Wednesday, January 30, 2013
I don't remember who said this, but there really are places in the heart you don't even know exist until you love a child. --Anne Lamott
Loving A Child Through the Challenges of Life
--by Rachel Stafford, Original Story, Sep 05, 2012
I was two years shy of becoming a mother when I learned my greatest
lesson about parenting. This information was not gleaned from a New York
Times bestseller, a renowned pediatrician, or an experienced parent. It
came from a 10-year-old boy born to a drug-addicted mother, with an
Individualized Education Plan thicker than an encyclopedia—a boy with
permanent scars along the side of his left arm from a beating with an
extension cord when he was three.
Kyle [*name changed] taught me the one and only thing I really needed to know about loving a child through the challenges of life.
This is my story …
It had been a difficult move. I left my family and friends and the beloved mid-western state where I’d lived most of my life. My new home was thousands of miles away from anything I knew. It was hot—all the time. There were no seasons and teaching jobs were hard to come by. Having seven years experience as a behavior specialist, I was up for a challenge. I would accept any job if it meant I could do what I was born to do—teach.
I accepted a teaching position in a classroom for children with an array of educational diagnoses. They were students with severe learning and behavioral difficulties who’d been shuffled from school to school. So far, no program in the district was able to meet their challenging needs.
The first few months of school were difficult. It was not unusual for me to cry as I made my 45-minute commute to the inner city. It required a deep breath to even open the classroom door, but I came back every day praying this would be the day—a breakthrough to one broken soul.
On this particular morning, I was excited. The other lead teacher and I had spent weeks teaching the children appropriate behavior for public outings. We would be going putt-putting and out to lunch. Miraculously, most of the children in class earned this privilege—only a few had not. Alternative arrangements were made for those students while we took the field trip.
We had an extensive plan in place to make the departure as smooth as possible. But due to the explosive behavior of many of the students, even the best laid plans could quickly turn sour.
Kyle was one of the students who had not earned the field trip, and he was determined to make that disappointment be known.
In the corridor between classrooms, he began screaming, cursing, spitting, and swinging at anything within striking distance. Once his outburst subsided, he did what he’d done at all his other schools, at home, even once at a juvenile detention center when he was angry—he ran.
The crowd of onlookers that congregated during the spectacle watched in disbelief as Kyle ran straight into the heavy morning traffic in front of the school.
I heard someone shout, “Call the police.”
Based on the information in Kyle’s file, I knew the officers would locate him and place him on a 5150 hold for a psychiatric evaluation.
But I could not just stand there. So I ran after him.
Kyle was at least a foot taller than me. And he was fast. His older brothers were track stars at the nearby high school. But I had worn running shoes for the field trip, and I could run long distances without tiring. I would at least be able to keep in him my sight and know he was alive.
With the agility of a professional athlete, Kyle dodged the moving vehicles in his path. After several blocks of running directly into on-coming traffic, he slowed his pace. Although it was still morning, the tropical sun was bearing down on the black tarmac baking anyone crazy enough to be running full speed on it.
Kyle took a sharp left and began walking through a dilapidated strip mall. Standing next to a trash compactor, he bent over with his hands on his knees. He was heaving to catch his breath. That is when he saw me. I must have looked ridiculous—the front of my lightweight blouse soaked with sweat, my once-styled hair now plastered to the side of my beat-red face. He stood up abruptly like a frightened animal that thought it was alone suddenly discovering he’d been spotted.
But it was not a look of fear.
I saw his body relax. He did not attempt to run again. Kyle stood and watched me approach. My exhaustion caused me to slow to a walk.
Kyle remained still.
I had no idea what I was going to say or what I was going to do, but I kept walking closer.
We locked eyes, and I willed every ounce of compassion and understanding in my heart toward his own.
He opened his mouth to speak when a police car pulled up, abruptly filling the space between Kyle and me. The principal of the school and an officer got out. They spoke calmly to Kyle who went willingly into the back of the vehicle. I did not come close enough to hear their words, but I didn’t take my eyes off Kyle’s face. His eyes never left mine … even as they drove away.
It was days before Kyle would be allowed to return to school. I shared my disappointment regarding the turn of events with Kyle’s speech therapist who was familiar with Kyle’s past history and family situation.
She placed her hand on my shoulder and said, “No one ever ran after him before, Rachel. No one. They just let him go.”
But I couldn’t help but feel that I had failed him … that I should have done more or said more … that I should have fixed the situation, or better yet, prevented the situation.
Kyle eventually came back to school. I quickly noticed that when he had a choice of which teacher to work with or which teacher to accompany him to special classes, he chose me. As weeks passed, he was glued to my side, complying with instructions, attempting to do his work, and once in awhile even smiling. For a child with severe attachment issues, it was quite amazing that he was developing a bond with me.
One day on the way to art class, Kyle unexpectedly grasped my hand. It was unusual for a boy his age and size to hold his teacher’s hand, but I knew I must act like it was the most normal thing in the world.
And then he leaned in and quietly said something I will never forget.
“I love you, Miss Stafford,” he whispered. And then, “I never told anyone that before.”
Part of me wanted to ask, “Why me?”
But instead I simply relished the moment—an unimaginable breakthrough from the child whose file bore the words: “Unable to express love or maintain a loving relationship with another human being.”
Besides, I knew the turning point. Things changed the day he ran, and I ran after him—even though I didn’t have the right words … even though I wasn’t able to save him from the mess he was in.
It was the day I didn’t throw my hands up in the air deciding he was too fast … a waste of time and effort … a lost cause.
It was the day my mere presence was enough to make a profound difference.
Ten years have passed since I’ve seen Kyle. I no longer live in the same state that I did back then. But I often think of him. When I am out running … when I am to the point where my legs are tired and aching … I think of him.
And I think of him when those really hard parenting dilemmas come my way—problems derived from inside and outside of the home—issues that make me want to beat my head against the wall or lower it in despair. I think of Kyle in those moments when I don’t know what to do or what to say when I look into my children’s troubled eyes.
That is when I see Kyle’s face and remember I don’t always have to have the answer. Because sometimes there is no clear-cut answer.
And I remember I don’t always have to “fix” their troubled hearts. Because there will be times when I can’t.
I think of Kyle and remember the power of presence.Because it’s possible to say, “I won’t let you go through this alone,” without muttering a single word.
Thank you, Kyle, for revealing the key to loving a child through the challenges of life.
Sometimes our mere presence is enough.
Sometimes it is exactly what is needed to change a dismal situation into one of hope.
Here in the U.S., many students are beginning a new school year. With that, social, academic, and emotional issues are bound to arise at any age. My hope is that we take some pressure off ourselves and realize we don’t always have to “fix it” or find a solution, but instead just be there for our children with love in our eyes.
Reprinted with permission. Rachel Macy Stafford is a certified special education teacher with a decade of experience working with parents and children. You can join her journey to grasp what matters through "The Hands Free Revolution" on her blog.
Kyle [*name changed] taught me the one and only thing I really needed to know about loving a child through the challenges of life.
