Our Energy Crisis is a Crisis of Conscience

Written By: Sara Ledesma

In Other Words…Our Energy Crisis is a Crisis of Conscience - The energy issue is this country has primarily been framed as one of renewable and green vs. unsustainable and “dirty”. Whichever side of the debate you land on, both exist within an unquestioned paradigm of pay-for-use. Whether your energy comes from windmills, or your local gas and power companies, you are charged by a company that provides that energy to you for a profit. The only alternative to this current structure being solar energy, which has such high installation costs, it is not an option for most households. So the discussion rages on: can coal be a “clean” energy source, is dependence on oil a greater security threat than terrorism, will cap and trade raise energy costs during an already stressed economy, how many jobs will renewable energy create, has oil production reached its peak?

The environmental costs, national security and the economy, dominate the debate. But no one talks about free energy. In fact, I’m sure you never even heard of Nicola Tesla, Steorn Ltd., Brian Appel and his revolutionary facility, or the Lutec company. But not to worry, there is an excellent reason you are uniformed of these visionary engineers and their paradigm shifting, or more aptly, paradigm revolutionizing and restructuring, work in the field of energy. The reason being: they would forever abolish the current system by which oil and energy companies rake in billions to provide you and your family with metered lights, heat and power.

“But nothing is free”, you protest. How could a light cast it’s illuminating glow, how could my TV provide endless content on demand and my computer perform limitless functions on command, and not accrue a monetary balance? Doesn’t this power require lines, laid for miles upon miles, like durable veins pulsating underground, pumping energy into my home? Do these veins not require construction and maintenance and replacing every now and then? Is there not a hub where all this power is generated that directs the flow to every business, agency and home? It must take a battalion of trained workers to deliver the life giving nectar that invigorates our modern appliances and technology, the basis of our modern lives! Surely this energy nucleus that powers entire cities must be expensive to control and maintain? How could anyone get such a thing at no cost?

Ready to be shocked and awed in 3…2...1…the knowledge and technology to transmit free power to every home around the world has existed since before you and I were born. And that’s not all, the technology to run a vehicle motor on only water and to turn garbage and sewage (as in the refuse smothering landfills, polluting our oceans and seeping into our drinking supply) into an energy source is now available…and in use. Generators using magnetic motors, capable of running your household or small business without oil and for a mere fraction of the cost, are available for sale now.

The transmission of wireless energy was the invention of obsessed engineer and genius inventor Nicola Tesla. His inventions are as instrumental to American industrialization as those of Albert Einstein and Thomas Edison. His patented inventions include: remote control and robotics (so ahead of his time it would take decades before people understood how to apply them), AC current (replacing Thomas Edison’s costly DC method and revolutionizing industrialization), cellular technology, x-rays, neon, radio transmission, and the modern motor (still the basis of what we use a hundred years later). Nicola had ideas so visionary and original he would eventually be granted 112 patents.

Nicola Tesla was born in Serbia in 1856. After completing degrees in mechanical and electrical engineering, Tesla worked for electric power companies in Germany and France. At age 28 he jumped the pond to the US to pursue his greatest obsession yet: the wireless transmission of energy.

Tesla began working with Edison, who he hoped could be the one to make his vision a reality. We will never what these two men of genius could have accomplished together, since Edison came to see Tesla as a rival, when Tesla’s AC current replaced his own DC, and kicked Tesla out of his lab.

Tesla dug ditches by day, and created inventions that would help navigate the course of the future, by night. As soon as he was able to secure investors, he was back in the lab full-time.
With the finacial backing of George Westinghouse and his Westinghouse Corporation, Tesla cemented his role in bringing about the industrial revolution in the US. Tesla’s revolutionary AC current design allowed Westinghouse to beat out General Electric (which was utilizing Edison’s costlier DC design) to illuminate the first electrical fair in history, The Chicago World’s Fair of 1893. Twenty seven million people watched Presdient Cleveland illuminate an entire city with the push of one button. Tesla become an instant celebrity among the eductated and elite. He could now secure an investor for his greatest dream, the wireless transmission of energy.

Tesla had a few setbacks, including a lab fire which destroyed most of his work. This allowed Marconi, an Italian engineer working with Edison and backed by the financial support of Andrew Carnegie, to win the race to be the first to transmit and receive signals across the Atlantic ocean. The competive pioneer that he was, Tesla had desired to be the first to transmit a transatlantic signal and make history as the person who created a worldwide communication system. But Tesla was not easily discouraged. He rebuilt his lab and shrugged off Marconi’s triumph by saying: “Marconi is a good fellow. Let him continue. He is using seventeen of my patents.”

From the transmission of that first wireless electrical signal, Tesla made the mental leap to energy, transmitted worldwide, accessible to every househould, free of charge. He needed enough money to build a giant tower capable of generating enough energy to make his dream of free energy to all a reality. He tapped the deep pockets of one J.P. Morgan (even back then the Moragn of today’s Morgan Stanley was running Wall Street). Tesla tantalized Morgan with a grandiose proposal to build a “world system” of wireless communications that would relay news, music, private conversation, secure military communication, up to date stock market reports, and even photos. No doubt Morgan thought it sounded more like science fiction than actual science! Tesla promised Morgan that, “When wireless is fully applied the earth will be converted into a huge brain, capable of response in every one of its parts”. Morgan must have salivated at the potential for global profits generating exponentially.

Tesla, however, had a different vision. He put Morgan’s money to work building a giant tower that would demonstrate electrical transmission without wires, capable of providing unlimited power freely accessible by everyone. Tesla’s tower, named Wardenclyffe, rose 187 feet in the air and held a fifty-five-ton sphere made of steel at the top. Beneath the tower, a 120 foot pipe plunged into the earth. Beyond that, were sixteen iron pipes for currents to pass through and grab hold of the earth. Tesla said his tower would seize the earth “so that the whole of this globe can quiver."

So, why don’t we have free energy today courtesy of a prophetic genius with a dream of using science to help the world? Morgan had no interest in energy he couldn’t meter. Making profits by selling energy had been his entire motive for his investiment. Morgan pulled the plug on Tesla, throwing him into financial ruin. Moragn then went a step further and ensured unlimited energy, free of charge, would never be a reality. By using his far-reaching political and business influence, he black-balled Tesla completely. He crushed Tesla, along with every hope for world-wide, free energy, for all. Not surprisingly, Tesla never recovered. A mental breakdown followed his financial one. One of the greatest, most revolutionary minds of our time died in 1943, nearly penniless. After his death, government officials seized all of Tesla’s research. Morgan’s good friend , J. Edgar Hoover, apparently shared his disinterest in a system of free energy, unmetered by business and unregulated by the government.

If you are a fan of Sci-fi movies or books, then you are already aware of the theory: They who control the energy and natural resources, control the populations of the world. Is it any wonder oil and gas companies have such influence in our government that they have kept us from heading down a more renewable energy source, cheaper, cleaner and more stable than the status quo? How amazing would it be if we could power a car motor on nothing but water? At least until water becomes so scarce that we begin to support repressive regimes, fight endless wars and spend billions of dollars to procure a steady supply, it would be a perfect solution. Right now water is abundant, it comes out of our taps, and has an efficient delivery system that is already in use.

Next shocking twist coming your way now…since 1988 water-powered motors have existed.
Stan Meyers created his water powered motor and probably expected to be the next Edison. Instead, he was to be the next Tesla. Once the local media covered his invention Stan was contacted by the Pentagon. Stan was told they were sending out a Colonel to look at his motor because they were interested in possibly using his technology to run their tanks. Being the dutiful American Stan was, he welcomed the military. Stan must have swollen with pride to imagine his technology helping the brave soldiers fighting for the country he loved. After the meeting, Stan Meyers was no longer able to secure any funding for his motors. Hmmmm.

The history of science is riddled with examples of alternative science and medicine being co-opted when they threaten the status quo. The history of politics is ripe with examples of policy being directed by corporate interests and intelligence agencies serving their own agendas with the powers they are bestowed in order to protect and serve. From that viewpoint, the following technologies in existence today, available on a mass level to every American if politics and energy billionaires would allow it, are not so shocking.

