Today's popular content
- Wisconsin’s System Increasingly Rigged Against the Unemployed (46)
- The Health Care Industry vs. Health Reform (25)
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food" (20)
- About ALEC Exposed (18)
- More Corporations Drop Off ALEC's Conference Brochure (14)
- Harold Camping's Global Apocalypse PR Campaign (12)
- Resources for Investigating ALEC/NRA Gun Bills (11)
- Why Do We Need Health Care Reform? Don't Ask George Will (11)
- PBS Killed Wisconsin Uprising Documentary "Citizen Koch" To Appease Koch Brothers (11)
- This Is Going to Hurt: What Your Doctor Doesn't Say Can Cost You (10)
Readers' Comments
-
Submitted by: Anonymous
-
Submitted by: pbarnrob
-
Submitted by: EarlBowden
-
Submitted by: Anonymous
-
Submitted by: Anonymous
-
Submitted by: Anonymous
-
Submitted by: Anonymous
-
Submitted by: Anonymous
-
Submitted by: Anonymous
-
Submitted by: AndrewG
Never trust a prankster
My article above quotes [[Stewart Brand]]. The quotes are from Brand's letter below announcing Rendon's talk.
Also, you can help read and help edit and write an article about Stewart Brand on SourceWatch at: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stewart_Brand
John Stauber
--------------
From: Stewart Brand
Date: July 10, 2006 2:14:19 PM CDT
To: salt@list.longnow.org
Subject: [SALT] The long game against terror, FRIDAY, July 14 (for forwarding)
As "senior communications consultant" to the current administration and every White House and Defense Department leadership since President Carter, John Rendon, head of The Rendon Group, has been in the thick of combatting terrorism for decades. In his view, the US needs to deepen its thinking and activities against terror from tactical to strategic--- from short-term reactive to long-term systemic.
"Long-term Policy to Make the War on Terror Short," John Rendon, Herbst Theater, San Francisco, 7pm, Friday, July 14. The lecture starts promptly at 7:30pm. Admission is free ($10 donation always welcome, not required).
The Rendon Group specializes in studying public opinion and media activities worldwide, in real time, and in devising appropriate responses. Some media characterize John Rendon as a right-wing information warrior, but it that is not my experience of him, and it belies his background as a campaigner for Michael Dukakis, Jimmy Carter, and John Kerry. What characterizes Rendon to me is that he is exceptionally informed, astute, and engaged. It should be a hell of a talk.
The Herbst Theater is at Van Ness and McAllister in the War Memorial Veterans Building, adjoining the San Francisco Civic Center.
This is one of a monthly series of Seminars About Long-term Thinking organized by The Long Now Foundation, usually on second Fridays. If you would like to be notified by email of forthcoming talks, please contact Simone Davalos--- simone AT longnow.org, 415-561-6582--- or go to: http://list.longnow.org/mailman/listinfo/SALT .
You are welcome to forward this note to anyone you think might be interested.
--[[Stewart Brand]]
--
Stewart Brand -- sb AT gbn.org
The Long Now Foundation - http://www.longnow.org
Seminars & downloads: http://www.longnow.org/projects/seminars/
Maybe Joshua Belile was there when the soldiers raped that 14 year old girl in her home with her family present and when they killed the girl's family and the girl after they got threw gang raping her. As evidenced by his song he seemed to have known alot about that story before it was ever "officially" investigated or made US news. I watched his performance of "Hadji Girl" on the video several times and I got the impression that he had written that song straight from the gut, like he wanted the world to hear every line of the story. First time I viewed it I immediately thought he has either heard about this story or had witnessed it first, hand, that it had some personal meaning to him. Regardless alas, we all now know "Hadji Girl" is a true story. If he survives Iraq (G-d willing), maybe he will write a book about how he came up with that little number.
