ARTICLES~!

A moderated forum for more thoughtful discussion.

Moderators: pd Rydia, LadyDragonClawsEDW

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

ARTICLES~!

Unread postby pd Rydia » Thu Jun 30, 2005 5:00 am

http://www.pojonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050629/NEWS01/506290323

<big>E-mail gaffe leaves lawmaker red-faced</big>
Group referred to as 'idiots'

By Anthony Farmer
Poughkeepsie Journal


Assemblyman Willis Stephens learned the hard way this week that there's a big difference between hitting the "reply" and "forward" buttons when you subscribe to an e-mail discussion list.

Stephens inadvertently sent an e-mail Monday morning to nearly 300 subscribers of a discussion group, or "listserv," that focuses on the community of Brewster, in Putnam County. Stephens, a Republican, represents an area that includes a handful of towns in Putnam and Westchester counties and the Town of Pawling in Dutchess County.

In his message, he said he subscribes to the list to monitor what is going on in Brewster but doesn't post messages.

"Just watching the idiots pontificate," Stephens wrote.

He had thought the message was going to Beth Coursen, an aide in his Assembly district office, Coursen said. But instead of forwarding an earlier e-mail from the discussion group to Coursen — noting a political opponent had registered a Web site address using Stephens' name — he sent his reply to all the subscribers.

-Apology issued-

Within in hour, Stephens sent another e-mail to the list apologizing for the earlier one.

"To all who read and post on this group, I honestly enjoy reading most of what is exchanged on this site and do not direct my indiscrete characterizations to anyone in particular or to the group in general," he wrote. "In fact, now I most closely resemble the type of poster I described."

When reached for comment Tuesday, Stephens said he was embarrassed and reiterated what he said in his e-mailed apology.

Anyone who has subscribed to such a discussion list has witnessed others make the same mistake — or has done it themselves. While certainly embarrassing, rarely are such mistakes so potentially damaging as an elected official referring directly to some of his constituents as "idiots."

The incident also highlights the growing influence technology is having on politics — and the pitfalls it brings along with it.

While in the past, a politician would have to go to a diner or American Legion hall to hear what a group of constituents is concerned about, they can now sit at their computer and read those discussions as they evolve via e-mail.

The discussion group — called "Brewster10509" — has a Web site describing what the list is for. Members are free to post anything that has to do with government, education, community organizations and a host of other things related to Brewster and the surrounding Town of Southeast.

The group's description also offers a warning to would-be participants: "Please be civil. You may be alone at your keyboard, but your words will be very public indeed!"

Greg Ball, a 28-year-old Pawling native who has already announced he wants to run in a Republican primary against Stephens in 2006, quickly seized on Stephens' gaffe. Ball's campaign sent out a press release late Monday that said Stephens' characterization of the members of the listserv was unsettling.

"This language clearly vindicates what the Ball campaign has been stressing for months: Mr. Stephens is out of touch and believes himself to be above the people," the press release said.

Stephens' e-mail also included what some might consider to be offensive remarks intended for his intended recipient, Coursen. Besides working for Stephens, Coursen is the Republican candidate for Pawling town supervisor in November and a current town board member.

In his message, Stephens inquired about Coursen's campaign and whether she'll seek other party lines on the November ballot. He suggests possible party names, including one that was off-color.

"If it is really hot tomorrow you are welcome to come for a swim (a suit would be appropriate :0) ..." he added.

Coursen said she could see why some might find those comments offensive, but she doesn't.

"They were intended for my eyes and I don't view them as sexist," she said.

Stephens conceded those remarks weren't politically correct, but said he and Coursen are old friends.

"It was just a friendly chat back and forth," Stephens said. "I never really thought twice about it until I realized someone else might read it."

Michael Santos, a Brewster resident who created the discussion group, said he is a long time political adversary of Stephens. Stephens has called him a lot worse than a pontificating idiot, Santos, a Democratic village trustee in Brewster, said with a laugh.

"I guess I was taken a little aback at first," Santos said. "On the other hand, I should probably send Will a thank you note since my in-box is now full with requests from people asking to be members" of the e-mail group.

Anthony Farmer can be reached at apfarmer @ poughkeepsiejournal . com <p>
<div style="text-align:center">"Pants are bad!!! We should wear pants only on our head you conformist bastard!!! Pants are the devils work!! Run freee!! And pantless!!!" -- Vulture</div></p>

Uncle Pervy
 

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby Uncle Pervy » Thu Jun 30, 2005 5:27 pm

I laugh. Greatly. <p>---------------------------

ReakoSomner: regardless, I was poor, and in need of diamonds</p>

SuperRube
 

Hell.

Unread postby SuperRube » Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:50 am

If he haden't apologised, I would have voted for him.


Will Rennar
 

Re: Hell.

Unread postby Will Rennar » Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:49 am

I am with the Rube on this one. Since he DID apologize, however, I only have this to say:

Image <p>This has been your daily interrupted moment of Zen.</p>

User avatar
Zemyla
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:01 am

Re: Hell.

Unread postby Zemyla » Fri Jul 01, 2005 11:32 am

Dammit, Rube, you took my comment!

When I run for office, I'm going to insult my constituents, which will make them vote for me because they find my honesty "refreshing". Then I will prove they were idiots for voting for me. <p>-----
Do not taunt Happy Fun Zemyla.

<span style="font-size:xx-small;">I think boobs are the lesser of two evils. - Inverse (Pervy)
Dammit, Dan, I'm not dating a damn NPC! - OOC Will (Will Baseton)
Of course! Anything worth doing is worth doing completely wrong! - Travis English
Ultimately, wizards and clerics don't say, "Gee, I want to become a lich because weapons hurt less and I don't have to worry about being backstabbed; that whole 'eternal life' thing is just a fringe benefit."-Darklion
But this one time I killed a walrus with my bare hands, and I suddenly understood spherical coordinates. - KnightsofSquare
Also, when you've worked a 36-hour shift as an intern you too just might pour yourself a catful of coffee and sit down to cuddle with your travel mug. -eirehound
</span>

Adventurers! | RPG World World | The Phantom Lord's OT Board mkII | Indie Madnesse | Brotherhood of Elitist Bastards</p>

Uncle Pervy
 

Re: Hell.

Unread postby Uncle Pervy » Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:08 pm

My goal is to insult my opponents openly, so I get a reputation for "pulling no punches" style honesty. Besides, we some good old fashioned 19th century mudslinging. <p>---------------------------

ReakoSomner: regardless, I was poor, and in need of diamonds</p>

User avatar
Ganonfro
 
Posts: 955
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 9:25 pm

Re: Hell.

Unread postby Ganonfro » Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:31 pm

We need duels to be legal again, that way, someone who was insulted can try to regain his honor! It was a great time in history when Alexander Hamilton fought Alan Burr...


User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: Hell.

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Sat Jul 02, 2005 4:21 am

Not really, considering Alexander Hamilton, one of the most brilliant men of his time, died.

Also, what the fuck is with these posticons? <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

User avatar
Spleen
I put a BOMB inside EVERY BAD GUY!
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 5:07 pm
Location: Demon Realms of Niu-Jiurzi

Re: Hell.

Unread postby Spleen » Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:33 pm

Canada Day. <p>__-__-__-__-__-__

"I'm just a guy with a boomerang. I didn't ask for all this flying, and this magic..."
-Sokka, Avatar

"Screw normal, because if you're normal, the crowd will accept you, but if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader."
-Christopher Titus</p>

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby pd Rydia » Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:38 pm

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/07/04/deep.impact.sues.reut/

Astrologist sues NASA over crash

Monday, July 4, 2005 Posted: 0845 GMT (1645 HKT)

MOSCOW, Russia (Reuters) -- A Russian astrologist who says NASA has altered her horoscope by crashing a spacecraft into a comet is suing the U.S. space agency for damages of $300 million, local media has reported.


NASA deliberately crashed its probe, named Deep Impact, into the Tempel 1 comet to unleash a spray of material formed billions of years ago which scientists hope will shed new light on the composition of the solar system.

"It is obvious that elements of the comet's orbit, and correspondingly the ephemeris, will change after the explosion, which interferes with my astrology work and distorts my horoscope," Izvestia daily quoted astrologist Marina Bai as saying in legal documents submitted before Monday's collision.

A spokeswoman for a Moscow district court said initial preparations for the case were underway but could not say when the hearing would begin. NASA representatives in Moscow were unavailable for comment.

Copyright 2005 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


<hr size=8 noshade width="74%" align=left>

I remember hearing about this a long time ago (as in, several years), but found this link just now:

http://www.osmond-riba.org/lis/essay_mcdonalds.htm

McDonalds coffee and the Liebeck lawsuit
Lis Riba, 2000


Here are some facts about what really happened:

At the trial, it was revealed:

* McDonalds required their coffee kept at 185 degrees Fahrenheit, plus or minus 5 degrees, significantly higher than other establishments. [Coffee is usually served at 135 to 140 degrees]
* An expert testified that 180 degree liquids will cause full thickness burns in 2 to 7 seconds.
* McDonalds knew before this accident that burn hazards exist with any foods served above 140 degrees.
* McDonalds knew that its coffee would burn drinkers at the temperature they served it.
* McDonalds research showed that customers consumed coffee immediately while driving.
* McDonalds knew of over 700 people burned by its coffee, including many third-degree burns similar to Ms. Liebeck's.
* McDonalds had received previous requests from consumers and safety organizations to lower their coffee temperature.

There were many things McDonalds could've done to prevent injuries:

* lowering the holding temperature of their coffee,
* putting warning labels on the cups not to drink immediately,
* redesigning the cups to minimize tipping or prevent drinking in cars

McDonalds knew of the risk and knew scores of injured customers, but did nothing to mitigate the chance of injury.

Evidence showed that McDonalds served their coffee so hot to save money. This let them get away with a cheaper grade of coffee and cut down on the number of free refills they had to give away. McDonalds executives testified that they thought it would be cheaper to pay claims and worker's compensation benefits to people burned by their coffee versus making any of these changes.

Even the trial court judge called McDonalds' conduct willful, wanton, reckless and callous.

On to the situation at hand:

* Stella Liebeck, age 79, was a passenger in the car.
* The car was at a full stop so she could add cream and sugar to her coffee. [She was not the driver and the car was not moving.]
* The cup tipped and spilled over her lap.
* Within a few seconds, Ms. Liebeck suffered third-degree burns over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, genitals and groin.
* Ms. Liebeck was hospitalized for 8 days, and required skin grafting and debridement treatments.
* Parts of Ms. Liebeck's body were permanently scarred.
* Ms. Liebeck tried to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses. McDonalds offered her $800. She sought mediation, but McDonald's refused.
* The jury initially awarded Ms. Liebeck the equivalent of two days worth of coffee sales for McDonalds as punitive damages.
* The trial judge reduced the verdict to something under $600,000.

McDonalds has since lowered the temperature on their coffee.

Information comes primarily from http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

Other sources I used and/or would recommend on this case are:

* http://www.accidentline.com/McDonalds.htm
* http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:30 ... it-faq.htm
* http://www.vamedmal.com/mainpages/FAQ.htm
* http://www.omnology.com/mcds.html
* http://quellerfisher.ljextra.com/liebeck.html
* http://web.langston.com/Fun_People/1997/1997BCY.html
* http://www.bhm.tis.net/jury/corner/dec09b.html
* http://insuranceattorney.com/McDonaldsCoffeeSpill.htm
* http://www.andrewprince.com/SOMECOLDarticle3.html <p>
<div style="text-align:center">"Pants are bad!!! We should wear pants only on our head you conformist bastard!!! Pants are the devils work!! Run freee!! And pantless!!!" -- Vulture</div></p>

User avatar
Zemyla
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:01 am

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby Zemyla » Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:32 pm

She should have seen it coming. Otherwise, she's not that good an astrologer. <p>-----
Do not taunt Happy Fun Zemyla.