In 2006, Sean McCarthy went on Fox news to invite the entire scientific community to examine the method of free energy his company Steorn Ltd. had developed. He wanted legitimate reviews by his peers of the new wave of technology which would power everything from cell phones to cars, for free, producing no pollution at all, and utilizing less toxic batteries than those currently in use. This was huge, revolutionary, would change the course of our industrial development and help rid our environment of harmful toxins. I try to be an optimist, but I’m not surprised that once again, free energy did not go over well.

A 400 billion dollar secret is a large one to keep. But when free energy is involved, things find a way of staying under wraps. 2008 marked the year a genius new technology was put into use making waste, that smelly trash you and I put on the curb so it can be transported to a dump somewhere out of sight and out of mind, into oil and gas (that stuff we spend billions on and conduct wars over).

Brian Appel and his company have a plant in Philadelphia that breaks down solid waste and extracts the carbon to make oil and gas that can power our cars and trucks! Garbage from landfills is broken down to a molecular level into three parts: oil, gas and solid. Garbage is ground down, water is added, and it is pressure-cooked using heat and a pump. Through this process, solids are transformed into oil, gas, and water. In a distillation tank the water and oil are separated, with the water sinking to the bottom, the gas floating up above and the oil suspended in the middle. Once the water is removed, viola, gas and oil are left. It can be pumped into a diesel engine right out of the machine.

The scientific name for the process is thermal deposionization, but the principle is simple: clean up the earth AND make gas and oil cheap, here at home, in the good ‘ol US of A. Brian and his team complete in minutes what the earth takes thousands of years to accomplish. They based their method on the natural process by which the earth makes the oil we find miles under the surface.

Making fuel from the foulest of waste and sewage is nothing short of brilliant! Why is this not on every news channel and in every classroom? Apel recently built a second facility in Carthage, Missouri. This 20 million dollar facility is capable of digesting 200 tons of turkey waste and coming out with oil. From 6 billion tons of agricultural waste, this facility can produce 4 billion barrels of oil a year. Incredibly, that is what we import in one year! Oil from turkey waste, agricultural waste, sewage and trash is cheap, easy, and done right here in the U.S. The oil crisis is over! National security problem solved. Someone please tell General McChrystal about this…NOW.

Lutec is a company, out of Australia, selling electric generators with magnetic motors able to provide clean, green energy. One generator can produce enough energy to run an entire household or small business. The technology to power a generator without oil is here and available to anyone with access to an Internet connection. For that clean energy enthusiast on your holiday list, you can purchase one at www.lutec.com.au/

The grave environmental, economic, political and social cost of our dependence on oil and gas is astronomical. Our greatest scientific and political minds are in a tailspin formulating plans and policies to convert to domestic, cleaner, sustainable energy sources. Or at least that is how the media and our government portray the issue. But well documented facts and technologies already in use, show the answers are already in our midst. Domestic, clean, and renewable energy are easily available for mass consumption and use. Why fight over clean vs. dirty coal and the environmental cost of drilling in pristine landscapes, when we can make oil out of garbage, run vehicle motors on batteries or water and power our homes and business with solar, wind and magnetic power?

In other words, our real energy crisis is the refusal of our political and corporate business leaders to facilitate the change from oil and gas to clean, renewable, and even free, energy. It is a crisis of conscience that energy that is beneficial to the health of our planet, the security of our country, and the well-being of humanity as a whole, is being buried so corporations can continue to excavate enormous profits from our current energy paradigm.

Hopenhagen?

Written By: Kelly Opdycke
(Editor, KO Zine)

This week a number of world leaders gather in Denmark to for the 15th annual United Nations Conference on Climate Change. Representatives from 192 countries will be in attendance, including President Barack Obama, who recently reversed his decision to skip the summit in response to India and China’s new commitment to reduce greenhouse emissions.

Copenhagen’s progressive green policies seemingly make the city a perfect host of the summit. Denmark was one of the first nations to be gung-ho on wind power, with 20% of the country’s energy furnished by wind. And despite the fact that the Danes produce the most pound-per-pound trash per capita (a major embarrassment to this European nation), only 5% of this waste ends up in landfills, compared with 54% of waste in the United States.

The summit’s main goal is to create an agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol. The draft agreement is currently at 176 pages and needs to be whittled down to a few pages by Dec. 15, when the high level debate is set to start. All debating, pleading and arm-twisting are to be finished on Dec. 19.

With the UK Met Office recently reporting that the last 10 years have been the warmest on record and the EPA warning that global warming endangers public health earlier this week, the need for this summit is obvious.

In the end will be an agreement on emission cuts and finance, as well as alliances on how to set up carbon markets, technology and forestry deals.

All of this is great, but one problem exists: none of it matters. These are non-legally binding agreements. Arguments will be had, agreements will be made, but in the end little will probably be done.

As an anonymous source told the Guardian, “This is profound decision-making. We are trying to affect a revolution. We do not know where this will end up.”
Maybe me and Ms./Mr. Anonymous are wrong. Maybe this conference will be the one that changes everything. I seriously hope so.
But I doubt it.

More Info:
L.A. Times
The Guardian (UK) #1
The Guardian (UK) #2
Common Dreams

A Time For Thanks?

Written By: Kelly Opdycke
(Editor, KO Zine)

This Thanksgiving may be one of the toughest for many of us. Some may not be able to afford to travel the distance to see their family. Others may not even have the money to recreate the traditional Thanksgiving dinner enjoyed year after year. Without the family or food of the holiday, some would say this holiday is nothing. Here’s something for you to think about, even if you have very little.

According to the History Channel, Thanksgiving was traditionally created following a particularly rough winter that killed many Pilgrims. After forming an alliance with some local American Indians, the Pilgrims were able to rack up enough food for the upcoming winter. Thanksgiving was a three-day feast to celebrate what they believed would be a less harsh winter.

You knew this already, right? Well, after being asked if Thanksgiving was an American holiday last week, thought I should do a little recap. Canada actually celebrates Thanksgiving, but it’s separate date with a whole different history.

While thankfulness is an important factor of this holiday, another aspect should be considered in the world of politics. The American Indians, native to what would become the United States, were willing to help their new neighbors, despite the fact that they had come from some unknown place. Today, many immigrants are simply pushed aside, left to do the jobs that many of us find menial.

When will this country finally start treating all immigrants with respect? Not just those who excel in math and science. - In June, President Barack Obama promised his commitment to “comprehensive immigration reform.”

He plans to “clarify the status of millions who are here illegally.” He believes those who wish to become citizens would be required to pay a penalty, learn English and go to the end of the line behind those who came here legally.

The president has asked Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), Chairman of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, to develop immigration reform legislation that was said to be announced this fail. Some of the 7 main points he plans to include are an employer verification system, a path to citizenship for those already in the country and better control of the borders.

All of this sounds great, but will it ever happen? I know, health care must be first and the government also must deal with growing unemployment, global warming, the list is never ending.

Those of us lucky enough to have Thanksgiving dinner this year probably have so many different dishes to prepare. We have to cook everything at once, getting as close to perfection as possible.

The government has the same problem, only they’re dealing with millions of lives. Tackling each issue takes patience and debate. If immigration must be put on the back burner, I hope it’s not forgotten.

More Info:
CBS News
New York Times
Senator Schumer Government Wensite
History Channel

Hollywood Non-Profit Helps Troubled Youth

Written By: David Carr
Photos By: Michael Kass

My Friend’s Place: A non-profit finds, help, hope and a home for troubled youth in Hollywood.

The homeless situation in Los Angeles is still a pervasive issue. Many organizations along with community representatives and volunteers have tried to make a dent into this on going problem. One organization making a difference is My Friend’s Place. My Friend’s Place has created a comprehensive approach to dealing with homeless youth in Hollywood by providing shelter, a safe environment and in some instances a pathway to education and a better life. Michael Kass is the Director of Development at My Friend’s Place and he sat down with me to talk about the organization and how they are tackling this crisis.

David Carr: How long has My Friend's Place been in operation and how long have you worked there?

Michael Kass: MFP was founded in 1988 and I have worked here for 2.5 years.

DC: At this point in time how many youth would you say are currently being helped at My Friends Place?

