s that he is one of approximately two million Americans who will be homeless tonight and likely the only one with a name and a press conference. Many of them have cardboard signs of their own as they stand near intersections and street corners all across our nation. Like Williams, many of them are there due to their own addictions and bad decisions. Some are victims of a rotten economy. But also like him, many of them could hold jobs and become contributing members of society if they weren’t invisible.
What allowed Ted Williams to stop being the Invisible Man? It was the unexpectedness of that voice, rich and deep, a voice that could reassure us that nine out of ten doctors agree or that the evening news with Katie Couric is up next. We are a country that loves finding treasure in unexpected places; we love the frog that turns into a prince.
So the moral of the story is not that so many riches shouldn’t be heaped on one man. I would love to hear that Williams is the voice of the Cleveland Cavaliers, commuting to work from his shiny apartment in the ‘burbs, his cardboard sign framed and hanging over his sofa. Happy endings are good for us all. But the moral of the story is that we should look each homeless person in the face and seek out the unique gifts that each of us possess. If the people of Cleveland can summon the generosity to celebrate Ted Williams, why can’t more communities find similar generosity for their homeless brothers and sisters?
Perhaps Ted’s legacy will be less about his voice and more about his hand, pointing toward others like him who are huddled under cardboard and blankets to get through the dark cold nights of winter. Under some of those blankets, we may find our own unexpected heroes…or at least a fellow human being willing and eager to work and rejoin our communities. We can call it “Tedding.”

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

In 2010, I went from being 40 to being in my early 40s. I also went from someone who’s able to go out and see bands at night to being a parent. So don’t think this list of my favorite records of the last year is anything but totally random; it’s albums that happened to catch my ear while I was otherwise occupied with changing diapers, getting too little sleep and losing touch (even more) with popular culture in the bargain. That said, I think my top ten are all worthy of the honor, and I would have dug them even if I’d gotten to hear ten times as much new music in 2010.
With all that in mind, here are…
My Ten Favorite Records Of 2010
10. KANYE WEST – My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy (Roc-A-Fella Records). Slowly but surely, over the last seven or eight years, I’ve stopped feeling the need to hear the newest and latest masterpieces beloved by the hipsters and criterati. I’ve liked most of what I’ve heard by Kanye West; his are among the few hip-hop albums I buy lately. But as a cranky, sleep-deprived new parent in the throes of box sets by hipsters like Duke Ellington and John Lennon, I declared (on Twitter, no less) that there was absolutely no need for me to hear Kanye’s latest magnum opus. Until I heard a track on YouTube. And liked it. And heard another and liked it even more. At the end of December, I broke down and bought the damn thing. And it really is as good as everyone says. I’m sure you’ve read at least one of the many, many glowing reviews the album has received in every paper, magazine and blog, so I’ll just say I agree. I’d probably place this one higher if I’d gotten to listen to it more before year’s end. The fault is mine alone.
9. TOM JONES – Praise & Blame (Mercury Nashville). It’s a shame that Sir Tom is generally thought of as a hairy-chested, medallion-wearing lounge lizard relic from the ’70s. Because, like him or mock him, the guy can take just about anything from “That Old Black Magic” to “Lust For Life” and sing the shit out of it. At age 70, with his voice in astonishingly good shape, he tackles what could loosely be called a religious album, though it encompasses songs by everyone from Bob Dylan to John Lee Hooker to Billie Joe Shaver and Susan Werner. The all-star backing band is a little too tame and polite — I wish they’d pushed Jones a little rather than relying on him to bring forth all the fire and brimstone. But bring it he does. And if you only know Tom Jones from hits like “What’s New Pussycat,” take a listen to his ferocious cover of John Lee Hooker’s “Burning Hell.” The scales will fall from your ears, believe me.
8. NEW PORNOGRAPHERS – Together (Matador). At their best, the New Pornos are a perfect blend of exuberance and craft, with hook-filled melodies and soaring choruses that can tug at your heartstrings and make you think, “Damn, what an interesting chord progression!” at the same time. Their last album, 2007′s Challengers, started to tone down the exuberance a bit in favor of craft, and the trend continues on Together. It’s their least thrilling album to date, and if I had to recommend one album of theirs it would still be 2005′s Twin Cinema. But even at something less than full steam, this is among the greatest bands of the last decade, and a good chunk of Together still delivers the spine-tingling pop delights I’ve come to expect from them.
7. CEE-LO GREEN – The Lady Killer. Sometimes I feel like Cee-Lo exists so that old farts like me can say, “Hey, I still like some new music!” His tunes and production often evoke the great R & B and pop hits of the ’70s and ’80s with just enough of a hip-hop edge to make me feel something less than totally un-hip. And if he attaches a brilliant lyric like “Fuck You” to a finger-snapping beat and a bouncy melody that kids and grownups can both dig, then so much the better. What really makes the album for me is his gorgeous voice. He’d have been one of the great soul singers of any era, and in 2010 he’s head and shoulders above the rest.
6. THE DEAD WEATHER – Sea Of Cowards (Warner Bros). The first album by the White Stripes/Kills/Queens Of The Stone Age supergroup, Horehound, left me cold — it felt to me like a failed experiment more than a cohesive album. But on the follow-up, I think they’ve reached their destination, and that place is Rawk Central. Eleven tracks of roaring, pounding, Zeppelin-esque whomp-whomp-whomp and thud-thud-thud, with Allison Mosshart (and sometimes Jack White) yelling and screaming on top of it all. It gets my blood pumping, my juices flowing, and set my head to banging. A fun, loud record that your inner 12-year-old will love.
5. SWEET APPLE – Love & Desperation (TeePee). Led by Cobra Verde alum John Petkovic and featuring Dinosaur Jr’s J Mascis, you might think that this would be a ’90s-styled indie rock nostalgia-fest. But if Love & Desperation harkens back to another era, it’s the ’70s, right down to the racy cover based on Roxy Music’s Country Life. Big power chords and fist-pumping choruses predominate — and of course, given the personnel, the music’s got a bit of a grunge vibe as well. But these killer tunes would have gone over in 1974 as well as 1994. In 2010, sadly, the album got lost in the shuffle, but it’s never too late to check it out.
4. THE PARTING GIFTS – Strychnine Dandelion (Into The Red). I came to dig the Reigning Sound rather late, and I know next to nothing about the Ettes, so I’m judging this meeting of the minds between Reigning Sound frontman Greg Cartwright and the Ettes’ Coco Hames on its own merits. And it’s freaking brilliant. First-rate garage-rock raveups, country-tinged stompers and gorgeous ballads, all played with gusto by a host of special guests including Dan Auerbach of the Black Keys. Both Cartwright and Hames are tremendous vocalists, so the only bad thing about the album is that they only duet on one song — and of course it’s the best track on the album. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the Parting Gifts evolve into more than a one-off.
3. THE SOUNDCARRIERS – Celeste (Melodic UK). I’ve always admired Stereolab’s ’60s pop-meets-droning art rock sound, but their stonefaced, chilly vibe has always left me a little, well, cold. Enter the Soundcarriers, who sound quite similar on the surface but with just a touch of Age-Of-Aquarius thrown in. The guy and gal vocalists, who often sing together in harmony, sound not only human, but somewhat happy as well. The grooves ebb and flow, the drones and melodies balance each other out, and the result is one of the most gorgeous, hypnotic albums around. Actually, Celeste isn’t exactly “around,” because it hasn’t yet come out in the States, but it should be easy enough to find from various online purveyors.
2. JASON FALKNER – I’m OK… You’re OK (Cobraside). This was my favorite album of 2007, when it was only available as a Japanese import. Three years later, it’s finally out in the States with different artwork and a couple of new tracks, and it’s still a great album. Falkner’s well-known by musicians — he’s worked with Air, Cheap Trick, Brendan Benson and Paul McCartney, to name just a few — but his brilliantly crafted and performed power-pop has never managed to find a significant audience (I wrote about his career at length here). I’m OK… didn’t do anything to change that, so you can still be the first on your block to hear it. Apologies for quoting myself, but I can’t find a superior way to rephrase it: If you like the Beatles, or XTC, or ELO, or Big Star — any pop music with strong melodies and intelligent lyrics, really — then Jason Falkner belongs in your pantheon of faves.
1. THE POSIES – Blood/Candy (Ryko). In 1993, the Posies created their masterpiece, Frosting On The Beater, which channeled the power of the Who, the harmonies of the Hollies, and the songcraft of the Zombies and brought it all forward into the Age Of Grunge. It never reached as wide an audience as it should have, because Nirvana fans had no use for the shimmering pop that lay beneath the power chords and pounding drums. Record company pressures and intra-band turmoil laid the Posies low, and by the end of the ’90s they were relegated to part-time status, as founding members Ken Stringfellow and Jon Auer pursued solo careers and played with everyone from R.E.M. to William Shatner.
It took 17 years, but with Blood/Candy, the Posies have fulfilled the promise of Frosting On The Beater. It’s like watching your underachieving, class-cutting child suddenly turn into the class valedictorian with an acceptance letter to Harvard. You can hear echoes of what they’ve done before, but they go far beyond it into new styles and textures and sounds. The musical breadth and depth of Blood/Candy is astonishing. They jump effortlessly from new wave-tinged rockers to Queen-like bombast to stunning Beatlesque ballads to jazzy art-pop, without losing their touch with hooks that lodge themselves in your cranium and refuse to let go.
I knew half a dozen fellow Posies fans who heard Blood/Candy before it was released. All seven of us (including me) chose a different song as our favorite. If that’s not the hallmark of a great album, I don’t know what is. And if they’ve progressed this far from 1993 to 2010, I can’t wait to hear what they’ll sound like in 2027.
HONORABLE MENTION FROM THE “WELL, TECHNICALLY IT’S A NEW RELEASE” DEPT.:
JIMI HENDRIX – Valleys Of Neptune (Reprise). Yeah yeah, I know the guy’s been dead for forty years now, but this “new” set of previously unreleased nuggets, mostly recorded in 1969, is one hell of an album. It mostly consists of songs that Hendrix nuts already know in different versions, but I’m not gonna complain when a track like his cover of Elmore James’ “Bleeding Heart” totally smokes the version that came out back in the ’70s. Most noteworthy is the title track, which may not feature a guitar solo but stands as proof of what a great songwriter the guy was. The mediocre box set West Coast Seattle Boy, which came out this fall, makes it appear that the bottom of the barrel may be close at hand for the most prolific dead rocker of all time. But Valleys Of Neptune is a keeper.

