atxhomeguide.com

Thursday, June 19, 2008

United States President George W. Bush delivered a speech Wednesday in which he urged the United States Congress to end a ban on oil exploration off of US shores. Currently there is both an executive order and a Congressional moratorium against such exploration.

The Congress issued its moratorium in 1981. In 1989, President George H.W. Bush issued an executive order in the wake of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

President Bush said that “we should expand American oil production by increasing access to the Outer Continental Shelf, or OCS. Experts believe that the OCS could produce about 18 billion barrels of oil. That would be enough to match America’s current oil production for almost ten years.”

“I know the Democratic leaders have opposed some of these policies in the past,” President Bush said. “Now that their opposition has helped drive gas prices to record levels, I ask them to reconsider their positions. If Congressional leaders leave for the Fourth of July recess without taking action, they will need to explain why $4-a-gallon gasoline is not enough incentive for them to act.”

Senator John McCain, who is the presumptive nominee for the Republican Party, said on Tuesday that he favors offshore drilling.

Senator Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader from the Democratic Party, said: “This week’s flip-flop on offshore oil drilling by President Bush and Senator John McCain is nothing more than a cynical campaign ploy that will do nothing to lower energy prices, and represents another big giveaway to oil companies already making billions in profits.”

“It’s cynical to say that we can drill our way out of this mess,” said Athan Manuel, of the environmental group Sierra Club. “The solution to $4 gas is not off our coast.”

A recent poll conducted by Reuters/Zogby showed that about 60% of Americans support more oil drilling and refinery construction, yet nearly the same percentage also say they are in favor of conservation.

“We will take pressure off gas prices over time by expanding the amount of American-made oil and gasoline. We will strengthen our national security by reducing our reliance on foreign oil. We will benefit American workers by keeping our nation competitive in the global economy — and by creating good jobs in construction, and engineering, and refining, maintenance, and many other areas,” said Bush in his speech.

Saturday, January 5, 2008

A new study by researchers of Boston University’s School of Public Health and colleagues sponsored by the World Health Organization (WHO) shows children with severe pneumonia can be effectively treated at home and do not need to be hospitalized. This finding is hugely significant for developing countries where children cannot be brought to a hospital easily or where no hospitals exist.

Per the study the change of treatment could save many children’s lives and take pressure off health systems. Every year pneumonia kills 2 million children under the age of 5. The researchers found that antibiotics given at home could significantly reduce deaths.

The group examined 2,037 children between 3 to 59 months in seven areas in Pakistan. About half of them were given antibiotics and sent home while the other ones got intravenous antibiotics in the hospital. Both groups were found to show equal progress in healing off the illness.

Current WHO guidelines recommend that pneumonia should be treated in a hospital with injectable antibiotics. With the new study there are indicators that pneumonia can be treated just as effectively at home with oral antibiotics.

Friday, September 22, 2006

The upcoming 2006 Mississauga municipal election, to be held November 13, features an array of candidates looking to represent their wards in city council.

Wikinews contributor Nicholas Moreau has contacted as many candidates as possible, including Tony Ciufo, asking them to answer common questions sent in an email. There is no incumbent in the newly created ward; the sixteen resident competing for the position are Shah Rukh Alam, John Briers, Jamie Dookie, Dale D’Souza, Prag Euclid, Adnan Hashmi, Elias Hazineh, Jack Janiak, Fasal Javaid, Craig Lawrence, Sue M. McFadden, Patrick Mendes, Barbara Polis, Graziano Roti, Ali Tahmourpour, and Scott Wilson.

Friday, March 11, 2005

A defendant on trial for rape in Atlanta, Georgia reportedly stole a deputy sheriff’s handgun and used it to shoot the judge, court reporter, and two deputies Friday morning. Three people were killed and one was wounded.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Rowland W. Barnes has been confirmed dead along with the court reporter and one of the deputies. After the shootings, the suspect reportedly attempted to carjack several cars in a bid to escape. He attempted to carjack a green Honda Accord with license plate 6584-YN, from a newspaper reporter, but eventually fled by other means. The reporter in question, Don O’Briant from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, was beaten by the suspect but was fortunate to receive only cuts to his face and a broken face from a fall.

The car was listed as being used by the suspect in public alerts across the area before it was realised that the car was in fact still in the garage of the courthouse.

