February 2006 Archives
Something interesting from http://icasualties.org/oif/:
On January 21, 2006 we added Katherine Patricia Singleton to our fatality list based on this article published by the Pensacola News Journal. The article states:
"Army soldier Katherine P. Singleton is the daughter of Doryce Blake and Maryon Singleton, who resides in Myrtle Grove. Singleton on Friday night confirmed his daughter's death but declined further comment. Details surrounding her death were not available late Friday."
Since this article was published there has been no confirmation from the Department of Defense and the family has refused comment. We will retain all information we have gathered on this incident, but since her death has not been confirmed we are removing from our official list.
___________________________
What happened? Why the mystery? Is something being hidden? Although somewhat conspiratorial, this does seem curious.
Related links:
http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060121/NEWS01/601210319/1006
uExpress.com: Ted Rall by Ted Rall -- (02/11/2003) RALL 2/11/03
02/11/2003
The Fleecing of Our Young
NEW YORK--Five years ago, I wrote a story called "College Is For Suckers." I argued that the costs of tuition, dorms and fees had risen so high that the additional income you'd earn as a college graduate---compared to going straight to work after high school--wouldn't make up for the massive student loan debts you'd acquire.
The magazine that ran my piece is no more. Both books that published it are out of print. But the problem of crippling student loan debt has gotten worse.
The pre-bankrupting of America's best and brightest, the young men and women who attend private colleges and public universities, is one of our nation's enduring, quiet scandals. Momentarily breaking the silence was a Jan. 28 New York Times profile of young adults who, because of their student loans, are forced to choose jobs solely based on pay. Margot Miles, a legal secretary who borrowed $25,000 to attend UPenn, wants to go to law school but "just can't imagine taking out any more loans." Anisa Brophy, an aspiring cartoonist, ran up a $70,000 tab attending Wilson College in Pennsylvania. Even Connie Chavez, whose $10,000 student loan Hofstra bill doesn't seem so bad, "has virtually given up on her dream of going to business school."
These kids will not take low-paying jobs teaching in the inner cities. They won't join the Peace Corps. If they find themselves with a few extra hours here and there, they won't volunteer at a homeless shelter--they'll take a second job. When young people defer their dreams, when options vanish, America loses.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
Justice Louis Brandeis dissent, "Olmstead v. United States," 277 U.S. 438, 485 (1928)
Runaway costs for a legal education are threatening to trample any optimism among law school graduates created by recent associate salary increases at the nation's top law firms.
Law school tuition is bounding far ahead of pay raises at firms of all sizes.
Whether new lawyers land jobs at giant international firms, where salaries recently hit $135,000 plus bonuses, or at small practices in the Midwest and elsewhere, they are paying up to 267% more for their education, compared to costs in 1990.
At the same time, new associates are earning on average just 60% more than what they were in the private sector in 1990, a figure that does not take into account decreased earning power due to inflation.
The result means that beginning lawyers-especially those in midsized and small firms-are shouldering proportionately much more debt at graduation than did their predecessors, a situation that some observers fear will lead to more loan defaults, attrition and job dissatisfaction.
Deputy's Gunfire Looks Like a Crime to Some - Los Angeles Times
Deputy's Gunfire Looks Like a Crime to Some
By Matt Lait and Lance Pugmire, Times Staff Writers
A San Bernardino County sheriff's deputy who shot a 21-year-old Air Force security officer in an incident captured by a video camera appears to have violated accepted police tactics and may have committed a criminal offense, experts in the use of force by police said Wednesday.
The experts cautioned that the low quality of the digital recording may obscure some important evidence. But what is visible - the image of the deputy firing multiple rounds at 21-year-old Elio Carrion as he appeared to follow the deputy's order to get off the ground - was shocking, they said.
"It's a criminal act," said Roger Clark, a former Los Angeles County sheriff's lieutenant who routinely testifies in court as an expert in police tactics. Clark has worked both for police officers and for citizens who have sued the police. "He shot an unarmed man who was complying with his orders," Clark said.
David Klinger, a use-of-force expert who teaches at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, and wrote a book titled "Into The Kill Zone: A Cop's Eye View of Deadly Force," said the recording was "the screwiest thing I've ever seen. It makes no sense."
t r u t h o u t - Al Gore | The Threat to American Democracy
Remarks by Al Gore | The Media Center
Wednesday 05 October 2005
Remarks delivered by Al Gore to a conference organized by "We Media" in New York.
I came here today because I believe that American democracy is in grave danger.
It is no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse ...