http://www.handsoff.org/
http://www.minimumwage.com
http://www.abionline.org
http://www.consumerfreedom.com
http://www.epionline.org
http://www.animalscam.com
http://www.activistcash.com
http://www.consumerfreedom.com
http://www.activistcash.com
http://www.physicianscam.com
http://www.epionline.org
http://www.abionline.org
http://www.physicianscam.com
http://www.petakillsanimals.com
http://www.nannyculture.com
http://www.cspiscam.com
http://www.animalscam.com
http://www.maddatgm.com
http://www.cspiscam.com
http://www.bacdebate.com
http://www.bacdebate.com
http://www.maddatgm.com
http://www.responsibledrinker.com
http://www.petakillsanimals.com
http://www.bermanco.com
http://www.firstjobs.org
http://www.petapetition.com
http://www.bermanco.com
http://www.obesityscam.com
http://www.rottenacorn.com
http://www.madcowscare.com
http://www.livingwage.com
for some reason I doubt your reaction would be the same to the Islamist music videos floating around the Net.
But you do hit on a disturbing point...when people sing about killing as "humorous way to pass the time"...there are much deeper, darker, problems afoot.
The war itself is encouraging these dark aspects of human nature, by bringing Americans and Iraqis together in an environment full of tension, fear, hatred and violence. And if the war itself is creating these evils, how can it hope to end them?
The first sentence could/should be re-written.
--
War itself encourages dark aspects of human nature by bringing different people together in an environment full of tension, fear, hatred, and violence.
--
And is a good reason to oppose starting one on general principals.
The ends needed to justify these means must be astronomical to make sense. The only ends that are, IMHO, justifiable are survival, survival, and survival.
Setting aside the question of what on earth anybody could possibly find humourous about this demented song, I choose instead to take issue with your observation that the song is "Not that big of a deal"???
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/30/AR2006063000495.html
"Troops Facing Murder Probe
Atrocities Against Iraqi Family Alleged
By Jonathan Finer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, July 1, 2006; A01
BAGHDAD, June 30 -- The U.S. Army is investigating allegations that American soldiers raped and killed a woman and killed three of her family members in a town south of Baghdad, then reported the incident as an insurgent attack, a military official said Friday.
The alleged crimes occurred in March in the insurgent hotbed of Mahmudiyah. The four soldiers involved, from the 502nd Infantry Regiment, attempted to burn the family's home to the ground and blamed insurgents for the carnage, according to a military official familiar with the investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was providing details not released publicly."
I think that the marine was just bored and wanted to write a humorous song to pass the time and give himself and his buds somthing to laugh about. Nothing is wrong with the song, cause its just that a song. Dont take it too seriously, it's not that big of a deal.
It's really the dark side of the corporate world. When we talk about globalisation, employee friendly HR polices, growth oriented strategies and equal opportunity employers, such incidents of harrassment and threatening present a different picture.
Yimprasert is right in filing a case and fighting for the rights of a victim of such harrassment. The Court's ruling in her favour is a testimony othe fact. Way to go Yimprasert!!!
Mohd. Ismail Sheriff, Head-Content, Blue Lotus Communications
Tort reform is actually a conflicting issue.People gotta know more about it.its has got its own impact.i read about it in the website of the Co-Founder and Chairman of the Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR) Mr DICK WEEKLEY .The TLR ia n organisation dedicated to bring back fairness and balance to the Texas civil justice sysytem.Texas tort reforms have strengthened the state’s economy in a variety of ways and are improving the quality of life for every Texan.
I love this article on Kraft Foods because I also have been calling them since February 2006 on an illegal and toxic ingredient in their Macaroni and Cheese.
Here is what happened. In February 2006 I attended a food activist conference at DePaul University in Chicago. At the conference I received a flier on a food ingredient I had never heard of before called Milk Protein Concentrate (MPC). The flier was titled "Is there "Krap" in your Kraft Singles?" The flier stated that instead of milk, Kraft puts MPC in their Kraft Singles which is a by-product of milk processing. MPC contains dried bacteria, radioactive isotopes, heavy metals, pesticides, dioxins and other dangerous residues and is not purchased locally but imported from places such as the Ukraine, India and New Zealand. Worse, MPC has never been approved by the FDA. (The flier can be found at www.familyfarmdefenders.org).