<span style="font-size:xx-small;">I think boobs are the lesser of two evils. - Inverse (Pervy)
Dammit, Dan, I'm not dating a damn NPC! - OOC Will (Will Baseton)
Of course! Anything worth doing is worth doing completely wrong! - Travis English
Ultimately, wizards and clerics don't say, "Gee, I want to become a lich because weapons hurt less and I don't have to worry about being backstabbed; that whole 'eternal life' thing is just a fringe benefit."-Darklion
But this one time I killed a walrus with my bare hands, and I suddenly understood spherical coordinates. - KnightsofSquare
Also, when you've worked a 36-hour shift as an intern you too just might pour yourself a catful of coffee and sit down to cuddle with your travel mug. -eirehound
</span>

Adventurers! | RPG World World | The Phantom Lord's OT Board mkII | Indie Madnesse | Brotherhood of Elitist Bastards</p>

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42197
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby Idran1701 » Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:28 am

Who said she didn't? Not like she could stop it, and it'd distort her horoscope whether or not she knew it'd happen.



Ignoring the whole "pseudo-science" thing, of course. <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Tue Jul 12, 2005 2:13 am

As for the McDonalds thing, as far as I knew their coffee cups *always* said HOT-HOT-HOT-HOT-HOT-HOT-etc all the way around the cup. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42197
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby Idran1701 » Tue Jul 12, 2005 2:50 am

Even if that is the case, you have to admit that it's not nearly the whiny consumer lawsuit that people always make it out to be. <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Tue Jul 12, 2005 3:10 am

*I* think it is. But then again, I don't drink coffee *on purpose.* And I read things that are handed to me. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42197
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby Idran1701 » Tue Jul 12, 2005 3:21 pm

...Did you even read that entire article?

"Evidence showed that McDonalds served their coffee so hot to save money. This let them get away with a cheaper grade of coffee and cut down on the number of free refills they had to give away. McDonalds executives testified that they thought it would be cheaper to pay claims and worker's compensation benefits to people burned by their coffee versus making any of these changes."

Plus, it was served _60_ degrees hotter than at other places that sell coffee. Heck, it was only 30 degrees cooler than boiling temperature. What's she supposed to do, laugh off the third-degree burns? "Oh, that wacky McDonalds. What _will_ they do next?" <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

User avatar
Shinigori V2
Wishing she brought a backup turtle.
 
Posts: 7996
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 6:13 pm

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby Shinigori V2 » Tue Jul 12, 2005 4:34 pm

The point is that she could obviously tell how hot it was, yet decided to do something stupid in a car at the wrong time.

As a hint! You don't want to do anything potentially harmful with liquids in a car. You want to do it before or after you get in/out! <p>
<div style="text-align:center">What's wrong with this ring?!</div></p>

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42197
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby Idran1701 » Tue Jul 12, 2005 7:36 pm

All right, I'll grant that she made a mistake in doing this in the first place. But can you two at least agree that McDonalds was in the wrong as well? Moreso than the woman, in fact, since they did it specifically because they decided paying these sorts of settlements every once in a while would be cheaper than serving coffee at normal temperatures? I mean, I can understand corporations wanting to maximize profits, but this is over the line. <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=idran1701>Idran1701</A] at: 7/12/05 19:38

deathcyth
 

bah

Unread postby deathcyth » Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:42 am

ah people need to take more responsibility for their actions. Ya the coffee was too hot but first obviouly this women had their coffee beofre so she knew the temperature. Second she tried something stupid in a car
with a coffee whose normal temperature she was already familiar with. So no it is her fault that she wanted to be stupid I think Mcdonalds has some minor blame but not much.


Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42197
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: bah

Unread postby Idran1701 » Wed Jul 13, 2005 4:31 pm

...All right. So she should take responsibility for her actions...but McDonalds shouldn't take any responsibility for putting profit above the _safety_ of their customers. Because for some reason making one stupid mistake means you should just get over the 8 days of hospitalization and permanent scarring and just continue on with your life.

Social Darwinism is awesome! :D

(Also, I like how you assume this wasn't her first time drinking the coffee even though it never said anything even suggesting that anywhere.)


Edit: All right, let me point out some facts from that article that some of you may have missed since bulleted lists are boring.

* McDonalds knew that its coffee would burn drinkers at the temperature they served it.
* McDonalds knew of over 700 people burned by its coffee, including many third-degree burns similar to Ms. Liebeck's.
* McDonalds had received previous requests from consumers and safety organizations to lower their coffee temperature.

This wasn't even the first time someone had been burned. How many times does it have to happen before McDonalds should have been made to stop? 1000? 2000? 10000? Or are we supposed to just let them continue serving their ludicrously-hot coffee because they don't want to shell out for free refills? I know it's entertaining for some of you to mock stupid people because you've never made idiotic mistakes that weren't entirely your fault, but seriously. If someone was distracted while using a table saw that wasn't built with a blade guard, would you say the manufacturer has "minor blame but not much" for the guy losing a thumb? <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=idran1701>Idran1701</A] at: 7/13/05 16:38

User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: bah

Unread postby Besyanteo » Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:48 pm

I'm gonna have to side with Idran here. Both parties are at fault, and that should be recognized.

However, as an ex-McDonalds employee, I'm gonna have to also say that if their lawyers can cheat you out of workers comp and overtime pay, chances are we won't see them lowering their coffee serving temperature. It sorta of pointless to worry about. If you want to hurt them somehow, the best you can do is refuse them business.

Or in short, I think that these kinds of suits are usually doomed from the get-go. :{


User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: bah

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Wed Jul 13, 2005 8:24 pm

I actually came into this thread with the mind that McDonalds is always guilty of everything, ever. So establishing their responsibility is not an issue--it's a given. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: bah

Unread postby pd Rydia » Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:36 pm

My opinion:

Those coffee lids? They don't go on the cup very well. The 2 years I worked at McDonalds, I scalded myself several times, and my customers once or twice. I'm certainly glad they lowered the temperature (note: they have--thus, no third degree burns on Dia!)

Note the second: they especially don't go on the cups well when the lids are stored in the grill area, above the grill itself or the oven (the actual oven, not the microwave oven), and the heat makes them shrink. In the store I worked, there was no other place to store these lids. (It was also highly convenient, as opposed to storing them in a storage room which took a while to run back to, considiring one runs out of lids quickly in a high volume store 1/2 the space it needs to be to handle its customers.)

It is stupidly easy for the lids to fall off the cup by accident, whether one is in a car, sitting at the table, or standing at the counter right in front of the McDonald's in question. Knowing this, it's not really a matter of "taking steps to protect oneself," so much as "coffee shouldn't be kept so ridiculously hot that it can cause permanent disfigurement, for the sake of profit."

People know coffee is hot. However, hot enough to send you or someone else to the hospital with 3rd degree burns and and rack up five digit bills? I don't generally buy food and drink which I can use as a weapon.


The thing is, I remember when the story came out, and the media jumped all over it. It was always made out to be a frivolous lawsuit thing...she had no bills to pay, she just wanted a quick buck. And she was driving the car, and the car was in motion. Always around the tune of "HAK PIE, of course coffee is hot! durdurdur" <p>
<div style="text-align:center">WITTY QUOTE.</div></p>

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42197
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: bah

Unread postby Idran1701 » Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:29 am

Indeed. I don't know if the misrepresentation was intentional to sell stories or just a Telephone-Game-like effect (probably a little of both), but I was quite surprised too when I had heard the actual stuff about the case. <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: bah

Unread postby pd Rydia » Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:00 am

Idran: Hm. If purposeful misrepresentation is profitable, you'd think that it would milk more money for the news to come back a bit later and say, "No wait, this is what REALLY happened!" Shock! Horror! It didn't REALLY happen that way after all!

So long as they didn't pull that too many times (to the point of blatant unreliability--as opposed to semi-blatant), it could squeeze a few more bucks out of a story. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>Edited by: pd Rydia&nbsp; Image at: 7/14/05 9:03

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby pd Rydia » Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:03 am

<small>http://www.wpta.com/story.aspx?type=nn&NStoryID=687


Chief Justice William Rehnquist Hospitalized
Jul 14, 2005 - (SUPREME COURT 7/14/05 AP)
The nation's chief justice, William Rehnquist, is hospitalized.


A spokeswoman say Rehnquist was taken to a hospital in suburban Washington Tuesday night with a fever, and was admitted for observation and testing.

Rehnquist suffers from thyroid cancer, and has been undergoing radiation and chemotherapy treatment.

But the 80-year-old justice had been going to work every day, despite his illness and intense speculation that he would soon retire from the bench.

In March, he was hospitalized with breathing problems. (Edited by Paula Hinton)</small>


As well, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has recently resigned.


For those unaware of how it works: "The Supreme Court symbolizes the third branch of government, the Judiciary. The Supreme Court only interprets Constitutional law and choses to hear a small minority of the cases that are sent up for review. Below it is a network of state and federal courts which decides the majority of legal questions. The Supreme Court is made up of 9 justices who are appointed by the President.Once confirmed by the Senate, the Justices, in effect, serve for life. The independence, and impartiality, of the Judiciary is supposedly assured by the fact that they are not elected and generally may not be removed." <p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>Edited by: pd Rydia&nbsp; Image at: 7/14/05 9:03

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby pd Rydia » Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:09 pm

http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,1261191,00.html

12.45pm
'Health warnings' for foreign news

Jason Deans, broadcasting editor
Wednesday July 14, 2004

Foreign news channels such as Fox News may have to carry on-screen "health warnings" as part of new accuracy and impartiality rules for TV and radio news.


Communications regulator Ofcom is to consult broadcasters and the public about introducing a new requirement for foreign news channels to carry on-screen labelling telling British viewers that their content was originally intended for viewers in other countries.

The proposed rules governing due accuracy and impartiality in broadcast news - published today as part of Ofcom's draft broadcasting code - would also allow TV broadcasters greater freedom to transmit polemical programmes, with presenters expressing strong personal opinions on particular subjects or issues.

In addition to the draft regulation, Ofcom said it would consider creating a new rule requiring foreign news channels to carry on-screen labelling.

However, foreign broadcasters would still be required to comply with Ofcom's accuracy and impartiality rules.

Ofcom added that audience research carried out at the end of last year suggested viewers would like better on-screen identification of foreign news channels.

"The research could be taken to show that, given the complaints received during the Iraq war, the essential tool UK audiences require is an indication of whether they are watching or listening to news that is primarily made for an overseas audience," the regulator said.

"Over 70% in the survey recognised examples of retransmitted news services that were in fact made for a country outside the UK or for a global audience - but that leaves a proportion who did not realise that. A rule could be created which says retransmitted news made originally for a non-UK audience should, in some way, be labelled as such," Ofcom added.

"It would still be the case that such services must ensure that a wide range of views and opinions are aired and that 'due impartiality' is still maintained."

In addition to Fox News, other Ofcom licensed services that might be affected by the new rule include CNN, CNBC, Bloomberg, Arab News Network and possibly even BBC World.

However, Arabic language news channel al-Jazeera, which has attracted criticism in some quarters for its allegedly anti-western bias, is licensed in France and does not fall within Ofcom's jurisdiction, although it is available to satellite TV viewers in the UK.

Last month Ofcom upheld 24 complaints about anti-BBC bias on Fox News, after news anchor John Gibson had accused the corporation of feeling "entitled to lie and, when caught lying, felt entitled to defend its lying reporters and executives", on the day the Hutton report was published in January.

However the Independent Television Commission, which regulated commercial TV before being superseded by Ofcom at the end of 2003, ruled last year that Fox News and Arab news channels had not breached regulations on impartial reporting during the Iraq war.

· To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 7239 9857 <p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby pd Rydia » Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:42 pm

Big update on supreme court stuff:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/14/rehnquist.health/

Rehnquist silences retirement speculation

Thursday, July 14, 2005; Posted: 11:42 p.m. EDT (03:42 GMT)

vert.rehnquist.ap.jpg
Chief Justice William Rehnquist

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Chief Justice William Rehnquist announced Thursday night that he has no plans to step down from the Supreme Court and will continue to serve as long as he can.


"I want to put to rest the speculation and unfounded rumors of my imminent retirement," Rehnquist said in a statement released through his family. "I am not about to announce my retirement. I will continue to perform my duties as chief justice as long as my health permits."

A Bush administration official involved in the judicial selection process said the White House is aware of Rehnquist's statement, which was sent to the White House counsel's office.

"We take him at his word," the official said.

Two sources close to the chief justice told CNN they were not surprised because Rehnquist enjoys his work on the court -- but were surprised he felt the need to take the unusual step of issuing a statement to shoot down the retirement rumors.

"All that wild speculation must have convinced him he had to say something," one said.

Rehnquist was released earlier Thursday from a hospital near his northern Virginia home after being admitted Tuesday with a fever, said a U.S. Supreme Court spokeswoman.