Follow Tony Sachs on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/RetroManNYC

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

The Israeli peace movement is coming back to life, and it’s a very courteous movement indeed. When activists find things marked “Made in USA” lying on the ground they deliver them directly to the U.S. ambassador to Israel.
The other night they returned a bunch of empty tear gas canisters, all marked “made in USA,” fired by Israeli soldiers in the West Bank. They’re used to break up nonviolent protests against the Israeli-built wall that is tearing Palestinian life apart.
One canister made in the USA killed Jawaher Abu Rahmah, in the village of Bil’in, on the last day of 2010. Another one killed Jawaher’s brother, Bassem, in April, 2009.
Apparently the ambassador did not appreciate the courteous gesture. The police quickly arrived, broke up the action, arrested eleven people, and found a way to keep them jailed on trumped up charges.
But these canisters, and the Israeli soldiers who shoot them, don’t discriminate against Palestinians. American-made tear gas canisters are used against American citizens too.
Just a few days before Bassem Abu Rahmah was killed by a tear gas canister blow to the chest, an American volunteer with the International Solidarity Movement, Tristan Anderson, was hit in the head by the same kind of canister in the village of Ni’lin. Anderson survived, though surgeons had to remove part of his brain. Another American, Emily Henochowicz, lost her eye in June 2010 when she was hit by a tear gas canister during a protest at a West Bank checkpoint.
The victims of all these tragedies were strictly nonviolent and posed no threat to the Israeli soldiers.
The Israelis used two kinds of tear gas canisters on New Year’s Eve when Jawaher Abu Rahmah died. One photographed by Joseph Dana, media spokesman for the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee, had the letters “CTS” stamped on it.
CTS, Combined Tactical Systems, is a brand name used by Combined Systems Inc. based in Jamestown, Pennsylvania (though the American company is owned by an Israeli, according to Dana). There’s plenty of evidence that the Israelis get tear gas from CSI. It was a CTS canister that killed Bassem Abu Rahmah.
The Israeli military also used lethal high-velocity projectiles at Bil’in, the kind that struck Bassem Abu Rahmen and Tristan Anderson, although they are supposedly banned by the Israeli Defense Forces. These are also made by CSI. An aluminum canister like the ones made by CTS took out Emily Henochowitz’s eye.
The grenade photographed at the New Year’s Eve protest appears to be what CTS calls a “Tear-Ball Grenade.” Another activist who was there, Jeff Klein, was photographed holding a Tear-Ball Grenade that he says had the letters “CTS” stamped on it. It spins through the air and then bounces along the ground, so no one can predict where the gas will spew out. CSI says that the Tear-Ball can be loaded with either CS (a strong tear gas), OC gas (more commonly known as pepper spray), or CN gas (mace).
Ha’aretz, Israel’s most respected newspaper, reported that Jawaher was killed by CS gas. “Protester death shows IDF may be using most dangerous type of tear gas,” the headline read. It’s the kind of gas the Israelis usually use, the report explains, even though “there have been reports of several deaths caused by the inhalation of CS.”
However, after Jawaher died her cousin Hamde Abu Rahmah said, “We deal with tear-gas on a regular basis but the amount that they used and the strength was something we have not yet seen.” Others at the New Year’s Eve protest agreed. One said that the gas felt “like a million blue shards of glass tearing at your alveoli and shredding your eyes… Every breath tears at your insides; vicious animals live in your lungs. I’d rather not breathe than take one more anguished, searing, charred breath. Then, you don’t have a choice; you can’t breathe.”
Ahmad el-Jobeh believes it was pepper spray that cost him his eyesight when he was accidentally caught up in Israeli repression of a protest in Silwan, an Arab section of Jerusalem where Jews join Palestinians regularly to protest the destruction of Arab homes and construction of Jewish dwellings. There’s no doubt that some tear gas canisters used in Silwan, whatever is in them, are marked”Made in U.S.A.” and say clearly that aiming them at people can be lethal. What’s worse, the gas in some of them, at least, is past its expiration date and thus even more dangerous.
The IDF is trying to deny responsibility for Jawaher Abu Rahmah’s death, claiming she was not even at the protest. But there are eyewitnesses who saw her there, saw her taken away in an ambulance, and can disprove virtually every piece of the IDF’s concocted story. With so many past instances of IDF cover-ups proven false, it’s hard to take this self-serving story seriously. The editors of Ha’aretz assume it’s not true. And some Israeli military officers dismiss it as “mere thoughts.”
But the most telling fact is that the debate about the IDF story has provoked more interest in Israel than Jawaher’s death itself. The dominant concern in Israel is not for the obvious evils of the occupation but for Israel’s public image.
The IDF is in a bizarre position — telling the world to ignore the unprovoked tear gas attack, ignore the wall that Israel’s Supreme Court has ruled illegal in Bil’in, ignore the confiscation of Palestinian land to enlarge settlements that the whole world says as illegal, and see Israel as totally innocent simply because Jawaher was at home when the Made-in-USA gas killed her.
Suppose she was in her home in the small village, a few hundred yards from the front of the protest. Tear gas does float through the air. Even if the Israelis could prove their claim true, the IDF’s PR barrage and the focus on that one detail of the story shows a depressing moral bankruptcy.
So what’s a U.S. citizen to do? There is a growing boycott/divestment/sanctions (BDS) movement aimed at Israel. But can we boycott the tear gas makers? Though they make an amazing variety of other products too, all are used by military forces, or by police departments. Nothing you’d be likely to buy.
However, you might check whether your local police department is patronizing Combined Systems, Inc. with your tax dollars. CSI says that it markets “its innovative line of less-lethal munitions” — less lethal than what? — “and crowd control products to domestic law enforcement agencies under its law enforcement brand name, CTS.” Even the moderate Jewish peace group J Street, which has serious reservations about BDS, says it takes a positive view of targeted boycotts aimed only at the occupation.
J Street itself is more interested in putting pressure on the Obama administration to take “a bolder, more assertive approach” to the peace process. It wants the U.S. to lean on the Israelis and Palestinians to quickly negotiate the borders of the new Palestinian state. If the parties can’t do it themselves (which seems likely) the U.S. should present its own proposal, J Street says — an idea that’s rapidly gaining a lot of support.
There’s no need for peace activists to decide between supporting a targeted boycott and a U.S. peace plan, nor to squabble over which approach is better. The two paths can, and should, be taken simultaneously. They reinforce each other. Israeli and American BDS supporters will keep calling attention to U.S. complicity in the repression and killing of Palestinians. The embarrassments to the U.S. — like the protest at the American ambassador’s home in Israel — will keep on mounting. Eventually, the Obama administration will find it impossible to let the conflict go on.
The U.S. government has played a central role in perpetuating this injustice. The U.S. government must take responsibility for righting the wrong and ending the killing. It’s one of those happy occasions were morality and self-interest both dictate the same policy.
The U.S. government can guide (to put it politely) the Israelis to make fundamental changes because ultimately Israel must bend to U.S. wishes, if the Obama administration asserts itself strongly enough. Whether that happens depends strictly on the administration’s political cost-benefit calculus.
Boycotts may or may not ever make the Israelis change their policies. But they might make U.S. companies stop dealing lethal material to Israel. And political pressure — if it’s strong and smart enough — can make the administration change its ways.
Ira Chernus is Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Read more of his writing on Israel, Palestine, and the U.S. on his blog.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