MK: We see nearly 2,000 youth per year. They access services ranging from basic needs (food, clothing, showers, etc.) to educational opportunities, health education, and clinical case management.

DC: What is the percentage of homeless youth in Hollywood right now?

MK: There are approximately 11,000 homeless youth in Los Angeles County. I'm not sure what the exact count for Hollywood is, but I can tell you that our area is one of the few in which the number of homeless youth is increasing. Hollywood has always been a magnet for homeless youth and the current economic conditions have not changed that.

DC: In your opinion what is the main catalyst that puts kids on the streets? Is it broken homes? Drug abuse? Teenage runaways?

MK: It runs the gamut, David. We are seeing an increasing number of youth who have aged out of the foster care system--they hit age 18 and are expelled from the system, often without the skills or resources to live independently. A significant percentage of the youth we see are escaping from mentally or physically abusive homes and/or families. As the economic crisis has gone on, we have seen more and more youth whose families simply cannot afford to care for them right now. Sometimes the entire family is living in a shelter and the youth just need a place to go to be safe during the day.

DC: Is there anyway to breakdown percentage what kind of situations these kids are coming out of?

MK: A needs assessment conducted last year by The California Endowment and Children’s Hospital Los Angeles revealed that 57% of the youth at MFP were victims of childhood physical abuse, 75% have been involved with the criminal justice system in some form, and nearly one third are dealing with depression and/or bipolar disorder.

DC: How does My Friends Place help these youth?

MK: The idea of building trust and strong relationships is at the core of all MFP programs. Our model is low-barrier--any homeless youth between the ages of 12 and 25 (and their children) is welcome into our space as long as they are able to maintain our safe haven. Our mission is to assist and inspire homeless youth to build self-sufficient lives. Within this broad framework, we offer services in three general areas:

1. Basic Needs: Food, clothing, showers, hygiene products, communication, referrals to outside services, etc... Often, a young person on the streets has not eaten for days. Extreme hunger can make it impossible to focus on anything other than getting food. By meeting these most basic of needs, MFP makes it possible for a youth to begin focusing on longer-term plans.

2. Transformative Education: This includes workshops ranging from employment skills, resume preparation, and GED preparation to Creative Arts (theater, circus arts, creative writing, and visual arts). The creative arts programs function as a mental health intervention--young people achieve breakthroughs in writing or even circus arts that would not be possible in a more traditional mental health setting.

3. Health and Well-Being: Includes health education (OD prevention, STI prevention, emotional well-being, violence prevention, etc.) and clinical case management.

In addition to services our staff provides, we have partnerships with over 70 organizations that allow us to offer services such as basic onsite primary medical care, mental health therapy, and legal services.

DC: I know as a development director your primary job is to raise money but do you ever get involved with the program side of the organization?

MK: I do get involved with some creative arts programs when time allows. I've facilitated the theater workshop a few times, facilitated a film festival jury (a group of young people served as the "Youth Jury" for the environmentally focused Jules Verne Film Festival), and have worked to expand our Circus Arts program

DC: How can people get involved with your organization? What can folks do to do help?

MK: We have tons of volunteer opportunities, and we are always looking for in-kind donations and people can donate online to help support our services. A complete rundown of volunteer opportunities can be found here: http://www.myfriendsplace.org/howtovolunteer.html

DC: Michael thanks for taking the time to chat with me about what’s going on at My Friend’s Place.

MK: Not a problem David.

For more information on how to get involved with My Friend’s Place log on to www.myfriendsplace.org.

Non-Profit Gives Young People A Way to Cope With Pain

To Write Love On Her Arms: A New Non-Profit Gives Young People A Way to Cope With Pain

Written By: David Carr

The World Health Organization estimates that 121 million people suffer from depression and 18 million of these cases are happening in the US. Another report claims that 2/3 of those suffering from depression never seek treatment and instead tend to self medicate with drugs, alcohol or cutting. A non-profit organization based in Florida is trying slowly but surely to reverse those numbers and they are using popular social networks to talk with young people openly, and honestly about their issues. To Write Love On Her Arms is a non-profit, based in Orlando, Florida, dedicated to creating a safe space for young people to talk about their issues. The organization’s staff and interns are able to refer troubled youth to professionals who can get them the treatment they need. Jamie Tworkowski is the founder of TWLOHA and he sat down with me for a lengthy discussion about his organization.

David Carr: Jamie, what prompted you to start this type of non-profit and how long has the organization been up and running?

Jamie Tworkowski: We have been operating for three years. The organization grew out of me trying to help a close friend. My friend Rene was really suffering from depression. She had tried to commit suicide. She had actually cut herself and carved “fuck up” on her arm. When we tried to get her into a hospital, the fact that she had ingested drugs meant that she actually had to wait five days before they could see her. I was with her for the five days, and while I was with her, I used things like My Space, Facebook and Twitter to reach out to people for help.

I knew that she could not afford treatment so I asked for donations. People started responding and helping; folks started to donate money but then other people started e-mailing about their issues with depression…other folks needed someone to talk to. It just seemed to grow from there. While my friends and I helped Rene we started helping other people in need.

DC: How big is your organization now?

JT: We have ten people on staff, and six interns. So far we have answered over 100,000 e-mails from people who needed to talk to someone and we have spoken to youth from over 100 different countries.

DC: Walk me through exactly what you do? Is your staff mostly talking to high school-age kids?

JT: Our message is a simple one. We basically set up a safe place either on My Space, Facebook, and/or Twitter, or over the phone for folks to talk to us and to share their story about dealing with their specific issue. Our goal is to meet them wherever they are and get them to the next step in their recovery. We are not the solution. Our role, after getting them to open up to us, is to get them to open up to a friend or counselor in their community. The age range of who we serve is pretty diverse. We end up talking to a lot of high school age kids, college kids, some adults…we have parents who talk to us about their kids. It’s a unique mix.

DC: What would you say is the number one issue many of the kids who reach out to you are facing?

JT: It’s depression. I mean, they just need ways to cope with different forms of depression. They get hooked on drugs or alcohol or they end up cutting themselves because they cannot figure out another way to deal with depression. The kids we work with don’t know how to cope with their pain.

DC: On average how many e-mails would you say you get a day from kids?

JT: We get anywhere from 500 to 1000 e-mails per week. We are also sending our staff to college campuses and interacting with young people face to face now.

DC: I know you had a booth at the Warped Tour this past year. How has music played a role in what you do?

JT: Two out of the five days I spent with Rene were at shows. Music was a huge part of her life. It was the only thing at the time, she felt connected to. When I reached out for help a few musicians responded. Young people feel a serious connection to the music and bands they are into, so I knew music had to be a part of this. We have been on the Warped Tour three times and Kevin (Lyman) and his people make it very easy for non-profits to set up and go on tour and reach out to young people.

DC: Are folks mainly stopping by during the tour to give a donation or do you have kids coming by to talk?

JT: All of the above. Some folks buy a T-Shirt, others want to really know what we are about but we do have kids at the shows who really want to have a serious conversation about what is going on with them. Sometimes they come to the booth in order to feel safe. They see it as a comfortable, safe place to be.

DC: How can people get involved and support the work you are doing?

JT: They can get on the website. They can donate money or just buy a shirt. We are working with a couple of great organizations right now to expand the kind of help we provide. We will be doing more peer to peer/face to face interactions with folks real soon. If folks are serious about helping us out all they have to do is hit the website.

DC: We started our conversation with you telling me about how helping your friend Rene was the catalyst that got you involved in creating this organization. How is Rene doing now?

JT: I'm happy to say that Rene has had three years of sobriety. Like any other person who has an addiction, she is taking each day as a challenge to stay sober. Some days have been better than others, but she's in a better place now, and she's in treatment getting the help she needs.

DC: Jamie thank you for chatting with me and good luck with all of the great work you're doing.

JT: Thanks, David.

If you are someone you know is suffering from depression, log on to http://www.twloha.com/index.php and get the help you or your friend needs.

Health Care Reform Passed?