The 80-year-old has been battling thyroid cancer since October and underwent a tracheotomy as part of his treatment. He endured weeks of chemotherapy and radiation.

His office has refused to characterize the seriousness of his illness, which forced him to work from home for several months and miss oral arguments in a number of cases.

Many court watchers had expected Rehnquist to announce his departure when the court concluded its annual session in June.

Instead, his colleague, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, 75, announced her retirement.

Rehnquist was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1972 by President Richard Nixon and was elevated to chief justice in 1986 by President Ronald Reagan.

Sources close to Rehnquist have said he deliberately has kept his staff and friends in the dark about his future, believing it would be a distraction to the court's business if the speculation became too rampant.

"I think he's happy now just getting his work done, and the work of the other justices done. He takes that leadership role seriously," said Richard Garnett, a University of Notre Dame professor and a former law clerk for Rehnquist.

He returned to his office in December and was back on the bench in March. Rehnquist braved the cold in January to uphold tradition and swear-in President Bush for a second term.

Rehnquist's trachea tube remains in place, leaving his voice scratchy, and he uses a wheelchair to get around on long trips.

CNN's Joe Johns and Bill Mears contributed to this report.


http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/breaking_news/12135709.htm

Posted on Fri, Jul. 15, 2005

Rehnquist says he's not retiring

He will remain as chief justice "as long as my health permits," he said in a statement last night.

By Charles Lane

Washington Post


WASHINGTON - Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist emphatically denied yesterday that he intended to step down from the Supreme Court, as he sought to halt a spiral of speculation about his possible retirement.

In a prepared statement, Rehnquist, who is 80 and suffering from thyroid cancer, said: "I'm not about to announce my retirement.

"I want to put to rest the speculation and unfounded rumors of my imminent retirement," he said, adding that "I will continue to perform my duties as chief justice as long as my health permits."

In a sign that the announcement reflected a personal reaction to the speculation, Rehnquist released the statement through his family, who contacted the Associated Press shortly before 9 last night - rather than putting the news out through the court's public information office, as would usually be done.

Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg later confirmed the statement's contents.

The announcement came just hours after Rehnquist had returned home from a two-day stay at the Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, where he had gone Tuesday complaining of a fever.

The White House had no advance notice of Rehnquist's statement, press secretary Scott McClellan said. "We didn't know before the statement," he said. "The chief justice is doing an outstanding job and we are pleased that he will continue his great service to the nation."

Several allies of the White House said Rehnquist's decision to announce that he was staying would help clarify the political situation and concentrate attention back on the choice to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. "It makes things easier in a certain sense because it makes it clear this is a process about picking a single justice," said Sean Rushton, executive director of the Committee for Justice, a group formed to support Bush judicial nominees.

Although hedged in the sense that the chief justice denied only an "imminent" retirement, Rehnquist's statement ends much of the uncertainty facing President Bush, who has been weighing a choice for a successor to O'Connor, who announced her resignation July 1.

Many in Washington had assumed that the White House might be delaying a nomination for O'Connor's seat until Rehnquist clarified his plans. His statement also appears to refute another popular speculative notion: that Rehnquist had already told the White House of his retirement plans, and was merely waiting for a prearranged moment to announce them.

Now both the White House and the Senate appear free to begin planning for a single confirmation process rather than two.

Perhaps more important for the chief justice, it will end an awkward interval during which reporters have camped out near his home in Arlington.

So strong had the expectations of his leaving the court become, that several members of the Senate had begun openly campaigning for O'Connor to remain on the court as Rehnquist's successor in the chief justice's chair.

Yesterday, four female senators called upon O'Connor to reconsider her retirement, saying in a letter to her that they would support her for chief justice if Rehnquist vacated the position. The senators said they were following up a similar suggestion made by Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Democrats Barbara Boxer of California and Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana and Republicans Olympia J. Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine signed the letter, saying they would "strongly recommend to President Bush that he nominate you as Chief Justice."

It was not clear whether O'Connor had seen the letter. She was traveling out of the country yesterday, Arberg said.

Rehnquist was diagnosed with thyroid cancer in October, missed much work while receiving treatments in November, and returned to the public eye by swearing in Bush on Jan. 20.

Since then, he has presided at court sessions, appearing mentally alert but physically weakened. He worked regularly at his court office. In recent days he has appeared thinner than he did during this spring's oral arguments.

Part of the reason for the speculation about the chief justice's plans is the mystery surrounding the precise nature of his condition. Thyroid cancer comes in several variants, most of them treatable, but some aggressive and usually fatal.

Although outside experts have often surmised that Rehnquist's symptoms and reported course of treatment were consistent with anaplastic thyroid cancer, a form of the disease that leaves most of its victims dead within a year of diagnosis, Rehnquist has neither confirmed nor denied those reports.

His emphatic statement last night lends credence to assessments by some doctors that perhaps his disease is not as aggressive as first suspected.

Rehnquist Statement

Here is the statement issued last night by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist:

"I want to put to rest

the speculation and unfounded rumors of my imminent retirement. I am not about to announce my retirement. I will continue to perform my duties as chief justice as long as

my health permits."


<hr size=8 noshade width="74%" align=left>

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002395242_oconnor22m.html

Friday, July 22, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 AM

Retiring justice worries about loss of states' rights

By Ralph Thomas

Seattle Times Olympia bureau


SPOKANE — Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, whose retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court will likely lead to a tumultuous fight in Congress over her replacement, said yesterday there is so much "antipathy" among elected politicians toward federal judges that she worries about the future of an independent judiciary.

"I'm pretty old you know, and in all the years of my life, I don't think I've ever seen relations as strained as they are now between the judiciary and some members of Congress," O'Connor said. "It makes me very sad to see it."

O'Connor's remarks came during a round-table discussion at the annual 9th Circuit Judicial Conference, a gathering of judges and lawyers from Western states.

In her hourlong appearance, O'Connor also said she worries the federal government is encroaching too much on states' rights and stressed the importance of religious freedom. But she said the courts must "protect citizens from religious incursions by the state as well as the federal government."

In talking about her role in history as the first woman on the Supreme Court, O'Connor said the late President Reagan, who appointed her 24 years ago, deserves the most credit.

"Don't give the credit to me. I didn't make that decision; Ronald Reagan made that decision," O'Connor said. "That was just an incredible thing that he did."

O'Connor, 75, announced July 1 that she is retiring so she can spend more time with her ailing husband. The news came as a surprise in the nation's capital, especially since most people expected that Chief Justice William Rehnquist would be the next justice to step down. Rehnquist, who is battling cancer, has said he plans to stay on as long as his health permits.

President Bush this week nominated federal appeals-court Judge John Roberts Jr. to replace O'Connor.

O'Connor earlier this week praised Roberts as "a brilliant legal mind" and said he is "good in every way, except he's not a woman." O'Connor, who was confirmed unanimously, said Roberts shouldn't have trouble getting confirmed. But with some members of Congress complaining about "activist" judges, O'Connor said a lengthy confirmation process is inevitable.

She said there are efforts afoot to limit federal courts' jurisdiction "in areas that some members of Congress think that the federal courts should not be involved. And that's a new approach that is worrisome."

Courts must be independent to protect individuals from seeing their constitutional rights taken away by the legislative branch, she said. "That's a concept that we've tried to promote across the globe."

O'Connor noted that Ukraine's supreme court recently overturned that country's presidential election after finding rampant vote fraud.

"I thought that was a transforming moment in the success of our efforts to promote the rule of law and the role of an independent judiciary," she said. "And yet in our country today, we're seeing efforts to prevent that — a desire not to have an independent judiciary."

Though O'Connor was appointed by one of the nation's most popular conservative presidents, she has often riled religious conservatives. She cast the deciding vote in a ruling upholding Roe v. Wade, the landmark case legalizing abortion.

Earlier this year, she joined in a 5-4 ruling that said the display of the Ten Commandments in two Kentucky courthouses violated the constitutional mandate for separation of church and state.

O'Connor said yesterday that the lack of such separation has had "violent consequences" in so many other countries, "it's hard to see why we should give that up in the face of the success that we've had."

On states' rights, O'Connor said she has always viewed state governments as laboratories. "Let them try things and see how it works," she said, citing California's effort to legalize marijuana for medical purposes as a good example. She dissented on a Supreme Court ruling that said the federal government's outright marijuana ban trumped California's law.

When O'Connor attended law school, only 3 percent of law students nationwide were women, she said. Now it's more than 50 percent.

She said she was always a little reluctant about the role-model status of being the first woman on the Supreme Court. "I never expected to be that person and was pretty scared to take it on," O'Connor said, "because it's a very hard job and I didn't want to mess it up because it would make it harder for other women to follow."

But she said her appointment by Reagan in 1981 — after the court had gone nearly two centuries without a woman justice — opened doors for women around the world.

Marsha Pechman, a federal district-court judge in Seattle, said she counts herself as one of those women. "She made such a huge difference," said Pechman, who became a state court judge in 1988 before moving to the federal bench in 1999. "I got to ride the wave of her wake."

Ralph Thomas: 360-943-9882 or rthomas@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=amecn6IvmZ0c&refer=us

O'Connor Says She Is Worried About Future of Federal Judiciary

July 21 (Bloomberg) -- Retiring U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said she is worried about the future of the federal judiciary because of a ``climate of antipathy'' in Congress.

``I don't think I've ever seen relations as strained as they are now between the judiciary and some members of Congress, and it makes me very sad to see it,'' O'Connor said today at a judicial conference in Spokane, Washington, televised on C-SPAN.

O'Connor cited congressional efforts to restrict federal court authority to decide certain issues, criticism by some lawmakers of Supreme Court decisions that cite international law and Congress's failure to raise judicial salaries to keep pace with equivalent private-sector legal jobs.

O'Connor, the first female justice, announced July 1 she will retire. President George W. Bush two days ago nominated federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. to succeed her. Yesterday, O'Connor was quoted by the Associated Press as saying Roberts was ``first rate'' though she was somewhat disappointed the nominee wasn't a woman.

Speaking at a conference of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, O'Connor cited the role of Ukraine's highest court in resolving the crisis over last year's presidential election as a ``transforming moment'' in the promotion of an independent judiciary in other nations.

``In our country today we're seeing efforts to prevent that, a desire not to have an independent judiciary,'' she said. ``That worries me.''

A `Worrisome' Approach

O'Connor said efforts in Congress to restrict federal court jurisdiction to decide particular issues were ``a new approach that's worrisome.''

Legislation introduced earlier this year would bar the Supreme Court from reviewing any government official's ``acknowledgment of God'' as the source of law or government.

Regarding judicial salaries, she said her former law clerks often earn more in their first year of private legal practice than federal judges receive. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has repeatedly called on Congress to raise judges' salaries.

``With the present climate of antipathy in Congress, I don't see any prospect for adjustment of those salaries,'' she said.

O'Connor noted that some in Congress criticized the court's March 1 decision outlawing the death penalty for juvenile murderers because it cited other nations' bans on such punishment.

``I don't personally think that it's a good idea to restrict freedom of speech or thought for any of our citizens, even if they are federal judges,'' O'Connor said.

<hr size=8 noshade width="74%" align=left>

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002395238_roberts22.html

Friday, July 22, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
Roberts makes the rounds
By David Espo
The Associated Press
CHUCK KENNEDY / KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS

Supreme Court nominee John Roberts Jr., left, meets with U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., yesterday. Schumer said he gave Roberts a list of questions and told him to "be prepared to answer them in the best way he can" when the hearings begin.


WASHINGTON — Supreme Court nominee John Roberts Jr. gained ground yesterday in his drive for Senate confirmation. He was rated a "non-activist judge, which everyone is looking for," by the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and was praised by several centrist Democrats.

"I'm enjoying my visits here in the Senate very much," said the 50-year-old appeals court judge, named to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

As well he might.

On the second day of a White House-choreographed confirmation campaign, Roberts had yet to draw the public opposition of a single Senate Democrat. Talk of a filibuster and partisan political brawl over the first Supreme Court vacancy in 11 years was nonexistent.

Democrats intend to use confirmation hearings later this summer to question Roberts on his views on abortion, the overturning of court precedent, invalidating acts of Congress and more. A separate struggle awaits if, as expected, they seek access to internal Justice Department memos from his days as a government attorney.

On a second day of courtesy calls in the Senate, Roberts' schedule included Sens. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Charles Schumer of New York, two of the three Democrats who opposed his nomination to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals two years ago.