This is my story …
It had been a difficult move. I left my family and friends and the beloved mid-western state where I’d lived most of my life. My new home was thousands of miles away from anything I knew. It was hot—all the time. There were no seasons and teaching jobs were hard to come by. Having seven years experience as a behavior specialist, I was up for a challenge. I would accept any job if it meant I could do what I was born to do—teach.
I accepted a teaching position in a classroom for children with an array of educational diagnoses. They were students with severe learning and behavioral difficulties who’d been shuffled from school to school. So far, no program in the district was able to meet their challenging needs.
The first few months of school were difficult. It was not unusual for me to cry as I made my 45-minute commute to the inner city. It required a deep breath to even open the classroom door, but I came back every day praying this would be the day—a breakthrough to one broken soul.
On this particular morning, I was excited. The other lead teacher and I had spent weeks teaching the children appropriate behavior for public outings. We would be going putt-putting and out to lunch. Miraculously, most of the children in class earned this privilege—only a few had not. Alternative arrangements were made for those students while we took the field trip.
We had an extensive plan in place to make the departure as smooth as possible. But due to the explosive behavior of many of the students, even the best laid plans could quickly turn sour.
Kyle was one of the students who had not earned the field trip, and he was determined to make that disappointment be known.
In the corridor between classrooms, he began screaming, cursing, spitting, and swinging at anything within striking distance. Once his outburst subsided, he did what he’d done at all his other schools, at home, even once at a juvenile detention center when he was angry—he ran.
The crowd of onlookers that congregated during the spectacle watched in disbelief as Kyle ran straight into the heavy morning traffic in front of the school.
I heard someone shout, “Call the police.”
Based on the information in Kyle’s file, I knew the officers would locate him and place him on a 5150 hold for a psychiatric evaluation.
But I could not just stand there. So I ran after him.
Kyle was at least a foot taller than me. And he was fast. His older brothers were track stars at the nearby high school. But I had worn running shoes for the field trip, and I could run long distances without tiring. I would at least be able to keep in him my sight and know he was alive.
With the agility of a professional athlete, Kyle dodged the moving vehicles in his path. After several blocks of running directly into on-coming traffic, he slowed his pace. Although it was still morning, the tropical sun was bearing down on the black tarmac baking anyone crazy enough to be running full speed on it.
Kyle took a sharp left and began walking through a dilapidated strip mall. Standing next to a trash compactor, he bent over with his hands on his knees. He was heaving to catch his breath. That is when he saw me. I must have looked ridiculous—the front of my lightweight blouse soaked with sweat, my once-styled hair now plastered to the side of my beat-red face. He stood up abruptly like a frightened animal that thought it was alone suddenly discovering he’d been spotted.
But it was not a look of fear.
I saw his body relax. He did not attempt to run again. Kyle stood and watched me approach. My exhaustion caused me to slow to a walk.
Kyle remained still.
I had no idea what I was going to say or what I was going to do, but I kept walking closer.
We locked eyes, and I willed every ounce of compassion and understanding in my heart toward his own.
He opened his mouth to speak when a police car pulled up, abruptly filling the space between Kyle and me. The principal of the school and an officer got out. They spoke calmly to Kyle who went willingly into the back of the vehicle. I did not come close enough to hear their words, but I didn’t take my eyes off Kyle’s face. His eyes never left mine … even as they drove away.
It was days before Kyle would be allowed to return to school. I shared my disappointment regarding the turn of events with Kyle’s speech therapist who was familiar with Kyle’s past history and family situation.
She placed her hand on my shoulder and said, “No one ever ran after him before, Rachel. No one. They just let him go.”
But I couldn’t help but feel that I had failed him … that I should have done more or said more … that I should have fixed the situation, or better yet, prevented the situation.
Kyle eventually came back to school. I quickly noticed that when he had a choice of which teacher to work with or which teacher to accompany him to special classes, he chose me. As weeks passed, he was glued to my side, complying with instructions, attempting to do his work, and once in awhile even smiling. For a child with severe attachment issues, it was quite amazing that he was developing a bond with me.
One day on the way to art class, Kyle unexpectedly grasped my hand. It was unusual for a boy his age and size to hold his teacher’s hand, but I knew I must act like it was the most normal thing in the world.
And then he leaned in and quietly said something I will never forget.
“I love you, Miss Stafford,” he whispered. And then, “I never told anyone that before.”
Part of me wanted to ask, “Why me?”
But instead I simply relished the moment—an unimaginable breakthrough from the child whose file bore the words: “Unable to express love or maintain a loving relationship with another human being.”
Besides, I knew the turning point. Things changed the day he ran, and I ran after him—even though I didn’t have the right words … even though I wasn’t able to save him from the mess he was in.
It was the day I didn’t throw my hands up in the air deciding he was too fast … a waste of time and effort … a lost cause.
It was the day my mere presence was enough to make a profound difference.
Ten years have passed since I’ve seen Kyle. I no longer live in the same state that I did back then. But I often think of him. When I am out running … when I am to the point where my legs are tired and aching … I think of him.
And I think of him when those really hard parenting dilemmas come my way—problems derived from inside and outside of the home—issues that make me want to beat my head against the wall or lower it in despair. I think of Kyle in those moments when I don’t know what to do or what to say when I look into my children’s troubled eyes.
That is when I see Kyle’s face and remember I don’t always have to have the answer. Because sometimes there is no clear-cut answer.
And I remember I don’t always have to “fix” their troubled hearts. Because there will be times when I can’t.
I think of Kyle and remember the power of presence.Because it’s possible to say, “I won’t let you go through this alone,” without muttering a single word.
Thank you, Kyle, for revealing the key to loving a child through the challenges of life.
Sometimes our mere presence is enough.
Sometimes it is exactly what is needed to change a dismal situation into one of hope.
Here in the U.S., many students are beginning a new school year. With that, social, academic, and emotional issues are bound to arise at any age. My hope is that we take some pressure off ourselves and realize we don’t always have to “fix it” or find a solution, but instead just be there for our children with love in our eyes.
Reprinted with permission. Rachel Macy Stafford is a certified special education teacher with a decade of experience working with parents and children. You can join her journey to grasp what matters through "The Hands Free Revolution" on her blog.
Arctic sea ice reaches a record low. Are we doomed?
posted 04 September 2012 17:43
It’s official: the Arctic sea ice extent has already reached a record low,
with weeks of melting still left this season. As predicted, the US
National Snow and Ice Data Centre released data showing that the rapid
ice melt has dropped below the previous record set in 2007:
An estimate of the Arctic sea ice extent in August 1938 compared to
satellite data on 28 August 2012 from the National Snow and Ice Data
Centre (source)
This is a problem, and not just for the animals who live there. Arctic sea ice plays a major role in keeping the region cool and thereby helping to control the global climate system. And with more sea ice melting, sea levels will rise globally – imperiling the lives of millions.
“The extraordinary thing is that this is not unexpected news," said Greenpeace executive director Kumi Naidoo, speaking from the Arctic, where he recently occupied a Russian oil platform. "Governments and decision-makers have known for years the effects of global warming yet their short-sighted approach has left people and other species living on the planet facing an increasingly insecure and uncertain future.”
