Tag Archives: chairman

Atheist Ads on Buses Rattle Fort Worth

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/14/us/14atheist.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2 FORT WORTH — Stand on a corner in this city and you might get a case of theological whiplash. A public bus rolls by with an atheist message on its side: “Millions of people are good without God.” Seconds later, a van follows bearing a riposte: “I still love you. — God,” with another line that says, “2.1 billion Christians are good with God.” A clash of beliefs has rattled this city ever since atheists bought ad space on four city buses to reach out to nonbelievers who might feel isolated during the Christmas season. After all, Fort Worth is a place where residents commonly ask people they have just met where they worship and many encounters end with, “Have a blessed day.” “We want to tell people they are not alone,” said Terry McDonald, the chairman of Metroplex Atheists, part of the Dallas-Fort Worth Coalition of Reason, which paid for the atheist ads. “People don’t realize there are other atheists. All you hear around here is, ‘Where do you go to church?’ ” But the reaction from believers has been harsher than anyone in the nonbeliever’s club expected. Some ministers organized a boycott of the buses, with limited success. Other clergy members are pressing the Fort Worth Transportation Authority to ban all religious advertising on public buses. And a group of local businessmen paid for the van with the Christian message to follow the atheist-messaged buses around town. “We just wanted to reach out to them and let them know about God’s love,” said Heath Hill, president of the media company that owns the van and one of the businessmen who arranged for the Christian ads. “We have gotten some pretty nasty e-mails and phone calls from atheists. But it’s really just about the love of God.” The face-off here follows efforts in other cities by several coalitions of atheists — American Atheists, the United Coalition of Reason and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, to name a few — that have mounted ad campaigns to encourage nonbelievers to seek out others of like mind. Some have compared their efforts to the struggle of gay men and lesbians to “come out” and win acceptance from society. In New York City, a large billboard promoting atheism at the entrance of the Lincoln Tunnel, which a local affiliate of American Atheists paid for, has generated controversy. (The message: “You know it’s a myth. This season, celebrate reason!) The Fort Worth group is affiliated with the United Coalition of Reason, whose local chapters have bought bus ads in Detroit, northwest Arkansas, Philadelphia and Washington, as well as billboards in more than a dozen cities, among them Chicago, Houston, New Orleans, Seattle and St. Louis. Most show a blue sky with variations on this message: “Don’t believe in God? You are not alone.” The ads have incited anger in some places. Vandals destroyed two bus ads in Detroit, ruined a billboard in Tampa, Fla., and defaced 10 billboards in Sacramento. One billboard in Cincinnati was taken down after the landlord received threats. And the local rapid transit authority in Des Moines pulled atheist ads off its buses in August last year because of complaints from local religious leaders. Four days later, however, the authority reversed its position after the local group that had bought the ads threatened legal action on First Amendment grounds. But nowhere has the reaction of believers been so forceful as in Fort Worth, to the delight of Fred Edwords, the national director of the United Coalition of Reason. The coalition’s local chapter spent only $2,400 for four bus ads, which will run through the month in a city with about 200 buses. “That’s more brouhaha for the buck than we have seen anywhere,” Mr. Edwords said. Some of the fiercest criticism has come from black religious leaders. The Rev. Kyev Tatum Sr., president of the local Southern Christian Leadership Conference, has called for a boycott of the buses, saying the ads are a direct attack during a sacred time in the Christian calendar. “It’s a season to share good will toward all men,” Mr. Tatum said. “To have this at this time come out with a blatant disrespect of our faith, we think is unconscionable.” While Mr. Tatum and about 20 other pastors have urged their congregations to avoid the buses, a smaller group met recently with the transportation authority’s president to demand that the policy allowing religious advertising on buses be reversed Wednesday at a meeting of the authority’s board. The bus system in nearby Dallas bans all religious ads. “I’m not against them getting their message out,” said the Rev. Julius L. Jackson, pastor at Macedonia Missionary Baptist Church. “I just don’t think it should be on public transportation.” Dick Ruddell, the president of the Fort Worth Transportation Authority, said churches were free to advertise. The only ads not accepted, Mr. Ruddell said, are those that have to do with a few vices, like cigarettes and alcohol. “There is nothing in the policy about religious content,” he said. Not all religious leaders are offended by the bus ads. “It doesn’t seem to me as an in-your-face, God-is-not-good message,” said Tim Bruster, the senior pastor at First United Methodist Church, where 3,500 families worship. “My very strong opinion is that, as people of faith, the very thing we should not do is lash out and condemn.” Mr. McDonald, chairman of the local atheist group, said the ad was intended not to insult Christians, but to console atheists. The initial plan, he said, was to run the ad on the Fourth of July, which is why it features dozens of portraits of Texas atheists in an American flag motif. But raising money and pulling together photos took longer than expected, he said, and the ad was not ready until last month. “It can be pretty lonely for a nonbeliever at Christmastime around here. There is so much religion,” Mr. McDonald said. “We thought, ‘What the heck? Nobody owns December.’ ” added by: Almibry