Schumer said he gave Roberts a list of more than 70 questions and told him to "be prepared to answer them in the best way he can" when the hearings begin.

Some were broadly written, such as, "Is it appropriate for the Supreme Court to overturn a well-settled precedent, upon which Americans have come to rely?"

Others sought the nominee's opinion about well-known and controversial decisions of the past, such as, "Do you believe that Roe vs. Wade ... was correctly decided? What is your view of the quality of the legal reasoning in that case? Do you believe that it reached the right result." Roe. v. Wade is the landmark 1973 case that established a woman's right to an abortion.

After spending an hour with Roberts on Wednesday, Sen. Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said yesterday, "I think we have a man, I would interpret it, who is a non-activist judge, which everybody is looking for. Both sides are looking for a non-activist judge."

Specter, R-Pa., said Roberts had told him he didn't prefer labels such as liberal or conservative and "his view was that the court ought to be modest. ... The other word which he used which I thought was important was an emphasis on stability. When you talk about a modest approach by a court and an approach on stability, I think you have critical ingredients of a judge who would be non-activist."

Specter's remarks suggested he did not believe Roberts would inject personal views into his judicial rulings, a comment of potential political significance coming from a senior Republican who has long supported abortion rights.

Some abortion-rights organizations have announced their opposition, expressing fears Roberts would become part of a court majority that first erodes and eventually overturns the historic ruling.

NARAL Pro-Choice America has cited a legal brief he co-authored for a Supreme Court case while serving as deputy solicitor general in the Reagan administration. "Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled," it said in part.

Asked about the legal filing, Roberts told senators during 2003 confirmation hearings to his current post that he would be guided by legal precedent. "Roe vs. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent," he said at the time.

Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company


http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascitystar/news/politics/12173529.htm

Former Rehnquist clerk picked for Supreme Court
Experts say choice might be able to avoid divisive confirmation fight

By RON HUTCHESON
Knight Ridder Newspapers


WASHINGTON — President Bush on Tuesday nominated appellate Judge John G. Roberts Jr. for the Supreme Court, choosing a quiet conservative who might be able to avoid a bitter confirmation battle.

Roberts, a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, is a former clerk for Chief Justice William Rehnquist and a former legal counsel in the Reagan White House. His nomination pleased conservative activists, who generally view him as a solid addition to the court’s conservative wing.

Democrats held their fire, saying they wanted to know more about Roberts’ opinions on abortion, individual rights and other sensitive issues. If confirmed by the Senate, he would replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a swing vote who often tipped the court balance against her more conservative colleagues.

Bush praised the nominee as a man of “extraordinary accomplishment” and integrity.

“He will strictly apply the Constitution and laws, not legislate from the bench,” Bush said in nationally televised remarks. “Judge Roberts has served his fellow citizens well. He is prepared for even greater service.”

Roberts, 50, who has argued 39 cases at the Supreme Court and won 25, said he was humbled by his selection.

“I always got a lump in my throat whenever I walked up those marble steps to argue a case before the court, and I don’t think it was just from the nerves,” he said.

The president signaled his determination to fight for the nomination by interrupting regular TV programming to announce it at 8 p.m. Central time. The timing gave him a chance to introduce his choice to the broadest possible audience.

As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Sam Brownback said he plans to be an active participant in the confirmation process for Roberts. The Kansas Republican, who hopes for a 2008 presidential bid, called Roberts “brilliant, well-spoken and highly qualified.”

“I look forward to discussing his view of the Constitution,” Brownback said. “Is it a living document or is it a document that is set and has boundaries to it?”

Sen. Kit Bond, a Missouri Republican, compared Roberts to O’Connor in his “dedication to the principles of legal tradition.” He said Roberts would “ensure that we continue to have an independent judiciary.”

Abortion rights groups mobilized against the nomination, but leading Senate Democrats were more restrained. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada promised to withhold judgment.

“The president has chosen someone with suitable legal credentials, but that is not the end of our inquiry,” Reid said.

The Senate is expected to begin confirmation hearings in September with the goal of approving Roberts’ appointment in time for him to join the court when the new term starts in October.

Sen. Jim Talent of Missouri, a Republican, applauded what he called Roberts’ “outstanding personal record” but said he did not want to prejudge Roberts before the confirmation hearings.

Roberts’ short tenure on the appeals court “is a reason to vet his nomination thoroughly,” Talent said.

“To me the key is, does he have an intelligent set of convictions and does he stick to them?” Talent said.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush settled on Roberts after culling a list of 11 potential nominees in the nearly three weeks since O’Connor announced her retirement. Although Roberts isn’t considered as controversial as some of the other possible court candidates, he can anticipate a grilling during the confirmation process. Even before Bush announced his choice, interest groups at both ends of the political spectrum were poised for battle.

Roberts’ views on abortion are sure to be one of the biggest friction points. While serving in the Justice Department under President George H.W. Bush in 1990, Roberts was co-author of a legal brief arguing that the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling for abortion rights “was wrongly decided and should be overruled.”

Roberts’ defenders note that he wrote the brief in his role as an advocate, not as a judge. During his confirmation for the appellate court, Roberts said he considered Roe “settled law of the land” and added, “There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent.”

NARAL Pro-Choice America, one of the nation’s largest abortion-rights groups, called Roberts “a divisive nominee” and vowed to defeat him. The American Civil Liberties Union expressed “deep concern” about Roberts’ views on individual liberties, without specifically calling for his rejection.

Roberts, a native of Buffalo, N.Y., grew up in Indiana. He graduated with honors from Harvard Law School. Roberts went into private practice in Washington and made a fortune after serving in the Justice Department under the first President Bush.

--
First glance

&#9632; President Bush nominates an appellate judge from D.C. to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
&#9632; Go to KansasCity.com for more on the Supreme Court nominee.
&#9632; Reactions from local, national figures, text of Roberts’ remarks on Page A-6
--
Upcoming cases

The Supreme Court returns to work Oct. 3 and will immediately confront some high-profile cases, among them:

&#9632; ABORTION: The constitutionality of a New Hampshire parental notification law that lacks an emergency health exception for minors. Justices could use the case to make it harder for opponents to challenge abortion restrictions.
&#9632; PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE: The Bush administration’s challenge to Oregon’s law allowing physician-assisted suicide.
&#9632; DEATH PENALTY: Four capital punishment cases, including one that will determine when prisoners can use DNA evidence to get a new trial.
&#9632; DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL: A test of a law that requires colleges that get federal funding to allow military recruiters. Some law schools want to bar recruiters as a way of protesting the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy excluding openly gay persons from military service.
&#9632; RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: The Bush administration’s appeal over a church’s use of hallucinogenic tea in its religious services. The government contends the tea is illegal and potentially dangerous.
&#9632; POLICE SEARCHES: Whether police may search a home when one occupant consents but another does not, without violating the Fourth Amendment ban against unreasonable searches and seizures.

— The Associated Press
<p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

daylight savings stuff

Unread postby pd Rydia » Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:54 am

HAY GUYZ.

Tell me about CBC news and Canada Free Press, kayk? I'm not particularly familiar with Canadian news sources, and I'm lazy. They could be tabloids for all I know. D=

Anyway...


<hr noshade size=8 width="74%" align=left>

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-daylight20.html

Congress to add 2 months to Daylight Savings Time
July 20, 2005
BY JOHN J. FIALKA



It looks like Daylight Saving Time is about to be extended, and that has child safety and fire prevention advocates riled.

Congressional leaders of both parties have signed off on a proposal, being considered in Washington this week, to start Daylight Saving Time on the first Sunday in March and end on the last Sunday of November. They say it would save energy.

If the president signs the bill, the new law would take effect immediately, extending Daylight Saving Time by one month this fall. Currently, Daylight Saving Time begins at 2 a.m. on the first Sunday of April and ends at 2 a.m. on the last Sunday of October.

"The more daylight we have, the less electricity we use,'' said U.S. Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who co-sponsored the measure with U.S. Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.).

The pair cited a government study that estimated the additional energy savings at the equivalent of 100,000 barrels of oil a day, or about half of 1 percent of the nation's daily oil consumption. Most of the energy saved would be in the form of electricity because lights would be used less in the early evenings, the study projected.

Fire officials argue against plan

The Chicago-based National PTA has opposed Daylight Saving Time for more than 30 years because of concerns about kids walking to school in darkness.

For years, the International Association of Fire Chiefs has framed a widespread public information campaign around Daylight Saving Time, reminding people to change the batteries in their smoke and carbon monoxide detectors when they change their clocks. The last weekend in November is too late for the reminder, fire officials say.

Wall Street Journal, with Staff Reporter Leslie Baldacci contributing


<hr noshade size=8 width="74%" align=left>

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/07/22/daylight050722.html

U.S. scales back daylight time extension plan
Last Updated Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:55:52 EDT
CBC News


The U.S. Congress has scaled back a plan to extend daylight time, opting for a total of one month extra instead of the two originally proposed.

* INDEPTH: Daylight Saving Time

The new proposal would start daylight time three weeks earlier in March, on the second Sunday, and extend it a week later to the first Sunday in November.

No change will be made until U.S. President George W. Bush signs it into law.

The shift has been promoted as a way to save energy by cutting the need for artificial light in the evenings.

But airlines said it would complicate international flight schedules, and U.S. farmers complained they would suffer because the amount of light animals receive adversely affects their mating cycles.

The revision was hammered out Thursday in a session between members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate. They also called for a study to examine how much oil the plan would actually save.

"We ought to take a hard look at this before we jump into it," said Idaho Republican Senator Larry Craig.

The proposal Congress had adopted earlier in the week called for U.S. residents to turn their clocks forward one hour on the first weekend of March, instead of April, and "fall back" on the final weekend in November instead of October.

* FROM JULY 20, 2005: U.S. moves to extend daylight time

Currently in both Canada and the U.S., daylight time runs from April through October. The exception in Canada is Saskatchewan, which keeps its clocks the same throughout the year.

Canadian provinces are considering moves to match the new hours if the U.S. goes ahead with the plan, set to start this fall.

* FROM JULY 20, 2005: Provinces grapple with U.S. daylight time decision

Canadian critics of the adjustment argue children will be walking to school in darkness, while drivers may face increased morning black ice, which hasn't melted in the sun.

The last time the United States and Canada observed different winter time systems was during the 1974-75 oil crisis. The U.S. did not turn its clocks back at all that fall in an attempt to conserve energy.

As a result, airline schedules involving flights from south of the border were occasionally one hour off, television schedules were mixed up and business associates regularly missed each other's phone calls.


<hr noshade size=8 width="74%" align=left>

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/07/20/daylight-savings-folo050720.html

Provinces grapple with U.S. daylight time decision
Last Updated Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:51:09 EDT
CBC News


Provincial governments across Canada face a big-time decision as they deal with an American move to extend daylight time by two months, so that it starts on the first weekend in March and ends in November.

* INDEPTH: Daylight time

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty says his government will "seriously" consider its options after the U.S. Congress adopted the plan Tuesday, citing the need to save energy by cutting the need for artificial light in the evenings.

"We're not anxious to have a disconnect between us and our chief trading partner," McGuinty said Wednesday.

However, McGuinty said he would also want to know how any change would affect families, given that children and parents would be travelling to school and work in the dark more often if Canada follows the U.S. lead.

* YOUR SPACE: Send us your thoughts

In Quebec, Premier Jean Charest's office told CBC News the province will consider how to gauge the impact of the American change on Quebec's business community.

Manitoba Premier Gary Doer is among those worried about being out of sync with U.S. clocks.

Doer's office told CBC News that Manitoba's transportation sector would be hurt if the province decides not to go along with the new U.S. system.

Doer is already suggesting the daylight time issue should be on the agenda at a premiers meeting this summer.

On Prince Edward Island, the deputy minister of energy said there are no plans at present to change the time there. But John McQuarrie added that the province is willing to look at anything to save energy costs and cut down on energy consumption.

Currently in Canada and the U.S., daylight time runs from April through October. The exception in Canada is Saskatchewan, which keeps its clocks the same throughout the year.

* RELATED STORY: U.S. moves to extend daylight time

The American change, due to take effect this autumn if President George W. Bush signs it into law, could cause headaches for Canadians during March and November, the two months the two countries would be out of sync.

Business leaders in Canada are already speaking out about the need to give the idea close and careful attention.