And yet, as the Arctic melts, oil companies are already moving into the ice-free waters to drill beneath the seabed – paving the way for an Arctic oil rush that would have devastating impacts on the surrounding environment and our planet. Shell has just been given the green light to start drilling there despite a deafening global call on the US Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw their permit.
But the good news is that it’s not all doom and gloom. Last year $280bn was invested in clean, safe energy and the ongoing global surge in these investments could mean that world emissions of greenhouse gases are close to hitting a peak and then reducing.
Clean energy is not only good for the planet: as a leading job creator, it’s good for the struggling world economy. In 2010, there were nearly 8m jobs in the sector, and that figure is set to rise by another 4m over the next three years – overtaking the number of jobs in the fossil fuel industry.
It’s estimated that already nearly 20% of the world’s electricity generation is coming from renewable energy and, given the growth in the sector over the last year, there is hope that we could finally be starting to win the war on climate change. (The International Energy Agency will be releasing a report in November).
But there’s a lot more we need to do if we’re going to stay below a global temperature rise of 2 degrees centigrade. Ending the $1 trillion of fossil fuel subsidies is at the top of the list. For too long, progress on a global solution to climate change has been held back by self-interest and the profits of big oil, coal and gas.
... And then join the Avaaz movement to support action on fossil fuels and other campaigns that can close the gap between the world we have and the world most people everywhere want
An estimate of the Arctic sea ice extent in August 1938 compared to
satellite data on 28 August 2012 from the National Snow and Ice Data
Centre (source)It’s not just about saving polar bears
The sea ice has recently been vanishing at a terrifying rate of 100,000 sq km a day – a record for August – and it’s expected to continue melting until mid- to late September.This is a problem, and not just for the animals who live there. Arctic sea ice plays a major role in keeping the region cool and thereby helping to control the global climate system. And with more sea ice melting, sea levels will rise globally – imperiling the lives of millions.
“The extraordinary thing is that this is not unexpected news," said Greenpeace executive director Kumi Naidoo, speaking from the Arctic, where he recently occupied a Russian oil platform. "Governments and decision-makers have known for years the effects of global warming yet their short-sighted approach has left people and other species living on the planet facing an increasingly insecure and uncertain future.”
And yet, as the Arctic melts, oil companies are already moving into the ice-free waters to drill beneath the seabed – paving the way for an Arctic oil rush that would have devastating impacts on the surrounding environment and our planet. Shell has just been given the green light to start drilling there despite a deafening global call on the US Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw their permit.
Is it too late?
Countless activists, organisations and pundits have been busy sounding the alarm about the world's impending fate if we carry on with the "business-as-usual" approach.But the good news is that it’s not all doom and gloom. Last year $280bn was invested in clean, safe energy and the ongoing global surge in these investments could mean that world emissions of greenhouse gases are close to hitting a peak and then reducing.
Clean energy is not only good for the planet: as a leading job creator, it’s good for the struggling world economy. In 2010, there were nearly 8m jobs in the sector, and that figure is set to rise by another 4m over the next three years – overtaking the number of jobs in the fossil fuel industry.
It’s estimated that already nearly 20% of the world’s electricity generation is coming from renewable energy and, given the growth in the sector over the last year, there is hope that we could finally be starting to win the war on climate change. (The International Energy Agency will be releasing a report in November).
But there’s a lot more we need to do if we’re going to stay below a global temperature rise of 2 degrees centigrade. Ending the $1 trillion of fossil fuel subsidies is at the top of the list. For too long, progress on a global solution to climate change has been held back by self-interest and the profits of big oil, coal and gas.
Get inspired to help
Watch these brave activists take on the "big beasts" polluting the Arctic:... And then join the Avaaz movement to support action on fossil fuels and other campaigns that can close the gap between the world we have and the world most people everywhere want
Americans for Prosperity Chief: We Don't Know If $27 Million in Anti-Obama Ads Has Any Effect
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
I was born intelligent, education ruined me.
"Remember this, take it to heart, live by it, die for it if necessary: that our patriotism is medieval, outworn, obsolete; that the modern patriotism, the true patriotism, the only rational patriotism, is loyalty to the Nation All the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it" - spoken by Tsar Nicholas II in Twain's The Czar's Soliloquy, 1905.---
Eugenics in Israel, Police State Prep, GMO Virus, Latin America Flips Capitalism.
tyt Filibuster
ACTIVIST POST FEATURED ARTICLES
Why are AR-15's 'Personal Defense' for the DHS but 'Assault Rifles' for Citizens?
Activist Post
Bioterrorism Homemade in the USA
Catherine Frompovich
Japan’s Wrong Political Course: Public Docility Versus Nuclear Magnates
Richard Wilcox
Fed Reserve Money Printing Is The Real Reason Why Stock Market Is Soaring
Michael Snyder
The Connection Between Big Food / Big Pharma and Nutrition Policy
Karen De Coster
Why the 5-fold expansion of Pentagon’s cybersecurity force should concern you
Madison Ruppert
New Must-See Videos
Why are AR-15's 'Personal Defense' for the DHS but 'Assault Rifles' for Citizens?
Bioterrorism Homemade in the USA
Fed Reserve Money Printing Is The Real Reason Why Stock Market Is Soaring
Protest Silver: Freedom Girl Unleashed
Dirty Wars: The World Is a Battlefield
Fear and Oath-ing in D.C.
Today's Forum Topics
8 Deliberate Suicidal Steps Towards Hell on Earth
How Television News Creates The Illusion Of Knowledge
Other Key Articles From Around the Web
California Shoots for Marijuana Legalization in 2016
Government to Dispose of Radioactive Waste By Putting It In Our SILVERWAREHow To Avoid The Obamacare Death Trap
The Hidden Connection Behind Viruses, Vaccines and Cancer
Reporting Factory Farm Abuses Considered "Act of Terrorism" If New Laws Pass
The Last American President?
U.S. To Bury Almost All Existing Nuclear Waste
Google Plus Now Bigger Than Twitter
Processed Food Manager: ‘Our Biggest Fear is the Health Activists’
Report: Pentagon planning massive cybersecurity increase
Irish banks at mercy of international paymasters
Can Yoga Reduce Symptoms of Major Psychiatric Disorders?
Government Ban On Bitcoin Would Fail Miserably
Rahm Emanuel to Bully Banks Into Cutting Off Gun Companies
Carmen Ortiz to motel owner: We’re not done yet
Bitcoin’s Gains May Fuel Central Bank Concerns
Hemp Gets The Green Light In New Colorado Pot Measure
January 29, 2013 |
After all the big news last week about Barack Obama’s all-too-close relationship with Wall Street, my dad and I got into a back and forth email exchange about whether to feel optimistic about the president’s second term and about how to explain the administration’s refusal to prosecute a single banker connected to the financial meltdown.
Though my father is no Obama apologist by any stretch, his politics lean liberal, and so in response to watching last week’s PBS Frontline report, he asked me questions that were similar to those I’ve heard before. He wants to believe Obama really hopes to “hold Wall Street accountable,” as the president claimed, and so my dad wonders whether the president’s refusal to do so can be explained by something other than corruption. He wants to believe — or at least to explore the possibility — that the depressing situation isn’t simply about Obama raking in massive Wall Street contributions and then paying back his donors with immunity from prosecution — immunity, mind you, that the rest of us are not afforded.
