|
|
|
In This Edition |
Follow @Uncle -Ernie Visit me on Face Book How Long Can You Tread Water Part IV Global warming strikes again! By Ernest Stewart
During the warmer summer months, the surface of Greenland's glaciers can melt and form large lakes that may then drain through to the base of the glacier. Studies on the inland Greenland ice sheet have shown that this reduces friction between the ice and ground, causing the ice to slide faster for a few days. Up to now, however, it has been unclear whether such drainage events affect the flow speed of tidewater glaciers, and hence the rate of calving events. To investigate this, a research team from Oxford University's Earth Sciences department, the Oxford University Mathematical Institute, and Columbia University used Global Positioning System (GPS) observations of the flow speed of Helheim Glacier -- the largest single-glacier contributor to sea level rise in Greenland. The GPS captured a near perfect natural experiment: high-temporal-resolution observations of the glacier's flow response to lake drainage. The results found that Helheim Glacier behaved very differently to the inland ice sheet, which shows a fast, downhill movement during lake drainage events. In contrast, Helheim Glacier exhibited a relatively small 'pulse' of movement where the glacier sped up for a short amount of time and then moved slower, resulting in no net increase in movement. Using a numerical model of the subglacial drainage system, the researchers discovered that this observation was likely caused by Helheim glacier having an efficient system of channels and cavities along its bed. This allows the draining waters to be quickly evacuated from the glacier bed without causing an increase in the total net movement. Although this appears positive news in terms of sea level rise implications, the researchers suspected that a different effect may occur for glaciers without an efficient drainage system where surface melt is currently low but will increase in future due to climate change (such as in Antarctica). They ran a mathematical model based on the conditions of colder, Antarctic tidewater glaciers. The results indicated that lake drainages under these conditions would produce a net increase in glacier movement. This was largely due to the less efficient winter-time subglacial drainage system not being able to evacuate flood waters quickly. As of yet, however, there are no observations of Antarctic tidewater glacier responses to lake drainage. The study calls into question some common approaches for inferring glacial drainage systems based on glacier velocities recorded using satellite observations (which are currently used in sea level rise models). Lead author Associate Professor Laura Stevens (Department of Earth Sciences, Oxford University) said: "What we've observed here at Helheim is that you can have a big input of meltwater into the drainage system during a lake drainage event, but that melt input doesn't result in an appreciable change in glacier speed when you average over the week of the drainage event." With the highest temporal resolution of satellite-derived glacier speeds currently available being roughly one week, lake drainage events like the one captured in the Helheim GPS data usually go unnoticed.
"These tidewater glaciers are tricky," Associate Professor Stevens added. "We have a lot more to learn about how meltwater drainage operates and modulates tidewater-glacier speeds before we can confidently model their future response to atmospheric and oceanic warming."
03-30-1950 ~ 10-14-2022 Thanks for the film!
10-14-1977 ~ 10-15-2022 Thanks for the music!
03-24-1932 ~ 10-16-2022 Thanks for the adventure!