At the conclusion of 2009, the outlook for Uyghur human rights looked very bleak indeed. In December of that year, 20 Uyghur asylum seekers were deported from Cambodia under intense Chinese pressure. The deportation capped off a year of human rights reversals in East Turkestan (also known as the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region) that stemmed from an outbreak of unrest in the regional capital of Urumchi on July 5. In the following months mass detentions, reports of torture, enforced disappearances, trials that fell short of international standards and swift executions marked a period of extreme difficulty for the Uyghur people. Although 2010 brought the reestablishment of Internet and international communications, as well as the removal of the unpopular Party Secretary Wang Lequan, there were few indications that the economic and social issues underlying the 2009 unrest were being addressed.
2010 began with an announcement on January 13 of a near doubling of the security budget for East Turkestan that underscored Chinese government approaches to establishing stability in the region. The emphasis on security and punishment was exemplified by reports later in January that four Uyghurs had been sentenced to death in connection with the 2009 unrest. Human Rights Watch called trials related to the unrest conducted in 2009 as lacking “due process”. January also witnessed tighter restrictions on cell phone use, with three cell phone users in the region punished by public security officials for sending text messages containing harmful information and affecting ethnic unity.
In February, Switzerland granted asylum to two Uyghur brothers detained in Guantnamo. Palau authorities had offered one of the brothers, Bahtiyar Mahmud, the opportunity to settle in Palau together with a group of other Uyghur detainees in 2009, but Bahtiyar rejected the offer. He opted to stay behind to look after his older brother Arkin, who suffered from mental illness and who was not given the choice of settling in Palau. At the time of writing, five of the original 22 Uyghurs remain in the U.S. detention facility. Five Uyghurs were released into Albania in 2006, four to Bermuda in June 2009 and six to Palau in October 2009. The two brothers arrived in Switzerland on March 23, 2010.
April saw the removal of Xinjiang Party Secretary Wang Lequan. Long reviled by many Uyghurs, Wang Lequan lost the confidence of a number of Han Chinese in the region due to mishandling of the 2009 unrest, as well as growing displeasure over his nepotistic business and political practices. Wang was known both for using his leadership post to ensure the business success of his friends in the ‘Shandong clique’, and also for appointing cadres from his home province of Shandong to top government positions throughout East Turkestan. During his fifteen-year spell as Party Secretary, he oversaw a hardening of regional policies that were seen as a break with the relative openness of the 1980s. 57-year-old Zhang Chunxian, formerly the Communist Party Secretary of Hunan Province, was appointed to replace Wang.
The following month was marked by a restoration of Internet access, which had been blocked since the July 5, 2009 unrest. Largely viewed as a goodwill gesture by new Party Secretary Zhang Chunxian, the lifting of restrictions occurred against a backdrop of detentions of Uyghur journalists and bloggers. Among those detained were Memetjan Abdulla, a 33-year-old journalist with China National Radio; Gheyret Niyaz, a journalist who was detained after talking to foreign media about the unrest; Dilshat Parhat, who co-founded the Uyghur-run website Diyarim; Obulkasim, an employee of Diyarim; Nureli, who founded the Uyghur website Selkin; and website supervisor Muhemmet.
The first ever Xinjiang Work Forum, which was convened in May and attended by all of China’s central leadership, appeared to be a tacit admission that economic policies had fallen short of bringing either stability or equity to the region. The fine point put on economic issues during the Work Forum signaled the nature of tensions underlying the July 5, 2009 unrest. The term ‘Development by Leaps and Bounds’ was coined to summarize the significant financial boost to the region, and the total aid package promised by the government between 2011 and 2020 would reach US$314 billion, while policies also promised to create more jobs and to eliminate absolute poverty by 2020. However, participatory mechanisms for Uyghur stakeholders, and an independent monitoring body, were both absent from development planning. The post Work Forum drive for modernization also witnessed an intensification of demolitions in Uyghur neighborhoods across the region. Demolitions were reported in Ghulja, Kashgar, Karamay and Urumchi.
On the one-year anniversary of the 2009 unrest, the Uyghur Human Rights Project and Amnesty International issued reports that described eyewitness accounts of deadly live fire used against Uyghur demonstrators. These claims are at odds with Chinese government claims that security forces used live fire to disperse Uyghurs by firing into the air, or to shoot Uyghurs in targeted situations that resulted in only 12 deaths. The end of July further illustrated the Chinese government’s hardening attitude to competing narratives of the unrest with the harsh sentencing of Gheyret Niyaz, Dilshat Perhat, Nureli and Nijat Azat, webmaster of the website Shabnam. Gheyret Niyaz’s sentence of 15 years in prison on charges of endangering state security shocked many observers. In China, a group of scholars and lawyers issued a letter of concern. The letter, which was signed by Beijing scholar and author Wang Lixiong, Beijing scholar Mao Yushi, and Beijing scholar Cui Weiping, among others, points out that Gheyret Niyaz had “promoted increasing mutual understanding between Uyghurs and Han” and went on to state that “this kind of intellectual is extremely important in advancing communication and reconciliation between ethnic groups.” In addition, the life sentence handed down to Gulmire Imin, who worked on the Selkin website, was received with dismay.
The decision by the Nobel Committee in October to award the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo also had resonances for the reconciliation of Uyghurs and Han Chinese. As co-author of Charter ’08, Liu was one of a group of prominent Chinese activists, lawyers and writers advocating for a federal China as a solution to ethnic autonomy issues. In November, the firing of Uyghur teachers in Toksun County reignited the sensitive issue of ‘bilingual education’ implementation in the region. Bilingual education policies have overseen the removal of Uyghur as a language of instruction in schools and universities across the region in favor of Mandarin Chinese. Radio Free Asia interviewed Uyghur teachers in Toksun County affected by local officials’ plans to fire 518 out of nearly 2,000 teachers in the county. A day before the announcement, Sharapet Tursun, chief of Toksun County’s educational bureau, told principals of local Uyghur schools at a meeting that the 518 layoffs were required in order to abide by a directive on bilingual education issued in October by the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region government. Tursun requested that each school in Toksun County conduct Chinese language proficiency exams prior to November 8 in order to determine which 518 teachers to layoff.
In December, human rights activists marked the one-year anniversary of the December 19, 2009 deportation from Cambodia of 20 Uyghur asylum seekers. Since the deportation nothing has been heard about the fate of the 20 Uyghurs. The anniversary not only brought to attention to the cycles of human rights activism, but also to the cycles of Uyghur protest and repression. The fall out from the Urumchi unrest has left its mark long past July 2009. The Uyghur asylum seekers in Cambodia, who had fled the post July 5 repression, represented one in a long line of consequences emerging from the 2009 unrest. Looking back over 2010, many of the incidents in the Uyghur human rights year stemmed from the summer of 2009. The effects of the July 2009 unrest reach into the present, and will most likely reach into 2011; however, looking back over 2010, the very promising genuine concern and dialogue built with a growing number of Han Chinese hold the seeds for a meaningful solution to Uyghur issues.
Note: Since the writing of this article, Memetjan Abdulla was sentenced to life imprisonment. In addition, Pezilet Ekber, a 19-year-old student at Xinjiang University was sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve for participating in the Urumchi unrest. Radio Free Asia reported that the trials for Memetjan Abdulla and Pezilet Ekber took place in April 2010.

Follow Henryk Szadziewski on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/henrykszad

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

The start of a New Year is an exciting reason to make a travel resolution. Travelers with a bucket list of places to see often begin to polish and fine tune their destinations. Meanwhile, new travelers might be ready to start a new adventure, or buy their first piece of luggage.
Travel is a great leisure activity for people with lots of positive energy for a New Year. Keeping travel resolutions might seem far-fetched when you’re working or unemployed, but they’re not entirely impossible.
First stamp in passport: There has to be a study of a record number of people who have a passport but have yet to rough it up. A passport is your best traveling companion and what good is to have one if it is not being used properly? Do yourself a favor and plan a trip abroad and get that special first stamp in your passport!
Travel with your best friend: Since your passport is your best friend, what better way to travel than to bring your own best friend? Often do people think of vacations as trips with a spouse, or for a business trip, but not one with their best friend. Make it a habit of taking one trip a year to reconnect with your best buddy; a girlfriend getaway or a trip to Vegas for the guys.
Pay for an upgrade: If you’ve never flown first class, you’re familiar with the infamous walk of shame. You walk to the back of the plane; looking at the first class passengers nestled comfortably in their seats. You could be that first class passenger if you spend some extra bucks for the upgrade. Everyone should do this at least once in their life to feel like a million bucks on a flight.
Plan a stay-cation: Traveling doesn’t always have to be across an ocean or a country, nor does it have to be in your own city. Planning a stay-cation within a small radius of your area can be easier than you think. How often do you think about your surrounding close-by cities as a place to relax and unwind? You’ll be surprised how relaxed and away you might feel, but content at the low-cost and fewer travel woes.
Plan an internet-free vacation: We all can be slaves to technology with iPods, net books and Wi-Fi during our travels. Why not go back in time and leave all the excess technology behind? Plan a transcendental trip to a cabin, ski resort or tropical paradise with only your ultimate necessities. You’ll feel more in touch with nature and less in touch with overage fee’s or technological malfunctions.
Learn how to pack properly: Packing can be like gift-wrapping; unique and often stressful. If you’ve made one resolution to wrap gifts properly, make it your travel habit to be a better packer. Learn how to pack for different kind of trips: Overnight, International, and Weekend getaways. This will be the resolution that will help you beyond the New Year.
Start a souvenir collection: As obnoxious as typical souvenirs can be, such as mini Eiffel Towers or “I Love NY” t-shirts, some souvenirs are actually interesting. Starting a souvenir collection of unique items can make for a constantly good reason to travel. Collect something that reflects your personality; if you’re a fashion designer, buy sewing material abroad and make your own shirt from it. Or, if you’re a beer aficionado, make it a reason to try a beer in every city and perhaps bring one home.
Plan a holiday abroad: As crazy as the holiday season can be, holiday travel is becoming more of a social habit. Plan the unorthodox holiday by doing something new, such as having the family meet and travel in a new city. You’ve got all year to plan and save so there is no excuse!
Learn something abroad: One can easily kill two birds with one stone with this travel resolution. Perhaps you’ve made a decision to learn a new language, or take cooking lessons to master the art of cooking. Take yourself abroad to Italy if you’re learning Italian, or Peru to take inexpensive cooking classes. Not only does it give you a chance to travel, but the experience is amplified by being in that region.
Travel less to travel more: Often times travelers are so busy being tourists that they forget to take a deep breathe and soak up the experience. Take time to travel less to fully enjoy where you are. Rather than bouncing around cities to make the most out of a trip, take it easy and enjoy your surroundings. Spend more time in one city you might particularly like to be a local expert and find reasons to visit again.
What is your travel resolution for 2011? Leave a comment below!
This article is courtesy of the CheapOair Travel Blog.