The suspect has been identified as Brian Nichols, 34, who was facing a retrial for rape and kidnapping after the first trial ended with a hung jury. Police are desperately searching for Nichols, as he is considered armed and dangerous.

The suspect reportedly stole the handgun by overpowering a deputy sheriff while he was being taken into the courtroom by the deputy, said Assistant Police Chief Alan Dreher. He then shot and critically wounded the female deputy, went to the courtroom where his trial was due to take place, and held about a dozen people at bay there before killing the judge and court reporter. He later shot and killed another deputy outside.

The deputy from whom Nichols stole the handgun is now sedated and in critical condition after surgery and has a bruise in her brain, according to Jeffrey Salomone, an attending trauma surgeon at Grady Memorial Hospital. Although she was shot in the head, the bullet did not penetrate her skull, said Salomone.

Tuesday, August 16, 2005

Documents, reportedly leaked from the investigation into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian electrician shot dead by British Police on the London Underground on 22 July reveal that Mr de Menezes was not acting suspiciously and was already restrained when shot.

Furthermore, the documents reveal that the original report given by the police and recorded on the coroners report contained many false statements. The reports suggest the police shot Jean Charles de Menezes because they mistakenly identified him as Hussain Osman, and had agreed to shoot him if he ran. Hussain Osman was suspected of having placed a faulty or mock explosive in a train.

The original reports claimed that de Menezes was acting suspiciously, was wearing a padded jacket, and ran when challenged, even vaulting the ticket barriers. However, the leaked documents, which include statements from officers involved in the operation and photographs of the scene, show that he behaved like any other commuter, used his travel pass to enter the station, even picking up a newspaper on his way. He was not challenged by police, and appears to have been unaware of being followed until after he entered the train. Photographic stills show he was only wearing a light denim jacket. It appears that he only ran in order to reach a train that was about to leave the platform.

The leaked document describes CCTV footage, which shows Mr de Menezes entered Stockwell station at a “normal walking pace” and descended slowly on an escalator.

The document said: “At some point near the bottom he is seen to run across the concourse and enter the carriage before sitting in an available seat.”

An eye witness, who was sitting opposite de Menezes on the train, is quoted as saying: “Within a few seconds I saw a man coming into the double doors to my left. He was pointing a small black handgun towards a person sitting opposite me. He pointed the gun at the right hand side of the man’s head. The gun was within 12 inches of the man’s head when the first shot was fired.”

This report is considerably different to initial reports that claimed de Menezes tripped as he fled onto the train, before being restrained by pursuing officers and shot. Photographs leaked to ITN appear to corroborate this new witness’s report as they clearly show blood on the seat in which de Menezes is said to have been sitting.

Other statements suggest that the Brazilian was seated before being pinned down by a plain-clothed police officer. Plainclothed armed officers had entered the carriage at this point. Several shots were then fired and de Menezes was hit seven times in the head and once in the shoulder. Three further shots missed Mr Menezes.

A community officer’s report (one of the leaked documents) confirms that Mr. de Menezes was seated and restrained at the time of being shot:

“I heard shouting which included the word ‘police’ and turned to face the male in the denim jacket.

“He immediately stood up and advanced towards me and the CO19 [the armed unit] officers …I grabbed the male in the denim jacket by wrapping both my arms around his torso, pinning his arms to his side.

“I then pushed him back onto the seat where he had been previously sitting … I then heard a gun shot very close to my left ear and was dragged away onto the floor of the carriage.”

The leaked documents confirm that Police had been given permission to shoot if a suspect was non-compliant, having been told that “unusual tactics” may be required and if they “were deployed to intercept a subject and there was an opportunity to challenge, but if the subject was non compliant, a critical shot may be taken.” It is thought that when he ran for the train officers felt this was suitable evidence of “non-compliance”.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said its priority was to keep Mr de Menezes family informed and refused to comment on the details of the leak.

The commission said the family “will clearly be distressed that they have received information on television concerning his death”.

In an interview with the Guardian Newspaper, Asad Rehman, spokesman for the family’s campaign, called for a public inquiry. “This was not an accident,” he said. “It was serious neglect. Clearly, there was a failure both in police intelligence and on an operational level.”

Harriet Wistrich, the family’s solicitor expressed concerns, during an interview with ITN, that the Police had withheld information from the investigation for a longer period than was permitted under UK law. Ms. Wistrich also claimed, in a separate interview with the BBC, that the documents suggest that the original information given to the pathologist who carried out the post-mortem examination on Mr de Menezes was incorrect and that the information the leaked documents contained was “shocking and terrifying”.