(c) 2022 Ernest Stewart a.k.a. Uncle Ernie is an unabashed radical, philosopher, author, stand -up comic, DJ, actor, political pundit and managing editor and publisher of Issues & Alibis magazine. Visit me on Facebook. and like us when you do. Follow me on Twitter. |
Trump Billed Secret Service $1.4 Million At His Properties During Presidency By Chris Walker Properties owned by former President Donald Trump overcharged the Secret Service for their lodging expenses, sometimes by as much as five times higher than the government-accepted rate, according to figures shared by the chair of the House Oversight Committee. Taxpayers paid at least $1.4 million to the Trump Organization in known expenses for the federal agency, in order to protect Trump, his family members, and other dignitaries staying at Trump's properties. Much of what was spent could have cost less for the same amount of protection - in at least 40 instances, the Trump Organization billed the government well past the government rate. In one example, Secret Service agents were charged $1,185 per night for a stay at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., a cost that was five times higher than what the government rate (usually between $195 to $240 per night) is supposed to be for such protection services. Details of the costs the agency incurred were laid out in a letter from Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-New York), who chairs the Oversight Committee in the House of Representatives. "The exorbitant rates charged to the Secret Service and agents' frequent stays at Trump-owned properties raise significant concerns about the former president's self-dealing and may have resulted in a taxpayer-funded windfall for former President Trump's struggling businesses," she said in a correspondence with Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle. Trump famously campaigned on being able to provide frugality to the White House, including in personal travel expenses. He claimed that he wouldn't even have much time to spend at his properties - yet once he became president, he spent a good portion of his time at them, traveling to places he owned 547 times while president, according to an analysis from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). CREW had also reported that the Trump family's documented vacation time was 12 times greater than his predecessor's, former President Barack Obama, whom Trump frequently harangued for traveling too often while he was in the White House from 2009 to 2017. Trump's travels to his own properties accounted for many of the 3,700 instances of conflicts of interest Trump engaged in while he was president, according to CREW. Trump also promised to return any income he earned while president back to the American people. Yet his earnings documented by Maloney in Secret Service stays at Trump properties alone showcase that any returns of the former president's salary to taxpayers were almost completely wiped out. Maloney's figures, however, are incomplete estimations of how much the agency was billed by the former president. It's much more likely a higher figure, with other estimates suggesting that at least $2 million was spent by the Secret Service to pay for stays and services while protecting Trump - and it all went directly to the Trump Organization. Maloney's figures also do not account for the charges Trump is still billing the agency for his continued Secret Service protection. One estimate shows that Trump is making close to $400 per night in charges to the agency since leaving office. Trump's family members who managed his company during his presidency lied about the degree to which they profited from it. Eric Trump, for example, when confronted with criticisms for costs being spent at Trump properties, played down the matter, and said that the costs were much lower than what they ended up being. "If my father travels, [Secret Service agents] stay at our properties for free," Eric Trump said in 2019. "So everywhere that he goes, if he stays at one of his places, the government…saves a fortune because if they were to go to a hotel across the street, they'd be charging them $500 a night, whereas, you know we charge them, like $50." In reaction to the latest revelations disclosed by Maloney, CREW noted that Eric Trump's past comments were knowingly false. "We knew that" Eric Trump's claim "was a lie," the watchdog organization wrote in a tweet, "but we didn't know just how wild of a lie it was until now." (c) 2022 Chris Walker is based out of Madison, Wisconsin. Focusing on both national and local topics since the early 2000s, he has produced thousands of articles analysing the issues of the day and their impact on the American people.
|
With No One Answering Phones, How Can We Actually Reach People? Getting through to your callee is so difficult these days that it represents a formidable obstacle both to a functioning democratic society and a functioning consumer-driven economy. By Ralph Nader A few weeks ago, I wrote a column on the imbalance of communications success between callers and callees. The latter have all kinds of ways not to return calls, emails, and other portals of the so-called communications technological revolution. Many people can't even get through on the telephone to their own neighbors because the latter no longer answer the phone due to the robocalls they receive. I noted that getting through to your callee is so difficult these days that it represents a formidable obstacle both to a functioning democratic society and a functioning consumer-driven economy. So now I'm asking you, the readers, to suggest ways you have either tried successfully or think could be successful in getting through to people or institutions. Here are some categories: 1. Legislators at the local, state, and federal levels. In my experience, it has never been more difficult to reach your senator, representative, or their staff, unless you're a campaign donor, a social friend, or are requesting a flag that has flown over the U.S. Capitol. Congressional offices are barricaded by voicemail or nameless interns who take messages without having a clue as to who is calling or how serious the message may be. Emails are sent into a vortex. Serious letters are viewed as quaint relics to be dismissed without even the courtesy of an acknowledgment. Readers-your suggestions about how to get through are welcomed. 