Follow CheapOair on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/cheapoair

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

The recent capitulation of Blockbuster video to Netflix has engendered a lot of ink. Most business writers seem to be getting no end of schadenfreude at the sight of the king of the late fees (Blockbuster collected half a billion dollars in late fees in its heyday) getting its comeuppance at the hands of an organization that seems to get the concept of customer service.
So the story we’re hearing is that Netflix’s ascendancy is the triumph of online retailing and technology over traditional retail stores and physical product. And sure, the facts are compelling. Netflix understood the revolution taking place in the global supply chain, particularly in the field of logistics which obviated the need to carry large inventories. While Blockbuster hung its hat on 5,000 stores nationally, Netflix operated 37 shipping centers located throughout the United States reaching nearly 92 percent of subscribers with generally one-day delivery. That’s one million DVDs each day. And, like Zappo’s, Netflix chased the good conduct medal, winning numerous customer satisfaction awards from places like ForeSee and Fast Company.
But the more interesting story, in my mind, is told through a socio-cultural lens. Some have described Netflix as a category killer but this seems wrong. It didn’t make its fortune on bargain prices and stocking commodity products. Netflix actually did the opposite — it gave the consumer more and better. A typical Blockbuster has 8,000 tapes covering 6,500 titles in its stores (a neighborhood video store generally has less than 3,000 titles); Netflix offers a collection of 100,000 titles on DVD. The mistake that business case-study scribes make is in thinking that films or music operate the way laundry detergent does. Netflix didn’t win because it had more titles at cheaper prices but because its catalog reflected the growing reach of the American and worldwide consumer.
The top rental at Netflix when I last checked was Crash, a searing Robert Altman-esque film from 5 years ago about race relations in California. This is a powerful indicator of what’s at play in the Netflix model. Clearly, Crash did not rise to the top of the charts because of advertising or the elephantine point-of-purchase displays one is accustomed to in a video store. Instead, the engine driving viewing tastes at places like Netflix is the Amazon-style customer-review model that has done more to break the stranglehold of advertising over buyer behavior than anything I can think of. Amazon, as we all know, sticks a cookie on your hard drive, so that you’re on the receiving end of all sorts of useful features like recommendations based on past purchases and lists of reviews and guides written by users who purchased the products you’re viewing. Netflix has now amassed more than 1 billion movie ratings from customers, and members select approximately 60 percent of their movies based on movie recommendations tailored to their individual tastes. For example, my recent browse of the description of the Werckmesiter Harmonies, an austerely beautiful black and white film by the Hungarian director, Bela Tarr led me via Netflix’s Cinematch recommendation system to the Devil’s Backbone by the Mexican filmmaker, Guillermo del Toro; a look at the terrifically exciting 60s thriller Blow Up led me to Nicholas Roeg’s 70s thriller Don’t Look Now. It’s hard to imagine this skein of sound recommendations happening in a storefront. And that’s what Netflix did — it led us away from the 50 copies of The Hangover or Transformers along an associative path informed by all of our past choices. It wrote a database for serendipity.
Perhaps the company that’s expanded on the customer-review idea in the most stunning way is the internet music service, Pandora. Started as a recommendation technology company, it was re-purposed in Fall 2005 as web radio service and today has more than 60 million registered users. Pandora’s model is the next iteration of Netflix and Amazon. Called the Music Genome Project, it offers listeners a prompt to enter an artist or song and then constructs a playlist based on the song’s distinguishing features. The difference is that Pandora has hired trained music analysts to categorize its entire inventory of music using up to 400 distinct musical characteristics, including melody, harmony, instrumentation, rhythm, vocals, lyrics (the typical music analyst has a four-year degree in music theory, composition or performance). My recent trip to Pandora on my iPhone which began with the 90s grunge heroes, the Pixies, led me to the French super group Phoenix and the even more obscure Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros, a buoyant California retro act which caught me by surprise. Again, I can’t imagine being able to deep dive into the indie music scene that way on terrestrial radio. Pandora took off when it began offering apps for smartphones and other mobile devices and turned its first profit in the first quarter of 2009. With half of all radio-listening occurring in the car, Ford, GM and Mercedes have all expressed plans to put Pandora into their dashboards.
In the end Pandora and Netflix are winning because they reflect their customers in a way that old-line firms with their hegemonic ad campaigns and totalizing distribution channels never could. Time Magazine put it rather well: they “are attempting to second-guess a mysterious, perverse and profoundly human form of behavior: the personal response to a work of art.” Pandora and Netflix know that customers today are smarter. And that roving appetite even for the obscure and the interesting is a function of how we’ve changed. By 2050, the world’s urban population will be 6 billion, 300 million inside US cities. 2 billion people will enter the middle class by 2050 mostly in Africa and Asia. We’re better educated and more curious about the world than big business gives us credit. And that’s the lesson of Netflix. When given the choice of something interesting and exciting that sidesteps the mainstream, we will take it.

Follow Tom Silva on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/thealtergroup

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

I am 25-years-old, and my hair is falling out. Granted, this according to my mother, who also thinks I should wear woolly sweaters until mid-May and that the amount of food on my plate is never quite enough… but I can’t help feeling that this time, she may be right. Hair loss is supposed to be hair-editary (sorry), but both my parents are still actively sprouting, and my Dad is in his seventies. What gives? Well, thanks to research conducted by Ellen Langer, Professor of Psychology at Harvard, and others, I can only blame myself.
Langer published her thoughts and selected findings most recently in the December issue of Perspectives on Psychological Science. Since Descartes, she writes, “we have mindlessly accepted mind/body dualism,” that is, the idea that our mind and body are separate, even conflicting entities. But Langer argues that even if we don’t understand exactly how or why, our thoughts do affect our bodies, often in surprising ways.
Since I am most interested in the shameful dereliction of duty displayed by my follicles, let’s discuss for a moment the active removal thereof: the haircut. Langer and her team spent some time at a local salon, where they used 47 women as guinea pigs, taking their photograph and blood pressure before and after their cut and/or color, and asking them how old they felt. Women who felt younger after their treatment showed a statistically significant reduction in blood pressure. (Incidentally, if you’re thinking: “Of course they did, I would too if someone massaged my scalp for 45 minutes,” then I would congratulate you on your skeptical mindset but also point out that all women received the treatment, and only those who felt younger showed a decrease in blood pressure.)
The researchers then Photoshopped each woman’s pictures (before and after the haircut), cropping out their hair. They then showed the images to independent raters (who, of course, did not know the purpose of the experiment) and asked the raters to estimate the women’s ages. Shockingly, women who perceived themselves as younger actually appeared younger. Apparently if you feel younger, you look younger, not just to yourself, but to others too.
So it would seem that early onset alopecia is my own fault: I feel old, therefore my hair falls out. But suppose for a moment that I’m wrong; that my hair is falling out not because I feel old but because my grandfather’s hair fell out when he was 25. Baldness, then, is not a symptom but rather a cue: because I’m losing my hair early, I feel older. And that, Langer suggests, can increase my risk for prostate cancer and coronary heart disease. A longitudinal study of almost 4,500 men found that prematurely bald men had a 50% excess risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer. Another study found that progression of baldness (not baldness itself) was associated with coronary heart disease occurrence and mortality risk.
Now I know what some of you are thinking. I’m thinking it myself: there is no possible way to effectively control for all variables in studies like these. Am I going bald because I feel old? Or, worse, is going bald going to make me feel older and put me at risk for all sorts of diseases? Neither? Both? Or are other factors playing havoc with our notions of causality? I don’t know. But I ask you: what’s the harm in feeling young?
So no more “Ha, ha, I’m such and old man” jokes for me. A curmudgeon? Perhaps. A Grinch, a grouch, even a Scrooge? Sure.
But old? Never.

Follow George Zaidan on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/georgezaidan

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

VIEQUES, PR — John Hix, the Canadian-born architect who developed the “eco-hip,” retreat the Hix Island House, sees Vieques as largely undeveloped gem in the Caribbean, a sort of “Central Park” in the midest of a highly developed region.
He sees sustainability as key to Vieques’ future success is creating homes which are energy dependent, “off the grid,” using solar power. He hopes that in the future wind farms will provide energy independence for the island.
Hix first visited Vieques some 28 years ago.
We spoke with him recently at his home for this interview.
You can also find this post at the travel video site, Vieques.TV.

Follow Andy Plesser on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/Beet_TV