"There is potential for huge confusion here, and we need to be vigilant, to look at the range of implications," Len Crispino, president and CEO of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, told the Canadian Press in Toronto.

Crispino used the example of the "just in time" delivery system that sees parts delivered to car plants, a major element of the Ontario economy.

The last time the United States and Canada observed different winter time systems was during the 1974-75 oil crisis. The U.S. did not turn its clocks back at all that fall in an attempt to conserve energy.

As a result, airline schedules involving flights from south of the border were occasionally one hour off, television schedules were mixed up and business associates regularly missed each other's phone calls.


<hr noshade size=8 width="74%" align=left>

http://www.torontofreepress.com/2005/weinreb072205.htm

Canadian Politics
Canada should follow U.S. in Daylight Savings Time change
By Arthur Weinreb, Associate Editor,
Friday, July 22, 2005


The U.S. Congress passed legislation that would see Daylight Savings Time (DST) extended for a period of two months every year, in March and November. All that is needed for the measure to become law is for President Bush to sign it and there are no signs that he will refuse to do so.

The purpose of the extension is to conserve energy. Extending Daylight Savings Time will add an extra hour of darkness in the morning when most people are still asleep, and add an extra hour of daylight in the evenings when the vast majority of people are awake. Adding an extra hour of daylight in the evenings will reduce the amount of power that is currently needed to provide artificial light during the twilight hours and after sunset. It is estimated that the two month extension of DST will reduce energy consumption by an estimated 2 per cent per year. After all people use less energy when they are sleeping than when they are awake.

Toronto and other parts of Ontario have recorded the hottest June in record and are headed for another record breaker this month. We are being constantly told to conserve energy and we have had and are being constantly threatened with brownouts and blackouts. In between stories of people who have died from heat related causes, the media is constantly telling us to take it easy with the air conditioners. The heat wave that has seen temperatures in excess of 30 degrees Celsius for weeks has put the issues of energy and energy conservation at the forefront of discussion. So you would think that following the lead of the Americans would be a no-brainer.

Unlike other issues such as same sex marriage, whether or not to extend DST for an additional two months a year seems to be worthy of debate. What is interesting in listening to the pros and cons, especially the pros, is that energy seems to be far down the list of arguments as to why Daylight Time should be lengthened by two months.

On the pro side of extending Daylight Savings Time, not changing times to conform to the United States will cause problems for many Canadian businesses. Those that work closely with American companies may have to change the hours in which their employees work to keep matters synchronized. Airlines and other companies that rely on strict schedules when interacting with the U.S. will be the hardest hit.

Safety studies show that anticipated change will result in less traffic accidents. More people will be driving home from work in daylight rather than dusk or dark.

One of the pros in keeping our times in sync with the Americans is that our television schedules will not be screwed up. Let’s face it; there can be no greater threat to our Canadian way of life than if Judge Judy and reruns of Everybody Loves Raymond start popping up on the nation’s television screens at the wrong time. In some reports of the possible time changes, disruption of the television schedule seems to be more important that the potential to save energy.

The biggest negative in changing Daylight Savings Time is that the matter is one of provincial jurisdiction. Getting all 10 premiers and the three territorial leaders to agree on anything other than the fact that Ottawa isn’t giving them enough money is difficult at the best of times. Already Manitoba Premier Gary Doer is balking. He was quoted in Maclean’s Magazine as saying that the energy savings will not be that great. Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, who sees himself not as providing a climate where Ontarians can thrive, but rather as a micromanager who knows what’s best for everybody, sees a problem. McGuinty worries about people and children leaving for work or school in the mornings when it is still dark out.

It is pretty hard to argue with the obvious fact that switching an hour of daylight from the morning to the evening will save some energy. We should stop debating the issue and ensure that the change can be made next November.

Of course there will be those who will be reluctant to follow the lead of the United States because it will be following the lead of the United States. To some, going our own way will more important than the benefits of extending DST.

Arthur Weinreb is an author, columnist and Associate Editor of Canada Free Press. His work as appeared on Newsmax.com, Men's News Daily, the Drudge Report, Foxnews.com and The Rant. He can be reached at letters@canadafreepress.com <p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>

Magnus de Silentio
 

Re: daylight savings stuff

Unread postby Magnus de Silentio » Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:48 am

Oh God...you have a thread...where people can post news...from articles?

I...I...

FEAR the news addict/blogger given such an opportunity.

Image


User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

not a hint at all

Unread postby pd Rydia » Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:17 am

Yeah, but generally speaking, no one much joins me in posting articles. Though there was that one time, with the UK elections and stuff. And that other time. But we don't talk about that. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>

User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: not a hint at all

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:31 am

.........Who WRITES these articles? I mean, for serious. That Daylight Savings stuff is absurd. But on the other side of the coin, I can't imagine someone having enough time on their hands to write a thorough set of articles, replete with embedded links to valid sites and all that, on behalf of a joke.

No, really. What the hell is going on. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: not a hint at all

Unread postby pd Rydia » Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 am

I heard about the DST stuff from IanJ's livejournal (the
Wall Street Journal article); however, when I news.googled, most the articles that came up were Canadian. They seemed to care--or hear--about it much more than we. :o

If it's a prank, there's a helluva lot of articles about it. It's funny, because you'd think the fact that time is being fucked around with would get talked about a lot more. It's kind of relevant. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>Edited by: pd Rydia&nbsp; Image at: 7/23/05 11:57

E Mouse
 

Re: not a hint at all

Unread postby E Mouse » Sat Jul 23, 2005 2:10 pm

Quote:
Legislation introduced earlier this year would bar the Supreme Court from reviewing any government official's ``acknowledgment of God'' as the source of law or government.


<span style="color:orange;font-size:xx-large;">WHAT?!</span>

Isn't that 'the divine right of kings?' I thought that was one of the major things that the US Government was designed NOT to have!

And isn't it also a blatant violation of the seperation of church and state?!

Okay, someone needs a few good boots to the head. Badly.

e.e <p>


<span style="font-size:xx-small;">"Their rhetoric... You didn't put communists in his bed did you!" came Amber's indignant reply.

"Why not? All I had to do was open a gate to his bed and stick up a sign saying 'Hot virgin willing to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of international socialist fraternity.'"</span>

<span style="color:blue;font-size:xx-small;">Excaliburned:</span> <span style="font-size:xx-small;">Ah yes, I'm thinking of having the USS Bob be preserved outside the Arena as a monument of sorts</span></p>

User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: not a hint at all

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:46 pm

No, really. The one article makes light of the same sex marriage issue, which from my understanding is like dragging a powder keg out from the cabin and then sitting on it to discuss poetry--I don't seriously believe a respectable periodical would put it that way (except in the editorials, mind you). And then there's the whole 'extending daylight savings does not actually change the rotation of the planet in such a way as to actually give us more daylight' business. It will not affect livestock or plants, because they do not wear watches. I am seriously worried about the energy situation of the country if changing daylight savings will actually significantly impact energy consumption, because people will turn on their lights *when it gets dark* according to my observation. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

User avatar
pd Rydia
Moderator
 
Posts: 5269
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Temple of Fiends

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby pd Rydia » Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:05 pm

That *is* and editorial, isn't it? Aside from the fact that the title is "Canada should follow U.S. in Daylight Savings Time change," which is a lot more opiniony than most attempts at "fair and balanced" reports, I got the sense of some sort of facetiousness. Only it wasn't applied with a 12 foot long sledgehammer as I'm typically used to.

Anyway, onward and forward.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-turley25jul25,0,3148446.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

The faith of John Roberts
By Jonathan Turley
Jonathan Turley is a law professor at George Washington University.
July 25, 2005


Judge John G. Roberts Jr. has been called the stealth nominee for the Supreme Court — a nominee specifically selected because he has few public positions on controversial issues such as abortion. However, in a meeting last week, Roberts briefly lifted the carefully maintained curtain over his personal views. In so doing, he raised a question that could not only undermine the White House strategy for confirmation but could raise a question of his fitness to serve as the 109th Supreme Court justice.

The exchange occurred during one of Roberts' informal discussions with senators last week. According to two people who attended the meeting, Roberts was asked by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) what he would do if the law required a ruling that his church considers immoral. Roberts is a devout Catholic and is married to an ardent pro-life activist. The Catholic Church considers abortion to be a sin, and various church leaders have stated that government officials supporting abortion should be denied religious rites such as communion. (Pope Benedict XVI is often cited as holding this strict view of the merging of a person's faith and public duties).

Renowned for his unflappable style in oral argument, Roberts appeared nonplused and, according to sources in the meeting, answered after a long pause that he would probably have to recuse himself.

It was the first unscripted answer in the most carefully scripted nomination in history. It was also the wrong answer. In taking office, a justice takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States. A judge's personal religious views should have no role in the interpretation of the laws. (To his credit, Roberts did not say that his faith would control in such a case).

Roberts may insist that he was merely discussing the subject theoretically in an informal setting, and that he doesn't anticipate recusing himself on a regular basis. But it's not a subject that can be ignored; if he were to recuse himself on such issues as abortion and the death penalty, it would raise the specter of an evenly split Supreme Court on some of the nation's most important cases.

Roberts could now face difficult questions of fitness raised not only by the Senate but by his possible colleague, Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the most conservative members of the court (and a devout Catholic). Last year, Scalia chastised Catholic judges who balk at imposing the death penalty — another immoral act according to the church: "The choice for a judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted constitutional laws and sabotaging the death penalty."

Roberts is known to be an honest and straightforward person. His answer seems to be a frank effort to deal with a deep-seated conflict of faith and public duties. As a government attorney, he was a coauthor of a brief that argued that Roe vs. Wade should be overturned. Yet later, in his appellate court confirmation hearings, Roberts was asked specifically whether he could apply Roe vs. Wade and he stated that he could. Now, as he moves toward a job in which he could ultimately be the deciding vote to narrow, preserve or overturn the doctrine, it could be a materially different moral choice for a devout jurist.

Unless Roberts denies the statement or somehow neutralizes it, it could seriously undermine the strategy of the White House for the confirmation hearings. For years, Roberts has been carefully groomed for greater things, one of a new generation of post-Bork nominees, young conservatives who have been virtually raised on a hydroponic farm for flawless conservative fruit. They learned to confine their advocacy to legal briefs so that their true views are only known to the White House and to God.

Now, however, Roberts may have opened the door to the very questions that the White House sought to avoid with his nomination. If he would have to recuse himself before ruling contrary to his faith, the Senate is entitled to ask specifically how he would handle obvious conflicts on issues such as abortion and the death penalty.


With the Roberts statement, the masterful "un-hearings" that the Bush administration hoped to have, in which nominees are not required to answer specific questions about their judicial views, would become particularly awkward.

This is not a question driven by ideology. I favor some of the conservative changes that Roberts is expected to bring in doctrine, and I believe that he has excellent qualifications for the position. I also believe that the president is entitled to such a conservative nominee.

The question of recusal raised with Durbin reflects a serious and important debate occurring within the Catholic community, in which I also was raised. It is the classic Sir Thomas More conflict of trying to serve both God and king. However, these are questions not just for a nominee to ponder but for senators.

None of this means that Roberts is unfit due to his faith. But in the end, the Senate is left a question that seems to grow each day: Who is John Roberts? The burden may now have shifted to the White House to fully answer this question.


<hr size=8 width="74%" align=left noshade>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4718249.stm

Downloading 'myths' challenged
People who illegally share music files online are also big spenders on legal music downloads, research suggests.


Digital music research firm The Leading Question found that they spent four and a half times more on paid-for music downloads than average fans.

Rather than taking legal action against downloaders, the music industry needs to entice them to use legal alternatives, the report said.

According to the music industry, legal downloads have tripled during 2005.

In the first half of 2005, some 10 million songs have been legally downloaded.

--Music 'myth'--

More needs to be done to capitalise on the power of the peer-to-peer networks that many music downloaders still use, said the report's authors.

The study found that regular downloaders of unlicensed music spent an average of £5.52 a month on legal digital music.

This compares to just £1.27 spent by other music fans.

"The research clearly shows that music fans who break piracy laws are highly valuable customers," said Paul Brindley, director of The Leading Question.

"It also points out that they are eager to adopt legitimate music services in the future."

"There's a myth that all illegal downloaders are mercenaries hell-bent on breaking the law in pursuit of free music."