After the conference I called Kraft's consumer information line and was told that Milk Protein Concentrate is concentrated protein from milk. When I asked them to explain further they suggested I call corporate headquarters in Glenview, Illinois. Since they are north of Chicago I paid them a visit in person. I asked to speak to a nutritionist and the receptionist said she would call someone. While I waited I flipped through their annual report which showed healthy, good-looking people smoking cigarettes (Kraft and Phillip Morris are owned by the same company-Altria). A woman named Sabrina contacted me on the lobby phone and took my information. While we were talking a security guard was called out to watch me and then escorted me out of the building (FYI-I made absolutely no fuss, am clean cut, in my forties and the father of 2 young boys).
Sabrina and I have hence talked back and forth over the past months. I told her that the FDA says MPC is an illegal ingredient and she said Kraft abides by all FDA guidelines and in no way would they break FDA regulations. I called her back and told her I downloaded a Warning Letter from the FDA's website addressed to Kraft that I will summarize- the FDA has inspected 3 of Kraft's plants and have found that Kraft is using MPC in their food-this is an illegal substance that needs to be removed. Sabrina was not aware of this letter and I told her where to find it (just type in MPC on the FDA's website and you will get it). She said she would get back to me and I haven't received a call in a number of weeks. I have tried unsuccessfully to talk to other people in the organization especially a nutritionist and even the CEO but to no avail. The road always leads back to Sabrina who would rather not talk to me and called me back once but prefers I call her.
According to the flier I received-instead of removing MPC-Kraft instead changed the name of Kraft Singles from "Cheese Food" to "Cheese Product". At least the new name is closer to what it is-an "industrial product" instead of food.
Mark Reed
For those (like me) who didn't know what REACH is all about, see:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2004/2004-06-24-03.asp
An excerpt:
"Under REACH, certain classes of industrial chemicals regarded as of Very High Concern would have to be registered, evaluated and authorized before they could be marketed. They are:
* carcinogens, mutagens, and reprotoxins which are either known or very likely to be toxic to humans
* chemicals that can become widely disseminated in the environment, and which are persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic, particularly persistent organic pollutants
* chemicals that are very persistent and very bioaccumulative in humans and wildlife for which toxicity data are still unavailable
"
Err ... mandatory registration and authorisation of chemicals that are carcinogenic, toxic, and bioaccumulative? What exactly is the problem?
Of course that part of our society which is known as "chemical industry" would be better off without any regulation of any kind.
The question is of course: how about other segments of society, notably consumers? After all ... our doctor's bills don't show up on their balance sheet, and neither does removal of e.g. pesticides from our groundwater. Both show up for consumers though: in our medical insurance or in our taxes. The US are a funny place ... on the one hand we have one of the strictest regimes in the world for medicines (the FDA regulations are famous) ... and one of the most permissive for all other chemicals. Does that make sense? I don't think so.
And funnily enough ... pleas for careful consideration of cost-benefit tradeoffs (such as from Boyden Gray) only seem to be heard from this administration when it's about to block, water down, delay, or derail legislation aimed at protection of consumers or the environment.
Why not just reverse the rhethoric and call it "a challenge", or even "an opportunity to innovate"? That would fit the issues just as well.
And I'm deeply sceptical of all those doomsayers who tell us we can't possibly afford strict environmental legislation because: it will undermine our industry's competitive position compared to China's / it's not cost-effective / it stifles innovation / it's a senseless treehuggers delusion / the market should sort it all out (cross out whichever isn't applicable).
For my part I hope that the EU goes straight ahead with what they're doing ... and we'll see that the US, Japan, China, and whoever will follow. Grumbling perhaps, but follow they will. That way they get the best of both worlds: they get good protective legislation, and and they get to bitch at "anti-business" measures at the same time.
From the [[http://www.cleanclothes.org Clean Clothes Camapaign]], The Netherlands:
Publicis Thailand Drops Suit Against TLC Coordinator!
The CCC is pleased to report that Publicis Thailand, the Thai subsidiary of French-based global public relations giant Publicis Groupe has withdrawn its libel lawsuit against Junya Lek Yimprasert, coordinator of the Thai Labour Campaign (TLC).
