Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
G_j
G_j's Journal
G_j's Journal
June 29, 2012
The Supreme Court has upheld the Affordable Care Act, President Obama’s signature bill, clearing the way for the largest revamp of America’s healthcare system since the 1960s. We get reaction from acclaimed filmmaker Michael Moore, whose 2007 documentary, "Sicko," tackled many failures of the U.S. healthcare system. "This really is a huge victory for our side, in spite of all of my concerns with this law," Moore says. "We have to work toward Medicare for all, so that everyone’s covered ... We can’t allow private insurance — people making a profit off of people getting sick." [includes rush transcript]
Michael Moore: Supreme Court Healthcare Ruling a Victory on the Path to Single Payer
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/6/29/michael_moore_supreme_court_healthcare_rulingThe Supreme Court has upheld the Affordable Care Act, President Obama’s signature bill, clearing the way for the largest revamp of America’s healthcare system since the 1960s. We get reaction from acclaimed filmmaker Michael Moore, whose 2007 documentary, "Sicko," tackled many failures of the U.S. healthcare system. "This really is a huge victory for our side, in spite of all of my concerns with this law," Moore says. "We have to work toward Medicare for all, so that everyone’s covered ... We can’t allow private insurance — people making a profit off of people getting sick." [includes rush transcript]
June 25, 2012
June 25, 2012
Amnesty International Responds to Supreme Court’s Decision on Arizona Law on Immigration Enforcement (SB 1070)
Contact: Sharon Singh, ssingh@aiusa.org, 202-675-8579, @spksingh
(Washington, D.C.) – Frank Jannuzi, the head of Amnesty International’s Washington office, issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to strike down major provisions of Arizona’s controversial immigration enforcement law, commonly known as SB 1070:
“Amnesty International welcomes the Court’s decision that the ‘right to work’ and possible criminal penalties for not carrying immigration documents provisions of SB 1070 are invalid because they encroach on federal responsibilities on enforcing immigration laws."
“However, we are disappointed that the Court failed to draw a clearer line in the sand against racial profiling. This leaves the door open for continued challenges as ambiguities in implementation still exist.”
Amnesty International is a Nobel Peace Prize-winning grassroots activist organization with more than 3 million supporters, activists and volunteers in more than 150 countries campaigning for human rights worldwide. The organization investigates and exposes abuses, educates and mobilizes the public, and works to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied.
Amnesty International Responds to Supreme Court’s Decision on Arizona Law on Immigration Enforcement
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/news-item/amnesty-international-responds-to-supreme-court-s-decision-on-arizona-law-on-immigration-enforcementJune 25, 2012
Amnesty International Responds to Supreme Court’s Decision on Arizona Law on Immigration Enforcement (SB 1070)
Contact: Sharon Singh, ssingh@aiusa.org, 202-675-8579, @spksingh
(Washington, D.C.) – Frank Jannuzi, the head of Amnesty International’s Washington office, issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to strike down major provisions of Arizona’s controversial immigration enforcement law, commonly known as SB 1070:
“Amnesty International welcomes the Court’s decision that the ‘right to work’ and possible criminal penalties for not carrying immigration documents provisions of SB 1070 are invalid because they encroach on federal responsibilities on enforcing immigration laws."
“However, we are disappointed that the Court failed to draw a clearer line in the sand against racial profiling. This leaves the door open for continued challenges as ambiguities in implementation still exist.”
Amnesty International is a Nobel Peace Prize-winning grassroots activist organization with more than 3 million supporters, activists and volunteers in more than 150 countries campaigning for human rights worldwide. The organization investigates and exposes abuses, educates and mobilizes the public, and works to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied.
June 22, 2012
Wolf removal from endangered species list is official
by: Steve Waters June 14th, 2012 | 7:02 PM
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in March affirmed the constitutionality of Congress’ removal of wolves from the federal endangered species list. The deadline to appeal that decision passed quietly this week with no action from animal rights and anti-hunting groups.
Attorneys representing the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation said that means the case will not advance to the U.S. Supreme Court, and that the litigation has ended in favor of science-based, state-regulated management and control of wolves.
“A lawsuit that began in 2011 in Judge Donald Molloy’s courtroom in Missoula, Mont., following the Congressional delisting is finally over — and conservation has prevailed,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “No appeals paperwork had been filed by end of the day on June 12, so the Ninth Circuit’s decision is absolutely final.”
Allen said RMEF applauds the development because it helps clear the way for continued work to balance wolf populations with other wildlife and human needs.
Attorneys representing RMEF and other conservation groups in the Ninth Circuit hearing had presented oral arguments supporting the Congressional action.
RMEF has pledged to continue to fight wolf lawsuits and support delisting legislation at both federal and state levels.