2. Executive branch agencies at the local, state, and federal level. We've tried, with other citizens, to get through to agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). They don't even bother to acknowledge, much less respond to, serious issues raised by citizen groups or taxpayers. I was reliably told that the bureaucratic staff of the FTC intercepts letters sent personally to FTC commissioners and decides what, if anything, to deliver to the commissioner addressed. No wonder FTC Chair Lina Khan doesn't respond to my letters. Reflecting their sense of hopelessness, people from all quarters say that they no longer even try to complain or get answers to their questions from local, state, and federal agencies. I've seen some local post offices take their phone off the hook or make callers endlessly wait on hold. That's why we hear some agency leaders claim they have gotten no complaints, other than from the rare caller who reaches them with a complaint. Readers-your suggestions! Please don't say write to your member of Congress. Unless you have a very personal, easy-to-remedy problem, like not getting a government check, it really doesn't work. 3. Getting through to corporations who have the nerve to name their outreach office-"customer service"-is a drain on the most deeply patient, determined consumer. I've found it difficult to even get through by telephone to my telephone company, and when I did, I was inundated with gobs of gobbledygook. You've had similar experiences, to be sure, with your banks, insurance companies, hospitals, clinics, and electric, gas, and water utilities. They don't like to use the telephone anymore. Even if you can leave a message, many just don't return calls or respond to repeated telephone inquiries. "Email," they say on their voicemail, good luck. One sometimes reaches a person at a call center in some foreign land. Unfortunately, call center operators rarely have the ability to resolve a caller's problem. (Note most companies refuse to put their response to you in writing.) I've found modest success in asking for the local bank branch's direct telephone number to get around the tiers of "press one, press two, press three." Also, small local businesses are usually more responsive. Readers-here is where your varied experiences and frustrations may produce suggestions to get through the force fields and at least getting to the "no people"-which is another barrier beyond the scope of this column. "No people" in companies are trained to deny, thwart, confuse, and wear you down, especially when you're asking about inscrutable overbilling or overdue repairs. There are still other categories. Many people can't even get through on the telephone to their own neighbors because the latter no longer answer the phone due to the robocalls they receive. Imagine an emergency. Decades ago, telephone calls got through, but that was before all these sophisticated techniques, which interfere between caller and callee. When one tries to email, they find more and more people aren't keeping up with their overloaded email inboxes. And so, it goes. Well, sagacious readers, give us your best practices and ideas about getting through. None of us is smarter than all of us. And as Norman Cousins once wrote: "No one really knows enough to be a pessimist." Thank you. (c) 2022 Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His latest book is The Seventeen Solutions: Bold Ideas for Our American Future. Other recent books include, The Seventeen Traditions: Lessons from an American Childhood, Getting Steamed to Overcome Corporatism: Build It Together to Win, and "Only The Super -Rich Can Save Us" (a novel). |
Once Upon A Time, America Was Brave It's just that simple By Leonard Pitts Jr. She shapes the question in a voice of rainy-day melancholy, frames it with piano meditation. "All we've been given by those who came before The dream of a nation where freedom would endure The work and prayers of centuries have brought us to this day What shall be our legacy? What will our children say?" Thus begins "American Anthem," Norah Jones' theme to "The War," Ken Burns' magisterial 2007 history of the conflagration that nearly burned down the world in the 1940s. But if the song spoke to the crisis of that generation, its central question also feels relevant to our crisis, 80 years later. "What shall be our legacy? What will our children say?" Of many of us, they will say nothing good. That's assuming any memory of America survives to give them a basis for comparison. History is written by the winners, after all, so there is always the chance, if intolerance wins, if ignorance wins, if election denial wins and they shape the future in their image, our children will inherit an America that is transactional, small-minded and mean, and never know that once upon a time, America stood - or at least, sometimes tried to stand - for something loftier. That once upon a time, America was brave. If the hearings of the Jan. 6 committee, which ended Thursday, have demonstrated nothing else, they've demonstrated how rare that virtue has become. Instead, we find ourselves largely a nation defined by fears. Because he lacked the guts to accept his election defeat, Donald Trump assembled an armed mob to attack the Capitol. Because they were terrified