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Demography is destiny. This axiom is underlined by HSBC’s “World in 2050 survey.
The bank’s detailed analysis is based on the theoretical work of Harvard professor Robert Barro. It analyzes everything from fertility rates to education levels and the rule of law, and predicts that the world’s economic output will triple by 2050, provided the major states can avoid conflict. However, a grim future seems assured for much of continental Europe.
A birth rate of 2.1 children per woman will keep a society stable in population terms. However, according to the Daily Telegraph: “The low fertility of Korea (1.1), Singapore (1.2) Germany (1.3), Poland (1.3), Italy (1.4), Spain (1.4) and Russia (1.4), more or less dooms these countries to aging crises and population decline unless they open the floodgates to immigration.”
For this reason Britain is likely to displace Germany as Europe’s leading economic player: “This is chiefly due to the UK’s healthy fertility rate (1.9), although skeptics might question whether a birthrate inflated by the EU’s highest share of unmarried teenager mothers is a good foundation for prosperity.”
US birthrates will also keep America a major player in to mid-century: “America’s high fertility rate (2.1) will allow it too keep adding manpower long after China’s workforce has begun to contract in 2020s and as even India starts to age in the 2040s.”
“Demography matters,” said Karen Ward, the report’s chief author. The “big losers,” she says will be the smaller states like Switzerland, Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, and Austria, which will mostly drop out of the top 30: “They may struggle to maintain their influence in global policy forums.”
The EU’s own figures bear out a looming demographic crisis in Europe: Eurostat last year released the figures showing that in 2009 Italy’s fertility rate remains one of the lowest in Europe. For any population to remain stable, it needs a “total fertility rate” of 2.1 children per woman. Italy has an average of only 1.31.
The Milan-based International Center for Family Studies has explored the country’s ultra-low birth rates which have resulted in a rapidly aging nation. Their recent report on Italian population levels says that despite high levels of foreign immigration, 2009 statistics show a significant decrease in the Italian population.
Their study found that 57.8 percent of childless Italian households said they had no children out of “personal choice.” Reasons given include a sense of uncertainty about the future and the difficulties involved in raising children.
Some demographers now hypothesize that Italy, along with many other European nations, has entered a “low fertility trap” — a sort of death spiral where a nation tips over a demographic cliff, never to recover.
The “low fertility trap” hypothesis was pioneered by demographer Dr. Wolfgang Lutz of the Vienna Institute of Demography. Proponents note that no society has ever recovered from a sustained birth rate of under 1.5 children per woman.
This is because after a few decades of very low birth rates, very simply, there are no longer enough potential mothers to have enough children to recover, and an irreversible downward spiral begins. Simultaneously, they say, a more subtle cultural shift also occurs: childlessness and small families become the norm, thereby institutionalizing the trend of low birth rates.
An example of this self-reinforcing cultural change has been noted Germany, where thirty per cent of young women say they don’t intend to have children at all. 48 percent of German men under 40 nowadays agree that you can have a happy life without children. When their fathers were asked the same question at the same age, only 15 percent agreed.
Unsurprisingly, given the prevalence these opinions, Germany now even surpasses Italy as the EU nation with the lowest birth rate and is also heading toward population collapse.
Demographer Peter McDonald estimates that if Italy’s recent fertility levels remain as they are, bar mass immigration, it will lose 86 percent of its population by the end of this century, falling to a population of 8 million, down from 56 million today. Similarly, he estimates Spain’s population will drop by 85 percent, Germany 83 percent and Greece 74 percent.
Not since the Black Death stalked Europe in the Middle Ages have we seen populations collapse like this.

Follow Rory Fitzgerald on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/roryfitzgerald

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Editor’s Note: Michelle Weber of the excellent food blog Thursday Night Smackdown begins liveblogging Top Chef with HuffPost Food tonight. So check back right here at 10/9c for live coverage, and in the meantime, a preview of tonight’s action from Bravo:
Just Hoping Things Go Right:
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /
Taking on Tom Colicchio:
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Yes, the New England Patriots have had another great season, but they are definitely not the most exciting team to watch in the playoffs. On paper, they’re a dream come true. In fact, if Superbowl rings were awarded on stats alone, the Patriots would have this one. Brady is a veteran, and he’s the top rated Quarterback in the league. Every week, New England fans expect to see amazing offensive yardage. Every week, New England fans expect the Patriots to win. More often than not, they deliver.
The Patriots are the safe, albeit boring, bet. They meet expectations. They represent stability, reliability, and consistency. These are excellent characteristics, but are they exciting?
No.
And much to New England’s dismay, Superbowls aren’t handed to the teams with the best record, either. That wouldn’t be interesting, and it certainly wouldn’t be exciting.
Excitement requires an inherent level of volatility and risk. The most exciting teams, the most dangerous teams, are the most volatile teams. Michael Vick is exciting. The Chicago Bears are exciting. The New York Jets are exciting. There’s even something exciting about the Seahawks — the veritable underdogs of the competition. What makes these teams is exciting is their unpredictability. It’s almost impossible to set expectations for these players and teams because every week is different. Some weeks they display a level of play that is above and beyond anything else in league. Other weeks, they simply look dismal.
One never knows what to expect when watching a hot and cold team like the Chicago Bears or the New York Jets — and naturally, the unpredictability leads to lowered expectations. That’s where the excitement comes in.
Simply meeting expectations is mildly satisfying. Exceeding them is exhilarating. It’s the reason why NFL fans cheer for the underdog and live for upsets. It’s why thousands of fans pack stadiums for games when their team is expected to lose by a 20-point margin. There’s something really exciting about an imperfect team pulling it together and having an amazing game. Perhaps it appeals to conflict inside us all — the knowledge that we can have both good and bad days, that we can make mistakes and move forward, and that our future isn’t determined by our past.
The New England Patriots are like the cool kid in high school, the one who has it all together. Everyone expects him to succeed, but nobody relates to him. He’s talented, but frankly, not that interesting. He validates our self-defeating believes that only people who are perfect and follow all the rules will succeed in life. It’s much more interesting to hear a rags-to-riches story, or to see the guy who gets cut from the high school team in his first year go on to play as a starter in college. These unconventional heroes silence the negative voices in our heads and show us that there is another way to succeed in the world, and it isn’t always perfect.
If the Patriots win the Superbowl, millions of NFL fans, outside of New England, will probably shrug their shoulders and say, “It figures.” But if another team wins, especially a volatile, unpredictable team, something more will be stirred in fans all across the country, something hopeful and exciting. When an imperfect team succeeds, it reminds us that there is a champion inside all of us, and we’re all capable of achieving greatness. If that’s not exciting, I don’t know what is.

Follow Amy Turek on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/thebearschick

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Belgian authorities are seeking to expel a Canadian priest accused of sexually abusing Inuit children.
The Reverend Eric Dejaeger, a Belgian native, is wanted in Canada on warrants involving alleged crimes against Inuit children more than 30 years ago.
Father Dejaeger, a 63-year-old Canadian citizen, was arrested and charged in Belgium with overstaying a visa.
Warrants were issued in Nunavut province in 2002 for his arrest. Interpol has also issued a .
Belgian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bart Ourvry said on Wednesday that Father Dejaeger had been arrested for overstaying a three-month visitor's visa and would be sent to Canada.
In 1990, Father Dejaeger was sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to nine charges of sexually assaulting children between 1983 and 1987 in the remote community of Baker Lake, in what is now Nunavut province.
He was released after 18 months, then travelled to Belgium after fresh allegations emerged.
He is currently wanted on six criminal charges of sexually assaulting children between 1978 and 1982 in the remote settlement of Igloolik in Nunavut, the CBC network reported.

Source:BBC

Dick Cheney is not heartless. He just has less of a heart. The New York Times says Cheney’s heart will never beat at full strength again. His new mechanical pump leaves patients without a pulse because it does not mimic the heart’s own beat.
So Dick Cheney has no pulse. Yet he walks among us. This is the Twilight Zone, verily.
He looks gaunt and frail, sitting down, holding a cane. What is scary is he looks almost human, an old man. It’s as if Darth Vader took off his cloak and it turned out to be the Tin Woodman looking for his heart.
The irony boggles the mind.
But there’s more. Within a few years he is going to probably need a full heart transplant.
Now we have the potential for the Great American Story. Imagine, said a colleague, that he gets the heart of an American soldier, brain-dead from being blown up in Iraq.
Then the war he unleashed based on fabricated intelligence would tick inside of him everyday. Would it drive him crazy? Or would it cause the heart to implode knowing it was trapped inside Dick Cheney?
For the last decade Dick Cheney has been the poster boy of evil, the grand vizier of an imperial presidency, sinister in his avuncularness. He was the one the anti-war people, the anti-neo cons, the anti-corporate types could all rally around. He was the one America loved to hate. He gave Bush cover. In 2007, Cheney came close to matching Dan Quayle for the least popular Veep ever with a 59% disapproval rating. At one point only 13 percent of Americans had a favorable rating of him. Though his ratings did improve after he left office in 2009 55% of Americans still disapproved of him.
Looking at his photograph now, you almost feel sorry for the man. You can hardly recognize the snarling Veep, the poster boy for evil incarnate, our Dr. Strangelove.
He is suddenly like any other aging war criminal, the Pinochets, unrepentant but frail, Goliaths turned David. I imagine the sympathy factor will rise.
And the bloodlust of the Impeach Cheney crowd will never be satisfied.
More importantly America will have to find another prototype for implacable evil, because its current model is falling apart.
But I cannot get over the image of Dick Cheney looking for a new heart. It could be our century’s version of Pilgrim’s Progress, traveling the world with his hunting rifle, weighed down by the burden of sin, seeking deliverance. What role will Harry Whittington play in that parable, shot in the face by Cheney, but big hearted enough to take the blame?
More likely it will be the Goldilocks story – looking for the perfect heart, not too soft, not too hard (remember he does accept his gay daughter) but just right for Dick Cheney. Now that would need to be some Brave Heart.