“What sort of society are we living in where we can execute suspects?” she asked in the BBC interview.

An unnamed senior police source told the Guardian that the leaked documents and statements give an accurate picture of what was known so far about the shooting. Former Flying Squad commander John O’Connor told the BBC “had the normal procedures taken place in which a warning is given and officers wear specially marked clothing then this young man may not have been killed.”

The IPCC statement added: “The IPCC made it clear that we would not speculate or release partial information about the investigation, and that others should not do so. That remains the case.”

Mark Oaten, Home Affairs Spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, said: “If true, these preliminary findings will create obvious concerns. It is in the best interests of the police and the community for the full report and any recommendations, to be published as quickly as possible.”

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

A recent study based on satellite radar altimetry indicates drastic thinning of Arctic ice during the winter of 2007. It was found that the ice thickness had been fairly constant for the five previous winters. The researchers were able to highlight widespread ice thinning in areas covered by both old and young ice. This thinning constitutes the most severe since records started being taken in the early 1990s.

The study by scientists of University College London has been published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. The work provides the first definitive proof for overall decrease in Arctic ice volume, claim the authors.

The researchers have found that last winter’s ice thickness represented a decrease of an average of 26 centimeters below the 2002-2008 winter average. The greatest decline of 49 centimeters was in the western Arctic, which could explain the region’s becoming relatively ice-free this summer, allowing it to be open to shipping for the first time in 30 years. The record low of ice thickness during summer happened when the weather was not abnormally warm.

Katharine Giles, the lead author, points out that the study used satellite data sets, which had a number of advantages over other methods. Previous studies have used measurements from drilling, or submarine and airborne surveys. These studies could be severely limited by time and space. The present study utilized continuous, all-weather, day-and-night radar altimeter data from the European Space Agency’s Envisat satellite. The study measured ice thickness from October to March, 2007, over more than half of the Arctic.

There has been considerable uncertainty over the causes of ice loss in the Arctic. It has been debated that ice could have been piled up against the coast, thus reducing the sea ice extent. Measurements of the ice thickness, as in the present study, give definite proof for ice melting. “So this means melting; it doesn’t mean that the ice has just been pushed up against the coastline,” remark Seymour Laxon, co-author of the paper.

The conclusions of the study can help predict what could happen with the ice cover in future. Deflection of sunlight by the Arctic ice cap could be reduced, leading to larger areas of water, which can absorb heat. Warmer temperatures will in turn promote more ice melting. “About five years ago, the average projection for the sea ice disappearing was about 2080”, said Dr Laxon. “But the ice minimums, and this evidence of melting, suggests that we should favor the models that suggest the sea ice will disappear by 2030-2040, but there is still a lot of uncertainty.”

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Zach Scruggs, a lawyer for United States Senator Trent Lott, says that State Farm Insurance Company is destroying records related to claims for damage from Hurricane Katrina.

The records allegedly contain information saying that State Farm fraudulently denied insurance claims made by its policy holders, including Lott, that had homes there were damaged or destroyed when Hurricane Katrina came ashore on the Gulf Coast.

Scruggs said that Lott has “good faith belief” that many employees of the insurance company in Biloxi, Mississippi are destroying engineer’s reports that were inconclusive as to whether or not water or wind was the main cause of damage to the buildings affected by the hurricane.

Lott is among thousands of home and/or business owners who had their property damaged or destroyed during the hurricane and had their claims denied because State Farm claimed that their policies don’t cover damage caused by floods or water that was driven by the wind.

State Farm has not issued a statement on the matter so far.

December 25, 2004

Officials in Mumbai, India, demolished over 6,000 shanties today in a push to eradicate the capital city’s slums. In total, 39,000 shanties have been flattened, displacing over 200,000 people, in the city’s biggest-ever demolition drive, which began in early December.

When complete, over 2 million people are expected to be displaced. After wiping out the least desirable shanties, next in line for demolition are the illegal ‘well-off’ shanties and neighborhoods, according to the legal and bureaucratic motions that have been executed toward cleaning up Mumbai’s appearance by lowering the dominance of shanties, which make up 62 percent of Mumbai’s housing.