the nation is changing without their approval, that mob did his bidding. Because they were scared of Trump, most of his party swallowed their tongues rather than protest. Because they have not the basic moral courage one usually learns on the playground - lose with dignity and fight again another day - they are trashing democracy itself. To wit: The majority of Republican candidates for this year's midterms reject or doubt the result of the 2020 election, according to The Washington Post. And just 42% of us have confidence in the fairness of U.S. elections, according to a July poll from CNN. America is a nation of sore losers ascendant. Such pusillanimity throws into sharp relief the acts of courage these hearings have shown us. Such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, captured on video coolly directing efforts to save the Capitol and continue government function even as she fled a mob howling for her blood. And Republican Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger giving up their political careers rather than acceding to their party's pact of lies. "Our duty today is to our country and our children and our Constitution," said Cheney. She said this by way of introducing a resolution to subpoena Trump to testify. The committee approved it on a dramatic and unanimous role-call vote. Trump will likely refuse to appear, though one hopes against hope he does. This moment cries out for accountability. That loser's weakness has brought America to a crisis as critical in its way to our continued viability as the one another generation faced eight decades ago. They had to find the courage to send their sons across the seas, to scrimp and save and bear unimaginable loss. We are asked only to find the courage to accept the truth. "What shall be our legacy? What will our children say?" Once upon a time, America was brave. Let's hope, for their sake, it still is. (c) 2022 Leonard Pitts Jr. won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 2004. He is the author of the novel, Before I Forget. His column runs every Sunday and Wednesday in the Miami Herald. Forward From This Moment, a collection of his columns, was published in 2009. |
We're Stuck On A Monopoly Merry-Go-Round By Jim Hightower The problem with our so-called "free market" is that it's not free for you and me. It's largely controlled by monopolies, which are free to inflate prices just because they can, letting gougers gleefully extract unwarranted monopoly profits from us. This milking of consumers by tightly consolidated industries is propelling today's surging price hikes. Brand name corporations claim they're being forced to mark-up price tags just to cover rising costs for raw materials, labor, transportation, etc. But in a competitive marketplace, they'd have to eat much of those increases by taking a bit less in profits. Instead, monopolies are now raising prices simply to squeeze even greater profits from hard-hit consumers - a game of corporate greed that socks America with more inflation. Consider diapers. A year ago, Procter & Gamble announced that the pandemic was driving up its production costs, forcing it to raise prices for its Pampers brand. At the time, it had just posted a quarterly profit of $3.8 billion, so P&G could easily have absorbed a temporary rise in its costs. But instead of holding the price to ease their customers' economic pain, the conglomerate used a global health crisis to justify upping diaper prices. Six months later, P&G's quarterly profit topped $5 billion. And - in that same quarter - P&G spent $3 billion to buy back shares of its own stock, a Wall Street manipulation that artificially bloats the wealth of top execs and other big shareholders. In short, P&G used the excuse of inflation to inflate the price of diapers, then used the extra money it extracted to inflate the value of its stock to benefit rich shareholders. Well, couldn't consumers just switch to Huggies, the brand sold by P&G's main "competitor"? No, for it's a co-monopolist, having also goosed up its prices. Welcome to the monopoly merry-go-round. (c) 2022 Jim Hightower's latest book, "If The Gods Had Meant Us To Vote They Would Have Given Us Candidates,"is available in a fully revised and updated paperback edition. Jim writes The Hightower Lowdown, a monthly newsletter chronicling the ongoing fights by America's ordinary people against rule by plutocratic elites. Sign up at HightowerLowdown.org. |
Democratic Rep. Bill Pascrell said Tuesday that every congressional Republican and GOP candidate should be pressed on whether they support their party leaders' stated plan to hold the U.S. economy hostage to force cuts to Social Security and Medicare, popular programs that have emerged as key midterm issues.
"The Republican Party is openly promising to topple the entire American economy unless they are allowed to demolish Social Security and Medicare," Pascrell said in a statement after House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) confirmed that the GOP will use a fast-approaching debt ceiling fight as leverage to enact spending reductions if Republicans retake control of the chamber in the November elections.
While McCarthy declined to explicitly say the GOP will target Social Security and Medicare, other top Republicans haven't been so reserved.
In an appearance on Fox News over the weekend, House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) defended his party's plans for the two programs, claiming that the GOP supports "shoring up Medicare and Social Security" and deploying the usual-and false-talking point that they are in crisis.
Earlier this year, the Republican Study Committee-of which Scalise is a member-released a proposal that called for raising the retirement age to 70, mean-testing Social Security benefits, and partially privatizing the New Deal-era program.