Written By: Kelly Opdycke
(Editor, KO Zine)

The House has finally passed a health care bill. Everyone in America can now jump for joy at this remarkable victory. But with one particularly big issue compromised and the dooms day that’s to come when the Senate tries to pass a similar version, I’m not sure the time has come for celebration.

Before I bring everyone down, let’s start with the positive: Democrats won a major victory with the inclusion of a public option in the bill. This will make health insurance accessible for those who aren’t covered by their employer and simply can’t afford it by allowing a government option at a much lower cost.

While this sounds great, one amendment that was attached to the bill stands out as a huge problem for those of us pro-choicers. The Stupak amendment prevents federal funding for any woman seeking an abortion. Now it’s nothing new for the government to refuse funds for an abortion except in the cases of rape, incest or harm to the mother (see the Hyde amendment), but this amendment is still the first of its kind. It also prevents abortion coverage for certain small businesses and families who qualify to receive a government subsidized insurance plan through private insurance agencies.

According to Mother Jones, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 18 million will utilize government subsidies to acquire health care for their family by 2019. Women may purchase their own abortion coverage, but like so many say, “Who really plans for an unplanned pregnancy?”

Pro-choice Senate Democrats have threatened to block any plan that includes this amendment.
On Nov. 9, President Barack Obama responded to critics by saying, “This is a health care bill, not an abortion bill.”

Next on my agenda is one specific opponent of this health care bill: Joe Lieberman. While I believe dissent is always a good thing, I think Lieberman deserves a good kick in the ass. Just because you label yourself an 'independent,' doesn’t mean you can ruin this moment for your former party.

So you want to filibuster the bill? Interesting, because in many other cases you have been an opponent of the filibuster, even for bills you did not support. You actually think this issue is worth standing up there and reading out of the phone book (or whatever) for who knows how long, more than say a high-tech fence to protect our borders (something you gave a nay, but it ultimately passed because you didn’t agree with wasting the Senate’s time).

Lieberman, you may not remember this, but last year you almost lost your committee chairmanship because you supported Sen. John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate. Because of the newly-elected president’s wish that you would not be punished, you were allowed to keep your position of power in the Senate.

President Obama choose to do this because he wants government to be more bipartisan. Politicians like you, who seem to be unwilling to compromise, prevent this bipartisanship dream from coming true. Mr. Independent, its time for you to start compromising.

Overall, this bill still has a long way to go in the Senate. All I know is I have a lot of friends who haven’t been to the doctor in years, including myself. I’m not happy with the abortion compromise and I hope it’s eventually killed in the Senate. But, unlike Lieberman, I’m willing to compromise a little for the greater good.

More Info:
Mother Jones
Huffington Post
CNN

Issues of Diversity on a Volatile School Campus Part II

A First Year Teacher in the World of Difference and Same (Part 2)

Written By: David Carr
Photo By: Colin Bootman

View Part I here.

So there I was and there we were, those sixty pairs of eyes staring at me, wondering what would come next. As I turned to the chalk board sweat starting to work its way on my brow, I started to write down a list of questions on the board. I turned to the sixty students and said in a commanding voice, "I need everyone to take out a sheet of paper, a pencil or pen and write these questions down right now." These were not tough questions by any stretch of the imagination. "What is your name, where do you live, do you live in a house or an apartment, when is your birthday?" These were the questions I had the students write down.

"What do we do after we write these down?"

Good question, I thought to myself but before I even knew it, I had the answer. I told the class that the Spanish I kids were going to have to ask my Hispanic students these questions in the best Spanish they could muster. My kids, the ESL kids were going to have to try and answer the questions in English. "When you are finished, I stated you will simply switch. My students will ask the questions in English and the Spanish I kids will answer back in Spanish."

"What will happen when we finish?" another student asked. "Don't worry; I replied there will be more questions." A funny and somewhat peculiar thing happened after I gave the directions. The students actually did what I said!! I almost fell over. At that time in my short career lesson plans were still tough for me to write but I had mastered the art of sounding like I meant business no matter what! I watched as the students asked each other the questions. I listened as the students stumbled through the answers and I looked on as the students tried to help each other with the assignment. This was truly the first time I had seen a large group of African American and Latino students working together on the campus. Even in classes where the two groups were mixed they often sat apart from each other and never interacted.

It was an anomaly to see the two groups now forced to work with each other. They finished the assignment by the time the class was over. They repeated the same assignment on Tuesday and I came up with new questions as I promised. By Wednesday the students were coming up with their own questions and I had become a non-entity in the room and to top it off, the kids seemed to be having fun.

The following week the Spanish I teacher was back at school. She was a bit perturbed at me for not having executed her lesson but she seemed interested in what had gone on in my class, because her students remarked that they had, had a good time with my kids. As fourth period began in my room my students seemed to lack focus. Finally one of my students asked, "Mr. Carr where are the students?" "Which students I asked?" "You know Mr. Carr los...los...los Africano Americanos, where are the friends?" This was the first time I had heard one of the immigrant students try to find a word other than 'mayate' to describe the Black students on the campus.

Now it seemed they had built some type of relationship with these students. However fleeting the relationship was they had no choice but to try and refer to the Black students with some sense of humanity and dignity. I suspect the same thing was happening in the Spanish I class. The Black kids had learned that not every Latino child on our campus was Mexican and that all they really had to do was ask and they would find out where some of the kids were from. At that moment I realized something about the champions of diversity and multicultural education.

These "do-gooders" often want to get kids of various ethnicities together to do one of two things. Either they have the kids talk about their differences to no end or they have the kids dialog on what it means to be "oppressed." The former in my mind is a mute point. The kids know they are different. They can see the differences as plain as day! The latter again in my humble still makes no sense. The kids know they are different and depending on where they live they know that their communities have been hard hit. They live it everyday.

What these folks never have kids do is get them to talk about what they actually have in common! How about that for a novel idea? Now my kids did not do that at all in that fourth period class, what they had to do was work together in order to finish an assignment. They had an assignment and they knew (or at the very least they believed) they had no choice and they needed to finish it. The only way that was going to happen was for them to work together.

I am not naïve enough to think that in one week you can solve racial issues on a high school campus or in a community. The problems that existed in my school and community still went on after that week. But what I do know is that if multi-ethnic communities are going to thrive and not just survive then we have to do more than just talk about our differences. We will have to find the ties that bind, find common ground and then work together to get things done.

I often look back on that week as the moment when I finally became a teacher. Kids were working together, checking each other's work, correcting each other while I merely looked on and coached. That was the week I learned of possibilities. It was the week I started to feel like a teacher and it was a week in which both teacher and student discovered hope...

Afghanistan: Crime and Corruption With Our Tax Dollars

Written By: Sara Ledesma

Our colossal, on-going military and financial expenditure in Afghanistan was intended to yield democracy and stability. Despite throwing exorbitant financial and military resources down the bottomless ditch we call “the war on terror,” Afghanistan is no more stable than when we sent our first brave soldiers and wrote our first blank check. Why, with all the military might and formidable financial wherewithal of the number one superpower in the world, have we yet to make any progress toward the goals of stability and 'democracy?' Military resources are exhausted to the point of endangering national security, spending is so out of control we are bankrupting our national reserves and we are losing our mothers, fathers, sons and daughters in escalating numbers. Yet, we are still no closer to declaring our goals met and ending the massive hemorrhaging of our national treasury and our soldiers’ blood.

Since billions of our tax dollars are funding this epic fiasco, we have a right, and a patriotic duty, to ask what return we are receiving on our tragic investment. Violence levels mock our goal of stability. The recent sham of an election in Afghanistan is a glaring indicator we have failed miserably to institute any semblance of 'democracy.' By taking a closer look at our military strategy in Afghanistan, we can discern why we have yet to make a single step toward progress despite years of appalling waste.

Afghanistan is run by two brothers, both of whom enjoy unwavering U.S. military, political and financial support. Hamid Karzai is the official president of the country and controls the political state. His brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai is a tribal warlord who controls Southern Afghanistan with a mafia-like, iron fist. Reports from our own CIA, narcotics officials and military personnel describe a history of government collusion with Wali Karzai, including eight years of pay-offs from the CIA. Our government agencies pay Wali for such services as: intelligence, the orchestration of meetings with insurgent groups we want to convert to our side, and the renting of his properties to house U.S. military.