In reality hardcore fans "are extremely enthusiastic" about paid-for services, as long as they are suitably compelling, he said.

Carrot and stick

The BPI (British Phonographic Industry) welcomed the findings but added a note of caution.

"It's encouraging that many illegal file-sharers are starting to use legal services," said BPI spokesman Matt Philips.

"But our concern is that file-sharers' expenditure on music overall is down, a fact borne out by study after study.

"The consensus among independent research is that a third of illegal file-sharers may buy more music and around two thirds buy less.

"That two-thirds tends to include people who were the heaviest buyers which is why we need to continue our carrot and stick approach to the problem of illegal file-sharing," he said.

--Music to go--

The Leading Question survey also asked 600 music fans what devices they would be buying in the next year.

A third planned to buy a dedicated MP3 player, while just 8% said they would be buying an MP3-enabled phone.

Reasons cited for not purchasing a music playing phone included worries about battery life and concerns about losing the handset, and potentially their music collection.

The fact that phones tend to be frequently replaced also meant people had a low emotional attachment to them.

"The phone is not ready to replace the iPod as a serious digital music player just yet," said Tim Walker, director of The Leading Question.

"One of the challenges will be to develop the perception of the phone as a credible entertainment device," he said.

Providers need to look at features such as dual download to mobile and PC, back-up facilities and improved interfaces between PC and mobile, he said.

There is a huge potential market for MP3 phones. The survey found that 38% were interested in downloading full tracks to their mobile phones.

And people are happy with the storage possibilities of phones with only 4% wanting to store more than 1,000 songs to take on holiday.

Story from BBC NEWS
Published: 2005/07/27 08:10:56 GMT
© BBC MMV



<hr size=8 width="74%" align=left noshade>

http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/sp_ncaa/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19874_3940406,00.html

The Albuquerque Tribune
Number of missing children treated like state secret
By THOMAS HARGROVE
July 19, 2005


The Justice Department for years has violated an act of Congress by refusing to reveal how many lost, runaway and kidnapped children have been reported to the FBI, a policy that has turned America's missing youth into a state secret.

The FBI says such information is confidential.

Advocates for missing children complain that the government's refusal to report the number of cases has allowed many police departments to escape public notice when they violate the reporting standards set by Congress in its landmark National Child Search Assistance Act of 1990.

Advocates urge swift reporting because young kidnapping victims often are slain in the first hours of their abduction. But several major law-enforcement agencies, including the New York City Police Department, typically wait four or five days before reporting missing children to federal and state authorities, and delays of two weeks are common.

Many other police departments, as a matter of policy, do not report missing children if they are runaways.

The 1990 law ordered that all children - regardless of the reason they are missing - must be "entered immediately" into state and federal police computer networks. These databases have been credited for the recovery of hundreds of children in recent years.

Congress also ordered the Justice Department to "publish an annual statistical summary" of missing-children cases received at the FBI's National Crime Information Center to ensure that provisions of its law are followed. But the FBI considered these crime files to be the property of local law-enforcement agencies, and the Justice Department has never published the required accounting.

"Why didn't they issue these reports? I've been asking that question for nearly 15 years and never got an answer," said David Thelen, founder of the Committee for Missing Children, a Georgia-based advocacy group. "We can't have the Justice Department, the top law-enforcement agency in the nation, ignoring a law like this. They should be held accountable."

Thelen said that an annual federal accounting of missing-children reports would have forced many local police departments to do a better job. "That would have opened up a lot of scrutiny of the system," he said.

Members of Congress say they are alarmed by the failure.

"This is critical. We are finding far too many cases that are going unreported," said Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., co-chairman of the Congressional Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children.

"Obviously, this is something the Department of Justice needs to work on. Congress wanted the information in order to assemble a comprehensive database of missing children," Foley said.

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said he's "deeply concerned to hear the Justice Department is evidently not fulfilling its duty to gather this information."

Dodd, hoping to improve the reporting rate for missing-children cases, for three years has proposed a bill requiring local police to alert federal and state authorities "within two hours" of receiving a missing-child report. "We need to do everything within our power to protect our children," he said.

Justice Department officials refused to comment for this story.

Telephone calls and e-mails from Scripps Howard News Service to more than a dozen Justice Department policymakers or their spokesmen went unanswered during the last three months. Letters to President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales mailed in mid-May also have gone unanswered, although an FBI spokesman confirmed they were received.

But a recently retired top Justice Department official said she didn't know the law requires the report.

"I'm sorry I did not become aware there was a report that we weren't filing that we were supposed to be filing," said former Assistant Attorney General Deborah J. Daniels, whom Bush designated as America's first federal Amber Alert coordinator in 2002 to help locate missing children.

"I tried to identify all the reports we were supposed to be making, whether on a one-time basis or on a continual basis. You wouldn't believe how many there were. I don't recall finding any that we just simply had never filed," Daniels said.

She said the Justice Department is aware that some police departments are in violation of the 1990 law.

"There was an old, traditional belief that if any person was missing, police were supposed to wait 24 hours. And some state laws required 24 hours," Daniels said. "We are still in the process to convince (police) departments that, in these cases, they can't afford to wait 24 hours. Because a child is vulnerable, 24 hours could mean the difference between life and death."

Scripps Howard, to study the problem, in February asked the FBI for an accounting of how many missing-children reports it received from each state and from every county. The bureau refused, claiming the data was the property of local law-enforcement groups and not of the federal government.

"It is inappropriate for the FBI to divulge information to the media about state and local law-enforcement records that reside in a law-enforcement-only database," said FBI spokesman Paul Bresson.

Bresson later said he was unaware of the reporting requirements under the National Child Search Assistance Act. "I'm not sure what, if anything, the act specifically directs the FBI to do," he said.

The bureau prepares monthly summaries of missing-person cases, including the number of missing children. These records are confidentially maintained by the Justice Department, even though the 1990 law instructs the attorney general to publish annual summaries of missing-children reports.

"The FBI does provide an annual report on missing persons to the Department of Justice. You would have to speak with DOJ on whether or not the numbers are released publicly," Bresson said.

Further attempts to obtain missing-children data from Justice Department officials were unsuccessful.

Scripps Howard was able to make a limited study of child-reporting rates by some police departments by using 37,665 missing-children cases received by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children from Jan. 1, 2000, through Dec. 31, 2004. Most of these reports were given to the center by parents of the missing children. That study was based on a small sampling of missing-children cases. The FBI received nearly 4.2 million missing-person reports during the same five years, most of whom were children.

Because Congress gave the National Center the authority to review FBI files, its investigators could check whether cases they received had been properly reported to federal authorities. About 12 percent of all of those missing-children cases did not appear to have been reported to the FBI.

The New York City Police Department had one of the worst reporting rates in the study because detectives keep missing-children cases at the city's 85 precincts for days or weeks before passing them on to the central Missing Persons Unit, which alone has authority to report missing children to the FBI.

Many other police departments were found to have low reporting rates, often because police have a policy of not reporting runaways. The Honolulu Police Department, for example, reported only about 10 missing children last year even though it arrested more than 2,700 runaway children.

Daniels said that "most departments do an admirable job" in promptly reporting missing children, "but there's still some work to be done."

She agreed with the FBI's claim that specific details contained in case files recorded in the National Crime Information Center database belong to local police departments. But she said she does not know why previous Justice officials did not begin reporting summary information when directed by Congress 15 years ago.

"I have no idea what they thought in 1990," Daniels said. "I would have thought we would have been doing this on a regular basis."

(Contact Thomas Hargrove at hargrovet(at)shns.com)
Copyright 2005, The Albuquerque Tribune. All Rights Reserved.



<hr size=8 width="74%" align=left noshade>

http://www.jimhightower.com/air/read.asp?id=11722

THE ARMY GETS PERSONAL
7/26/2005


Hey, youngsters–Uncle Sam not only wants you, he's got your number!

Not yet sure what you want to do in life? Why not get paid and see an exotic part of the world while you're getting it all together? Yes, you could summer in sunny Iraq...and be a part of our exciting occupation forces there, where there's never a dull moment!

If you are 16 to 25 years old, chances are you'll soon be receiving such a sales pitch from the Army. How will recruiters find you? Easy–thanks to a new database secretly built by the Pentagon, they know where you live. They also know your phone number. And your social security number, your email address, your height and weight, your grades in school, your ethnicity...and so much more.

The Pentagon's "Joint Advertising Market Research Studies Division" (did you know they had one of those?) brags that this superdandy database is "arguably the largest repository of 16-to-25-year-old youth data in the country, containing roughtly 30 million records." It includes the names and personal info on 3.1 million graduating high school seniors and 4.7 million college students–possibly including you or someone you know. All this is to be used to target, reach, and recruit young folks to fill the troop quotas for George W's war in Iraq.

There are, however, two little glitches with the Pentagon's sweeping new database. First, it was illegally compiled. Officials began building it three years ago without giving public notice and allowing public comment–a flagrant violation of the Federal Privacy Act. Second, (and more alarming to mothers and fathers) the private data allows military recruiters to intrude surreptitiously into people's homes and put a sales job on their children. As one appalled mom says: "It's a direct shot to someone's child without consent from a parent."

This is Jim Hightower saying...To help shut down this illegal, intrusive database, call the Electronic Privacy Information Center: 202-483-1140.

"Age 16 to 25? The Pentagon Has Your Number, and More," New York Times, June 24, 2005


<hr size=8 width="74%" align=left noshade>

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/072605A.shtml

Go to Original

Lawmakers Reach a Deal on New Energy Policies
By Carl Hulse
The New York Times
Tuesday 26 July 2005


Washington - House and Senate negotiators came to agreement on broad energy legislation early today, hoping they have put together an overhaul of national energy policy that can clear Congress after years of stalemate.

"We hope to have the bill on the House floor on Wednesday and I think the Senate is going to put it up on Thursday," said Representative Joe Barton, Republican of Texas and chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, as he concluded negotiations shortly before 3 a.m. Eastern time.

The measure touches on virtually every aspect of American energy production and consumption, including the electrical grid, hybrid cars, traditional oil and gas drilling, and incentives to develop new energy sources. But it does little to immediately lower the price of gasoline at the pump.

As they wound up their talks, lawmakers agreed to a significant new requirement to add corn-based ethanol to the gasoline supply, which will build support for the measure from farm state lawmakers.

Working furiously to try to strike an energy deal, the negotiators killed two major provisions aimed at curbing consumption of traditional fossil fuels like oil, natural gas and coal. They also agreed to slow the potential takeover of Unocal by a Chinese oil company to allow for a study of the national security and economic implications of the acquisition.

In a decision that could cost support for the bill from some coastal state lawmakers, negotiators beat back efforts by Florida and California House members to strip from the measure a provision that would allow an inventory of offshore oil and gas resources. Some lawmakers view the inventory as a precursor to a push to allow drilling off states that have opposed it.

"I'm here to say that the people of North Carolina right now don't want drilling," said Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina. "We can force it on them or wait until they are ready."

The House and Senate reached similar agreement on energy legislation in 2003, but the measure stalled in the Senate over objections to a plan to provide producers and distributors of the gasoline additive MTBE some legal immunity from lawsuits. In a decision that helped the bill's prospects this year, lawmakers on Sunday abandoned that plan. Hoping to dodge another obstacle, senators on Monday rejected a House proposal to relax some clean air standards.

Approval of the legislation would be a victory for President Bush, who has pressed for a new energy policy since taking office in 2001 and urged lawmakers to deliver a plan before leaving at the end of this week for a monthlong summer recess.

"Four years is long enough to wait for comprehensive energy legislation," the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, said Monday.

The final version of the energy plan is certain to come under attack by some lawmakers and conservation groups who consider it too heavily skewed in favor of traditional oil and gas companies, which it showers with billions of dollars of aid and tax breaks at a time when high oil prices are producing huge profits.

As the nine-hour negotiating session was nearing an end, Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, failed in an effort to eliminate some of the relief from drilling royalties that the industry would receive through the bill, arguing that it was wrong to let oil companies escape fees for drilling on public land. "We might as well be giving tax breaks to Donald Trump and Warren Buffett here tonight," said Mr. Markey. The Republican-led House majority on the conference committee quickly rejected his proposal.

In a disappointment for environmental advocates, House members on Monday rejected an effort to incorporate a plan passed by the Senate to require utilities to use more renewable energy like wind and solar power to generate electricity. They also defeated a bid to direct the president to find ways to cut the nation's appetite for oil by one million barrels a day within 10 years.