Jeremy Scahill Testifies Before Congress on America’s Secret Wars

Nation national security correspondent Jeremy Scahill today testified before the House Judiciary Committee on the US's shadow wars in Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere. His complete testimony is below. My name is Jeremy Scahill. I am the National Security correspondent for The Nation magazine. I recently returned from a two-week unembedded reporting trip to Afghanistan. I would like to thank the Chairman and the Committee for inviting me to participate in this important hearing. As we sit here today in Washington, across the globe the United States is engaged in multiple wars. Some, like those in Afghanistan and Iraq, are well known to the US public and to the Congress. They are covered in the media and are subject to Congressional review. Despite the perception that we know what is happening in Afghanistan, what is rarely discussed in any depth in Congress or the media is the vast number of innocent Afghan civilians that are being killed on a regular basis in US night raids and the heavy bombing that has been reinstated by General David Petraeus. I saw the impact of these civilian deaths first-hand and I can say that in some cases our own actions are helping to increase the strength and expand the size of the Taliban and the broader insurgency in Afghanistan. Read Full Testimony: http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/12/jeremy-scahill-testifies-be… added by: GLOBALPOLITICAL

Husbands

Funny pictures – Husbands added by: susuru

McCain presses for accountability in WikiLeaks breach

Really?? What about the accountability of the former president and his staff?? What about the accountability of the US and the thousands they have killed over a bullshit war?? What about the accountability of our government and the LACK OF SUPPORT FOR IT'S PEOPLE AND THE MONEY THEY KEEP WASTING??? They already bailed out the banks, when are they going to bail out the PEOPLE THAT PAY THEIR SALARIES??? More and more I find our country lacking moral judgement and the balls to question, accuse and attack others, but not take responsibility of it's actions!! When is someone going to? or are we (people who protest) so called “terrorist”/ “traitors” for not accepting the bullshit that's going on in this country??? ************************************************************** and by the way, here's the news article… =D http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/02/mccain.wikileaks/ Washington (CNN) — A senior Republican senator pressed Pentagon leadership Thursday as to why nobody — other than a very junior soldier — has been held responsible for the leak of thousands of secret national security documents to WikiLeaks. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, called the WikiLeaks episode “an incredible breach of national security.” In a tense exchange, McCain asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates whether the Pentagon has identified or punished anyone else. “Have you held anyone responsible?” McCain asked. “Not yet,” replied Gates, who earlier said the criminal investigation limits the Defense Department's ability to conduct an independent investigation. So far a single low-ranking U.S. soldier, Pfc. Bradley Manning, is the only person charged and held in custody in connection with the leaks. Later McCain grilled other Pentagon officials, who were testifying with Gates before the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the ban on gays and lesbians serving opening in the military. McCain appeared obviously frustrated. “It's been since July,” McCain said with a dismissive wave of his hand, referring to the first WikiLeaks release of Defense Department documents. “Can't you carry out an investigation at the same time that the criminal investigation is going on?” McCain asked Joint Chiefs Chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen. “Yes, sir, in certain kinds of incidents that's certainly possible,” Mullen answered. “At least, maybe, to hold someone responsible for this besides a private first class,” McCain said. Mullen said everything necessary must be done to prevent another breach of secure documents, stopping short of directly endorsing McCain's call for punitive action against WikiLeaks organizers such as travel bans, asset freezes and other sanctions. “In my world, when I've got men and women in harm's way and they are now exposed because of this, I think we as a country should do all we can to make sure it can't happen again,” Mullen said. The political frustration was bipartisan. Following a closed-door hearing of the Senate's intelligence committee on WikiLeaks' latest release, the group's outgoing chairwoman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, said that not enough is being done to protect critical government information. “This qualifies as espionage,” the California Democrat said as she left the hearing. “[The release] incapacitates this nation to carry out business… This is far beyond free speech.” On Thursday, Sens. John Ensign (R-Nevada), Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts) and Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) proposed legislation to make it easier for federal authorities to go after WikiLeaks' founder, Julian Assange, and others behind leaks of confidential U.S. documents. “What Wikileaks has done amounts to espionage in a most serious form,” said Lieberman. “It's probably the most terrible act and greatest act of espionage against the United States in our history.” Meanwhile, the U.S. government also continued its verbal assault on Assange. “He could be considered a political actor. I think he's an anarchist, but he's not a journalist,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said at his daily briefing. “Mr. Assange obviously has a particular political objective behind his activities and I think that, among other things, disqualifies him from the possibility of being considered a journalist.” Wikileaks often is referred to as a “whistle-blower” organization but the State Department spokesman shot that down, too. “He's not a journalist, he's not a whistle-blower,” Crowley said. “He is a political actor; he has a political agenda.” more at the link… added by: KSirys