Despite the existence of long-held knowledge that Wali Karzai is involved in the 3 billion-dollar- a-year Opium trade, U.S. tax revenue is used to protect and enrich Wali. In addition to being a known heroin trafficker (the illegal drug made from Afghanistan’s Opium), allegations against the leader of the southern half of Afghanistan include: orchestrating mass election fraud to keep his brother illegitimately in power and playing both sides of the fence with U.S. and insurgent forces. Wali takes money from our CIA and military, then turns around and accepts bribes from Taliban smuggling their heroin through his territories. No doubt he then allows them to pass back through those same routes to smuggle weapons paid for with profits from that heroin. Wali Karzai uses his control of the bridges and pathways in Southern Afghanistan to profit off the heroin dealers who must pay to transport their contraband through the territory he rules. He has used his control of areas such as the Khyber Pass (to Pakistan) to create great wealth off those who traffic in contraband.

Wali Karzai has used the military crackdown on the heroin business in Afghanistan to increase his own influence and power. When our narcotics agents make an arrest of an Afghani drug trader, Wali himself steps in to fill the void, thus increasing his own share of the multi-billion dollar drug trade. Is it any wonder that with all the resources we are dedicating to stamping out the opium trade in Afghanistan, it still amounts to 15% of the nation’s GDP?
The drug trade is so entrenched in Afghanistan politics, the Obama administration recently pressured President Karzai to purge those with drug ties from his government and depose hi s brother from Southern Afghanistan. Not surprisingly, President Karzai has yet to do either. In fact, Ahmed Karzai’s running mate in the recent election, Mohammed Fahim, is a former warlord accused of drug trafficking.

Advocates of our current Afghanistan policy argue no one in Afghanistan is untainted by the drug trade or corruption. They claim it is a country run on an informal, back-channel system of survival of the fittest. From local police demanding bribes, to high-level political corruption and election fixing, conspiring with thugs and warlords is routine and customary. Everyone in Afghanistan is somehow compromised. Two cunning brothers, colluding to play our government for a fool and profiting by any means available—legal or illegal—are the perfect poster boys for politics in Afghanistan.

We partake in a corrupt system, reinforce it with our resources and complicity, and then have the audacity to wonder why we make no progress toward a legitimate, stable government in Afghanistan? If we participate in a soiled, perverted system, we cannot expect results that are free from taint and perversion. We say we are committed to destroying the lucrative drug trade which funds the death of our soldiers and undermines every goal we have in Afghanistan. Yet, Wali Karzai takes advantage of our hard work by capitalizing on any advances we make in prosecuting drug leaders, to enhance his own status as a drug king pin. Wali’s grip on the South (stronghold and sanctuary of Taliban forces) means anyone who passes through does so with his consent—which of course comes with the prerequisite kickback. Who is to stop him when he has the backing of the U.S. military and Drug Enforcement, as well as the political immunity granted him by his brother, the President of the country?

We are palling around with drug lords and corrupt politicians who care nothing for democracy, make a mockery of free elections and democratic principles and only value wealth and power. Our government is being manipulated by a pair of thuggish brothers who take our money, extol the virtues of democracy and diplomacy, then turn their backs and spit on everything democracy stands for. They engage in such widespread corruption, with well-known drug leaders and thugs, that there is no chance to earn the legitimacy that political and social stability requires.

In Other Words…the problem in Afghanistan is crime and corruption pay, and they pay with our tax dollars.

Viral Marketing: A Social Media Experience

Written By: Khadeeja Coonrod

Ever heard of anything such as word of mouth? Ever heard of Viral Marketing? Welcome to Viral Marketing, a marketing technique that uses social networks to increase brand awareness by word of mouth delivery or network effects of the internet. Viral promotions come in the forms of: E-books, images, text messaging, video clips, brandable software, advergames, and interactive Flash games.

In the 1990's the producers of Mystery Science Theatre realized that their best marketers were the show's few but faithful audience and so they encouraged the show's viewers to videotape their copyrighted shows and pass on to friends. This was the beginning of a new way for word of mouth to spread.

Flashforward to 2002, three years before YouTube, BMW reported that over 11 million viewers tuned in to watch The Hire, a series of eight short films made specifically for the internet starring Clive Owen. 2 million of those viewers registered to the BMW website and within four years, the videos were viewed over 100 million times.

The proof now exists that viral marketing is a good technique. YouTube acquainted viral marketing to social media. Now we have more tools than we know what to do with: YouTube, Myspace, Facebook, Twitter, PayPal, Flickr, Ning, and the list goes on.

Let me give an example of how I've seen viral marketing do way better now than personal face to face contact has. I was working with an owner to promote his club and he wanted a street team to put promotional flyers for his club on cars parked around the club area. Do you want to know what everyone did? Most got to their cars and took it off, made sure it's not a parking ticket, and then threw it on the ground. Many of them looked annoyed or angry that there was some paper on their car in the first place only promoting yet another club that may or may not last. The street team I was working with kept saying, "This would be easier if the owner used Facebook or Myspace to send out club invitations and there, people can look at more information and see who's attending the events held."

Friendly faces aren't enough these days. People want to see results. People want to make sure someone they know will be there, they want to discuss details. They want to know through the web. The internet is the place to do that since it uses marketing tools to help promote their companies from online contests to online banner ads.

Blogging is another huge tool in social interaction. One of the first ways people will openly discuss something they saw or experienced that they liked or didn't like is to blog about it. Once it's out in the open, you get a reaction. Someone will either agree with you or disagree with you but now you have a list full of comments by readers or fans who are adding in their two cents worth. This is an effort in contribution.

To make viral marketing work, you must be able to build a solid relationship and how's that done? Communication, communication, communication. It's all about what the consumer wants. It's all about what's being mentioned by everyone. The consumer gets the last word. But just because someone tells you to buy a certain laptop doesn't mean you're going to go out and purchase it. You want the one that goes with you. You may not even want a laptop, you may want a PC or; you may not even know what you want. It could turn out that you may need to talk to someone who can assist you in trying to figure out what you need, what you don't want, and try to then know exactly what works best for you. It's about listening and paying attention to what websites are being used, what isn't going well for people, and what could be improved.

Viral marketing is about catering to the crowd and influencing what's in demand for the masses.

Issues of Diversity on a Volatile School Campus

A First Year Teacher in the World of Difference and Same (Part I): Dealing with REAL Issues of Diversity on a Volatile School Campus

Written By: David Carr Photo By: Barbara Penoyar

I can remember it like it was yesterday. There I was, a first year teacher at Compton High. I was idealistic, young, a bit naive and in over my head. It was the month of October and September had seemed like the longest month of my life. I was teaching English as a Second Language at the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels. The woman who taught Spanish was going to be gone for an entire week and she had asked me if I could take her 4th period class into my classroom while she was gone. She had a lesson plan and work for the students to do. It seemed like a slam dunk.

All of my students were recent Latino immigrants. All of her Spanish students were African American. Back in the early 90's the demographics of places like South Central, Watts, and Inglewood had seen a huge shift. During the 80's these aforementioned places were 90-95% African American. By 1993 these areas were now 50% Black and 50% Latino. With the shift in demographics came racial tension. The tension on the street with the gangs was fierce. The tension also manifested itself politically. These areas were now half Latino but were being governed by a virtually all African American political elite. At times, the Black political establishment found itself at odds with its new found community members.

Compton had seen the biggest shift out of all of the neighborhoods. Compton was now 60% Latino and our high school reflected that demographic in terms of the student's population. The tension on school campuses was also an issue that needed to be dealt with. There were many fights and full-scale riots at big inner city high schools. I had found myself in the middle of two of them on my campus. All of these issues swirled in my head as I told the Spanish I teacher I would take all of her kids in my class for a week during my fourth period.

The following week, as I began the drive to Compton High, I started thinking to myself about the fact that on this Monday, my fourth period my classroom would have 30 Latino kids and 30 African American students in it. My students usually just kept to themselves on campus. On the campus the racial divide was thick. The Black kids played basketball at lunch. The Latinos played handball. The sports teams were not racially mixed at all. Unless they were forced to do so, you rarely saw any interaction between the Black and Latino students. The racial divide in my mind was a huge issue that someone had to deal with at the school and in the community.

