Democratic Senators Issue Strong Warning About Use of the Patriot Act

March 16, 2012, New York Times

For more than two years, a handful of Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee have warned that the government is secretly interpreting its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming if the public — or even others in Congress — knew about it. On [March 15], two of those senators — Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado — went further. They said a top-secret intelligence operation that is based on that secret legal theory is not as crucial to national security as executive branch officials have maintained. The Justice Department has argued that disclosing information about its interpretation of the Patriot Act could alert adversaries to how the government collects certain intelligence. It is seeking the dismissal of two Freedom of Information Act lawsuits — by The New York Times and by the American Civil Liberties Union — related to how the Patriot Act has been interpreted. The dispute centers on what the government thinks it is allowed to do under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, under which agents may obtain a secret order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court allowing them to get access to any “tangible things” — like business records — that are deemed “relevant” to a terrorism or espionage investigation. The interpretation of Section 215 that authorizes this secret surveillance operation is apparently not obvious from a plain text reading of the provision, and was developed through a series of classified rulings by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Note: For key reports from major media sources on surveillance and other government restrictions of basic civil liberties, click here.

White Coats, White Lies: How Honest Is Your Doctor?

February 9, 2012, Time Magazine

Is your doctor telling you the truth? Possibly not, according to a new survey in Health Affairs of nearly 1,900 physicians around the country. The researchers found that 55% of doctors said that in the last year they had been more positive about a patient’s prognosis than his medical history warranted. And 10% said they had told patients something that wasn’t true. About a third of the MDs said they did not completely agree that they should disclose medical errors to patients, and 40% said they didn’t feel the need to disclose financial ties to drug or device companies. Nearly 20% of the doctors admitted that they didn’t disclose a medical error to their patients because they were afraid of being sued for malpractice. Doctors’ fear of malpractice suits may often be misplaced. Studies suggest that in cases where physicians are open about their mistakes, patients are more likely to be understanding and refrain from suing. So how can doctors learn to be more honest with their patients? More training about how to communicate with people about their health is critical — especially when it comes to delivering bad news. Patients also need to be clear and firm about how honest they want their doctors to be. Communication is a two-way street, after all, even in the doctor’s office.

Note: For key reports from reliable sources on important health issues, click here.

  READ MORE

Bill Gates' support of GM crops is wrong approach for Africa

February 27, 2012, Seattle Times

Bill Gates' support of genetically modified crops as a solution for world hunger is of concern to those ... involved in promoting sustainable, equitable and effective agricultural policies in Africa. His technocratic ideology runs counter to the best informed science. The World Bank and United Nations funded 900 scientists over three years in order to create an International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Its conclusions were diametrically opposed, at both philosophical and practical levels, to those espoused by Gates and clearly state that the use of GM crops is not a meaningful solution to the complex situation of world hunger. The IAASTD suggests that rather than pursuing industrial farming models, "agro-ecological" methods provide the most viable means to enhance global food security. These include implementing practical scientific research based on traditional seed varieties and local farming practices adapted to the local ecology over millennia. Agro-ecology has consistently proven capable of sustainably increasing productivity. Conversely, the present GM crops generally have not increased yields over the long run, despite their increased costs and dependence on agricultural chemicals, as highlighted in the 2009 Union of Concerned Scientists report, "Failure to Yield."

Note: For an excellent summary of the risks posed by genetically-modified foods, click here.

Character of Florida shooter pondered

10:18 PM, Mar. 21, 2012  |  

SANFORD, FLA. — George Zimmerman once took criminal justice classes at the community college and was practically a one-man neighborhood watch in his gated part of town, calling police close to 50 times over the past eight years to report such things as slow-driving vehicles, strangers loitering in the neighborhood and open garages.

Now, suddenly, people are wondering if the 28-year-old Zimmerman is an earnest if somewhat zealous young man who was just looking out for his neighborhood, or a wannabe cop who tried to take justice into his own hands.



He has been at the center of a growing furor over vigilantism, self-defense and racial profiling since he shot and killed an unarmed black teenager who was walking through his neighborhood Feb. 26 carrying only a bag of Skittles and an iced tea.   READ MORE

Florida shooting highlights folly of “amateur hour”

George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin/ AP Photo

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpy

Post by Brian O'Neill on March 21, 2012 at 6:25 pm

The alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.

Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.

As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.

Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?

The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.

So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.   READ MORE

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-The alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.

Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpyThe alleged shooting death of a Florida youth by a citizen watch volunteer has officially crossed over from tragedy to spectacle.
Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-0ld African-American, was reportedly shot after being confronted by Robert Zimmerman, an armed resident voluntarily patrolling the gated community in Sanford. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense, but the 911 tape and excerpts from Martin’s last phone conversation suggest otherwise.
As a result, Sanford, a suburb of Orlando, is currently hosting an armada of civil rights tourists, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the National of Islam and the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights. The swelling numbers have also attracted hordes of media as well as local and state policitians. It may not be Disney, but it is a circus.
Nevertheless, many fair questions are being asked of this shooting: Was race an issue? Was self-defense involved? Was the new Florida “Stand Your Ground” law a factor? Was Zimmerman acting in the capacity of law enforcement?
The answers may be frustrating for a while, because it may be difficult to prove racist motivations in Zimmerman’s actions, even if such exist. And without eye-witnesses,  we may never know exactly how the last few seconds of Trayvon Martin’s life played out. As for Florida’s 2005 law, its stated purpose permits residents to use deadly force if a person “reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm…or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” That standard contains no language capable of stretching to cover the unreasonable situation of shooting a person without such reasonable fear.
So what do we know? We know that Zimmerman, a volunteer on neighborhood watch, was not acting as a police officer.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpy

ead more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/03/21/florida-shooting-highlights-folly-of-amateur-hour/#storylink=cpy

Florida shooting renews debate over 'stand your ground' laws

A Florida law allows people to defend themselves
with violence in many situations.

By Michael Pearson, CNN

updated 9:22 PM EDT, Tue March 20, 2012

 

(CNN) -- In the months after the Florida Legislature passed a law in 2005 allowing residents to use deadly force to protect themselves no matter where they were, gun-control advocates plastered the state with fliers bearing warnings to tourists.

Be careful, the fliers said. Florida had become a "shoot first" state.

The issue has remained in the news, on and off, ever since, but perhaps never so much as now in the aftermath of the shooting death of an unarmed teen in Sanford, Florida.

A neighborhood watch volunteer, George Zimmerman, has claimed self-defense in the February 26 shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, who was killed while walking back to the house of his father's fiancee after a trip to a convenience store.

Lawyer: Phone records cut self-defense claim

Florida's "stand your ground" law appears to be central to the case.

The law allows people to use deadly force away from their homes -- where such force has long been allowed -- if they have reasonable fear an assailant could seriously harm them or someone else.

It also eliminates a longstanding "duty to retreat" in the face of imminent harm, asserting that would-be crime victims have the right to "stand their ground" and "meet force with force" when attacked as long as they are in a place they have a right to be, are not engaged in unlawful activity and believe that their life and safety was in danger.

It won with the strong endorsement of the National Rifle Association, or NRA, which at the time said it put the law "on the side of law-abiding citizens."

Justice Department, FBI to probe Florida teen's death

  READ MORE

 

Voter ID: The American Anti-Democracy Movement's Weapon of Choice

Civil rights activists confronted by National Guardsmen
during a protest in Memphis, Tennessee, 1968.
(photo: Corbis)

By Kevin Powell, Guardian UK

17 March 12

Whatever the claims, voter fraud is almost non-existent. The real problem is the regressive forces promoting discriminatory laws.

nti-democracy forces in the US are relentless.

Each time our nation takes a step forward, sure enough, a collective of well-financed anti-democracy naysayers comes along to shoot holes in the social and political progress of this country. Never mind that voting is a fundamental right guaranteed by the US constitution. Never mind that people have been killed, through decades and centuries, so that ordinary working Americans, including blacks and other people of color, women, and 18 year-olds could have this basic human and civil right. Never mind that the 15th amendment to the constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were added as extra layers of protection to insure democracy for all.

Anti-democracy forces could care less. For they are thumbing their noses at this history, at human and civil rights, and instead, are promoting for all they're worth the "voter ID law" movement, which has been in play the past few years but is now amplified in 2012 because of the presidential election. This means there are now eight American states with voter photo ID laws. These laws vary from state to state in terms of what is "identification". Some require an ID card with an expiration date. Others mandate that an ID be only state-issued and for the state where that person is voting. Still others demand a full name and address on the ID card. While others specifically prohibit even valid college IDs as proof of identity.

 

Given these new sets of rules, and the very real possibility that more of America's 50 states will adopt similar measures, despite the movement's legal setback in Wisconsin this week, it is little wonder that the Brennan Center for Justice recently reported that as many as 5 million eligible voters could have difficulty casting ballots, come Tuesday 6 November, election day in America, including an estimated 800,000 in Texas alone.

And the most vulnerable to voter ID laws? Poor people of all races, and people of color, who've historically had to do battle with laws preventing them from voting, as well as senior citizens and college students. Then, there are groups like newly-married couples, or newly-divorced ones, the transgendered community, Native Americans, American citizens with immigrant family members, and those who may have recently lost their homes due to the foreclosure crisis.