Follow Sandip Roy on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/sandipr

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

He’s best known here in the states as Giles, the librarian and watcher of vampire hunter Buffy, but Anthony Head has had a long and illustrious career. He is currently playing King Uther Pendragon, father of the future King Arthur in the BBC show, Merlin. Though the show is about to enter it’s fourth season on the other side of the pond, Season 3 will premiere in the states on the SyFy Channel on January 7th.
Fans of the show know that Uther has, well, issues. His ward Morgana (Katie McGrath) has disappeared and is about to exact some revenge for Uther’s decree to outlaw magic. His son Arthur (Bradley James) is in love with a serving girl named Gwen (Angel Coulby) and his son’s servant Merlin (Colin Morgan) is hiding his powers with the help of his only confidant Gaius (Richard Wilson). What’s a poor king to do?
I got a chance to chat with Head about the show and what’s next for the troubled monarch. He gave us some hints about what we’re going to see in Season 3, and working with the cast. He also graciously answered my questions about the proposed (and much railed against) remake of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the lost spinoff Ripper and the famous romantic coffee commercials people still ask him about. (Check them out here.)
I have to start off by asking about Uther. He’s got some serious issues.
[laughs] You think?
I think he may! So what are we going to see happen to him in Season3?
Season 3, it all comes down on him really. All his issues…stuff that comes out about his past…[laughs] He probably didn’t know it would have the effect that it has. There are some big old family issues. We start off Season 3 with this mega, two part story that establishes Morgana for what she is and who she is. Uther pretty much becomes a shell of his former self and is haunted by stuff that he’s done in the past. It’s great because we start off the season with a whoo! Where do you go from there? [laughs] And they do go from there. They take it on. There are some really cool story lines. With some stuff that was really cool to play. You don’t expect…you always hope but you don’t expect in a family drama, that you’re going to get some really good stuff. Stuff that evolves, stuff that hangs on character, that hangs on good story lines to play. Stuff that at this point, three seasons down, you kind of think they might have to resort to the Lost syndrome of just confusing people. Instead of which, this has got really strong through lines and stuff that was…the thing that I always loved about Joss’ (Whedon) scripts is that everything had a repercussion. Everything had a consequence. And so it is in Merlin. It’s not Joss writing, but it has that fullness. That richness. You know if someone does something bad, and there is stuff that Uther has done in his past that is bad, you know it’s going to come out somewhere. And it really really does.
I talked to Katie McGrath the other day and she said she feels really bad about being a bitch to you in your scenes.
[laughs] Well, I don’t hold it against her! No, it’s great. We had some cracking stuff to do. A lot of Uther stuff in Season 3 kind of revolves in one way or another around Morgana. It was great fun. Really good fun. She’s adorable and as I say, we had some lovely stuff to play off each other. She says she’s a bitch, but I can’t say that Uther is exactly Mr. Sweetie Pie.
[laughs] I think it’s really interesting, the blind spot Uther has with her. What do you attribute that to?
All I can say is, I think there is more going on than at first meets the eye.
Doing a research for a role like this…is there any sort of research you’ve done that you’ve just loved?
As far as Uther was concerned, there is so very little about him. I didn’t want to research the Arthurian legend as written, because we’ve strayed away from it. I mean, I know all the stories and the myths, but what I did largely was to watch other people playing kings. It’s fascinating watching people playing kings because some people do it so much better than others. It was watching Peter O’Toole in Becket. He was wonderful playing in Becket, this troubled king, trying to come to terms with what he had to do, what he was supposed to do and what he wanted to do. It translates. The thing that makes it interesting, watching someone play a king is not the power. It’s not how they use the power. It’s how they manage what’s going on inside. The man and what other people perceive as a king. That’s why it’s fun to play a king. I mean, I see our Queen as fascinating, because you wonder what’s going on in her head. [laughs] With all the stuff she has to do and the people that she has to meet. And you think, what does she really think of them. Mind you, Prince Phillip usually says it. He’s gotten into terrible trouble for what he’s said. But all that, it is very interesting, what’s going on with the person inside and what other people see.
I wanted to ask you about the relationship with Gaius. In a way he’s really Uther’s only friend.
I don’t know if he’s a friend, really. He’s a confidant. Gaius I find fascinating, and I wonder if it’s anything that they will really truly explore…Gaius isn’t really whiter than white either. I mean, he obviously stitched up…the Great Purge was actually a lot like the McCarthy witch trials. And I think Gaius stitched up a few friends in order to stay alive and stay in Uther’s favor, which makes him equally interesting. He’s got a conscience in there. And it’s not something we ever really see an awful lot of. I’d like to see more of that. [laughs] It does mean that our stuff together is…there’s a lot going on between us. There is a lot more than what is said. There is a lot of unwritten past between us.
I have to ask you about some coffee commercials that you did a while back that I just watched again on YouTube last night.
[laughs] You have to?
Yeah, I really really do. [laughs] Do you still get people talking about that?
Yeah! Strangely, usually only journalists. But when I meet somebody who said, ‘Oh, where have I seen you? What have you done?’ I’ll go through the list of Buffy, and Little Britian and Merlin, then right at the end I’ll go, ‘…or the coffee commercial, ‘ and they’ll go, ‘Oh, that’s it!’ Or recently, I had this guy…I went through the whole list at which point you’re thinking, do I really need to go through my resume? [laughs] I said, ‘…or it’s the coffee commercial.’ And he said, ‘Little Britain [laughs] Okay. No, I’m as fascinated by what was an incredibly iconic campaign. And it’s not only created opportunities for me in Britain, but basically it was the reason I went to America, because I could. If I hadn’t gone to the states…I’d always wanted to. It created opportunities for me and gave me the reason to scootch out of England for a little while, to create a different persona. I didn’t want to be just the coffee commercial guy. It created Buffy and all the rest of it.
Well…speaking of Buffy, I have to get your opinion on the remake that’s going around the news.
It’s not a great idea.
Oh, thank you for saying that!
It’s a horrible idea. It’s a horrible idea in as much as Buffy was a great conceit. It was a great story. A great idea. I don’t think you can…whether you feel as though you helped it on its way, I don’t feel that you can then remake that without the original creator on board. It doesn’t make sense. And I mean, somewhere down the line, I suppose sometimes…I suppose you could, but it never sits very comfortably. With someone like Joss, why would you want to? Well, I know why you want to. You want to make money. As he said recently, ‘I hope it’s good!’ [laughs] I love him.
I’ve been hearing rumors about that Giles spinoff, Ripper again too. Any chance that’s happening?
Not unless he comes back as a ghost. In Season 8, the comic book, Giles just died. [laughs] So I think it’s R.I.P. Ripper.
Back to Merlin…one of the things I love about the show is how you can go from a deep, dark episode to a really funny one. Last season, you hooked up with a troll. What sort of fun stuff will we see in Season 3?
Baldness. There’s a great episode where Gaius becomes inhabited by something that makes him do very silly things, one of which is to make me go bald. But there is also a lovely episode with an actress called Georgia King, where she…well, she almost marries Arthur. But it’s a great way of keeping light and shade and keeping it…when it gets a little sort of dark and heavy for the kids, they reward them next week with something light and frothy. [laughs] And the adults don’t mind a bit or ribald humor. A couple of fart gags here and there always go down well. [laughs] Needless to say, it bridges that gap. One of the great things about Merlin is that it does appeal to this multi-generational audience. It’s a truly family show. Now everybody who comes up to me says they love watching this show, and I especially love that I can sit down with my kids and watch it, and I see stuff that the kids don’t. It’s just the best. And that’s the success of the show.
It was something that Buffy had. And yet the WB never, never ever explored it. They only ever played it to literally a generational band. Their demographic. And they could have expanded it, but because they were tied up with what their demographic was, they blew it on a big level. In fact, that’s why Buffy universally…I had people come up to me in their forties and be embarrassed that they watch Buffy. And it’s like, no! You don’t have to be embarrassed! [laughs] It’s for you too! And Merlin goes younger. It goes down to five and six. Kids love it. I think it’s the fact that, even if it does get a bit scary and a bit dark, they will be rewarded with a lighter episode.
So what do you think…musical episode of Merlin?
Never say never. I can’t quite see how or why there would be, but you never know. Who knows? All musicals aren’t always necessarily good. It’s another thing that Joss was ground breaking on, really when you think about it. Nobody had really make musicals work on TV like that before. Now we’ve got Glee and all that stuff and who knows whether it was down to Joss, but it was the first TV show to actually…they’d tried it so many times and it always felt clumsy and sticky. But he really pulled it off.
Merlin Season 3 premieres on January 7th at 10/9c on SyFy.

Follow Jenna Busch on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/jennabusch