Yimprasert had been charged with "defamation by propagation" after the TLC website republished a CSR Asia Weekly article about an unfair dismissal case filed by Publicis Thailand employees. Following an international campaign calling upon Publicis to unconditionally drop their suit against Yimprasert, on June 20th Publicis lawyers withdrew the suit from Bangkok’s Southern Criminal Court.
Reflecting upon her experience with this case, Yimprasert noted “It is frustrating that we, who are directly in contact with workers that produce for the world and witness many rights violations, cannot bring the situation to the attention of the world without the risk of being sued. Furthermore, workers who report to us, of course, must face all kinds of pressures and risk being dismissed.”
“I think that solidarity action has worked again in this case,” said Yimprasert. “To every supporter that helped us this time: I would encourage you to continue your solidarity in any of the future campaigns led by LabourStart, Clean Clothes Campaign and Reseau-Solidarite. Your 'click' is really making a difference in the producing world. I think that my case has been further proof of that.”
Sanofi-Aventis announced on June 8, 2006, after the flurry of negative reports, that it was voluntarily ceasing the trial of this antibiotic on children.
See my blog http://www.prwatch.org/node/4916
Citizen journalists on [[SourceWatch]] have been investigating and exposing the many Republican connections and the partisan pro-war political agenda behind [[Vets for Freedom]], a new organization with mysterious funding and a flashy website designed by Campaign Solutions, part of the [[Donatelli Group]]. [[Vets for Freedom]]'s hollow claim of "non-partisanship" took another blow Sunday, June 25, when the Buffalo News published a front page story by Jerry Zremski, their Washington correspondent, [http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20060625/1066005.asp linking Vets for Freedom to the Bush White House].
Here is a question for us all, about the irrelevant, pseudo, swing issues(eg. the widespread "problem" of flag-burning and where a candidate stands on this issue), which candidates use to hoist themselves up and over an otherwise skeptical public:
Let's look at history. In 1920's and 1930's Germany, a man who was a maniac and probably insane got elected. While the election might have been rigged, nevertheless many of his supporters were under the spell of what seemed at the time a very benign and harmless issue of race, and even this was based upon partial truths, such as the fact that like begets like, etc. I mean who is to argue that a daisy does not produce a rose. But is this really an election issue?
Anyway the question for us today is do we want to elect maniacs into office, simply because they have won over the public based upon some irrelevant "swing" issue?
Do we care more about burning symbols (flags) or sending innocent people to the electric chair over circumstantial evidence, because we couldn't get it figured out just what happened?
It is alarming how many prisoners were going to be executed for murders they did not commit, but DNA testing came along and proved their case.
Okay what is more important --- burning a symbol, or burning people at the stake? A symbol is nothing other than a symbol, and it involves freedom of speech. It is not a sacred cow.
Maybe I should be burned at the stake, in fact, since I once had a dream that the Statue of Liberty was lying down under water with her hands together in prayer (as if perhaps frightened, or maybe just exasperated --- I couldn't really tell), instead of standing tall with the flame held high. What if I had decided to turn that dream into art, or satire?
Lately the nation's powerful think tanks have thought up some issues for us, carefully placing them in media outlets and megaphones to serve as our nation's "problem" issues.
One of these issues is the widespread problem of flag burning.
Another is the influx of immigrants, and how this might impact our fragile yet carefully-established echo chamber.
I'd like to have a word myself about these psuedo, let-them-eat- cake issues:
These carefully concocted non-issues are simply very tangible "anchor" issues which the public is "supposed" to grasp onto. They come with redi-made answers and require little or no personal assessment or thought. The issues and sub-issues are totally spoon-fed to the public by a Big Brother telling the masses to take their so-to-speak medicine.
We might call them "lollipop" issues, since they are nothing much other than a piece of candy for the public to be entertained by and to suck on and think that it is food. Let them eat lollipops.