“As far as eye can see, there are mounds of wood, tin and tarpaulin, the remains of 6,200 illegal homes, flattened by a heavy excavator running on tank-like tracks and giant motorised claws,” the Indian Express reported about today’s destruction. [1]

Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh said that citizens would see a change within six months. “Every chief minister likes to be remembered, and I’m no exception,” said Deshmukh, who despite having an empty exchequer, also announced that Rs 31,000 crore will be spent on new roads, sea links and rail lines. [2]

Saturday, May 24, 2008

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) of the government of the United Kingdom told the City of London Police on Friday that there will be no prosecution for a 15-year-old boy who called Scientology a “cult” at a May 10 peaceful protest. The City of London Police had previously confiscated the boy’s protest placard and gave him a court summons at the demonstration, which took place near St Paul’s Cathedral at the Church of Scientology‘s London headquarters on Queen Victoria Street. The boy’s poster read: “Scientology is not a religion, it is a dangerous cult”. The human rights organization Liberty has come out strongly against the City of London Police for their actions at the protest, and said they are pursuing an inquiry into the police force for what they say is a troubling freedom of speech issue.

Individuals from the group Anonymous have held monthly international protests against the Church of Scientology since February, as part of the anti-Scientology movement Project Chanology. The Project Chanology movement began when the Church of Scientology attempted to get a leaked Scientology promotional video featuring Tom Cruise removed from websites YouTube and Gawker.com.

Members of Anonymous were motivated by the actions of the Church of Scientology, and bombarded Scientology websites and were successful in taking some of them down. Anonymous later changed tactics towards legal measures, and held international protests against Scientology on February 10, March 15, April 12, and most recently May 10.

City of London Police approached the 15-year-old boy at the May 10 protest and cited section five of the Public Order Act 1986, which deals with “harassment, alarm or distress“. In response, the boy cited a 1984 judgment given by Mr. Justice Latey in the Family Division of the High Court of Justice of Her Majesty’s Courts of Justice of England and Wales, in which Latey called Scientology a “cult” and said it was “corrupt, sinister and dangerous”. In the actual 1984 judgment made by Judge Latey, he stated: “Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious. […] In my judgement it is corrupt, sinister and dangerous. […] It is dangerous because it is out to capture people, especially children and impressionable young people, and indoctrinate and brainwash them so that they become the unquestioning captives and tools of the cult, withdrawn from ordinary thought, living and relationships with others.” The boy told fellow protesters he was not going to take the sign down, saying: “If I don’t take the word ‘cult’ down, here [holding up his sign], I will be either, I think, most likely arrested or [given] a summons. I am going to fight this and not take it down because I believe in freedom of speech, besides which I’m only fifteen.”

When the boy refused to take his sign down, City of London Police removed it, cited him with a court summons and informed him that the matter would be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service. The boy was the only protester who did not comply with the police requests to remove signs which referred to Scientology as a “cult”. According to The Guardian, a CPS spokesman stated Friday that: “In consultation with the City of London police, we were asked whether the sign, which read ‘Scientology is not a religion it is a dangerous cult’, was abusive or insulting. Our advice is that it is not abusive or insulting and there is no offensiveness, as opposed to criticism, neither in the idea expressed nor in the mode of expression. No action will be taken against the individual.”

“The CPS review of the case includes advice on what action or behaviour at a demonstration might be considered to be threatening, abusive or insulting. The force’s policing of future demonstrations will reflect this advice,” said a spokeswoman for the City of London Police in a statement in The Guardian.

The 15-year-old boy’s mother called the CPS decision a “victory for free speech”, saying: “We’re all incredibly proud of him. We advised him to take the placard down when we realised what was happening but he said ‘No, it’s my opinion and I have a right to express it’.”

The incident has generated significant interest on the Internet, from civil rights groups and anti-cult groups, and in the press. Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, and Ian Haworth of the United Kingdom-based Cult Information Centre were highly critical of the actions of the City of London Police. George Pitcher of The Daily Telegraph called the actions of the City of London Police “a mockery of the law”. Other publications also criticized the actions of the police, compared the boy to past civil rights protesters, and analyzed how the characterization of “cult” applied to Scientology. The Guardian reported that human rights activists “were outraged” when reports of the actions of the City of London Police at the protest surfaced this week. Marina Hyde wrote in a comment piece in The Guardian that the City of London Police should spend a little less time “reaching for the collar of free-speaking children”. An article in The Guardian about the boy’s court summons hit the front page of the website Slashdot on Wednesday, and an article about the statement by CPS hit the site’s front page on Friday. The anti-Scientology website Enturbulation.org devoted its front page to the incident on Saturday.