````
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Wolf-hunt-opponents-forgo-appeal-to-Supreme-Court-3636597.php
Wolf hunt opponents forgo appeal to Supreme Court
Updated 05:14 a.m., Friday, June 15, 2012
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Wildlife advocates say they decided not to appeal to the Supreme Court to keep wolves on the endangered list in Idaho and Montana after their arguments were rejected in lower court rulings.
Congress ordered the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to take gray wolves off the endangered species list last spring. That triggered lawsuits from wildlife groups and environmentalists who argued state-sponsored hunts could again drive wolves towards extinction.
But after two lower courts sided with the government, the plaintiffs let the 90-day deadline for appeal to the Supreme Court pass this week without action.
Representatives of the groups involved in the case say they did not expect to prevail before the high court.
There were an estimated 1,774 wolves in the Northern Rockies at the end of last year.
Wolf removal from endangered species list is official
http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/outdoors-fishing-boat/2012/06/14/wolf-removal-from-endangered-species-list-is-official/Wolf removal from endangered species list is official
by: Steve Waters June 14th, 2012 | 7:02 PM
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in March affirmed the constitutionality of Congress’ removal of wolves from the federal endangered species list. The deadline to appeal that decision passed quietly this week with no action from animal rights and anti-hunting groups.
Attorneys representing the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation said that means the case will not advance to the U.S. Supreme Court, and that the litigation has ended in favor of science-based, state-regulated management and control of wolves.
“A lawsuit that began in 2011 in Judge Donald Molloy’s courtroom in Missoula, Mont., following the Congressional delisting is finally over — and conservation has prevailed,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “No appeals paperwork had been filed by end of the day on June 12, so the Ninth Circuit’s decision is absolutely final.”
Allen said RMEF applauds the development because it helps clear the way for continued work to balance wolf populations with other wildlife and human needs.
Attorneys representing RMEF and other conservation groups in the Ninth Circuit hearing had presented oral arguments supporting the Congressional action.
RMEF has pledged to continue to fight wolf lawsuits and support delisting legislation at both federal and state levels.
````
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Wolf-hunt-opponents-forgo-appeal-to-Supreme-Court-3636597.php
Wolf hunt opponents forgo appeal to Supreme Court
Updated 05:14 a.m., Friday, June 15, 2012
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Wildlife advocates say they decided not to appeal to the Supreme Court to keep wolves on the endangered list in Idaho and Montana after their arguments were rejected in lower court rulings.
Congress ordered the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to take gray wolves off the endangered species list last spring. That triggered lawsuits from wildlife groups and environmentalists who argued state-sponsored hunts could again drive wolves towards extinction.
But after two lower courts sided with the government, the plaintiffs let the 90-day deadline for appeal to the Supreme Court pass this week without action.
Representatives of the groups involved in the case say they did not expect to prevail before the high court.
There were an estimated 1,774 wolves in the Northern Rockies at the end of last year.
June 21, 2012
Lawyers for NATO Protesters Charged with Terrorism Obtain Copy of Indictments
By: Kevin Gosztola Wednesday June 20, 2012 12:50
Lawyers representing three individuals who came to Chicago in May to protest at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit and who were indicted just over a week ago on terrorism-related charges have obtained a copy of the indictments.
The lawyers from the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) had expected to see official indictments when the three were formally indicted in court, but prosecutors declined to provide a copy of the indictment to the defense, a decision the judge presiding over the hearing called “a little strange.”
The judge had the power to compel state prosecutors to hand over the indictment to the defense, but did not make such an order. The judge instead made it clear the prosecutors had to provide the indictment to the defense by July 2, when the three are scheduled to be arraigned.
The National Lawyers Guild obtained the indictment from the Clerk of the Cook County Circuit Court. What the indictment shows is the three —Brian Church, 22, of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Jared Chase, 27, of Keene, New Hampshire, and Brent Betterly, 24, who lives in Massachusetts—are not just facing charges of material support for terrorism, possession of an incendiary device, and conspiracy to commit terrorism, which were previously known to the lawyers and the public. The three also face charges of “possession of an incendiary device, attempted arson, solicitation to commit arson, conspiracy to commit arson and two counts of unlawful use of a weapon.” That brings the total number of charges the men face to eleven.
..more..
Lawyers for NATO Protesters Charged with Terrorism Obtain Copy of Indictments
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/06/20/lawyers-for-nato-protesters-charged-with-terrorism-obtain-copy-of-indictments/Lawyers for NATO Protesters Charged with Terrorism Obtain Copy of Indictments
By: Kevin Gosztola Wednesday June 20, 2012 12:50
Lawyers representing three individuals who came to Chicago in May to protest at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit and who were indicted just over a week ago on terrorism-related charges have obtained a copy of the indictments.
The lawyers from the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) had expected to see official indictments when the three were formally indicted in court, but prosecutors declined to provide a copy of the indictment to the defense, a decision the judge presiding over the hearing called “a little strange.”