We might call them "hump" issues, since they are pseudo-issues that create a pivot or launching pad for a particular candidate (or agenda) to swing an election, over some otherwise hurdle or hump of public dubiousness. They categorize the candidate, and launch the candidate over a certain "hump" of otherwise public skepticism.
Whatever they are called, it's all a waste. It ain't real life.
Okay first let me say that I personally do not have quite the same animosity towards blacks who "wear" their religion for show than for whites who do so, and this is simply my own personal bias because I have not had the same personal life observations of blacks as whites. Blacks have often had to lead harder lives, and therefore I feel less judgemental of them. Anyway this comment is not directed towards blacks or racial issues, but wearing one's religion for show in general.
People everywhere feel like they are "okay" because they think they know what is wrong with everyone else. They are majoring in the presumed errors and wrongs of everyone else. But they don't have a clue about their own personal flaws --- just 20/20 vision on everyone else (or so they think), and perhaps this is only a natural human condition for which little can be done.
Anyway it is curious why the two words "secular" and "humanism" have been combined --- as if the two necessarily have anything to do with each other. (I was trying to be satirical above, and so called this comment "secular hedonism . . . ")
Also there are people going around in cars with bumper stickers that say that because they are Christians, they are not perfect but that they are "forgiven." Okay this particular presumption warrants some closer inspection, being that there is a little comment in their Bible in which Jesus tells his disciples to pray to "forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." This is found in the book of Matthew, chapter 6 verse 12. Since it says to pray for one's own forgiveness to the same degree one is willing to forgive others, then could it be possible that there is a sort of "condition" involved?
Anyway it does give rise to some question that Christianity is really some club of license to sin with no reckoning or Day or Reckoning to come about it all. "There comes a Day of Reckoning" one lady once very aptly put it.
Okay sorry I don't have more time to devote/give to writing this up better but there is just very little spare time for very many of us in this world today, for us to sit around and perfect these sorts of write-ups. So this will have to do.
Also I did a little digging on the internet about these guys. If you look up the internet domain name they are hosted with Smartech Corporation. If you do a search on Smartech Corporation in google.com 3rd link down: 2006 : Republican Party. Click that link and you get: http://www.opensecrets.org/parties/expenddetail.asp?txtName=SMARTECH+CORPORATION&Cmte=RPC&cycle=2006
See for yourself. To me this just further proves www.vetsforfreedom.org is a prop for the Republican Party.
William Wade Zirkle graduated from Avon Old School in Avon CT in 1996, according to the Hartford-Courant. Average tuition now for a boarder at Avon Old School is $35k annually. Mr. Zirkle certainly was not your average GI.
The address of Vets for Freedom is 132 N. Main St., Woodstock VA 22664. The building was purchased by Lloyd H. Hartman in 11/01. Woodstock is in Shenandoah County.
There are a number of Zirkles in and around Woodstock and a number of businesses registered to Zirkles.
W. Denham Zirkle is director and former president of the Zirkle Mill Foundation, Inc., 12097 S. Middle Road, Edinburg, VA 22824, registered 9/04. Lisa R. Zirkle is secretary, Sharon Z. Wetherholtz is treasurer and Ann M. Zirkle is another director. 990s are not available online. The foundation receives state and federal funding, according to its website.
The address of Zirkle Family Farms, LLC, formerly Zirkle & Associates, LLC, is 12097 S. Middle Road, Edinburg, VA. No officers listed.
Katherine E. Ramsey of Hunton & Williams, Riverfront Plaza East Tower, 951 E. Byrd St., Richmond VA 23219, is the registered agent for the Zirkle Foundaton and Zirkle Farms.
W. Denham Zirkle, a former executive vice-president with Templeton Investments, is or was CEO of Carret and Company, another investment firm. Carret and Company is owned by Castle Harlan Partners III L.P., a private-equity investment fund organized and managed by Castle Harlan, Inc., the New York merchant bank. Assets under management by Carret and Company are now more than $2 billion.
William D. Zirkle of Edinburg, VA donated a total of $4.5k to the campaigns of Todd Gilbert and Jerry Kilgore in 2005. William Wade Zirkle, also of Edinburg, donated $2k to the Virginia League of Conservation Voters in 2005.