What this translates into are additional costs per voter to secure new IDs, or birth or marriage certificates, or transportation fees to get to hours-long lines, and away from work and other gainful activity. Many will simply shrug their shoulders and not bother to vote. And this, I feel, is the ultimate goal of the voter ID movement.  READ MORE

Why Greg Smith's Critique Is Way Too Narrow

Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09.
(photo: Perian Flaherty)

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

17 March 12

reg Smith, a Goldman Sachs vice president, resigned his post Wednesday with a stinging public rebuke of the firm on the oped page of the New York Times - accusing it of no longer putting its clients before its own pecuniary goals.

But if Mr. Smith believes his experience at Goldman is something new, he doesn't know history. In 1928, Goldman Sachs and Company created the Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation, which promptly went on a speculative binge, luring innocent investors along the way. In the Great Crash of 1929, Goldman's investors lost their shirts but Goldman kept its hefty fees.

If Mr. Smith believes such disregard of investors is unique to Goldman, he doesn't know the rest of Wall Street. In the late 1920s, National City Bank, which eventually would become Citigroup, repackaged bad Latin American debt as new securities which it then sold to investors no less gullible than Goldman Sachs's. After the Great Crash of 1929, National City's top executives helped themselves to the bank's remaining assets as interest-free loans while their investors and depositors were left with pieces of paper worth a tiny fraction of what they paid for them.

The problem isn't excessive greed. If you took the greed out of Wall Street all you'd have left is pavement. The problem is endemic abuse of power and trust. When bubbles are forming, all but the most sophisticated investors can be easily duped into thinking they'll get rich by putting their money into the hands of brand-named investment bankers.  READ MORE

Limbaugh's $400 Million Payday

FATMAN DOWN

By Eric Boehlert, Media Matters

17 March 12

here was something very telling, and even morose, about the commercial break Rush Limbaugh took deep into his third hour of broadcasting on Tuesday's show. Still at the center of an advertising firestorm that rages around his program as corporate America turns its back on the AM talker in the wake of his ugly, invasive, three-day smear campaign against Sandra Fluke, Limbaugh boasted he had thwarted the left-wing attack and they were the ones "shell shocked" at the turn of events.

But the truth was that for days on his flagship station, WABC in New York, Limbaugh's show had been stripped of key advertisers. Instead, the once robust revenue-generating program had turned into a feel-good forum where during commercial breaks WABC ran nonpaid public service announcements on behalf of the United Negro College Fund and New York Office of Emergency Management. That's because WABC didn't feel comfortable putting lots of advertisers on Limbaugh's show, which up and down Madison Avenue had become poisonous in this wake of his misogynistic Fluke debacle.

So towards the end of his show on Tuesday, the nine-figure salary talk show host went to commercial break and a paid advertiser did pop up. And it was a new advertiser, a sponsor who apparently had signed on amidst the controversy. The sponsor's name? The Holy Name Cemetery in New Jersey, which was advertising a "pre-planning open house weekend."

How fitting.  READ MORE

Who Knew? Videos(23 Videos) INTERESTING VERY

Some very interesting short videos,  you'll probably want to bookmark the site and watch a few now and then.  Visit it

LBJ’s ‘X’ File on Nixon’s ‘Treason’

National security adviser Walt Rostow shows
President Lyndon Johnson a model of a battle
near Khe Sanh in Vietnam.
(National Archives Photo)

March 3, 2012

 

Special Report: In the dusty files of Lyndon Johnson’s presidential library in Austin, Texas, once secret documents and audiotapes tell a dark and tragic story of how Richard Nixon’s team secured the White House in 1968 by sabotaging peace talks that might have ended the Vietnam War four years earlier, Robert Parry reports.


By Robert Parry
On May 14, 1973, Walt W. Rostow, who had been national security adviser during some of the darkest days of the Vietnam War, typed a three-page “memorandum for the record” summarizing a secret file that his former boss, President Lyndon Johnson, had amassed on what may have been Richard Nixon’s dirtiest trick, the sabotaging of Vietnam peace talks to win the 1968 election.

Rostow reflected, too, on what effect LBJ’s public silence may have had on the then-unfolding Watergate scandal. As Rostow composed his memo in spring 1973, President Nixon’s Watergate cover-up was unraveling. Just two weeks earlier, Nixon had fired White House counsel John Dean and accepted the resignations of two top aides, H.R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman.

Three days after Rostow wrote the memo, the Senate Watergate hearings opened as the U.S. government lurched toward a constitutional crisis. Yet, as he typed, Rostow had a unique perspective on the worsening scandal. He understood the subterranean background to Nixon’s political espionage operations.