FCC’s ‘Net neutrality’ plan would permit super-tiers, network traffic throttling

By Stephen C. Webster Wednesday, December 1st, 2010 — 1:08 pm Internet providers will not be subjected to so-called “Net neutrality” rules and may experiment with tiered, usage-based pricing and “network management” practices, according to new rules being considered by the Federal Communications Commission this month. Advocates of Net neutrality had hoped the regulatory agency would mandate Internet service providers treat all traffic equally: one of the Web's founding principles. Instead, the FCC's Internet regulations adopts many proposals by search and telecom giants Google and Verizon, with the caveat that wireless telephone providers not block competing voice applications. In a speech, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski specified that the FCC would permit ISPs to charge heavy bandwidth users even more, creating a tiered pricing structure. ISPs would also be able to charge fees to businesses serving large quantities of data. The announcement is a victory for Comcast, the nation's largest cable Internet provider, which recently forced a bandwidth toll upon Netflix partner Level 3. The company called Comcast's move “extortion” but agreed to their conditions to prevent any service interruptions. “With this action, Comcast demonstrates the risk of a 'closed' Internet, where a retail broadband Internet access provider decides whether and how their subscribers interact with content,” the company's chief legal officer said in a media advisory. Comcast insisted the move had nothing to do with Net neutrality. The company has been leading the charge among ISPs to establish tiered-based pricing systems. Comcast admitted in 2008 that it uses “network management” practices to speed up some data transfers and slow down others, and users of peer-to-peer file sharing services have complained to the FCC that the provider has blocked their transfers altogether. Tiered pricing structures are already in place for many communications providers like AT&T and Cricket, which offer wireless broadband services. Verizon said it would implement similar pricing structures in the coming months. The FCC's rules would permit the practice on wired networks as well. Both Comcast and Time Warner, two of America's largest wired broadband providers, have already experimented with the practice. A Texas-based trial run of Time Warner's bandwidth caps saw users paying nearly $30 a month for 768 kilobits-per-second access, with a limit of 5 gigabytes per month and a $1 fee for each gigabyte they went over. One step-up on their pricing tier had users paying nearly $55 for true broadband speeds of 15 megabits-per-second, with a limit of 40 gigabytes per month. Public advocates say the move may ultimately force heavy Internet users to consume less bandwidth and stay tied to television subscriptions over cable and satellite. Comcast, which is in the process of merging with NBC-Universal, stands to benefit tremendously from the arrangement. The American Cable Association's (ACA) claimed the merger “will send monthly cable bills higher by billions of dollars over the next decade.” Major corporations have long sought a way to charge and earn more for bandwidth, ever since Enron attempted to create a bandwidth trading market where space in data pipes would be traded as a commodity like oil or gold. On wired Internet, which is expected to dramatically decrease in relevance in the coming years as fourth-generation wireless networks proliferate, a “public Internet” would be protected from bandwidth throttling. Companies, however, would be permitted to experiment with establishing super-tiers for preferred traffic, but must justify why individual services should be separated from the public Internet. The FCC would additionally require broadband providers to disclose their network management practices. The chairman's proposal lines up closely with a bill proposed by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), who campaigned on pledges to institute Net neutrality rules. His bill, however, completely undermined those principles, but Democrats scrapped the legislation in Sept. The commission was expected to vote on the measure during it's Dec. 21st meeting. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/fcc-puts-net-neutrality-dec-agenda/?utm_sourc… added by: treewolf39

Joe Jackson Compromises Wrongful Death Claim

Filed under: Joe Jackson , Michael Jackson , Katherine Jackson Joe Jackson may have just dug himself a hole to China during a TV appearance in Brazil … by telling the host Michael Jackson “never supported me.” During the interview on ” Hoje em Dia ,” the interviewer incorrectly said, “According to TMZ, you were… Read more