Any idea if William D. or W. Denham Zirkle is related to William Wade Denham Zirkle?
Thanks from this Iraq vet for exposing these partisan hacks.
The sheer arrogance of anyone naming their organization "(Blank) For Freedom" is enough to tick me off, but to dishonestly advocate for an open-ended policy of sacrificing young American lives for no good reason sickens me.
I guess I hate freedom.
Coulter is a man. Wait til she finally comes out one day and you will finally understand the person.
First of all, yes, very few women smoked during that period. HOWEVER, flappers DID! Flapper women were the epitome of the counterculture female and if this person actually paid attention to the movie, the average woman/burgeoning feminist was represented by Mary Sunshine who wrote for a paper that encouraged young women to NOT drink, smoke, listen to jazz, etc. The main characters of Velma Kelly and Roxie Hart were also in the vaudeville/burlesque entertainment industry and they were most definitely counterculture. They were most likely modeled after women Bob Fosse met while he was a child as his mother was a burlesque performer.
Flappers wore clothes, spoke and danced unlike any of their mainstream counterparts. Flappers were not well-received by mainstream society because they did not just want to get married, stay at home and pop out baby after baby. They drank hard 'manly' liquors, smoked, cussed, cut their hair far shorter than a 'proper' woman did, wore flimsy clothes, danced 'unladylike', stayed out all night, and experimented sexually. Hell, that's not even accepted TODAY! Flappers were the backlash against the Victorian Era which ended not too long before they first appeared. Remember that era when women were as conservative and asexual as possible?
Add to that most of the scenes took place while they were in jail. A lot of people pick up bad habits in jail, among them are smoking and doing drugs. I doubt it was different back then.
Second, I doubt thousands of girls started smoking because of that movie. I doubt that many young girls went to see the movie considering the only recognizable person under 30 was Mya and Lindsay Lohan, Mischa Barton, Orlando Bloom or any other teen heartthrob was nowhere in sight. Considering the overall theme was that of women killing their ne'er-do-well boyfriends and husbands, are girls going to start doing that too because of the movie? That's just stupidity of the highest order.
Thanks to the ALA campaigns against smoking and those insipid Philip-Morris anti-smoking ads, most young people view smoking as 'totally uncool'. Most likely if any young girl (and by that I mean under 18) went to see Chicago she was probably more likely to start taking jazz classes that taught the Fosse technique than smoke or more likely she is already a dancer and went to see the movie since Chicago is one of the most popular musicals in the world.
Third, if they eliminated the smoking from the movie it would not be true to the original musical (remember, Hollywood didn't come up with this, Glantz!) OR to the characters shaped by their particular subculture of the 1920s. The female characters were counterculture and the main male character, Billy Flynn, smoked a cigar like many men did in that era.
Lastly, I do not remember Catherine Zeta-Jones smoking while she was dancing. In the opening number she held a cigarette and gave it to the male dancer behind her then later during the Cell Block Tango the character Velma put out her cigarette before dancing while telling the story of why she 'justifiably' killed her husband and sister.
I remember hearing "haji" as far back as 1989 when I lived in Los Angeles. It seemed to apply to anyone from North Africa to Bangladesh. The derivation from the Haj didn't occur to me until more recently when someone pointed it out. Probably the people I heard using it in '89 weren't aware of it either.
Two days after I posted this article, the PR industry site the Holmes Report ran [http://www.holmesreport.com/holmestemp/story.cfm?edit_id=5893&typeid=2 an impassioned defense] of VNRs as "free speech," and attacked the Center for Media and Democracy as hypocritical censors:
The problem with this argument (well, the major one) is that VNR disclosure does not equal "regulating what and how journalists can report." TV stations can air as many VNRs as they want. Bad journalism (fueled by under-resourced newsrooms and omnipresent PR flacks) can -- and will -- continue.
What VNR disclosure will do is tell viewers when the "report" they're watching on, say, the Medicare drug program or Pfizer's new drug, was actually funded by and scripted on behalf of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department or Pfizer's marketing team.