In
2010, the Supreme Court opened the floodgates for the corporate
takeover of American politics with the Citizens United decision, which
held that corporations are not only people, but have the right to
effectively buy elections outright. In 2012, we saw the the decision’s
disastrous effects: corporate money flooded into elections at
unprecedented levels. three billion $'s to choose two clowns that share the same rhetoric............kos 
False and doubtful positions, relied upon as unquestionable maxims, keep those who build on them in the dark from truth. Such are usually the prejudices imbibed from education, party, reverence, fashion interest, et cetera. Locke
A person who knows all that is good and all that is true — as much as can be known — but does not resist evils, knows nothing....Emanuel Swedenborg
But there is only one thing which gathers people into seditious commotion, and that is oppression..New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common...It is one thing to show a man that he is in error, and another to put him in possession of the truth.--John Locke
S0
Check out the video 'Fight The New World Order with Global Non Compliance (Full Version)'
Disclose.tv - David Icke: Saturn & The Moon Matrix [Jack Blood @ DeadLineLive]
For David Icke fans?
Mali
Egypt violence
tyt obama
looters obama
Syria/US
rt syria
us cyber war
this will keep us distracted for awhile...teacup aliens to go with Iche's reptiles
“Prosecutors destroy a life.” That could be a headline in every
newspaper every day in a land where the answer to every problem (and
many nonproblems) is police and prisons. When 26-year-old Internet
prodigy and freedom of information activist Aaron Swartz committed
suicide on January 11, the tragedy was the direct result of US attorneys
deciding to throw criminal charges at him for violating a website’s
“terms of services” while accessing publicly subsidized academic
research. Swartz entered the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s
open campus, accessed its open network and downloaded a few million
academic articles owned by the digital library JSTOR, whose database
contains content belonging to hundreds of publishers. JSTOR and MIT now
insist they would have been only too happy to drop the matter, but
prosecutors pushed forward, throwing four felony charges at Swartz, who
then faced a maximum sentence of thirty-five years in prison, along with
fines of up to $1 million. Prosecutors shoveled on nine more felony
counts in September, bringing the total to thirteen.
The Justice Department’s legal assault on Swartz is of a vindictive piece with the prosecution of others who have carried important information into the public realm. Front and center is 25-year-old Bradley Manning, the Iraq War enlistee accused of being WikiLeaks’s source in the military. The restricted foreign policy documents that Manning allegedly released don’t amount to even 1 percent of the 92 million items the government classified last year, but the young private faces life in prison at his court-martial in June for the charge, among twenty-one others, of “aiding the enemy.” Then there’s Jeremy Hammond, age 28, who in his freshman year at the University of Illinois hacked the computer science department’s home page, then told them how they could fix its problem. He got thrown out of school for that; now he’s in a federal prison facing thirty-nine years to life, charged with various hacks and leaks (all apparently led by an FBI informant) including the 5 million internal e-mails of Stratfor, a private security firm hired by corporations to surveil private citizens, among other activities.
Barack Obama once campaigned as a friend to whistleblowers. Yet his Justice Department has launched twice as many Espionage Act prosecutions against domestic leakers as all previous administrations combined. One defendant, former National Security Agency official Thomas Drake, resembles an older version of Swartz: a former math and chess prodigy, Drake saw wanton illegality in the NSA’s post-9/11 surveillance program. When his internal complaints went nowhere, he went to The Baltimore Sun. The case against Drake crumpled on contact with a courtroom, but it was enough to ruin his career and financial well-being. Drake pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and now works at an Apple Store when he isn’t attending Bradley Manning’s court hearings.
Too often the cause of open information is dismissed as a geek fetish, a tedious hobby for the IT crowd. This is a grave error, as the high barriers around information are literally killing us. Larry Korb, former assistant secretary of defense, has told me he doesn’t think the Iraq War—endpoint of a debate starved of meaningful information, which has slaughtered hundreds of thousands—would have happened had unredacted intelligence reports been made more public.
Circulation of knowledge is a social justice issue, too. Dean Baker estimates that reforming the patent law regime for pharmaceuticals—currently a system that guarantees Big Pharma’s monopolies—would shrink annual spending on prescription drugs from $300 billion to $30 billion, a savings some five times the annual cost of Bush’s tax cut for the richest 2 percent. Meanwhile, grotesquely prolonged copyrights for literary and artistic properties are fencing off the cultural commons, a boot on the throat of a generation’s creative voice.
Prosecutors have cast activists like Swartz as cyber-terrorist Bond villains. In reality, they are more like earnest variations on Lisa Simpson. Swartz’s account of how he got involved with the fight to stop the SOPA/PIPA intellectual property bill in Congress reads like a Capra-esque rhapsody to American democracy. Manning, neck-deep in the worst foreign-policy disaster since Vietnam, hoped his leaks would lead to “worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms” because “without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.” Jeremy Hammond’s rhetoric admittedly tends to the extra-spicy, but many of his alleged misdeeds—revealing corporate spying on ordinary citizens—are a public service. Is getting the truth out really such a bad thing?
To be sure, the truth alone has never been enough to set anyone free. And truth, whether about foreign civilians killed or domestic surveillance programs, is very often the last thing people want. District attorneys know this. Perhaps the greatest tribute to the power of knowledge is the prosecutorial state’s panicked attempts to suppress it.
The notion that information should be easy to come by was not cooked up at the annual DefCon hacker conference. It was James Madison who wrote, “Popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both.” In the year 2013, such an Enlightenment cliché should not be sounding radical. (It is only since the summer of 2011 that Washington finished declassifying material from the Madison administration—a lag measured in centuries.)
The death of Aaron Swartz has rallied a small counterattack against the know-nothing state: mild law professors are spitting nails about bullying prosecutors, and the US attorney overseeing the case, Carmen Ortiz, no longer has a bright future in Massachusetts politics. “Aaron’s Law,” a bill proposed by Representative Zoe Lofgren, would prune the overreaching Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and even right-wing Senator John Cornyn is asking whether the case against Swartz was retaliation for the activist’s assertive use of Freedom of Information Act requests.
These are good developments, but they are overshadowed by runaway overclassification, toothless whistleblower-protection laws and an intellectual property regime driven by greed alone. Ignorance enforced by police and prosecutors will not bring us security, wealth or justice.
William F. Baker writes that the FTC’s investigation of Google has skirted the issue of the search-engine giant’s ability to restrict readers’ access to news.
But there is only one thing which gathers people into seditious commotion, and that is oppression..New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common...It is one thing to show a man that he is in error, and another to put him in possession of the truth.--John Locke
S0
Other points of view, trying to be objective here. We humanoids are the real aliens upon this globe, a metastasizing tumor, poised to devour the host.......kosmicdebris
Check out the video 'Fight The New World Order with Global Non Compliance (Full Version)'
Disclose.tv - David Icke: Saturn & The Moon Matrix [Jack Blood @ DeadLineLive]
For David Icke fans?