Backers of the initiative to identify the oil savings said it was an alternative to the politically difficult approach of increasing automotive gas mileage standards and would demonstrate that Congress was serious about cutting the nation's dependence on oil imports.

"We are having an energy bill that is doing so much on the supply side that we need to address the demand side," said Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, who said the goal was the "bare minimum of what we ought to be doing."

But Republican opponents of the plan said the fuel savings target could lead to unpopular restrictions like mandatory car pools and put too much responsibility for achieving the goal in the hands of the president.

"Just telling the president to wave a magic wand and tell each and every one of us that we need to conserve may sound good," said Mr. Barton, who was in charge of the House-Senate negotiations, "but those of us elected by the people every two years have a different view of that."

Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the senior Democrat on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said his plan to require power plant operators who now rely on coal, oil and natural gas to increase their use of renewable fuels was a low-cost, market-driven approach to cutting demand for fossil fuels and easing air pollution.

Under the proposal, which has repeatedly passed the Senate, utilities would have to generate at least 10 percent of their electricity through renewable fuels by 2020.

But opponents of the initiative, known as the renewable portfolio standard, said it would drive up the cost of electricity, conflict with similar state initiatives and put a burden on utilities in some regions where acceptable alternative fuels are in short supply.

While House and Senate negotiators on energy policy met into the night in an effort to agree on an energy measure that could clear the House and Senate this week, a separate group of lawmakers was trying to hash out the tax elements of an energy proposal.

Lawmakers and aides said they expected the tax breaks and incentives to cost in the neighborhood of $11.5 billion: more than sought by the House and White House but less than approved by the Senate. Should lawmakers agree on that figure, the tax package was expected to include a substantial emphasis on tax credits for energy efficiency.

-------

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.


<hr size=8 width="74%" align=left noshade>

Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove Rove - Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR2005072501586_pf.html - Nine Defy Vatican's Ban on Ordination of Women

dumbness! - State plans to help cigarette maker: Critics upset policies clash on smoking
<p>
<div style="text-align:center">dictionary.com | encyclopædia dramatica</div></p>

The Great Nevareh
 

Re: ARTICLES~!

Unread postby The Great Nevareh » Fri Jul 29, 2005 9:41 pm

So that's why I've been recieving phone calls from a variety of representatives of the armed forces recently. <p>[---------------------------]
"There is great disorder under Heaven, and the situation is excellent."
-Mao Tse-Tung

"I eat the talking bees because I am George Washington Christ"
-From "Bob the Ball"</p>

User avatar
Animala
HATED BY SKELETONS
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:52 pm

remember when the news was all about Korea and the IRA?

Unread postby Animala » Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:17 pm

I hijack Mike's account. HUWAH!


<hr size=8 noshade align=left width="74%">

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000080&sid=aANF42GdjCfc&refer=asia

N. Korea Negotiator Says Talks in `Stalemate' on Nuclear Limits

Aug. 4 (Bloomberg) -- North Korea's chief negotiator said nuclear talks in Beijing are at a ``stalemate'' over whether his government can maintain a civilian research program while the Korean Peninsula is rid of atomic weapons.

``Every country in the world has the right to peaceful nuclear activities,'' Kim Kye Gwan, the vice foreign minister of North Korea, told reporters after a late-night negotiating session. ``We are not a loser of a war nor have we committed any crime.''

The U.S. and the four other nations trying to persuade North Korea to destroy its nuclear weapons capability will tomorrow go into an 11th straight day of talks with the communist nation, South Korea's chief delegate and deputy foreign minister, Song Min Soon, said. After wrapping up discussions at about 6 p.m. in Beijing, the governments got together again for less than an hour in a meeting that ended around 10 p.m. in the Chinese capital.

The U.S., China, South Korea, Japan and Russia yesterday agreed to a draft statement of principles on nuclear disarmament, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said in Beijing. Hill vowed to stay at the talks until North Korea agrees to give up its entire nuclear program, including the civilian development of nuclear energy, in return for food, economic aid and security guarantees.

Hill said late today that the governments negotiating with North Korea are trying to get a specific understanding of what a de-nuclearized Korean Peninsula means to the regime run by Kim Jong Il.

--No `Creative Ambiguity'--

``In other issues, you want creative ambiguity,'' Hill told reporters. ``But we're talking about nuclear weapons. We need clarity.''

A 1994 accord in which the U.S. and South Korea offered to supply energy to North Korea in exchange for the North Korean regime's halt to weapons development foundered in part because United Nations inspectors couldn't get access to all sites in the North Korean nuclear program.

Hill and Japan's chief delegate to the talks, Kenichiro Sasae, said all parties in the Beijing talks were determined to continue discussions. There is an expectation that the talks are ``getting toward the end game,'' Hill said.

``We've made progress in that we've been able to deepen mutual understanding,'' Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said at a briefing. ``That in itself is progress and there has been no breakdown in the talks.''

Qin said he didn't know how long the talks would last.

--Russia Returns--

Russia's chief negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alexeyev, today returned to Beijing from Moscow, according to a Russian Embassy spokesman who asked not to be identified.

Alexeyev left on July 30 for Moscow, saying he had ``business to tend to back home'' and that he would return when a deal was at hand.

North Korea told the U.S. in October 2002 it had broken the 1994 agreement and was continuing with its arms program, sparking the crisis. Negotiations with North Korea resumed on July 26 after a 13-month hiatus, during which the country announced it had built nuclear weapons.

North Korea and the U.S. hit a roadblock earlier over North Korea's demand that the U.S. remove its so-called nuclear umbrella protection for South Korea and Japan. There is no possibility of negotiation on that point, a senior U.S. official, who declined to be identified, said in response.

``We plan to give up our nuclear weapons and all plans relating to weapons as soon as the U.S. eliminates its nuclear threat toward us and mutual trust is established,'' North Korea's Kim told reporters Aug. 2. ``This is not a decision made on demand by anyone else or forced by anyone else. This is what we have decided on our own.''

North Korea has balked at demands it disarm before it receives aid promised by the U.S. and the other governments in the negotiations. North Korea, with a population of 22 million, has depended on outside aid since the 1990s, when more than a million people may have died from famine because of years of flooding, drought and economic mismanagement.

To contact the reporters on this story:
Heejin Koo in Seoul at
hjkoo@bloomberg.net; Allen T. Cheng in Beijing at
0586 or acheng13@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: August 4, 2005 11:58 EDT
©2005 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved.



<hr size=8 noshade align=left width="74%">

http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID=%7B648B3615-8C4D-4ED6-88C6-0BF738353DA1%7D&language=EN

Korea Nuke Talks Linger On

Beijing, Aug 4 (Prensa Latina) Negotiators in the six-party talks on the Korean nuclear issue opened Thursday their tenth day of discussions centered on a draft joint statement, with the United States saying a final document is near.

No ending date has been set so far for the record-long fourth-round of negotiations, while the draft joint statement, which has been revised three times, was yet to be accepted by all the parties, but everyone is constructively willing to keep talking till they find a solution.

"I have no good news, neither bad news nor frightening news to report," US Chief Negotiator Christopher Hill told reporters Wednesday night after a lengthy bilateral consultation with the Chinese delegation.

Piao Jianyi, a professor with the Asian-Pacific Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said that the talks might end on Thursday if all parties concerned could be persuaded to accept the draft document, according to the Chinese news agency Xinhua.

Jin Linbo, head of the Asia-Pacific Office under the China Research Institute of International Studies, said the talks would possibly conclude or take a recess within this week.

Jin believed that the process depends on the attitude of the United States and said that there is still time for the participants to seek a solution.

The Korean Peninsula nuclear talks, involving China, the DPRK, the United States, the Republic of Korea, Russia and Japan, resumed on July 26 after a 13-month impasse.

Over the past nine days, the six parties have held frequent bilateral and multilateral consultations.

The negotiators continue to make revisions to and coordinate their stances on the latest draft of a common document during Wednesday"s negotiation, with China serving as the key coordinator.

A series of one-on-one contacts were made on Wednesday for the negotiators to exchange views on the latest draft common document, which is aimed at establishing a framework for future talks on the eventual settlement of the nuclear issue.

mh


<hr size=8 noshade align=left width="74%">

http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/?feed=TopNews&article=UPI-1-20050804-10074300-bc-norkor-nuketalks.xml

N. Korea only hold-out at nuclear talks

BEIJING, Aug. 4 (UPI) -- North Korea was the only country holding out on a Chinese proposal in the 10th day of six-nation nuclear disarmament talks in Beijing Thursday.

Christopher Hill, the top U.S. envoy to the talks, said there is a lingering dispute over verification of Pyongyang's activities, Voice of America reported.

"We cannot have a situation where (North Korea) pretends to abandon its nuclear program and we pretend to believe them," Hill said. "We need to have a situation where we know precisely what they have agreed to do, exactly what they have agreed to abandon."

South Korean envoy Song Min-soon made a similar comment, saying the North Korean position remains out of line, which is why the talks have not ended.

Three rounds of previous talks involving the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the United States failed to resolve the conflict. North Korea is seeking significant economic aid and U.S. non-aggression guarantees before it dismantles its nuclear weapons.

Copyright 2005 by United Press International. All Rights Reserved.


<hr size=8 noshade align=left width="74%">

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/ira_07-28-05.html

July 28, 2005, 2pm EDT
IRA VOWS TO END ARMED CAMPAIGN IN NORTHERN IRELAND


The Irish Republican Army announced Thursday it would end all armed campaigns and work purely through political channels in what could be a historic step forward in advancing the stalled 1997 peace deal.

The IRA said all clandestine units have been ordered to place their weapons in arms dumps and cease all activities, effective 4 p.m. local time, but would not disband, reported the Associated Press.

"All volunteers have been instructed to assist the development of purely political and democratic programs through exclusively peaceful means. Volunteers must not engage in any other activities whatsoever," the IRA command said in a statement to its 500 to 1,000 members, according to the AP.

The IRA arsenal, used to fight for a united Ireland until a 1997 cease-fire, was a major stumbling block to the peace process.

Some 3,600 people died in Northern Ireland since renewed violence began more than 30 years ago, half of them killed by the IRA, according to Reuters.

The group said John de Chastelain, a retired Canadian general who since the signing of a political peace deal in 1997 has been working to disarm the IRA and other militant groups, would be invited to decommission more hidden weapons bunkers soon. It said a Catholic priest and Protestant minister would also be invited to witness the disposal of weapons, reported the AP.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Irish counterpart, Bertie Ahern, hailed the move.

"I welcome the recognition that the only route to political change lies in exclusively peaceful and democratic means," Blair said in his London office. "This is a step of unparalleled magnitude in the recent history of Northern Ireland."

Ahern, who has worked with Blair since 1997 to reach a compromise in the British territory, said the announcement marked "the end of the IRA as a paramilitary organization."

Mistrust of the largely Protestant police force in Catholic neighborhoods and a failure of the political process to move forward were long cited as justification for the IRA's violent activities.

Protestant leaders, who support a continued union with Britain and are suspicious of the IRA's motives, said they would wait several months to see whether the IRA's actions matched its words.

Democratic Unionist Party head Ian Paisley, whose fiery rhetoric and strong pro-British stand has built his party into the largest political group in the region, said IRA commanders "have failed to explicitly declare an end to their multimillion-pound criminal activity, and they have failed to provide the level of transparency that will be necessary to truly build confidence that the guns have gone in their entirety," the AP reported.

All sides publicly say they are committed to rebuilding a joint Catholic-Protestant administration that would replace Britain as the primary government authority in Northern Ireland. But the DUP and other Unionist, or pro-British and largely Protestant groups, have refused to work with Sinn Fein, the IRA-linked party, until the IRA is no longer a threat to stability.

A coalition of Protestant and Catholic moderates gained power in 1999 but fell apart in 2002 amid arguments over IRA activities and arms. Since then, the more strident DUP and Sinn Fein have gained more electoral strength in their communities and the British and Irish governments, seeking to maintain the peace accord, have suspended the Northern Ireland Assembly until the issue of disarmament could be resolved.

-- Compiled from wire reports and other media sources

Copyright ©2005 MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.