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

It is disturbing to read about the continued tensions between North and South Korea. Tens of millions of people live near the DMZ. The center of South Korea, Seoul, is within range of North Korean artillery and military assets. The North would surely face overwhelming destruction should any full-scale engagement occur. At present, a dangerous cycle of stupid provocations by the North and placations by the South has entered a new phase. The Lee administration and South Korea, backed by the United States, have signaled that further provocations will be met with a direct and unmistakable response. The North speaks of a “sacred war,” and recent reports indicate that it has further fortified its military border.
What is going on, one might ask? The transition in leadership to Kim Jong-un, likely a weak choice and a vulnerable one after Kim Jong-il dies, might prompt adventurism on the part of the North. The North is a past master in the game of brinksmanship-for-concessions, an irrational long-term strategy, but one that its economically marginalized and ideologically hyperbolized state and elite seem to depend upon more and more. The leadership in the South is making continued strides among the alpha class of nations, recently hosting the G-20 summit and working toward greater autonomy in military control with its American partner. This juxtaposition cannot but embarrass the few who do not have their minds brainwashed in the North.
China has an especial role in remonstrating with Pyongyang. It appears to have activated this potential, somewhat late and to the disappointment of the national community. Nonetheless, the South’s live fire drill a few weeks ago did not result in a North Korean response. This summer saw China conduct its own military drills and engage in a series of diplomatic wrangles over disputed territories with Japan and Taiwan may have contributed to emboldening Pyongyang. China’s giving cover to North Korean adventurism through blocking and distancing itself from U.N. condemnations is not in keeping with the promises of peaceful regional and international leadership. We should all be calling on China to do more.
The situation is nothing if not serious. Where we are headed at present, and perhaps that is where we must head, is a world where Korea will become the next nuclear frontier. Anyone who has not learned from watching a host of historical examples, of which Iran and North Korea are only the latest examples, that any nation with sufficient resources and resolve will develop nuclear energy and nuclear weapons with or without international approval is stupid, full stop. The irrationality of nuclear powers thinking that they can forestall other nations from having the same power potentials, in particular if the nations are rising or declining powers, goes against the social science of the last century.
The current situation begins to remind me of the MAD era of bygone Soviet-American days — even though the world still exists under mutually-assured destruction, and the Obama administration has just concluded a new nuclear arms treaty with Russia. I mean, what is going to come of all of this? Does anyone really think that the North, paranoid and destitute as it might be, would go to war with the South? They could cause a lot of damage, and they themselves would be destroyed. There is no first-strike plan or intention on the part of the South or the United States. No one is planning to “take over” North Korea. The spectacle of a backwater state and nation, proudly propping up its weapons and military whilst languishing in pre-modern conditions and deifying its national leaders so as to maintain a totalitarian society is not just a joke. It’s eerily familiar. And that’s the point.
One grows weary of posturing by American leaders at the borders, at rostrums of regional meetings, at press conferences, and amongst friends. One equally grows tired of seeing special envoys trotted out and over to do the takeaways for momentary satisfaction. Of course, they should go, but such triage efforts only prop up the status quo. All the United States will accomplish is to institute what it claims to have transcended, a MAD world, in the Asian theater. All of our ability and power cannot undo the rot that the end of the Korean War froze in space and time. All of power will not prevent China from growing more powerful, and its ally retaining geostrategic protection. As we continue to live on and rely on a divided Korea, it will grow to cost the world in time, money, and danger of mass destruction. And just as Americans looked on while South Koreans fought to develop their democracy in the 1980s, as a kind of games-and-spectacle looking glass, we can pat ourselves on the back for being the new Rome again in this instance. That is unless we start to do things differently.
We are heading slowly to a time when North and South, plus all comers, will have to nuclearize and militarize further the DMZ, their nations, and the region. The game of build to deter will see a new instantiation. And in the end, the North will be disrupted, either out of its poverty or mendacity, but not without decades of wasted expense, wasted instability, and all that goes with it.
What is needed is a mature use of the technologies of peace. All interested parties should work to open up economic relations with Korea, so as to create economic markets that require the maintenance of peace. The game of isolating nations doesn’t really work to create peace. In time, American and South Korean leaders need to start their versions of nuclear arms negotiations. Many more people in the world need to study the occult society that is North Korea. It can become the next area studies program for the 21st century.
The dream of unification is being set back by decades with each grain of sand that drains out of the hourglass these days. Not to be cynical about it, but perhaps there is no other way. We’re heading to a new Cold War, if things remain the same. But I still see a day when the two Koreas will be one. It will occur without further warfare, and it will occur on democratic terms, but it won’t occur on anyone’s timetable in particular. And it won’t occur if the emphasis of the world’s “mature powers” amounts to mutual conduct of military exercises as the major events for regional relations each year. Here’s hoping 2011 sees major efforts by all nations concerned to bring the two Koreas to the path of peace.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Most people don’t season their lobster. In our new book, Ideas in Food, Great Recipes and Why They Work, we talk about brining and why we think it’s important. Lobsters especially benefit from a saline soak and it’s about more than just enhancing flavor.
Live Lobsters
1 of 8
First Slide
Previous Slide
Next Slideshow
@
Tips and Tricks for Making Hot Cocktails
New Year’s Day Pre-Production
8 Cocktails to Try in the New Year
Top 10 New Foods of 2010
How to Snap Pictures of Your Holiday Food that Look Good Enough to Eat
10 Holiday Gift Wines Under $15
Cooking lobsters at home can be intimidating. They are one of the few ingredients classically purchased while still alive and the moment of truth can be daunting. Heres how we do it: put a cutting board on a sheet pan. Put the lobster on the cutting board and with an oyster knife pierce a deep hole in the lobsters shell between and directly behind the eyes. Twist the oyster knife a half turn and remove it. This procedure destroys the lobsters brain killing it instantly.
comments(0)
<>
Total comments: 0 | Post a Comment
Rate This Slide
Rank #2 | Average: 8.6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Current Top 5 Slides
loading…
Choose your Top 5 Slides
UserName
| Become a fan
Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow
loading…
Top User Slides
← Prev|Next →
| Become a fan
Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow
loading…
Users who voted on this slide
← Prev|Next →
loading…

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

“Could you comment on the mood in Gaza since the events on the Turkish Flotilla?”
I was asked this question in the aftermath of the botched Israeli raid on the Turkish Flotilla that killed eight Turkish participants and one Turkish-American. I sensed the Canadian interviewer was looking for a comment that would fit the narrative that depicted Gazans cheering and hugging each other in cafes. I politely informed the interviewer that I could not speak on behalf of more than 1.5 million people; but remarked that there was far more excitement on the streets after Real Madrid vs. Barcelona.
Gazans are no fools. They listened to President Obama’s honeyed words in Cairo in 2009, they recall Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s explicit and ill-fated demands to end all settlement activity, and they watch on television as international newscasters report selectively on Gaza’s plight from Washington — or at best from the comfort of the other side of the barriers that enclose the coastal strip. The overwhelming message they conclude from these dispatches is that the people of Gaza are allowed little say in the coverage of Gaza, let alone in articulating their hopes for the future.
After so many years of indignity, broken promises, and perverse neglect, not to mention heavy bombardment, Gazans would be foolish to look to the ajnebees (foreigners) for answers or for hope. But such is the paradox of donor aid, US power in the region, and EU ambiguity, that one dares not bite the hand that could and does sustain so many.
Thoughtful analysts recently concluded that Obama differed from his predecessor, and that the EU was on the verge of taking a lead role in the push for peace. Yet after two dismal years, Brand Obama has so far proven to be a figment of our wildest and most optimistic projections despite his obvious charm, intelligence, and the key fact that he was not George W. Bush. The continued siege on Gaza under his watch has revealed in full High Def that Obama is at a loss on Gaza and that the EU slavishly follows the U.S. There is a policy vacuum on Gaza that has become the only policy in town — namely do nothing that might help. The continued presence of the literal and figurative ruins of Israel’s brutal military onslaught on Gaza exactly two years ago this past Dec. 27 is the most disheartening and undeniable reminder of this fact.
Much is spoken of realities on the ground in the conflict, typically in reference to Israeli settlement expansion. The other whispered reality is Hamas. And much like settlements, it’s thought better by western leaders to ignore it for now.
Hamas’ popularity is at 29 percent, down from last year. Yet their recent anniversary drew crowds in excess of 100,000. So in one world Hamas is an ugly representation of modern day Islamic barbarism and a problem to be expunged. In a saner world, however, Hamas represents an organic, though troubling, response to the Palestinian struggle for a legitimate and dignified existence. U.S.- backed Fatah leaders lived in villas; Hamas ministers choose to live in the dwellings of the poor. Hamas speaks the language of resistance. Fatahs speak the defunct language of Oslo.
Beyond ideology, Hamas over the last two years has gained respect for its on-the-ground practical advances. It governs with limited funds and under an illegal siege. Within these constraints Hamas can claim small victories: the export of strawberries and more recently furniture, a new sewage treatment plant, unemployment down to 33.9 percent according to the World Bank, a thriving tunnel economy, and increasing agricultural sustainability. There are failures too: the infringement of liberties, particularly women’s rights, and the superseding of laws, to close down and interrogate NGOs.
Reminiscent of Obama’s words in Cairo, Hamas has extended both clenched fist and open hand. This open-hand policy translates into a long-term hudna (truce/ceasefire), acceptance of borders (1967), and a referendum on the Peace Process. To its credit, Hamas has curtailed rocket fire from armed groups and at some cost to its claim to be a resistance movement. Hamas’ clenched fist is far less threatening than the world would like to admit. Whilst Hamas has discipline amongst its ranks and legions of young men to recruit, its projection of power amounts to homemade firepower: Rockets that have undeniably negative and counterproductive consequences and rockets that Israel has also to recognize will never go away, at least as long as Gaza remains isolated and occupied from without.
Today’s situation is untenable; but that is not to say it cannot continue for some time. Driving Gazans into the sea is not an option; neglecting and trying to forget Gaza is the next best thing. Therefore, this small Mediterranean community has little choice but to be anything but patient. Gazans will still be here after Cast Lead 3.0 and Gazans will still raise their families, celebrate the marriages of their children, and watch football on TV. Gazans, in other words, will be Gazans.
After decades of suffering and indignity, has it ever been more clear that when left alone Gazans can govern? Is it not self-evident that the vast majority of Gazans are moderate and lead mundane lives of routine? Perhaps it’s time President Obama learned a lesson from his Wall Street campaign backers and took a gamble on Gazans not being any more of a threat to regional instability than an out-of-control Israel.
Wasseem El Sarraj is a Palestinian researcher based in Gaza. He is the co-founder of TiDA, a Palestinian think tank.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Judy Bonds’ life teaches us how to fight harder
In this line of work, we are lucky to meet and work with a lot of heroes, people who stand up against all odds for the health of their communities, who sacrifice for the greater good of their brothers and sisters. Judy Bonds of Marfork, West Virginia was a hero among heroes, an extraordinary leader and an indomitable spirit. Today, we mourn her passing, and with that, the loss of an inspiration, a warrior and a visionary for the movement to abolish mountaintop removal mining and protect communities from poisonous coal mining pollution.
We at Earthjustice started working with Judy in 2003, just before she won the prestigious Goldman Prize for her courage and accomplishments in the fight to stop mountaintop removal mining. She was the firebrand leader of a scrappy community organization called Coal River Mountain Watch (CRMW) that at the time ran on the sheer grit and will of a band of big-hearted volunteers, with Judy as their fearless director. When she received the Goldman Prize, she used the prize funds to launch CRMW as a full-time nonprofit organization, and they came to Earthjustice for help in bringing their fight from the coalfields to America’s courts.
Judy could always be counted on to cut straight to the heart of the matter with a colorful turn of phrase that was singular and persuasive. She kept a hard line and railed against compromise when it meant that her neighbors and community would suffer. She pushed us, her partners and her friends to keep a hard line, too, and to resist negotiating away protections for her fellow Appalachians. Judy also saw to it that environmentalists didn’t get so bent on cutting global warming pollution through new methods of carbon sequestration that they ignored the problems of mining coal. “I don’t care if it’s marshmallows coming out of those coal stacks,” she said. “As long as you’re mining and burning coal, it’s a problem for me and my family.” She fought for her people and inspired us to fight harder, too.
And she did this all in the face of great adversity. She stood proud and tall when people in favor of mountaintop removal threatened her life, when they struck her, and when they slung hateful words at her. As she stood her ground under these circumstances, we were fortified in our commitment that the fight to abolish mountaintop removal is too important to give up on.
More than anything, Judy was determined to open America’s eyes to the human injustices of mountaintop removal mining. She spoke about the greed and corruption of the coal companies dumping their mining waste in her state’s waters, contaminating water supplies and sickening mostly poor people with their pollution. She made many see that this type of mining is not just a crisis for the environment, it’s a crisis for people–and that the people of Appalachia deserve the same protections as other Americans.
“It has taken a lifetime to fit together the pieces of the puzzle,” she wrote in 2006, “that the people who exploited Appalachia–the coal and land barons–stereotyped us in order to justify the treatment of my people–to make us the ‘national sacrifice zone’ for America’s cheap energy.” Through her work she showed us, in the words of the great Martin Luther King, Jr., that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Though we have lost one of our greatest heroes and leaders, we must press on. Today, our fight continues. Thank you, Judy, for all you have done and taught us. We will fight harder.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Remember “freedom fries”? That’s what the House Republicans, when they were last in the majority, renamed french fries, after France refused to support the invasion of Iraq. It seems like renaming fries might be just about the extent of food regulation that some in Congress are willing to support.
The new Republican majority threatens a barrage of investigations. California Republican Darrell Issa is the new chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Issa has been tweeting about the subjects he intends to investigate: “CONTINUED INITIAL OVERSIGHT INVESTIGATIONS LINEUP: WikiLeaks, the safety of American food/medicine and effectiveness of @FDArecalls …”
The timing of his tweet on food safety was impeccable, coming just one day before President Barack Obama was scheduled to sign into law the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, one of the last bills passed by the House before Congress recessed in late December. The new law will give the Food and Drug Administration authority to order a food recall, among other tools intended to protect people in the U.S. from foodborne illnesses. Believe it or not, before now, the FDA could only recommend a recall, not order one.
The new law won’t come in time to help Shirley Mae Almer. She died Dec. 21, 2008, after becoming infected with salmonella, which she contracted from tainted peanut butter. Almer and at least eight others died of the illness, caused by King Nut peanut butter and other products made using infected nuts from the Peanut Corporation of America. Two years have passed since Almer’s death, and her family has just filed suit in federal court. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports at least 714 people were sickened by the outbreak in 46 states. The CDC says foodborne illnesses cause millions of people to get sick every year, sending 128,000 to the hospital and killing 3,000–that’s more than eight people a day.
The American Public Health Association, a member of the Make Our Food Safe coalition, celebrated the bill, which, it writes, “will finally begin to address the dangerous gaps in our nation’s woefully outdated food safety system.” Just because a bill is signed into law, though, doesn’t mean it will get funded. Republicans in Congress can still hold up funding (as it seems they will do for sections of the health insurance reform law passed last year). Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., who sits on the Appropriations subcommittee that funds the FDA, told The Washington Post: “No one wants anybody to get sick, and we should always strive to make sure food is safe. But the case for a $1.4 billion expenditure isn’t there.”
Really? It’s comforting to know that Kingston doesn’t want anybody to get sick. But that doesn’t alter the fact that millions do. When it comes to food safety, as with airline safety, mine safety, pick an industry: Regulations save lives.
Nevertheless, Darrell Issa, reported Politico, sent letters to 150 trade associations, companies and think tanks, seeking advice on which regulations to investigate. An excerpt of the letter, posted by NBC News, read: “I ask for your assistance in identifying existing and proposed regulations that have negatively impacted job growth in your members’ industry. Additionally, suggestions on reforming identified regulations and the rulemaking process would be appreciated.”
The Issa approach is similar to that of the new chair of the House Financial Services Committee, Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., who told The Birmingham (Ala.) News, “In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks.”
It should be clear now why the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its member corporations poured so much money into the election. A new survey done by the Union of Concerned Scientists shows a large number of government scientists and inspectors believe corporate interests are undermining food safety in the United States.
Darrell Issa is the wealthiest member of the House, with a net worth of at least $160 million. He earned it from the Viper car alarm system–you know, the one that blares (in his own voice), “Step away from the car.”
Chairman Issa, protect the American people–step away from the corporations.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 900 stations in North America. She is the author of “Breaking the Sound Barrier,” recently released in paperback and now a New York Times best-seller.
2010 Amy Goodman