Mali
Egypt violence
tyt obama
looters obama
Syria/US
rt syria
us cyber war
this will keep us distracted for awhile...teacup aliens to go with Iche's reptiles
Posted: 28 Jan 2013 11:41 PM PST
Yesterday
in Jakarta, a coalition of NGOs held a press conference to demand that
the Indonesian government takes meaningful action to protect Indonesia’s
remaining forests. Among their demands is that the two-year moratorium
on new forest concessions should be extended beyond May 2013.
In that, they have the support of the head of Indonesia’s [...]
From Bradley Manning to Aaron Swartz -- The Government's Inhumane Persecution of Brave Truth Tellers
January 28, 2013 |
The Justice Department’s legal assault on Swartz is of a vindictive piece with the prosecution of others who have carried important information into the public realm. Front and center is 25-year-old Bradley Manning, the Iraq War enlistee accused of being WikiLeaks’s source in the military. The restricted foreign policy documents that Manning allegedly released don’t amount to even 1 percent of the 92 million items the government classified last year, but the young private faces life in prison at his court-martial in June for the charge, among twenty-one others, of “aiding the enemy.” Then there’s Jeremy Hammond, age 28, who in his freshman year at the University of Illinois hacked the computer science department’s home page, then told them how they could fix its problem. He got thrown out of school for that; now he’s in a federal prison facing thirty-nine years to life, charged with various hacks and leaks (all apparently led by an FBI informant) including the 5 million internal e-mails of Stratfor, a private security firm hired by corporations to surveil private citizens, among other activities.
Barack Obama once campaigned as a friend to whistleblowers. Yet his Justice Department has launched twice as many Espionage Act prosecutions against domestic leakers as all previous administrations combined. One defendant, former National Security Agency official Thomas Drake, resembles an older version of Swartz: a former math and chess prodigy, Drake saw wanton illegality in the NSA’s post-9/11 surveillance program. When his internal complaints went nowhere, he went to The Baltimore Sun. The case against Drake crumpled on contact with a courtroom, but it was enough to ruin his career and financial well-being. Drake pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and now works at an Apple Store when he isn’t attending Bradley Manning’s court hearings.
Too often the cause of open information is dismissed as a geek fetish, a tedious hobby for the IT crowd. This is a grave error, as the high barriers around information are literally killing us. Larry Korb, former assistant secretary of defense, has told me he doesn’t think the Iraq War—endpoint of a debate starved of meaningful information, which has slaughtered hundreds of thousands—would have happened had unredacted intelligence reports been made more public.
Circulation of knowledge is a social justice issue, too. Dean Baker estimates that reforming the patent law regime for pharmaceuticals—currently a system that guarantees Big Pharma’s monopolies—would shrink annual spending on prescription drugs from $300 billion to $30 billion, a savings some five times the annual cost of Bush’s tax cut for the richest 2 percent. Meanwhile, grotesquely prolonged copyrights for literary and artistic properties are fencing off the cultural commons, a boot on the throat of a generation’s creative voice.
Prosecutors have cast activists like Swartz as cyber-terrorist Bond villains. In reality, they are more like earnest variations on Lisa Simpson. Swartz’s account of how he got involved with the fight to stop the SOPA/PIPA intellectual property bill in Congress reads like a Capra-esque rhapsody to American democracy. Manning, neck-deep in the worst foreign-policy disaster since Vietnam, hoped his leaks would lead to “worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms” because “without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.” Jeremy Hammond’s rhetoric admittedly tends to the extra-spicy, but many of his alleged misdeeds—revealing corporate spying on ordinary citizens—are a public service. Is getting the truth out really such a bad thing?
To be sure, the truth alone has never been enough to set anyone free. And truth, whether about foreign civilians killed or domestic surveillance programs, is very often the last thing people want. District attorneys know this. Perhaps the greatest tribute to the power of knowledge is the prosecutorial state’s panicked attempts to suppress it.
The notion that information should be easy to come by was not cooked up at the annual DefCon hacker conference. It was James Madison who wrote, “Popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both.” In the year 2013, such an Enlightenment cliché should not be sounding radical. (It is only since the summer of 2011 that Washington finished declassifying material from the Madison administration—a lag measured in centuries.)
The death of Aaron Swartz has rallied a small counterattack against the know-nothing state: mild law professors are spitting nails about bullying prosecutors, and the US attorney overseeing the case, Carmen Ortiz, no longer has a bright future in Massachusetts politics. “Aaron’s Law,” a bill proposed by Representative Zoe Lofgren, would prune the overreaching Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and even right-wing Senator John Cornyn is asking whether the case against Swartz was retaliation for the activist’s assertive use of Freedom of Information Act requests.
These are good developments, but they are overshadowed by runaway overclassification, toothless whistleblower-protection laws and an intellectual property regime driven by greed alone. Ignorance enforced by police and prosecutors will not bring us security, wealth or justice.
William F. Baker writes that the FTC’s investigation of Google has skirted the issue of the search-engine giant’s ability to restrict readers’ access to news.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 28, 2013 |
If asked why we live in a great country, an American is likely to
respond: "Because we are free." Fortunately for the respondent,
explanation is rarely required. Freedom is difficult to define, and
today it seems to exist more in our minds than in realitybillions of bees are dying, threatening our crops and food. But in 48 hours the European Union could move to ban the most poisonous pesticides, and pave the way to a global ban that would save bees from extinction. Avaaz
Dear friends,
Bees around the world are dying off and Europe’s food watchdog just said certain pesticides are part of the problem. We’ve got 48 hours before key meetings -- let’s get a 2-million-person swarm to save the bees. Click to take urgent action now:  |
Four EU countries have begun banning these poisons, and some bee populations are already recovering. Days ago the official European food safety watchdog stated for the first time that certain pesticides are fatally harming bees. Now legal experts and European politicians are calling for an immediate ban. But Bayer and other giant pesticide producers are lobbying hard to keep them on the market. If we build a huge swarm of public outrage now, we can push the European Commission to put our health and our environment before the profit of a few.
We know our voices count! Last year, our 1.2 million strong petition forced US authorities to open a formal consultation on pesticides -- now if we reach 2 million, we can persuade the EU to get rid of these crazy poisons and pave the way for a ban worldwide. Sign the urgent petition and send this to everyone -- Avaaz and leading MEPs will deliver our message ahead of this week's key meeting in Brussels:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/hours_to_save_the_bees/?bNxfadb&v=21428
Bees don't just make honey, they are vital to life on earth, every year pollinating 90% of plants and crops -- with an estimated $40bn value and over one-third of the food supply in many countries. Without immediate action to save bees, many of our favourite fruits, vegetables, and nuts could vanish from our shelves.
Recent years have seen a steep and disturbing global decline in bee populations -- some bee species are already extinct and some US species are at just 4% of their previous numbers. Scientists have been scrambling for answers and now the European Food Safety Authority is saying that toxic chemicals called neonicotinoid pesticides could be responsible for the bee deaths. France, Italy, Slovenia and even Germany, where the main manufacturer Bayer is based, have banned one of these bee-killing pesticides. But Bayer continues to export its poison across the world.