Speaking to Bloomberg Government last week, several Republicans hoping to serve as chair of the House Budget Committee next year explicitly said they plan to take aim at Social Security and Medicare if the GOP wins a majority.
In his statement Tuesday, Pascrell said it "isn't hyperbole" to warn that Republicans are willing to risk an economic disaster to impose long-sought changes to Social Security and Medicare.
"This is Republicans' own words and Americans need to hear them loud and clear," said the New Jersey Democrat. "Every Republican should be asked if they agree with their leaders' stated plans to tank the economy to demolish Social Security and Medicare. Breaching the ceiling and blowing up the entire American economy can never happen. We must use every tool at our disposal to prevent Republicans from destroying America."
Democratic lawmakers who want to raise taxes on the rich to fund an increase in Social Security benefits haven't hesitated to spotlight GOP leaders' recent comments, even as they receive relatively little attention in the corporate media.
"Seniors are about to see the largest increase in their Social Security checks in 40+ years," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, tweeted Tuesday, referring to the newly announced cost-of-living adjustment.
"But if Republicans take control of Congress," Jayapal added, "they'll cut benefits and raise the eligibility age-forcing seniors to risk their health by delaying retirement."
A number of Republican candidates-including incumbent Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)-have said on the campaign trail that they would like to cut or privatize Social Security and Medicare. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has proposed sunsetting all federal laws-including those authorizing Social Security and Medicare-every five years.
In recent weeks, Democrats have begun more frequently highlighting Republicans' comments on Social Security and Medicare in campaign ads as the pivotal midterms draw closer.
"All you have to do is Google Blake Masters to see how extreme he is," says a recently launched Senate Majority PAC ad in Arizona.
The Democratic ad plays footage of GOP Senate nominee Blake Masters putting his support for gutting Social Security in plain terms.
"Maybe we should privatize Social Security, right?" Masters said during a candidate forum in June. "Private retirement accounts, get the government out of it."
(c) 2022 Jake Johnson is an author and staff writer for Common Dreams
|
Wisconsin's most ardent advocate for marijuana legalization, state Sen. Melissa Agard, gave an enthusiastic thumbs-up to President Biden's announcement last week that he would pardon all people convicted of simple marijuana possession under federal law.
"The most dangerous thing about marijuana is that it is illegal," declared the Madison Democrat, who for years has battled the steady resistance of Republican legislators and the caution of Democrats on behalf of marijuana legalization. "I applaud the president's recent action on marijuana reform. By pardoning all prior federal convictions of simple marijuana possession, we can begin to right the wrongs of our nation's outdated and inequitable marijuana policy. Too many lives have been wrongfully upended by these convictions and our antiquated laws, from impacting an individual's ability to obtain gainful employment to their ability to secure housing."
Agard had every reason to be excited by Biden's pardons, and by the fact that the president's executive order included a request for the secretary of Health and Human Services and the attorney general to review how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. "This," she explained, "is an important step towards nationwide legalization of marijuana. There is clearly more work that needs to be done but these significant steps deserve to be celebrated."
Agard understands that what Biden did last week was smart policy - and smart politics.
According to national polling data compiled by YouGov.com in 2020, more than 70% of Americans favor expungement of the records of those with marijuana convictions. At a time when Republicans candidates are attacking Democrats for supporting criminal justice reform in this midterm election season, this is a reform that has the support of 81% of Democrats, 69% of independents and 57% of Republicans.
Those numbers are roughly parallel to the levels of support for legalization of marijuana. And they provide a reminder that ending prohibition can and should be an issue in midterm election races this fall for state and federal posts.
Biden framed the pardon order as a practical response to a particular consequence for thousands of Americans - 6,500 convicted under federal offenses, and thousands more in the District of Columbia - who are the victims of this country's failed war on drugs.
"No one should be in jail just for using or possessing marijuana," said Biden, who explained, "Sending people to prison for possessing marijuana has upended too many lives and incarcerated people for conduct that many states no longer prohibit. Criminal records for marijuana possession have also imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities. And while white and Black and brown people use marijuana at similar rates, Black and brown people have been arrested, prosecuted, and convicted at disproportionate rates."