As I pulled on to the campus I decided that my fourth period would be the place where change would begin. I didn't care about what the Spanish I teacher's lesson was. I simply threw it away and as soon as her kids came into my class I was going to be the one to bring these two factions together! So I threw her lesson away and as I taught periods 1-3 I feverishly tried to figure out what I was going to do with these two groups of kids once they hit my room. I knew I wanted to do something, but I didn't have a clue as to what that "something" would be. As the first break after third period ended, I began to sweat. At that point, I was wishing I didn't throw away that lesson plan!

As the bell rang, my students walked in and took their seats. I was given the typical greeting I had quickly become accustomed to in both English and Spanish (Hola Mr. Carr, hi Mr. Mr. Carro...my favorite was que onda Meeeester.) My kids took out their notebooks and started copying down their first assignment. "Maybe I lucked out and the Spanish I kids won't show," I thought to myself. No such luck.

All thirty of the Spanish I students arrived. I quickly tried to seat them throughout the room next to my students. As I did this you could hear the racially volatile questions coming out of the mouths of both groups of students. "Damn, why are their so many Mesakins in this class? How come you don't teach any Black kids?!!?" It seemed, that for the African American students, if you spoke Spanish, you were Mexican. At times they were just not aware of the diversity within the Latino community in the neighborhood.

"Hay porque los mayates esta en este classe?" I had heard some of the Latinos use this word to describe the Black students on campus. The literal translation of the word "mayate" is a small disgusting black bug. I learned quickly that this word was the Spanish equivalent of the word 'nigger.' The students passed these phrases between each other with the greatest of ease on campus and now they were doing it in my classroom. After I situated the students I went to the front of the classroom. You could cut the tension in the room with a knife. The thirty pairs of eyes I usually had staring at me were now sixty pairs of eyes, all wondering what we were going to do. They all seemed to be wondering what would come next. Interestingly enough, I was also wondering what we were going to do and what would come next...

Piracy, The Future Money Maker?

Written By: Khadeeja Coonrod
Photo Credit: Michael Cogliantry

**Editor's Note: Before you read this article, read "Why Selling Records is Like Picking Up Women, and How The Big 4 Failed"

Illegal file sharing may turn out to be the next big sale. DigiRights Solutions (DRS) from Damstadt, Germany is passing around a presentation to future possible clients offering plans for how they might make more money by overtaking illegal file sharing instead of regular, legal sales. The interesting part about all of this is the fact that DigiRights Solutions is an anti-piracy body.

There's a mysterious number to the DRS strategy: one figure would ask for 25 per cent of people who get a letter, warning of legal action, if they prefer to pay the settlement fee without question. So that would be up to 150 times what a legal download brings in.

DRS says presently it can go after 5,000 illegal downloaders a month so their approach comes from the amount of legal sales compared to the amount of threatening letters DRS can send out for a client.

The plan is simple, DRS is going to force money out of lawbreakers by encouraging illegal music to be downloaded. The idea is simply genius.

If Shawn Fanning, the creator of Napster heard about this, I would be curious in what he had to say since Napster was one of the biggest popular peer-to-peer file distribution systems and was different from previous networks since it focused exclusively in music in the form of MP3 files. Napster also provided a wider selection of music that could be downloaded and copies of older songs, unreleased recordings, and bootleg recordings from concerts could be shared through Napster. After a few lawsuits which the first done by Metallica due to a leak of their demo and later the company had another lawsuite this time coming from Dr. Dre after he had sent a letter asking his works to be removed and then it not being done. Napster later shut itself down in July 2001 and declared itself bankrupt in 2002. It started June 1999 and paved the way for major filesharing companies such as Limewire and I-Tunes which are major names in filesharing providers along with Kazaa, Imeem, and Pandora; to name a few.

DRS is thinking forward and one's thing's for sure, it's paying close attention to what's happening in the technology industry and how to gain more money.

FCC Net Neutrality Doesn't Go Over Well

Written By: Khadeeja Coonrod

It seemed like a brilliant plan to the FCC (Federal Communications Commissions) when FCC chairman Julius Genachowski announced in September 2009 his plans to develop formal rules prohibiting internet providers from selectively blocking or slowing Web content and applications. Then 44 companies sent a letter to the FCC saying new regulations could make the process of the development of the Internet more difficult.

The letter stated; "Until now, the innovators who are building the Internet and creating the advancements in telemedicine, education and the vast array of other online products and services have done so in an environment driven by competition and innovation. We believe government's role in the Internet should be to support investment, jobs and new technologies, especially if they increase the opportunity for all Americans to connect online. Public policy should encourage more investment to expand access to the Internet, whether it is access through a cell phone, a laptop, a PC or any new device that we have yet to imagine. If the FCC takes a prescriptive approach to new regulations, then it could place itself in the position of being the final arbiter of what products and services will be allowed on the Internet." The letter was signed by Cisco Sytems, Alcatel-Lucent, Corning, Erricsson, Motorola, and Nokia.

The companies believe the new rules could prohibit broadband providers from offering advanced and well-managed networks. The day before these companies sent in their letter, a group of 18 Repulican U.S. senators also sent in a letter also raising concerns about net neutrality regulations. "Broadband is growing while other segments of the U.S. economy are struggling, and there have been only a couple of examples of broadband providers blocking or slowing Web content," told the letter spearheaded by a Kansas Rebublican senator, Sam Brownback.

The net neutrality backers say new rules are necessary to protect the open nature of the Internet. "The FCC in 2005 relaxed rules requiring network providers to share their networks with competitors and without a net neutrality rule, powerful, large broadband providers could shut out Web sites or applications," net neutrality advocates say.

"Net neutrality rules would protect innovators and small businesses that want equal access to broadband networks from large companies that can enter into deals with network providers," said Art Brodsky, communications director for Public Knowledge, a digital rights advocacy group. "Broadband providers and others opposed to net neutrality are engaged in a coordinated effort to stop the FCC effort in its tracks. Arguments that net neutrality rules will stop telecom investments in networks are nonsense and insulting. All some industries do is threaten and bully. It's like they're saying, 'If we don't get what you want, then you're not going to get your network.' Telecom providers operated under network neutrality-like rules for more than 70 years and investment continued. Telecom providers and their allies have all the resources, Democrats and Republicans, that they've traditionally called upon, and it will obviously be incumbent on those of us who want a free and open and nondiscriminatory Internet to make the case."

The consumers should have the biggest say on what is blocked or can be viewed on their computers. The FCC should make sure nothing too manipulative is happening behind the scenes but the end result should be that everyday people should be able to have a say on what's blocked or isn't blocked just like they have a right to get an anti-virus protector for their computer. Competition between companies do create more jobs.

If huge companies and Government lawmakers don't agree with the FCC on this, then who knows what the rest of America will decide. Could it be that big corporations and lawmakers are just trying to remain powerful in the rights or will the FCC's new Net Neutrality rule really be problematic until of a problem solver? Only time will tell.

Taking It Dry

Written By: Michael Raysses

Growing up, my Father had strange ways of teaching me about the world. Sometimes he would just utter an old Greek adage to illustrate a point. “A fish rots from the head down” comes most readily to mind. Regardless of his method, though, he would never expressly say what it was he wanted me to learn. Instead he would just suggest that I observe life and take note of what I noticed. One of his favorites that baffled me for years was when he recommended that I watch the way people interact, especially in those instances in which one of them is subordinate and poses no prospect of doing anything of benefit for the other.

This dynamic comes to mind when contemplating the issues of art and culture, especially as they relate to a civilization up to its earlobes in war, economic distress, and a malaise so pervasive it defies categorization. How do we accord art and culture in the post-We’re-At-(Undeclared)-War-In-Afghanistan-But-No-One-Bothered-To-Mention-It-So-Let’s-Pretend-It’s-Not-Really-Happening era? How do we treat art and culture when they arguably pose no obvious benefit to us as a civilization? And the unfortunate answer, as my Uncle Tasso would say, is that art and culture are taking it dry.