Now the issue is coming to a boil. EU parliamentarians are stepping up their pressure on the European Commission and key governments to push new legislation to ban the deadly pesticides, and we can offer them the public support they need to counter the powerful pesticide lobby. Sign the urgent petition to Europe’s leaders, then forward this email widely:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/hours_to_save_the_bees/?bNxfadb&v=21428
Our world is beset with threats to what makes it habitable, and to what fills it with wonder. The Avaaz community comes together to defend both -- large or small. Whether winning a battle to keep the International Whaling Commission from sanctioning the murder of these giants, or saving bees, the tiny creatures upon which so much depends, we will come together and stand up for the world we all want.
With hope,
Luis, Ari, Alice, Iain, Ricken, David, Alaphia, and the Avaaz team
SOURCES
Pesticides pose danger to bees (European Voice)
http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2013/january/pesticides-pose-danger-to-bees/76158.aspx
Crop pesticides are 'killing our bees' - says MEP (Public Service Europe)
http://www.publicserviceeurope.com/article/3007/crop-pesticides-are-killing-our-bees-says-mep#ixzz2JGICse6a
Death knell for nerve agent pesticides in move to save bees (Independent)
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/death-knell-for-nerve-agent-pesticides-in-move-to-save-bees-8454443.html
Give Bees a Chance! (The Greens European Free Alliance)
http://www.greens-efa.eu/give-bees-a-chance-9012.html
Studies fault Bayer in bee die-off (Christian Science Monitor)
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0406/Studies-fault-Bayer-in-bee-die-off
Monday, January 28, 2013
If we had no faults, we should not take so much pleasure in noting those of others.
Si nous n'avions point de défauts, nous ne prendrions pas tant de plaisir à en remarquer dans les autres.....François VI, duc de La Rochefoucauld, le Prince de Marcillac
My guess is that well over eighty per cent of the human race goes through life without ever having a single original thought. That is to say, they never think anything that has not been thought before, and by thousands.
A society made up of individuals who were all capable of original thought would probably be unendurable. The pressure of ideas would simply drive it frantic. The normal human society is very little troubled by them. Whenever a new one appears the average man displays signs of dismay and resentment. The only way he can take in such a new idea is by translating it crudely into terms of more familiar ideas. That translation is one of the chief functions of politicians, not to mention journalists. They devote themselves largely to debasing the ideas launched by their betters. This debasement is intellectually reprehensible, but probably necessary to carry on the business of the world.
—Mairead Maguire,
I
decided to pop into Burger King wid m’ horse, because 29% of their burgers are horse meat. The horses don’t like it. I’m a vegetarian, but I
don’t campaign against meat eaters, live and let live.
But meat is very dangerous because cows have a type of bovine leukemia, and both cows and chickens are full of growth hormones. Every mouthful of steak is a chemical pellet. The meat industry is very cruel to animals and they are cruel to us, as they don’t mention the dangers of their products. Creepy.
As part of Project Mayhem (just kiddin’) some likely lads printed up 10,000 stickers that say “Horse”, to highlight cruelty to horses, for when you are in the supermarket shopping for stuff.
If you’d like some (tee hee), just send us an email at the email address that starts 45…. We don’t publish the email address ‘cos of spam. But many of you that came to the gigs or bought mail order products from us have it, or write to Tom at his Ayahuasca gig site (see: thehiddendoorway.com) he’ll forward it for you.
The horse stickers are not illegal, they are mailed from Scotland, if you send us an email with your address, we’ll send it to the lads, allow two weeks. They are free of course. Love, love, AND over the gate we go.
© Stuart Wilde 2013 – www.stuartwilde.com
http://www.stuartwilde.com/2013/01/project-mayhem-horse-stickers/
Continuing tributes to the late Aaron Swartz, Anonymous hacked the website of the U.S. Sentencing Commission twice over the weekend. The hacker collective first commandeered the Justice Department site Friday night, replacing the homepage with a video, in typical Anons style, which decried the government’s treatment of Swartz, a brilliant young technologist who committed suicide facing felony charges for downloading over 4 million JSTOR articles.
Anonymous also claims to have distributed encrypted government files through the DoJ website, threatening to release the decryption codes (revealing the as-yet unknown information held on the stolen files) if the government fails to comply with demands to reform flawed cyber crime laws — the laws under which Swartz was persecuted. The released files were named after Supreme Court Justices. “A line has been crossed” with the zealous pursuit of charges against Swartz, the hackers’ statement noted.
choices?
The show did not entirely skirt the controversies over drones. A section of the broadcast dealt with drone pilots firing on targets in countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan. Viewers, though, are told that drone pilots have distinct advantage over conventional pilots. One drone operator talks about how, after a strike, a drone can "stick around for another few hours to watch what happens afterwards." A more critical look at drone wars might have mentioned these are the same circumstances under which U.S. drones have attacked rescue workers and funeral processions (Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 6/4/12).
The show does not ignore the question of civilian deaths--though it says "the facts are hard to come by" and that "there are not fully reliable counts of civilian deaths." Nova does mention that some estimates are that 30 percent of those killed are civilians, and talks about one attack that killed 23 civilians in Pakistan.
The
program's sponsorship tie to the drone industry were never
mentioned--though there were opportunities to disclose that
relationship. In addition to Lockheed Martin's connection to one of the
interview subjects, the show discussed a U.S. drone that was captured
by Iran--without mentioning that it was manufactured by Nova's underwriter. And when Nova
discusses the drones of the future, it's talking about the kind of
miniature drones Lockheed Martin is developing to provide "constant
surveillance capabilities" (TPM IdeaLab, 7/4/12).
ACTIVIST POST FEATURED ARTICLES
Wyoming Announces Anti-NDAA Legislation HB 114
Final FDA Raid and Takeover of Morningland Raw Milk and Cheese Dairy
A $14 Trillion Extortion for a Global Warming Scam
Glasgow, UK: 1st ‘smart city,’ to include facial recognition surveillance cams
Is UK Defense Contractor Planning Syrian WMD False Flag?
New Must-See Videos
Final FDA Raid and Takeover of Morningland Raw Milk and Cheese Dairy
How The Government is Profiling You
Congress AWOL Over Unconstitutional Intervention in Mali
Machine gun fire from military helicopters flying over downtown Miami
Iceland President at Davos: Let the Banks Go Bankrupt
Today's Forum Topics
Special Interests...EXPOSED!!! (Video)
“Prometheus”: A Movie About Alien Nephilim and Esoteric Enlightenment
To Combat Organized Transitional Crime By Corporativism
Project Mayhem - Horse Stickers
Other Key Articles From Around the Web
Great Cen-Banking Experiment: Will Unlimited Cash Solve Problems or Cause Them?
Louisiana Milk Police Combat Prices That Are Too Reasonable
Britain's deadly superdrone that picks its own targets set for take off
CBS Runs Segment Called 'Let's Give Up On The Constitution'
Seattle Gun BuyBack Turns Into a Gun Show!