With that in mind, the president urged governors to follow his lead and issue pardons in their states - a move that could impact tens of thousands of Americans who have marijuana convictions on their records. "Just as no one should be in a federal prison solely due to the possession of marijuana," said Biden, "no one should be in a local jail or state prison for that reason, either."
Gov. Tony Evers is clearly on board with the position Biden has taken. His Republican challenger, however, has taken a hardline prohibitionist stance that is out of synch with the overwhelming majority of Wisconsinites - and most Republicans.
Millionaire candidate Tim Michels, who bought the GOP nomination in August, doesn't just oppose ending the failed drug war. He falls back on tired arguments against liberalizing laws against marijuana possession and use that were disproven decades ago. "I do not support the legalization of marijuana," Michels said in a May radio interview. "I think it's all a slippery slope. I really do."
While Michels looks backward, Evers looks forward.
"It's time for Wisconsin to join more than a dozen states across the country by legalizing and taxing marijuana, much like we already do with alcohol, so we can continue to compete for talented workers to come to our state, expand access to medical treatment for thousands, and have more resources to invest in critical state priorities like K-12 education," said the governor.
That's the way most Wisconsinites see it. According to an August survey by the Marquette University Law School polling group, 69% of Wisconsin voters support legalizing marijuana, while just 23% share the position taken by the Republican gubernatorial nominee and Republican legislators who have blocked reform.
Michels and his allies are attacking Evers for issuing pardons. Instead of being defensive, the governor should point out that a substantial portion of the pardons he issued were for marijuana offenses. This is definitely a case where Democrats running for statewide posts and for legislative seats can - and should - reframe the debate about criminal justice reform in a way that assures that voters have the full picture.
When they do this, Evers and the other Democrats who support reform can confidently promise to follow Joe Biden's lead and echo the president's message that, "Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana. It's time that we right these wrongs."
(c) 2022 John Nichols writes about politics for The Capitol Times. His book on protests and politics, Uprising: How Wisconsin Renewed the Politics of Protest, from Madison to Wall Street, is published by Nation Books. Follow John Nichols on Twitter @NicholsUprising.
|
From the esoteric perspective, we who delve into the world of the occult have reached the conclusion that our universe is the creation of our own minds, that all we believe is reality is but an illusion, and that truth is always just one step ahead of us as we constantly reach for it.
Because of these conclusions, we often hear the declaration that there can be no such thing as coincidence. Thus when we hear stories of strange events like the ones we list below, we must suggest that something more is involved here. Are we victims of a parallel universe from which we slide in and back out? Is some puppet-master playing tricks on our minds? Or have we created our own illusions out of sheer boredom because of our mundane existence?
Whatever the reason, we offer a list of strange events, some of them drawn from the old series titled Ripley's Believe It Or Not. Some of the stories may be fabrications, yet from our own experience, and because we knew Ripley was a careful researcher when he wrote his books and articles, we think the reports are quite accurate. Thus we let the reader come to their own conclusions.
There seems to be a strange psychic and spiritual link between twins. This odd synchronicity that occurs between twins sometimes has an affect that continues right up to their moment of death. One of the stories involves 71-year-old Finnish twin brothers killed in identical bicycle accidents on the same road only two hours apart in March, 2002. The story was so sensational at the time it made headlines.
An article in the January, 1980 edition of Reader's Digest reported the strange lives of identical twin boys, separated at birth in Ohio, and adopted by different families. Forty years later the boys were reunited and discovered that their lives had been amazingly parallel. Both boys were named James. Both trained in law enforcement. Both had abilities in mechanical drawing and carpentry. They both married women named Linda, had sons named James Alan and James Allan, respectively. Both brothers later divorced and both remarried women named Betty. They both owned dogs named Toy.
From a website named Chronogenetics we found yet another twin story to include in this collection. It seems and John and Arthur Mowforth were twins living about 80 miles apart in Great Britain. On May 22, 1975, both men developed severe chest pains, were rushed to local hospitals and both were pronounced dead of heart attacks shortly after their arrival in the emergency rooms.