I know that I am not the only one who feels that something has gone basically
and badly wrong in the way America's fabled "marketplace of ideas"
now functions.
How many of you, I wonder, have heard a friend or a family member in the last
few years remark that it's almost as if America has entered "an alternate
universe?"
I thought maybe it was an aberration when three-quarters of Americans said
they believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for attacking us on September
11, 2001. But more than four years later, between a third and a half still believe
Saddam was personally responsible for planning and supporting the attack.
At first I thought the exhaustive, non-stop coverage of the O.J. trial was
just an unfortunate excess that marked an unwelcome departure from the normal
good sense and judgment of our television news media. But now we know that it
was merely an early example of a new pattern of serial obsessions that periodically
take over the airwaves for weeks at a time.
Are we still routinely torturing helpless prisoners, and if so, does it feel
right that we as American citizens are not outraged by the practice? And does
it feel right to have no ongoing discussion of whether or not this abhorrent,
medieval behavior is being carried out in the name of the American people? If
the gap between rich and poor is widening steadily and economic stress is mounting
for low-income families, why do we seem increasingly apathetic and lethargic
in our role as citizens?
On the eve of the nation's decision to invade Iraq, our longest serving senator,
Robert Byrd of West Virginia, stood on the Senate floor asked: "Why is
this chamber empty? Why are these halls silent?"
The decision that was then being considered by the Senate with virtually no
meaningful debate turned out to be a fateful one. A few days ago, the former
head of the National Security Agency, Retired Lt. General William Odom, said,
"The invasion of Iraq, I believe, will turn out to be the greatest strategic
disaster in US history."
But whether you agree with his assessment or not, Senator Byrd's question is
like the others that I have just posed here: he was saying, in effect, this
is strange, isn't it? Aren't we supposed to have full and vigorous debates about
questions as important as the choice between war and peace?
Those of us who have served in the Senate and watched it change over time,
could volunteer an answer to Senator Byrd's two questions: the Senate was silent
on the eve of war because Senators don't feel that what they say on the floor
of the Senate really matters that much any more. And the chamber was empty because
the Senators were somewhere else: they were in fundraisers collecting money
from special interests in order to buy 30-second TV commercials for their next
re-election campaign.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, there was - at least for a short time
- a quality of vividness and clarity of focus in our public discourse that
reminded some Americans - including some journalists - that vividness and
clarity used to be more common in the way we talk with one another about the
problems and choices that we face. But then, like a passing summer storm, the
moment faded.
In fact there was a time when America's public discourse was consistently much
more vivid, focused and clear. Our Founders, probably the most literate generation
in all of history, used words with astonishing precision and believed in the
Rule of Reason.
Their faith in the viability of Representative Democracy rested on their trust
in the wisdom of a well-informed citizenry. But they placed particular emphasis
on insuring that the public could be well-informed. And they took great care
to protect the openness of the marketplace of ideas in order to ensure the free-flow
of knowledge.
TomPaine.com - The America We Believe In
John Edwards is a former senator from North Carolina and was John Kerry's vice presidential candidate in 2004. Visit Edwards' new website at www.oneamericacommittee.com .
I am grateful for the opportunity to talk with you about the state of our union on the day of the president’s address to our country. While it is discouraging for all of us to see our country moving in the wrong direction, we need to take this opportunity to offer ideas for how to get the nation back on track.
America is losing the most important element of our national character: We are no longer the land of opportunity for all.
Generations before us came to America for one reason. This is the land where everyone who worked hard would be rewarded, could raise a family and could make a better life for their children. But America has changed. Now, hard work does not guarantee a decent standard of living, and our children do not believe they can achieve the successes of their parents. It should not be that way.
Hurricane Katrina brought the issue of poverty to the forefront for the first time in decades. But the reality is that the people of the Gulf Coast—the vast majority of them working—were living in crisis for years before the hurricane hit and put them on the news. They were living without good schools, adequate health care, safe housing and without hope—just like millions of other families across this country.
During the week of the hurricane, the Census Bureau reported that more than 37 million Americans live in poverty; 13 million of them children, most likely as not going to bed hungry some nights. Their parents sit around the kitchen table and wonder how they’ll be able to feed their kids the next day—let alone send them to college. When will our leaders recognize that Americans are ashamed of our failure to reach out to these families?
My friend, Rev. Jim Wallis, has said that the Bible talks about fighting poverty more than 3,000 times. Three thousand times. Our work here on earth is clear.
When history judges us, as a nation and as individuals, it will ask: What did we do to end poverty? How we answer this call will forever define us as a nation—showing the world how America leads or how we fail to live up to our most cherished values.