Catholic and 46 other Churches back Obama’s Gun Grab
If ‘Assault Weapons’ Are Bad…Why Does DHS Want 7,000 For ‘Personal Defense’?
Barack Obama: 'I go shooting all the time'
Poland's investigation into secret CIA prisons loses steam
ACLU Challenging DEA’s Access to Confidential Prescription Records W/O Warrant
My guess is that well over eighty per cent of the human race goes through life without ever having a single original thought. That is to say, they never think anything that has not been thought before, and by thousands.
A society made up of individuals who were all capable of original thought would probably be unendurable. The pressure of ideas would simply drive it frantic. The normal human society is very little troubled by them. Whenever a new one appears the average man displays signs of dismay and resentment. The only way he can take in such a new idea is by translating it crudely into terms of more familiar ideas. That translation is one of the chief functions of politicians, not to mention journalists. They devote themselves largely to debasing the ideas launched by their betters. This debasement is intellectually reprehensible, but probably necessary to carry on the business of the world.
H.L. Mencken
| “ | Gandhi taught that nonviolence does not mean passivity. No. It is the most daring, creative, and courageous way of living, and it is the only hope for our world. Nonviolence is an active way of life which always rejects violence and killing, and instead applies the force of love and truth as a means to transform conflict and the root causes of conflict. Nonviolence demands creativity. It pursues dialogue, seeks reconciliation, listens to the truth in our opponents, rejects militarism, and allows God's spirit to transform us socially and politically. | ” |
 |
Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant Rakes in $3 Million from Shares As Biotech Giant Continues Destroying Planet
By Alex Kane, AlterNet
Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant sold 30,000 shares of stock in Monsanto in January, netting over $3 million. READ MORE»
|
What to Make of the Scary GMO study?
was flooded with messages yesterday about the new long-term rat study reporting that both GMO corn and Roundup ...September 20, 2012, 10:28am - 0 comments-
Are Walmart and Big Food Lobbying for a GMO Labeling Law?
organic and anti-GMO movement, and finagle a federal labeling law so toothless it won’t be worth the ink ...January 12, 2013, 12:19pm - 0 comments -
Monsanto Threatens to Sue Vermont if Legislators Pass a Bill Requiring GMO Food to Be Labeled
a mandatory GMO labeling bill and then having to “go it alone” against Monsanto in court. What ...July 23, 2012, 8:55pm - 0 comments -
Court Orders Destruction of Monsanto's Dangerous, Illegal GMO Beet Crop
gmo farming farm crops safety food monsanto ...July 23, 2012, 2:00pm - 0 comments -
6 Reasons GMO Labeling Will Pass in Washington State
have required mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in food ingredients. ...January 3, 2013, 9:42am - 0 comments -
USDA Allows GMO Sugar Beet Planting Even After a Landmark Court Decision Says No
it seems. alfalfa sugar beets vilsack usda gmo ...July 23, 2012, 2:00pm - 0 comments -
US food agency opens hearings on GMO salmon
rear GMO salmon in inland hatcheries, and that only sterile female salmon will be sold to farmers. ...July 23, 2012, 2:21pm - 0 comments -
USDA Caves to Industry Pressure, OKs GMO Alfalfa
the environment." gmo alfalfa ge organic farming ...July 23, 2012, 2:00pm - 0 comments -
It's Vilsack: Obama Picks Pro-GMO and Pro-Biofuels Ag Secretary
Tara Lohan is a managing editor at AlterNet. agriculture biotech gmo ...July 23, 2012, 8:13pm - 0 comments -
Is Elena Kagan Leading Us Toward a Pro-GMO Supreme Court?
I
decided to pop into Burger King wid m’ horse, because 29% of their burgers are horse meat. The horses don’t like it. I’m a vegetarian, but I
don’t campaign against meat eaters, live and let live.But meat is very dangerous because cows have a type of bovine leukemia, and both cows and chickens are full of growth hormones. Every mouthful of steak is a chemical pellet. The meat industry is very cruel to animals and they are cruel to us, as they don’t mention the dangers of their products. Creepy.
As part of Project Mayhem (just kiddin’) some likely lads printed up 10,000 stickers that say “Horse”, to highlight cruelty to horses, for when you are in the supermarket shopping for stuff.
If you’d like some (tee hee), just send us an email at the email address that starts 45…. We don’t publish the email address ‘cos of spam. But many of you that came to the gigs or bought mail order products from us have it, or write to Tom at his Ayahuasca gig site (see: thehiddendoorway.com) he’ll forward it for you.
The horse stickers are not illegal, they are mailed from Scotland, if you send us an email with your address, we’ll send it to the lads, allow two weeks. They are free of course. Love, love, AND over the gate we go.
© Stuart Wilde 2013 – www.stuartwilde.com
http://www.stuartwilde.com/2013/01/project-mayhem-horse-stickers/
 |
Zack Beauchamp, Think Progress
David
French interprets the Christian Bible as granting everyone a right to
self-defense. He suggests that this means that God’s will is that people
have access to guns. READ MORE»
|
January 28, 2013 |
Continuing tributes to the late Aaron Swartz, Anonymous hacked the website of the U.S. Sentencing Commission twice over the weekend. The hacker collective first commandeered the Justice Department site Friday night, replacing the homepage with a video, in typical Anons style, which decried the government’s treatment of Swartz, a brilliant young technologist who committed suicide facing felony charges for downloading over 4 million JSTOR articles.
Anonymous also claims to have distributed encrypted government files through the DoJ website, threatening to release the decryption codes (revealing the as-yet unknown information held on the stolen files) if the government fails to comply with demands to reform flawed cyber crime laws — the laws under which Swartz was persecuted. The released files were named after Supreme Court Justices. “A line has been crossed” with the zealous pursuit of charges against Swartz, the hackers’ statement noted.
Although the government site
appeared to return to normal on Saturday, it was hacked again Sunday
night (suggesting the government had not wrested control back from
Anonymous. This time, the hack was spiced with a touch of lulz —
Anonymous distributed a basic code, which turned the website into a
version of the videogame Asteroids. Players were invited to shoot away
at the homepage to reveal a Guy Fawkes made up of text, “We do not
forgive. We do not forget.”
In targeting the Sentencing Commission site, hackers symbolically took aim at a justice system wherein minimum sentencing laws put undue power in the hands of government prosecutors, who can exact guilty pleas from suspects afraid of facing hefty jail sentences at trial. “The federal sentencing guidelines,” Anonymous’ message on the site read, “enable prosecutors to cheat citizens of their constitutionally-guaranteed right to a fair trial.”
The prosecution of Swartz "a grotesque miscarriage of
justice" and "a distorted and perverse shadow of the justice that Aaron
died fighting for," Anonymous outlined its list of goals under a section
labeled "Our wishes:"
In targeting the Sentencing Commission site, hackers symbolically took aim at a justice system wherein minimum sentencing laws put undue power in the hands of government prosecutors, who can exact guilty pleas from suspects afraid of facing hefty jail sentences at trial. “The federal sentencing guidelines,” Anonymous’ message on the site read, “enable prosecutors to cheat citizens of their constitutionally-guaranteed right to a fair trial.”