The following story from Phenomena: A Book of Wonders doesn't involve twins, but brothers who died under strangely similar circumstances just one year apart. The first brother was struck and killed by a taxi while riding a moped in Bermuda in 1975. One year later, the brother was riding the same moped when he, too, was struck and killed by a taxi. To make the story even more odd, they were hit by the same taxi driven by the same driver.
From Mysteries of the Unexplained, we find this: It seems that in the 1920s three Englishmen boarded a train in Peru and found themselves to be the only passengers in the train car. Naturally they struck up a conversation, discovered they were all from England. When they introduced themselves, they made an even more amazing discovery. One man's last name was Bingham. The second man's last name was Powell. And the third man's last name was Bingham-Powell. They were not related.
And finally, from Incredible Coincidence, we found a story about George D. Bryson who registered at the Brown Hotel in Louisville, Kentucky, in the late 1950s. After signing the register and being assigned to Room 307, Bryson was handed mail addressed to him in Room 307. Thinking that was somewhat odd, Bryson made an inquiry. It seems that the letter was for the man who previously occupied the same room. And yes, you guessed it, his name was George D. Bryson.
(c) 2022 James L. Donahue is a retired newspaper reporter, editor and columnist with more than 40 years of experience in professional writing. He is the published author of five books, all dealing with Michigan history, and several magazine articles.
|
The Nobel Committee has yet again awarded a peace prize that violates the will of Alfred Nobel and the purpose for which the prize was created, selecting recipients who blatantly are not "the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses."
With its eyes on the news of the day, there was no question that the Committee would find some way to focus on Ukraine. But it steered clear of anyone seeking to reduce the risk of that thus-far relatively minor war creating a nuclear apocalypse. It avoided anyone opposing both sides of the war, or anyone advocating for a ceasefire or negotiations or disarmament. It did not even make the choice one might have expected of picking an opponent of Russian warmaking in Russia and an opponent of Ukrainian warmaking in Ukraine.
Instead, the Nobel Committee has chosen advocates for human rights and democracy in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. But the group in Ukraine is recognized for having "engaged in efforts to identify and document Russian war crimes against the Ukrainian civilian population," with no mention of war as a crime or of the possibility that the Ukrainian side of the war was committing atrocities. The Nobel Committee may have learned from Amnesty International's experience of being widely denounced for documenting war crimes by the Ukrainian side.
The fact that all sides of all wars have always failed and always will fail to engage in humane operations is possibly why Alfred Nobel set up a prize to advance the abolition of war. It's too bad that prize is so misused. Because of its misuse, World BEYOND War has created instead the War Abolisher Awards.
*****
Adding here some thoughts from Yurii Sheliazhenko:
NGO Center for Civil Liberties (Ukraine) recently was co-awarded the Nobel Peace Prize with Russian and Belarussian human rights defenders.
What is the Ukrainian secret of success? Here are some tips.
- don't rely on support of local citizens, embrace international donors with their agendas, like the U.S. Department of State and NED;
- insist that war is necessary for survival and no negotiations are possible>;
- insist that international institutions are worthless and therefore human rights activists must ask for weapons for the Ukrainian Armed Forces;
- insist that only Putin violates human rights in Ukraine, and only the Ukrainian army are real human rights defenders;
- never criticize Ukrainian government for suppression of pro-Russian media, parties, and public figures;
- never criticize Ukrainian army for war crimes, for violations of human rights related to war effort and military mobilization, like beating of students by the border guard for their attempt to study abroad instead of becoming cannon fodder, and nobody should hear from you even a word about human right to conscientious objection to military service.
(c) 2022 David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is director of WorldBeyondWar.org and campaign coordinator for RootsAction.org. Swanson's books include War Is A Lie. He blogs at DavidSwanson.org and WarIsACrime.org. He hosts Talk Nation Radio. He is a 2015 and 2016 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee. Follow him on Twitter: @davidcnswanson and FaceBook.
The backlash against critical race theory (CRT), explorations of LGBTQ+ identities and the banning of books by historians such as Howard Zinn and writers such as Toni Morrison, are extensions of this attempt to deny the oppressed their song.
Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges, U.S. Capitol Police Sergeant Aquilino Gonell, and U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn attend a hearing by the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol in the Cannon House Office Building on October 13, 2022 in Washington, DC.
|