<hr size=8 noshade align=left width="74%">

http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=8d962cbb-334a-4f8b-97b1-c8abf44674b3

Maybe IRA killing will end - this time
The Gazette
July 30, 2005


It's hard to write, or even say, the words "The Irish Republican Army has renounced violence" without rolling your eyes and muttering a sarcastic "sure" under your breath. We've all heard this "breakthrough" before, and the suspicion lingers we'll hear it again. For the IRA, giving up violence has been more a tactic than a commitment.

But maybe this time the terrorist commanders mean it. Maybe this time, Prime Minister Tony Blair's extravagant optimism is justified. Maybe this time the killing will end.

There are reasons for guarded - very guarded - optimism. Sinn Fein - the IRA's political wing - has demonstrated in Ulster elections that democracy could, indeed, work for the Republicans who want to unite Ireland. If that's the carrot for IRA leaders, the stick would be the growing disgust on both sides of the Irish border for the IRA's sordid criminality. The Catholics of the north - the IRA's natural constituency - are said to be particularly fed up with the group's extortion and intimidation.

The IRA's declaration certainly sounded more unequivocal than previous vows. The order to volunteers - IRA-speak for rank-and-file terrorists - to dump their arms and desist from all violent activity was direct and impervious to misinterpretation. The invitation to have two clergymen - a Catholic and a Protestant - witness the disarming with Canada's retired general John de Chastelain is also promising.

But if there are reasons for optimism, there are also reasons for doubt. Even if the IRA commanders are all perfectly sincere - and we have every reason to be skeptical about that - there's no certainty everyone will obey them. Many IRA members consider the whole peace process a betrayal. Some have already broken away to wreak violence of their own. More will no doubt follow, and all it will take is one bomb or one shooting by one lunatic cell for the whole thing to unravel.

Many IRA men are just thugs. What idealism they might once have had eroded long ago, leaving just the violence and secrecy on which criminal enterprise flourish. In spite of the IRA's denials, for example, there's little doubt its members were responsible for robbing the Northern Bank of Belfast last December - an action that netted $50 million. Persuading "volunteers" to abandon such lucrative criminal activity for a job turning bolts on the Short Bros. assembly line isn't going to be easy.

If the IRA does disarm, however, it will be a victory for the peace process. Persuading the gunmen to lay down their arms and embrace democracy was the point of that whole painful exercise. That it has come this close to working is something of a miracle.

Unfortunately though, it's a process Britain can't apply to the new terrorist threat it faces. The IRA, for all its brutality and Celtic mysticism, had legitimate grievances and realistic objectives. But Al-Qa'ida appears to be full of madmen who dream of reconquering Andalusia, destroying Western democracy and slaughtering infidels. There's no room for negotiation there, no common ground for reasoned discussion. On that front, Britain will have to rely on less subtle means than persuasion.

© The Gazette (Montreal) 2005


<hr size=8 noshade align=left width="74%">

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=655293

IRA items flood Ebay following peace move
By Senan Hogan
newsdesk@belfasttelegraph.co.uk
04 August 2005


DOZENS of pieces of IRA memorabilia have appeared on internet auction site eBay since the terror group announced the end of its armed campaign last week.

More than 150 items have been put up for sale, including original 1981 hunger strike posters and a gun-shaped badge posted just two hours after the July 28, 4pm deadline for volunteers to dump weapons.

Second-hand books, CDs, DVDs and bumper stickers also feature in the mass sell-off by anonymous vendors in Belfast, Derry and London determined to profit from the IRA's decision to go out of business.

A May 1981 copy of Republican newspaper, An Phoblacht, which was shrunk down to be smuggled into Republican prisoners on hunger strike in the H-blocks, has been bid up to 65 euro (£40) by 13 potential buyers.

The Belfast-based seller of the item said on the site: "In this edition, there is an exclusive interview with the IRA and pictures on two pages of an IRA training camp."

A 1981 hunger strike poster featuring prisoners Bobby Sands, Francis Hughes, Raymond McCreesh and Patsy O'Hara is currently fetching bids of 59.53 euro (£37).

The vendor says: "Please no timewasters. You will get this for a bargain as I should be keeping it for next year for the 25th anniversary but it's on sale now."

The highest bid item in the IRA category is an Irish Easter Rising 1916 medal currently priced at 827 euro (£524) by 27 bidders.

A copy of Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams' memoir, Hope and History, signed by the author, has so far failed to attract any bidders.

A biography of the party's chief negotiator, Martin McGuinness entitled: IRA: From Guns To Government was put on the eBay site just five hours after the armed campaign officially ended.

Tim Pat Coogan's book, The IRA, is being offered for 10.89 euro (£6.70) by a Co Down reader.

Mr Coogan, a former Irish Press editor, said: "I'd have thought it would go for a bit more, but there you are." <p>
to make the pain go away
i cut the universe
with ribbons
because that make perfect sense.</p>

User avatar
Animala
HATED BY SKELETONS
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:52 pm

:[

Unread postby Animala » Thu Aug 04, 2005 9:03 pm

http://www.washblade.com/2005/7-15/news/localnews/minister.cfm

LOCAL NEWS | washingtonblade.com
Minister’s fiery anti-gay sermon riles activists
Influential Rev. Wilson leads Millions More Movement
By KATHERINE VOLIN and LOU CHIBBARO JR.
Jul. 15, 2005


An influential D.C. minister is under fire by local gay activists following an anti-gay sermon in which he claimed that, “lesbianism is about to take over our community.”

Rev. Willie Wilson delivered the remarks at Union Temple Baptist Church in Southeast D.C., where he is pastor. Wilson is a former mayoral candidate and serves as executive director of the Millions More Movement march, an effort to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Million Man March.

Efforts by gay civil rights advocates to secure a visible role at the march stalled again this week when excerpts from Wilson’s anti-gay sermon came to light. One lesbian march organizer quickly resigned in protest.

“Sisters making more money than brothers and it’s creating problems in families … that’s one of the reasons many of our women are becoming lesbians,” Wilson said.

The Blade obtained a copy of the sermon, titled “You’ve Got to Fight to Be Free,” which Wilson delivered at Union Temple on July 3.

“Lesbianism is about to take over our community. … I ain’t homophobic because everybody here got something wrong with him,” he said. “But … women falling down on another woman, strapping yourself up with something, it ain’t real. That thing ain’t got no feeling in it. It ain’t natural. Anytime somebody got to slap some grease on your behind and stick something in you, it’s something wrong with that. Your butt ain’t made for that.

“No wonder your behind is bleeding,” he said. “You can’t make no connection with a screw and another screw. The Bible says God made them male and female.”

The congregation can be heard shouting its approval in the background during Wilson’s sermon.

Wilson declined to comment for this story.

Reaction was swift from gay civil rights advocates, several of whom have been organizing monthly community meetings related to being included in the Millions More Movement march, which is to take place in D.C., Oct. 14-16.

Longtime gay rights activist Phil Pannell, one of the most visible and vocal advocates in favor of gay participation in the upcoming event, said he was disappointed when he learned of Wilson’s sermon.

“It’s very difficult to go forth in the community to even try to have a meeting with Rev. Wilson because, with views expressed like that, particularly in the pulpit of the church, it makes it very difficult for the GLBT community to think that any conversation or dialogue regarding inclusion … would be constructive and fruitful,” he said. “I’m quite distressed.”

At a planning meeting held earlier this year at D.C.’s Union Temple Baptist Church, Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam leader who organized the Million Man March in 1995, told Pannell that black gay people were welcome to take part in all aspects of the event, Pannell said. He also said Wilson invited him to that planning meeting and told him that a gay speaker at the October event might be possible.

But black gays were absent on May 2 when a group of African-American leaders held a news conference in D.C. to announce the Millions More Movement march.

Carlene Cheatam, another longtime gay civil rights advocate who has been spearheading efforts to organize gay participation at the anniversary event in October, agreed with Pannell.

“I’m terribly upset. It is sickening that he said it,” she said. “I’m surprised that that’s how he feels, but it truly shows his colors.

“The reaction in the community has been very dramatic and dynamic. People are very angry,” Cheatam said. “I’m not sure how we will move forward, because there are people who say, ‘I don’t want to have anything to do with that because of him.’ But the movement is bigger than he is.”

The next “GLBT Dinner Meeting about the Millions More Movement” is scheduled to be held from 6 to 9 p.m., Sunday, July 17, at Freedom Fellowship Church, 400 H St., NE. A citywide meeting of the Millions More Movement organizers and supporters is to take place at 6 p.m., Saturday, July 16, at Scripture Cathedral, 810 O St., NW.

Wilson has been pastor at Union Temple for 22 years.

Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance, said he also was disappointed with Wilson’s anti-gay sermon.

“It is certainly appalling, if not surprising, to hear a self-professed minister of God spewing such hatred from the pulpit of a church,” he said.

Political observers consider Wilson one of the city’s most politically influential ministers. Many of the city’s leaders, including Mayor Anthony Williams, and D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, have sought Wilson’s advice on matters related to sections of the city east of the Anacostia River, where Union Temple is located.

In 2000, Williams appointed Wilson to the Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia, and the D.C. Council confirmed the appointment. Two years later, Wilson ran against Williams in the Democratic mayoral primary.

“You would think that such a divisive figure would be treated as persona non grata by the city’s leaders, but this has not been the case,” Rosendall said.

Rev. Dr. Amina Binta, co-chair of one of the Millions More Movement march’s local organizing committees, resigned her post this week, based on Wilson’s comments.

“They’re not serious about allowing us to sit at the table,” she said. “And if they are, I don’t care to eat their fare, because they’re serving up a steady diet of homophobia that is very venomous.”


IN HIS OWN WORDS
Click HERE to listen!

Except from Rev. Willie Wilson’s sermon on July 3:
“… We live in a time when our brothers have been so put down, can’t get a job, lot of the sisters making more money than brothers. And it’s creating problems in families. That’s one of the reasons our families’ breaking up. And that’s one of the reasons many of our women are becoming lesbians. You got to be careful when you say you don’t need no man. I can make it by myself. Well, if you don’t need a man, what’s left? Lesbianism is about to take over our community. I’m talking about young girls. My son in high school last year, trying to go to the prom, he said, ‘Dad, I ain’t got nobody to take to the prom because all the girls in my class are gay. There ain’t but two of them straight and both of them are ugly. I ain’t got nobody to take to the prom.’ Now, can I talk here? I ain’t homophobic, because everybody in here got something wrong with him. Whoever you point at, you can point at your own self. You got something wrong with your life. But when you get down to this thing, women falling down on another woman, strapping yourself up with something, it ain’t real. That thing ain’t got no feeling in it. It ain’t natural. Any time somebody got to slap some grease on your behind, and stick something in you, it’s something wrong with that. Your butt ain’t made for that. [Audience shouts and yells its approval in the background.] You got blood vessels and membranes in your behind. And if you put something unnatural in there, it breaks them all up. No wonder your behind is bleeding. It’s destroying us. Can’t make no connection with a screw and another screw. The Bible says God made them male and female. The Hebrew word "neged," which means complementary nature — there is something unique to man and unique to woman and it takes those two things to complement each other. You can’t make a connection with two screws. It takes a screw and a nut! (shouting).”


Rhonda Smith contributed to this report. <p>
to make the pain go away
i cut the universe
with ribbons
because that make perfect sense.</p>

User avatar
Zemyla
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:01 am

Re: :[

Unread postby Zemyla » Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:32 am

Quote:
You can’t make a connection with two screws. It takes a screw and a nut!


Well, he's a nut, but who would be the screw? <p>-----
Do not taunt Happy Fun Zemyla.

<span style="font-size:xx-small;">I think boobs are the lesser of two evils. - Inverse (Pervy)
Dammit, Dan, I'm not dating a damn NPC! - OOC Will (Will Baseton)
Of course! Anything worth doing is worth doing completely wrong! - Travis English
Ultimately, wizards and clerics don't say, "Gee, I want to become a lich because weapons hurt less and I don't have to worry about being backstabbed; that whole 'eternal life' thing is just a fringe benefit."-Darklion
But this one time I killed a walrus with my bare hands, and I suddenly understood spherical coordinates. - KnightsofSquare
Also, when you've worked a 36-hour shift as an intern you too just might pour yourself a catful of coffee and sit down to cuddle with your travel mug. -eirehound
</span>

Adventurers! | RPG World World | The Phantom Lord's OT Board mkII | Indie Madnesse | Brotherhood of Elitist Bastards</p>

Next

Return to Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron

Yalogank