But before we proceed, we need to understand the slippery nature of the topic at hand. Like beheading a hydra, defining culture can be elusive—just when you think you’ve nailed it down, at least two more meanings spring up. In fact, in Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, authors Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn compile a list of 164 meanings of the term. Broadly speaking, though, three meanings come to mind when discussing culture. It can touch on excellence of taste in the fine arts and humanities, i.e., high culture. It can represent an integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for symbolic thought and social learning, or it can manifest as the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution, organization or group.

Regardless of what definition you choose, though, what is palpable is a sense of cultivation or improvement—that culture’s driving force is the betterment or refinement of the individual, especially through education, through art, and then onto the fulfillment of national aspirations and ideals. Sadly, what is even clearer is how this view is lost in
the current political milieu.

Back on March 31st of this year Time magazine’s Richard Lacayo reported on the annual lobbying blitz in our nation’s capital called Arts Advocacy Day. That’s the one day when various art groups from around the country plead their case that art is not only intrinsically good for people, but that it’s good for the economy too. In that piece, he cited the following statistic in reference to the National Endowment for the Arts’ budget:
“Thirty years ago, the NEA received a modest 12 cents per $100 of non-military discretionary spending. Today that is just three cents per $100. If the NEA had simply maintained its 1979 percentage of discretionary funding, its 2008 budget would have been $613 million.”
To give the issue of the NEA budget some context, consider this: The budget peaked in 1992 at $175 million. But a mere three years later, the budget was slashed by a Republican House majority to $99.5 million, a 39 percent cut. The freefall continued up until 1997 when the same House voted to eliminate the NEA altogether, an idea that was mercifully rejected by the Senate.

Though things have calmed down in the last 10 years, the 2009 NEA budget request by the Obama White House is just $155 million, an increase of only $10 million. Admittedly, that would be on top of the $50 million that the NEA got in the stimulus bill. But given the boatloads of funds dispersed by the feds to financial institutions who represent themselves to be too big to fail, (when in fact all they are is too greedy to succeed), $205 million seems Uncle Sam’s version of rolling up a wrinkled $20, stuffing it into our unsuspecting hand, and telling us to go buy ourselves a Coke or something nice.

These are tough economic times that demand fiscal accountability. So what do we get for our hard-earned tax dollars from the NEA? We get the benefit of the express mandate of a designated arts organization by our government. It is an entity dedicated to bringing the arts to all Americans, while providing much-needed leadership in the field of arts education. Its influence has impacted the development and preservation of folk art, theater, opera, literature, dance, as well as other realms of artistic expression. Though the majority of direct public funding is still generated by a raft of other federal, state, regional, and local agencies, the role of the NEA as the de facto leader in its field can’t be understated.

But watching the federal government’s treatment of the NEA and of art and culture generally, I suddenly understand my Pop’s wisdom. The fish in this case, the federal government, has most definitely rotted from the head down. How else do you explain the gap between the proposed NEA budget and a Department of Defense budget for the 2009 fiscal year that comes in at anywhere from between $925 billion to $1.14 trillion, depending on whose numbers you use?

I am aware of how naïve this might sound. But there is no balance in our current state, no recognition or action to engage the things we know are our civilization’s lifeblood—our culture and the art that springs forth from it. What shocks me even more, though, is that there is no national dialogue on this issue anywhere in the mainstream media. The orgy of defense-related spending is now a way of life, beyond question because it flies under the radar of public perception

Suddenly my Father’s obsession with the notion of watching two entities interact comes into distinct focus: You measure character in a vacuum of potential benefit. How does a dominant entity treat a subordinate one when there is no perceived value to be gained? In this case, I am afraid Uncle Tasso had it right.

Michael Raysses is a writer/actor/National Public Radio commentator living in Los Angeles. E-mail him at MichaelRaysses@hotmail.com.

Obama Admin’s Sudan Middle of the Road Approach

Written By: Kelly KO
(Editor, KO Zine)

Last week, the Obama Administration finally laid out their plans for how to deal the controversial Sudanese dictator Omar Hassan al-Bashir. The decision took months of debate, but will effect many, in the region and beyond, for years to come.

The policy will place pressure on al-Bashir and offer incentives should he comply with US demands. Both the demands and incentives have yet to be released. This middle of the road approach is much softer than President Obama had pledged on the campaign trial, but hard enough to avoid giving the Sudanese government a free pass.

The al-Bashir’s regime is responsible for genocide in their region that has killed more than 300,000 in six years, according to UN estimates.

The lack of harsh sanctions in the policy is somewhat aligned with renowned expert on Sudan Alex de Waal’s argument that aggressive international intervention is either ineffective or sometimes counter-productive.
Regarding the issue, the Program Director at the Social Science Research Council has wrote, “When peace and justice clash, as they do in Sudan today, peace must prevail.”

Two key members of the administration are said to be the reason behind the extended debate and the final decision is a compromise between the two’s arguments.

Retired Air Force Maj. Gen. J Scott Gration, the US special envoy to Sudan, fought for more communications and easing of sanctions on Sudan. Gration preferred a “gold star” and “cookies” approach (as told to the Washington Post), which outraged many in the human rights camp.

The other side of the debate is lead by UN Ambassador Susan Rice. Rice believes that the on-going genocide calls for harsh penalties and some, including former envoy to Sudan Andrew Natsios believe she, “want[s] to declare all out war.”
Of course, the US is not the only player in this issue. Earlier this year, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for al-Bashir, leading the Sudanese government to tell the ICC to “eat” the warrant. In the following months, most aid workers were forced out of the region because of fear of unrest that the warrant was expected to spark.

The US policy is much like those of other countries efforts with Sudan, including many in Western Europe. To complicate the issue, Sudan’s strong relationship with China means that they don’t necessarily need to comply with the US and other countries that have similar policies.

Some may argue that compromise is just an indecisive leader’s way of making a decision. In some cases, this may be true. However, in the case of US-Sudan relations, a compromise should be just enough to finally bring this war-torn region closer to peace.


Find out more:
Washington Post

The Atlantic

Time

BBC

In Other Words… Military Contractors Gone Wild Part2

Who is Blackwater and why are they building a privately owned mercenary army in our country?

Written By: Sara Ledesma

• Founded in 1996, Blackwater has used government contracts granted by the Bush administration to build up a private army of twenty thousand soldiers of fortune and a massive military base. The Blackwater compound in North Carolina is worth about $50 million.

• The Blackwater base contains: tanks, helicopter gunships, a Boeing 767, a Zeppelin and a complete arsenal of weapons.

• The most publicized incident involving Blackwater involved the shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians on Sept. 16 in Baghdad labeled by American troops present at the scene a "criminal event." It is alleged this was payback for the killing and hanging of Blackwater troops. The subsequent investigation cleared Blackwater of any criminal liability. As it turns out, the report exonerating Blackwater for the massacre was written by a Blackwater employee. Is it any surprise he found his company innocent of any wrongdoing?

• Another case of unprovoked assassination was the murder of the Iraqi Vice President’s bodyguard by an intoxicated Blackwater contractor.

• None of these violations were deemed prosecutable by law. Blackwater effectively plays both sides of the fence to escape prosecution. When they are being sued in the U.S they claims they are part of the U.S. Armed Forces to declare immunity, and alternately assert themselves as an independent contractor domestically, to avoid being subjected to the military court martial system. Thanks to Paul Bremmer who, on his last day in Baghdad signed the order making this legal, the strategy is airtight.

• Blackwater recently re-branded itself as ”Xe” in order to separate itself from the notorious reputation of scandal and lawlessness tied to its former name.

• Their original contract in Iraq was to provide private security for Bremer, but within a year, their services expanded to include military combat.

• The U.S .occupation is now dependent on this one private, mercenary company and can’t function without Blackwater on the roads.

• The White House has systematically fought every attempt to establish oversight of the contractors and has granted them immunity under Iraqi law.

• Blackwater is not the only company making its own rules while the government writes the checks –tens of billions of our tax dollars have been allocated to the rebuilding of Iraq, and the tally keeps rising. Add to that the estimated $9 billion of Iraq’s own oil money that has gone missing and we’ve got waste, and possibly fraud, on a massive level.