Follow Amy Goodman on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/democracynow

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

On his Thursday Fox Business show, John Stossel took aim at ten government policies that he claimed have unintended consequences and are causing more harm than good. Included in his top-ten list, which ranged from health care reform to parity for women’s sports, was the minimum wage. Stossel, a TV personality who probably brings in more in a week than a minimum wage earner does in an entire year, opined that our nation’s lowest-paid workers get paid too darn much — and that’s why unemployment is so darn high.
As Stossel tells it, he doesn’t oppose the minimum wage because he’s in the pocket of Wal-Mart, Pizza Hut and the other national chains that profit by keeping wages low. Instead, he cares deeply about workers who fill low-wage jobs, and wants what’s best for them. Home health aides, restaurant workers, and janitors may think they’d be better off if they got paid more. But Stossel explains that many of them will be out of work if the minimum wage goes up — and that therefore they’re better off working for lower pay and getting experience. His sympathetic guest, Russell Roberts, a professor at George Mason University delivers the Stossel message quite clearly: “What can be more cruel than to raise your wage artificially, and then have no wage?”
But even the most casual examination of Stossel’s critique reveals that it’s long on rhetoric but short on facts.
Myth Number 1: Minimum wage earners are mostly teens.
Minimum wage opponents like to claim that low-wage workers earning near the minimum wage are mostly teenagers working for pocket change. They therefore characterize low-wage jobs as valuable learning opportunities for kids — rather than a job that needs to deliver a fair paycheck. Says Stossel, “Low wage jobs used to be a way for kids and the unskilled to get into the labor force; to prove themselves.” He continues, “The construction industry used to be a place teens could get a foot in the door, learn the discipline of regular work. Minimum wage has left many teens without a job.”
Not counting the fact that construction is a relatively high-paying industry with few minimum wage jobs, there are two major problems with this argument. First of all, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, three quarters of minimum wage earners are 20 or older. In fact, many of the largest growth occupations in the low-wage economy, like home health aides, are generally worked by older adults, many of them in their forties and fifties. So when we’re talking about minimum wage jobs we are overwhelmingly talking about adults. Period.
And about those teens. While Stossel’s kids may not need the money, many of the small share of low-wage workers who are teens come from low and middle income families who rely on their wages to make ends meet and cover growing tuition bills.
In addition, the rationale perpetuated by Stossel that teens should be happy with any job — no matter how low paying — is deeply troubling. Stossel presents minimum wage jobs as almost a social service, repeating over and over again how minimum wage jobs provide critical work experience for youth. In this context, any pay for these jobs seems generous. But while they are gaining experience, minimum wage earners are carrying out critical jobs that keep businesses operating and profiting. When they serve food, watch a child or ring up a customer, they are doing valuable work that keeps businesses depend on to thrive.
Myth Number 2: Minimum wage increases kill jobs.
Stossel claims that low-paid workers are actually hurt by the minimum wage because businesses cut jobs when the minimum wage goes up. “Minimum wage left many teens without a job,” said Stossel. “No wonder teen unemployment is 26%.”
It’s true that teen unemployment is disturbingly high, and we need to work hard to bring that number down so that teens who are trying to help contribute to their families or pay for their education can get back into the labor market. But Stossel’s claim that minimum wage has created the crisis in teen unemployment is just not true.
Lest we forget, we are currently experiencing the highest unemployment since the Great Depression because of the wreckage caused by the bursting of the housing bubble and the financial crisis. Teens, who have less experience than their older coworkers, are generally the first fired and last to be rehired when jobs are scarce, and are therefore suffering from even greater joblesssness.
Furthermore, more than a decade and a half of academic research has shown that the minimum wage raises the incomes of the lowest paid workers without reducing employment. The effects of the minimum wage have been studied in the real world for years, and the most rigorous science on the subject shows that increases in the minimum wage don’t cut jobs.
The latest contribution to this body of work is a comprehensive new study recently published in the prestigious Review of Economics and Statistics. A team of economists from the University of Massachusetts, University of California and University of North Carolina compared every pair of neighboring counties in the United States that straddle a state border and had a different minimum wage at any time between 1990 and 2006. Their analysis of employment in over 500 counties across the nation found that minimum wage increases did not lead to job loss.
And another study, to be published in April in the journal Industrial Relations, specifically examines teen employment and finds that even during times of high unemployment, minimum wage increases have not lead to job loss.
While Stossel claims that the minimum wage cuts jobs, the real experience on the ground shows otherwise. That’s because while employers give their lowest-paid employees a little bump up in pay when the minimum wage increases, they also benefit from lower turnover and higher morale and productivity. Better-paid workers are better employees.
While Stossel’s recycled attacks on the minimum wage don’t hold water, expect to see these arguments for gutting the paychecks of the lowest paid workers gathering steam. Business interests are poised to take advantage of high unemployment and decreased worker bargaining power to try to shred decades-old worker protections.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com