The prosecution of Swartz "a grotesque miscarriage of
justice" and "a distorted and perverse shadow of the justice that Aaron
died fighting for," Anonymous outlined its list of goals under a section
labeled "Our wishes:"
- We call for this tragedy to be a basis for reform of computer crime laws, and the overzealous prosecutors who use them.
- We call for this tragedy to be a basis for reform of copyright and intellectual property law, returning it to the proper principles of common good to the many, rather than private gain to the few.
- We call for this tragedy to be a basis for greater recognition of the oppression and injustices heaped daily by certain persons and institutions of authority upon anyone who dares to stand up and be counted for their beliefs, and for greater solidarity and mutual aid in response.
- We call for this tragedy to be a basis for a renewed and unwavering commitment to a free and unfettered internet, spared from censorship with equality of access and franchise for all.
choices?
PBS Drone Coverage Brought to You by Drone Makers
Lockheed's Nova sponsorship violates underwriting rules
Lockheed's Nova sponsorship violates underwriting rules
1/28/13
The PBS Nova broadcast "Rise of the Drones" was sponsored by drone manufacturer Lockheed Martin--a clear violation of PBS's underwriting guidelines.
As Kevin Gosztola reported (FireDogLake, 1/24/13),
the January 23 broadcast was a mostly upbeat look at surveillance and
weaponized drones. "Discover the cutting edge technologies that are
propelling us toward a new chapter in aviation history," PBS urged, promising to reveal "the amazing technologies that make drones so powerful."
Some of that technology, unbeknownst to viewers, was created by the company described as giving Nova "additional
funding" at the beginning of the broadcast. Lockheed Martin, a major
military contractor with $46 billion in 2011 sales, is the manufacturer of drones used in warfare and intelligence, including the Desert Hawk, the Falcon, the Stalker and the Tracer. In December 2012, Lockheed bought AME Unmanned Air Systems, maker of the Fury drone (New Times, 12/19/12).
Nova's history of unmanned
flight technology included comments from Abe Karem, dubbed the "father
of the Predator" drone. His current company, FireDogLake's Gosztola noted, has a business relationship with Lockheed Martin.The show did not entirely skirt the controversies over drones. A section of the broadcast dealt with drone pilots firing on targets in countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan. Viewers, though, are told that drone pilots have distinct advantage over conventional pilots. One drone operator talks about how, after a strike, a drone can "stick around for another few hours to watch what happens afterwards." A more critical look at drone wars might have mentioned these are the same circumstances under which U.S. drones have attacked rescue workers and funeral processions (Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 6/4/12).
The show does not ignore the question of civilian deaths--though it says "the facts are hard to come by" and that "there are not fully reliable counts of civilian deaths." Nova does mention that some estimates are that 30 percent of those killed are civilians, and talks about one attack that killed 23 civilians in Pakistan.
But, in keeping with the generally upbeat tone, Nova
tells viewers that technology will help turn things around. "Drones
can strike with pinpoint precision," the programs explains, "but their
visual sensors are limited in ways that can lead pilots to make
mistakes." Not to worry, though; "engineers are working to create new
sensors that can see more in greater detail than ever before."
The
program's sponsorship tie to the drone industry were never
mentioned--though there were opportunities to disclose that
relationship. In addition to Lockheed Martin's connection to one of the
interview subjects, the show discussed a U.S. drone that was captured
by Iran--without mentioning that it was manufactured by Nova's underwriter. And when Nova
discusses the drones of the future, it's talking about the kind of
miniature drones Lockheed Martin is developing to provide "constant
surveillance capabilities" (TPM IdeaLab, 7/4/12).
Though the
broadcast included an underwriting announcement at the beginning
("Additional funding from Lockheed Martin: Inspiring tomorrow's
engineers and technologists"), that credit was removed from the
webcast, and the company is not credited on the Nova website for the episode.
So can a corporation really provide "additional funding" for public TV journalism that discusses its own interests? PBS
rules would seem to say no. The network has three tests that "are
applied to every proposed funding arrangement in order to determine its
acceptability":
* Editorial Control Test: Has the underwriter exercised editorial control? Could it?
* Perception Test: Might the public perceive that the underwriter has exercised editorial control?
* Commercialism Test: Might the public conclude the program is on PBS principally because it promotes the underwriter’s products, services or other business interests?
On the perception test, PBS explains:When there exists a clear and direct connection between the interests or products or services of a proposed funder and the subject matter of the program, the proposed funding will be deemed unacceptable regardless of the funder's actual compliance with the editorial control provisions of this policy.
On commercialism:
The policy is intended to prohibit any funding arrangement where the primary emphasis of the program is on products or services that are identical or similar to those of the underwriter.
It is difficult to see how PBS could argue that the Nova special does not violate these rules. And PBS wants you the believe they take such matters seriously:
Should a significant number of reasonable viewers conclude that PBS has sold its professionalism and independence to its program funders, whether or not their conclusions are justified, then the entire program service of public television will be suspect and the goal of serving the public will be unachievable.
If PBS really believe these words, why did they allow the Lockheed-funded "Rise of the Drones" to air?
ACTIVIST POST FEATURED ARTICLES
Wyoming Announces Anti-NDAA Legislation HB 114
Activist Post
Final FDA Raid and Takeover of Morningland Raw Milk and Cheese Dairy
Heather Callaghan
A $14 Trillion Extortion for a Global Warming Scam
SARTRE
Glasgow, UK: 1st ‘smart city,’ to include facial recognition surveillance cams
DHS: 136 ‘snitch visa’ applications ea yr; could allow terrorists & criminals in US
Madison Ruppert
Is UK Defense Contractor Planning Syrian WMD False Flag?
Tony Cartalucci
New Must-See Videos
Final FDA Raid and Takeover of Morningland Raw Milk and Cheese Dairy
How The Government is Profiling You
Congress AWOL Over Unconstitutional Intervention in Mali
Machine gun fire from military helicopters flying over downtown Miami
Iceland President at Davos: Let the Banks Go Bankrupt
Today's Forum Topics
Special Interests...EXPOSED!!! (Video)
“Prometheus”: A Movie About Alien Nephilim and Esoteric Enlightenment
To Combat Organized Transitional Crime By Corporativism
Project Mayhem - Horse Stickers
Other Key Articles From Around the Web
How The Government is Profiling You
Great Resource: Package Insert Info & Manufacturers for some US VaccinesGreat Cen-Banking Experiment: Will Unlimited Cash Solve Problems or Cause Them?
Louisiana Milk Police Combat Prices That Are Too Reasonable
Britain's deadly superdrone that picks its own targets set for take off
CBS Runs Segment Called 'Let's Give Up On The Constitution'
Seattle Gun BuyBack Turns Into a Gun Show!
Catholic and 46 other Churches back Obama’s Gun Grab
If ‘Assault Weapons’ Are Bad…Why Does DHS Want 7,000 For ‘Personal Defense’?
Barack Obama: 'I go shooting all the time'
Poland's investigation into secret CIA prisons loses steam
ACLU Challenging DEA’s Access to Confidential Prescription Records W/O Warrant
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)