• We’ve now added Afghanistan to the bill, and still, there is no effective oversight as to how the money is being spent.

The Iraq Embassy Scandal

• The embarrassing photos coming out of the ArmorGroup scandal proves we have learned nothing from the debauchery and contemptible behavior by contractors at Abu Ghraib.

• September 15, 2009: photos are released showing half naked, boozing contractors, entrusted with the job of protecting our embassy, running wild like immature frat boys.

• Members of the independent Commission on Wartime Contracting, established to investigate contracting issues in Iraq and Afghanistan, make parallels between the infamous photographs of detainee abuse and those depicting the Kabul Embassy guards caught engaging in various acts of lewd conduct. The widely publicized photos show contractors: urinating on one another, exposing themselves, engaging in sexually deviant behavior, drinking off each other’s naked body parts and more.

• The photos circulate online, embarrassing the State Department and endangering our missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

• Terry Pearson, a 23-year veteran of the British Army who worked for ArmorGroup subcontractor RAI in Kabul gave the following firsthand account: “The first thing that struck me was they had a metal container in the middle of the road, on which they were burning wooden pallets. The second thought that went through my mind was alcohol and a fire this size, looked very unsafe. Most of people there were wearing underwear, but many were also wearing coconut shell braziers [sic] and coconut shells over their groins, and were for the best part naked. Some were standing there urinating on the ground and on each other.”

• As recently as March 2009, spot checks revealed that the guards were often absent for hours at a time.

• An employee of ArmorGroup made counterfeit purchases from his wife's company worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

• The Senate Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight investigated AmorGroup’s 5 year, 189.3 million dollar contract awarded to them in 2007 by the State Department. They found AmorGroup failed to provide: a sufficient number of guards, proper weapons training, requisite levels of ammunition or the proper security clearances. They also severely lacked the adequate number of medical technicians and emergency planning.

• As of today, AmorGroup still holds its contract in Kabul

Commission on Wartime Contracting 


Congress formed The Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan to study the allocation and administration of privatized military contracts. These are a few of the findings in their report:

• The commission calculated that investigators had issued 1,287 recommendations to fix waste, fraud and abuse in the Pentagon, but many had never been implemented.

• The 111-page report documents mismanagement, lack of oversight, and a failure to learn from past mistakes.

• The Commission noted a perfect example of waste/mismanagement: Houston-based KBR was building a 30-million-dollar dining facility at Camp Delta in southern Iraq, after the company had just completed a 3.36-million-dollar renovation of the old dining facility—making the new one a sickening waste of tax payer money.

• Of the 504 oversight officials that the military estimated it needed to oversee contracting in Afghanistan, only 166 were actually in the field in April 2009.

• The Pentagon had only four auditors in Afghanistan to supervise billions of dollars in government money.

• The Pentagon failed to deduct money from contractors who underperformed or didn’t meet the terms of their contracts.

• The investigators were prevented from uncovering the full extent of the fraud because they were not allowed to examine the work of sub-contractors.

• Although companies like ArmorGroup and KBR work directly for the U.S. government, an estimated 70 percent of the work is done by sub-contractors (like First Kuwaiti Trading Company, Prime Projects International from Dubai or Tamimi of Saudi Arabia) and these companies operate outside the jurisdiction of the oversight committee.

• Many of the soldiers assigned to supervise the contractors had never received the formal training necessary to conduct their oversight duties. 


KBR

KBR, a former subsidiary of Halliburton, holds the contract for the electrical services performed in Iraq. They are being sued for causing the unnecessary deaths of our courageous men and women in uniform as a result of criminally negligent electrical work.

• An Army inspector found thousands of buildings at U.S. bases in Iraq and Afghanistan have such poorly installed wiring that it places the lives of American troops at risk.

• Many of the wires installed in Iraq need to be replaced.

• Jim Childs, a master electrician and the top expert in the Army Safety Survey told CNN that "with the buildings the way they are, we're playing Russian roulette."

• In Iraq, 18 U.S. troops have died by electrocution since 2003.

• Of the nearly 30,000 buildings the Army's "Task Force Safe" has examined so far: more than half "failed miserably” and 8,527 were given a "flash" warning to repair in four hours or evacuate the facility.

• After the January 2008 elocution death of the Army’s Green Beret Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth at a U.S. base in Baghdad, faulty electrical work has become a chief concern in Iraq and Afghanistan.

• Staff Sgt. Maseth’s electrocution in the shower prompted the creation of "Task Force Safe," a team of master electricians assigned to inspect Army posts for electrical dangers.

• At least two service orders were issued warning of the hazard in Maseth's quarters.

• Maseth's family is suing KBR. An Army investigator has sided with Maseth’s family and recommended his death be declared a "negligent homicide.”

• KBR denies responsibility for Maseth's death or those of any other soldiers.

• KBR was not the only company found to be negligent. Unbelievably, the Army survey found problems with every contractor whose work it inspected.

• Task Force Safe has begun to inspect another 70,000 buildings in Iraq and is commencing a review of bases in Afghanistan. Pentagon spokesman Chris Isleib told CNN, "We are correcting hazardous conditions every day."
The vote against Franken’s Amendment

A final case study exposes the true depths of depravity to which our government leaders will sink in order to protect the cash cow contracts of their cronies in the ever-expanding privatized military contracting industry. 30 Republican members of the United States Senate voted to protect a private contractor, in this case Halliburton/KBR, over a woman who was gang raped. The shocking details of this implausible low to which our Congress has sunk:

• In 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones was working for Halliburton/KBR in Baghdad and was gang-raped by her co-workers. She was locked in a shipping container for at least 24 hours without food, water, or a bed, and "warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she'd be out of a job."

• As sick as this is, it was not an isolated incident.

• Jones was denied the right to bring charges against KBR because her employment contract stipulated that sexual assault allegations could only be addressed in private arbitration.

• Senator Al Franken of Minnesota stepped up to the plate to confront this glaring injustice committed against Jamie Leigh Jones. He proposed an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would withhold defense contracts from companies like KBR "if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court."

• Despite the obvious responsibility of our government to protect women from rape, 30 Republican senators voted against justice for victims of violent sex crimes in order to allow private contractors to continue living above the law.

• Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions of Alabama had the audacity to claim that allowing victims of sexual assault their day in court is tantamount to a "political attack" of Halliburton. Apparently the GOP believes the interests of their contractor cronies supersede the constitution of the United States.

• The fact that 29 others, exclusively men, chose to join the Republican lawmaker in opposing the Franken amendment is too sick and sad to comprehend.

• Those senators who refused to protect a victim of rape in order to privilege a callous corporation are:
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

• Ten Republican senators did vote according to their humanity and conscience, including every female member of the GOP.

• Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska defended her vote for Franken’s Amendment by stating: "I want to make sure that a woman, any individual who is a victim of a terrible act, knows that they have got protections." Republican Sen. George LeMieux of Florida explained his vote in the following words: "I can't see in any circumstance that a woman who was a victim of sexual assault shouldn't have her right to go to court," LeMieux said. "So, that is why I voted for it." Perhaps a hint of morality still exists in the GOP.



Conclusion

From Abu Ghraib, to the gang rape of a contractor at Halliburton, to Blackwater’s repeated abuses of power and KBR’s criminally negligent electrical work, we have witnessed a spectacle of waste and debauchery unleashed by unregulated military contractors. Halliburton overcharges us for everything from towels to gas. KBR sticks it to us for over 33 million dollars for a dining hall and is so criminally negligent in the performance of their duties that enlisted soldiers, fighting for their lives on the battlefield, are dying in their bathrooms as a result of shoddy wiring.

A woman can be gang raped and 30 Senators will vote to deny her justice. A U.S. Watchdog agency can report such fraud as: "The State Department does not know specifically what it received for a billion-dollar contract with security firm DynCorp International to provide training services for Iraqi police”. Despite these incidents, and more, nothing is done to rein in these rogue companies. The only explanation is that our government is complicit.
In Other Words…our military and intelligence agencies are being outsourced to private companies who are running wild like cowboys on the frontier and pillaging our federal treasury, unaccountable to the laws of our country or to us tax payers who are footing the bill.