See more here:
Joe Jackson Compromises Wrongful Death Claim

Audio Expert: Britney Recording Was ‘Manipulated’

Filed under: Britney Spears , Jason Trawick , Jason Alexander A highly-respected audio expert tells TMZ … Jason Alexander ‘s recording of the woman he claims is Britney Spears “has been electronically stepped on.” Tom Owen of OWL Investigations , and Chairman of the Audio Engineering Society Standards Committee… Read more

See the rest here:
Audio Expert: Britney Recording Was ‘Manipulated’

Will the Fed’s policies touch off inflation and dollar depreciation? Or is inflation not the problem?

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke is under fire for a quantitative easing policy which some say will lead to debasing our currency, inflation, or even superinflation. Others have suggested that inflation is not the issue; the real question we should be asking is if quantitative easing will improve the domestic economy. Will this policy

Lady Gaga’s Least-Likely Little Monster? Rob Halford

‘She’s exactly what we need right now,’ Judas Priest frontman says, comparing Gaga to Madonna and praising her activism. By Jon Wiederhorn Lady Gaga Photo: Kevin Winter/ Getty Images Rob Halford, a.k.a. the Metal God, fronts one of the most influential heavy metal bands on the scene. Along with his Judas Priest bandmates, the leather-favoring singer spends most of his time on the road fraternizing with metal legends like Ozzy Osbourne, Motley Cr

Scooped: British Publication Tells Us Uncle Sam Having Problems Unload Citi Shares

You would think someone in the U.S. establishment press would be following Uncle Sam’s progress or lack thereof in getting out from under its investment in Citigroup, especially since the government promised that it would be fully divested from the bank holding company by the end of this year. From all appearances, you would be wrong. It looks like the government may not be able to keep that year-end divestiture promise. For a fair number of news followers to learn that, the UK’s Financial Times had to take an interest (link may require registration), and Drudge had to link to it: US Treasury stumbles selling Citi shares The US government is in danger of missing its deadline of divesting all of its Citigroup shares by the year-end after a fall in stock market trading volumes prompted authorities to slow down sales in July and August. The lull could prompt the US Treasury, which has a stake of about 17 per cent in Citi, to consider a share offering instead of selling the stock in small quantities in the market, according to bankers and analysts. “The sales of Citigroup stock have slowed way down in July and August … The US Treasury will not finish its share sale by … the end of the year,” said Linus Wilson, a professor of finance at the University of Louisiana. “The only option for the Treasury if it wants to exit Citigroup before the year-end seems to be to conduct a large secondary offering of the stake.” The government only seeks to sell shares equivalent to a small percentage of the overall trading volume in Citi to avoid depressing the price. By the end of August, less than half of the government’s 7.7bn shares in Citi had been sold, with the average number of shares sold per day falling sharply, the latest official data show. The Treasury has until Thursday to complete the sale of 1.5bn shares before entering a “blackout period” ahead of Citi’s third-quarter results. … The government’s continued involvement complicates Citi’s efforts to convince investors its troubled past is behind it. The lack of stateside establishment media interest is, as far as I can tell, complete. None of the stories returned in a search on the company’s name at the Associated Press’s main site contained any information citing the government’s stock-selling difficulty. One item in a group of “Business Highlights” at least acknowledges that Citigroup “is still partly owned by taxpayers.” A search on the company’s name at the New York Times also returned nothing relevant. The Washington Post also has nothing relevant , though it does have an item also carried at the AP’s main site on bonuses that are being paid to Citi execs in (of all things) company stock. But there’s no mention of the problems the government is having in unloading its stake. If Uncle Sam is having trouble unloading Citi, imagine the difficulties it might encounter pulling off its planned initial public offering of stock in Government/General Motors, an attempt which has conveniently been put off until after Election Day. It would appear that the establishment press might be interested in keeping a lid on stories indicating that once the state gets in the business ownership door, it’s very hard for it to get out — assuming it even really wants to. Ultimately, that explains why one has to hope that the British and foreign press stay on top of developments such as these — and that Drudge keeps on reviewing their work. Meanwhile, Tim Geithner says that TARP has worked out just fine , almost as if we’re in past-tense mode. Uh-huh. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

View original post here:
Scooped: British Publication Tells Us Uncle Sam Having Problems Unload Citi Shares