The judge had the power to compel state prosecutors to hand over the indictment to the defense, but did not make such an order. The judge instead made it clear the prosecutors had to provide the indictment to the defense by July 2, when the three are scheduled to be arraigned.
The National Lawyers Guild obtained the indictment from the Clerk of the Cook County Circuit Court. What the indictment shows is the three —Brian Church, 22, of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Jared Chase, 27, of Keene, New Hampshire, and Brent Betterly, 24, who lives in Massachusetts—are not just facing charges of material support for terrorism, possession of an incendiary device, and conspiracy to commit terrorism, which were previously known to the lawyers and the public. The three also face charges of “possession of an incendiary device, attempted arson, solicitation to commit arson, conspiracy to commit arson and two counts of unlawful use of a weapon.” That brings the total number of charges the men face to eleven.
..more..
June 12, 2012
Find out where things come from .. fascinating
Find out where things come from.
Sourcemap is the crowdsourced directory of product supply chains and carbon footprints.
http://sourcemap.com/
June 6, 2012
BP accused of attack on academic freedoms after scientists subpoenaed
Oceanographers say they fear erosion of scientific process after they were forced to turn over emails related to BP oil spill
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday 4 June 2012 18.00 EDT
A pair of scientists have accused BP of an attack on academic freedom after the oil company successfully subpoenaed thousands of confidential emails related to research on the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.
The accusation from oceanographers Richard Camilli and Christopher Reddy offered a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes legal manoeuvring by BP in the billion-dollar legal proceedings arising from the April 2010 blow-out of its well.
It also heightened fears among scientists of an assault on academic freedoms, following the legal campaign against a number of prominent climate scientists.
In an opinion piece in the Boston Globe, the scientists, from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said they volunteered in the early days of the spill to deploy robotic technology to help BP and the Coast Guard assess how much oil was gushing from the well.
..more..
BP accused of attack on academic freedoms after scientists subpoenaed
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/04/bp-accused-attack-scientific-freedom?newsfeed=trueBP accused of attack on academic freedoms after scientists subpoenaed
Oceanographers say they fear erosion of scientific process after they were forced to turn over emails related to BP oil spill
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday 4 June 2012 18.00 EDT
A pair of scientists have accused BP of an attack on academic freedom after the oil company successfully subpoenaed thousands of confidential emails related to research on the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.
The accusation from oceanographers Richard Camilli and Christopher Reddy offered a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes legal manoeuvring by BP in the billion-dollar legal proceedings arising from the April 2010 blow-out of its well.
It also heightened fears among scientists of an assault on academic freedoms, following the legal campaign against a number of prominent climate scientists.
In an opinion piece in the Boston Globe, the scientists, from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said they volunteered in the early days of the spill to deploy robotic technology to help BP and the Coast Guard assess how much oil was gushing from the well.
..more..
June 5, 2012
Pressure On Trinity Church To Call Off Occupy Wall Street Trespassing Charges
By Nick PintoMon., Jun. 4 2012 at 5:00 AM
Trinity Church, a massive New York landowner with an estimated $1 billion in real estate holdings, is once again at odds with Occupy Wall Street, the movement that sprung up in its back yard.
The relationship between Trinity and Occupy has been fraught almost from the start, but tensions escalated last winter, after the NYPD evicted Occupy Wall Street from Zuccotti Park, when protesters asked the church for sanctuary in an unused church-owned plot in Duarte Square.
The church refused, and on December 17, the protesters, led by clergy including retired Episcopal Bishop George Packard, jumped the chain-link fence anyway, prompting dozens of arrests.
Many of those arrested that day are scheduled for trial next Monday, June 11, charged either with violation-level trespass or with criminal trespass in the third degree, a charge which can carry three months of jail time.
..more..
Pressure On Trinity Church To Call Off Occupy Wall Street Trespassing Charges
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/06/pressure_on_tri.phpPressure On Trinity Church To Call Off Occupy Wall Street Trespassing Charges
By Nick PintoMon., Jun. 4 2012 at 5:00 AM
Trinity Church, a massive New York landowner with an estimated $1 billion in real estate holdings, is once again at odds with Occupy Wall Street, the movement that sprung up in its back yard.
The relationship between Trinity and Occupy has been fraught almost from the start, but tensions escalated last winter, after the NYPD evicted Occupy Wall Street from Zuccotti Park, when protesters asked the church for sanctuary in an unused church-owned plot in Duarte Square.
The church refused, and on December 17, the protesters, led by clergy including retired Episcopal Bishop George Packard, jumped the chain-link fence anyway, prompting dozens of arrests.
Many of those arrested that day are scheduled for trial next Monday, June 11, charged either with violation-level trespass or with criminal trespass in the third degree, a charge which can carry three months of jail time.
..more..
Profile Information
Gender: MaleCurrent location: NC
Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 40,459