Those secret activities surfaced with the arrest of the Watergate burglars in June 1972, but they had begun much earlier. In his memo for the record, Rostow expressed regret that he and other top Johnson aides had chosen – for what they had deemed “the good of the country” – to keep quiet about Nixon’s Vietnam peace-talk sabotage, which Johnson had privately labeled “treason.”  READ MORE

Are Public Schools Safe for Black Children?

THE RESULTS OF A STUDY BY THE U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SHOW THAT
AFRICAN-AMERICAN CHILDREN RECEIVE
LESS RESOURCES AS COMPARED TO
CHILDREN OF OTHER RACES.
(PHOTO: JAN-GEPHARDT.BLOGSPOT.COM)

By Lynette Holloway, 

The Root

09 March 12

n Tuesday the U.S. Department of Education released the Civil Rights Data Collection sample, which found that public school educators unfairly punish minority students. The Associated Press had previously reported on a preliminary release of the report.

The survey of 7,000 school districts and 72,000 schools was conducted during the 2009-2010 school year. It also found that African-American children were less likely to be exposed to high-level curriculums and experienced teachers.

"The data portend a very disturbing picture," Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali explained during a conference call on Tuesday. "They tell us that across the country, African Americans, Latinos, students with disabilities and English-language learners continue to receive less than their fair share of our most important resources."

For example, while African-American children represent 18 percent of the sample in the study, they represent 35 percent of the number of students suspended once, 46 percent of those suspended more than once and 39 percent of all students expelled, the report shows.   READ MORE

Building a 'Mature' Democracy in Afghanistan

Presidents Hamid Karzai and Barack Obama at the
White House. (photo: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images)

By Tom Engelhardt, TomDispatch.com

09 March 12

ow primitive the Afghans are!  A New York Times account of faltering negotiations over a possible “strategic partnership” agreement to leave U.S. troops on bases in that country for years to come highlights just how far the Afghans have to go to become, like their U.S. mentor, a mature democracy.  Take the dispute over prisons.  Afghan President Hamid Karzai has been insisting that the U.S. turn over its prison facility at Bagram Air Base to his government.  (The recently burned Korans came from that prison's library.)  The Obama administration initially refused and now has suggested a six-month timetable for such a turnover, an option Karzai has, in turn, rejected.  No one, by the way, seems yet to be negotiating about a second $36-million prison at Bagram that, TomDispatch recently reported, the U.S. is now in the process of building.

The Times' Alissa Rubin suggests, however, that a major stumbling block remains to any such turnover.  She writes: “The challenges to a transfer are enormous, presenting serious security risks both for the Afghan government and American troops. Many of the estimated 3,200 people being detained [in Bagram's prison] cannot be tried under Afghan law because the evidence does not meet the legal standards required to be admitted in Afghan courts. Therefore, those people, including some suspected insurgents believed likely to return to the fight if released, would probably have to be released because Afghanistan has no law that allows for indefinite detention for national security reasons.”

Honestly, what kind of a backward country doesn't have a provision for the indefinite detention, on suspicion alone, of prisoners without charges or hope of trial?  As a mature democracy, we now stand proudly for global indefinite detention, not to speak of the democratic right to send robot assassins to take out those suspected of evil deeds anywhere on Earth.  As in any mature democracy, the White House has now taken on many of the traits of a legal system -- filling, that is, the roles of prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.  READ MORE

How the Right's Smear Machine Started

Richard Nixon, the 37th President of the United States

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

09 March 12

mericans sometimes wonder how the nation’s political process got so unspeakably nasty with vitriol pouring forth especially from right-wing voices like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Michael Savage, to name just a few. Yet, whenever called on this ugliness, conservatives insist that they are the real victims, picked on by the Left.

This destructive and whiny dynamic has existed at least since the late 1960s when angry passions spilled over from the Vietnam War and grew worse after Richard Nixon exploited Democratic dissension on the war to win the White House in 1968 – and then continued the war for another four nasty years.

As president, Nixon also responded to the fury splintering American society with wedge issues, appealing to the "silent majority" and denouncing anti-war protesters as "bums." He rode that divisive formula to a landslide victory in November 1972 but soon ensnared himself in the Watergate political spying scandal that drove him from office in August 1974.

Out of all that anger emerged an American Right that believed, as an article of faith, that the Democrats and the "liberal press" had turned Nixon’s run-of-the-mill indiscretions in Watergate into a constitutional crisis to undo Nixon’s overwhelming electoral mandate of 1972.

So, over the next two decades – with Nixon in the background egging on Republican politicians – the Right built an attack machine that was designed to defend against "another Watergate" but also was available to destroy the "liberal" enemy.   READ MORE