BBC News reported that attorneys for Liberty represented the 15-year-old boy to the CPS. In media statements Friday, Liberty said it would continue its inquiry into the actions of the City of London Police. “The police may have ended their inquiries into this tawdry incident but rest assured that Liberty’s inquiry will continue. Democracy is all about clashing ideas and the police should protect peaceful protest, not stifle it,” said James Welch, legal director at Liberty. “Reason has prevailed in the case of the anti-Scientology protester”, wrote Welch in a comment piece in The Observer. According to The Press Association, Liberty’s inquiry may result in actions taken against the City of London Police.

The City of London Police has faced controversy in the past for its close association with the Church of Scientology. When the City of London Scientology building opened in 2006, City of London Chief Superintendent Kevin Hurley praised Scientology in an appearance as guest speaker at the building’s opening ceremony. Ken Stewart, another of the City of London’s chief superintendents, has also appeared in a video praising Scientology. According to The Guardian over 20 officers for the City of London Police have accepted gifts from the Church of Scientology including tickets to film premieres, lunches and concerts at police premises.

Unlike the City of London Police, the Metropolitan Police Service (the territorial police force responsible for Greater London excluding the City of London) has not raised an issue with protesters using placards with similar wording at protests against Scientology, according to The Guardian and Londonist.

Each of the Project Chanology international protests against Scientology has had a theme: the February protest called attention to the birthday of Lisa McPherson, who died under controversial circumstances while under the care of Scientology, the March protest was arranged to take place two days after Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard‘s birthday, the April protest highlighted the Church of Scientology’s disconnection policy, and the May protest highlighted the Scientology practice of “Fair Game” and took place one day after the anniversary of the publication of Hubbard’s book Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. Another international protest is planned for June 14, and will highlight the Church of Scientology’s elite “Sea Organization” or “Sea Org”.

Tuesday, July 5, 2016

On Saturday, acclaimed writer Elie Wiesel died in New York City at age 87, his family said, following a lengthy illness.

Wiesel was born 1928 in the town of Sighet in Romania. Twelve years later, in 1940, his town was included in an annexation by Hungary. In 1944, Wiesel, fifteen at the time, and his family, along with the entire Jewish population in Sighet, were sent to Auschwitz concentration camp. He was freed in 1945, only to realize his mother and sister died in death chambers and his father from disease and starvation. Elie Weisel, on the advice of an older Jew, had lied to the Nazis about his age, as an eighteen-year-old would be useful to them as a worker.

Ten years after his freedom, he wrote the famous book Night — written in Yiddish, first published in French translation — detailing his experience in the camp and his regret of survival. His book sold only about a thousand copies in the first year it was published, however today the book has been translated into 30 different languages with more than ten million copies sold. In 2006 TV personality Oprah Winfrey added it to her book club, prompting the swift selling of three million copies.

Wiesel wrote around 60 books, two plays, and two cantatas.

Wiesel first started a career in journalism in 1948 for the French newspaper L’Arche, which sent him as a correspondent to Israel. He also became a Paris correspondent for Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot and he was encouraged by an interviewee to write about his experience in the camp.

In 1972, Wiesel was a professor of Judaic Studies at the City College of New York for four years until he became a professor of Humanities at Boston University, where he remained.

Wiesel then became an activist and advocate during many conflicts, such as the Bosnian genocide of the 1990s. He advised the actions of several U.S. presidents, including then-President Ronald Reagan. During his acceptance of the Congressional Gold Medal, he advised Reagan not to visit a Bitburg military cemetery containing Waffen-SS graves. Reagan, however, continued with his trip, which created much controversy. Former President Jimmy Carter also appointed Wiesel as Chairman of the Presidential Commission on the Holocaust.

In 1986, Wiesel won the Nobel Peace Prize as an advocate for racial and religious groups and a spiritual leader.

Wiesel also helped in the creation of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. He was the chairman of the organization that collected funds from other survivors of the Holocaust to create the museum.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called him “a ray of light and an example of humanity that believes in the goodness of man”. U.S. President Barack Obama called him a “living memorial”. French President Francois Hollande called him a “grand humanist” and a “tireless defender of peace”.

He is survived by his wife Marion and his son Elisha.