Saturday, August 25, 2007

Chandra Leigh Brown, brain injury survivor, is interviewed by Fran Briggs

Chandra, a contributor to this website was recently interviewed by Club Drug about her struggle with her physical limitations imposed on her by a drunk driver and the drug-pushers that masquerade as physicians.

Visit http://clubdrug.thedruginfo.com/ for the full uplifting interview.

Chandra Leigh Brown is a woman who lives a life of dedication and perseverance as she fights for the rights of the disabled, and differently-abled. Following a horrendous car accident where she was ejected through her car’s window, Brown suffered multiple fractures and a severe brain injury. Left on life support, she was not expected to live. But it was while she was still unconscious that Brown says that she was determined to “go back” because she still had things to do. Chandra eventually completed three years of physical and cognitive therapy (which included relearning the alphabet and how to tie her shoes). While it’s true that she has not fully recovered from the extent of her injuries,

She speaks with a clear, calm, and upbeat voice, and enjoys working out three days a week. Her personal nature includes a heightened sense of humor, and an infectious smile and laugh.

Passionate and determinedly inspirational, Chandra Brown is devoted to serving disadvantage youth and women. She is also an advocate for social change having adopted a resolve to help disabled individuals worldwide with their plight for living in a more equitable society.

I sat down with the Chandra Leigh Brown and interviewed her as part of the OnTheMove Interview series. We talked about her accident, her road to recovery, how she became the International Chairperson for Disabled Individuals for the Oprah Winfrey for Nobel Peace Prize Fan club, and

Fran Briggs: Good morning, Chandra. Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today.

Chandra Brown: You are welcome. And, thank you for inviting me.

FB: May 3, 2002. Would you briefly describe the events of that day just prior to your accident?

CB: I woke up with the idea of going to visit my mother. I was living in Jonesboro, Georgia and my mother lived in Mableton, Georgia; it’s about a 40 minute drive. I went to the gas station to fill up my car and proceeded out of the parking lot after I filled the tank. And, that’s all I remember.

FB: Has your spirit changed since the day of the

CB: My spirit has changed a great deal. I’ve always believed in God, but I am happier. I smile more and I am more humble. I feel good about life and about living and carrying out God’s divine plan. I have been awaken by God’s love and power! Today, I feel God’s Hand on me — holding me and supporting me on my journey.

FB: Many people simply give up after experiencing a traumatic, life-altering event such as you did. Was there ever a time when you felt like giving up after the accident?

CB: Give up? No. I would always have to give my best — whatever the situation may be. I’ve been an athlete
Drug Store Fixtures
...floor displays, shelving, sign holders, tables, literature holders, risers, wall standards, brackets, display cases and counters, backroom storage, news stand, toy area, and cash counter wall unit are all part of drug store fixtures.. All drug store fixtures are designed ...
most of my life. I played basketball, played a little tennis, and I ran to stay in shape. Since my accident, I have taken what I learned from sports, and applied it to my life living with a brain injury. That is the conditioning and discipline part. Fall down 7 times; get back up 8 times. No pain, no gain. I could never give up. I thrive on challenges. Giving up has never been an option of mine. I do get tired, frustrated, and angry with myself. My life is so much different from what it used to be — it does get frustrating. There are times when I have to take long breaks to regroup with myself. After that,

Posted by SPN on 08/25 at 03:02 PM
BloggingReligion / SpritualityPersonal • (1) CommentsPermalink

Friday, August 24, 2007

iPhone unlocked by teen hacker to work on other carrier’s networks

NEW YORK - A 17-year-old hacker has broken the lock that ties Apple’s iPhone to AT&T’s wireless network, freeing the most hyped cell phone ever for use on the networks of other carriers, including overseas ones.

George Hotz of Glen Rock, N.J., confirmed Friday that he had unlocked an iPhone and was using it on T-Mobile’s network, the only major U.S. carrier apart from AT&T that is compatible with the iPhone’s cellular technology. In a video posted to his blog, he holds an iPhone that displays “T-Mobile” as the carrier.

While the possibility of switching from AT&T to T-Mobile may not be a major development for U.S. consumers, it opens up the iPhone for use on the networks of overseas carriers.

“That’s the big thing,” said Hotz, in a phone interview from his home.

The phone, which combines an innovative touch-screen interface with the media-playing abilities of the iPod, is sold only in the U.S.

AT&T Inc. spokesman Mark Siegel said the company had no comment, and referred questions to Apple. A call to Apple was not immediately returned. Hotz said the companies had not been in touch with him.

The hack, which Hotz posted Thursday to his blog, is complicated and requires skill with both soldering and software. It takes him about two hours to perform. Since the details are public, it seems likely that a small industry may spring up to buy U.S. iPhones, unlock them and send them overseas.

“That’s exactly, like, what I don’t want,” Hotz said. “I don’t want people making money off this.”

He said he wished he could make the instructions simpler, so users could modify the phones themselves.

“But that’s the simplest I could make them,” Hotz said. The next step, he said, would be for someone to develop a way to unlock the phone using only software.

The iPhone has already been made to work on overseas networks using another method, which involves copying information from the Subscriber Identity Module, a small card with a chip that identifies a subscriber to the cell-phone network.

The SIM-chip method does not require any soldering, but does requires special equipment, and it doesn’t unlock the phone — each new SIM chip has to be reprogrammed for use on a particular iPhone.

Both hacks leave intact the iPhone’s many functions, including a built-in camera and the ability to access Wi-Fi networks. The only thing that won’t work is the “visual voicemail” feature, which shows voice messages as if they were incoming e-mail.

Since the details of both hacks are public, Apple may be able to modify the iPhone production line to make new phones invulnerable. The company has said it plans to introduce the phone in Europe this year, but it hasn’t set a date or identified carriers.

There is apparently no U.S. law against unlocking cell phones. Last year, the Library of Congress specifically excluded cell-phone unlocking from coverage under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Among other things, the law has been used to prosecute people who modify game consoles to play a wider variety of games.

Hotz collaborated online with four other people, two of them in Russia, to develop the unlocking process.

“Then there are two guys who I think are somewhere U.S.-side,” Hotz said. He knows them only by their online handles.

Hotz himself spent about 500 hours on the project since the iPhone went on sale on June 29. On Thursday, he put the unlocked iPhone up for sale on eBay, where the high bid was above $2,000 midday Friday. The model, with 4 gigabytes of memory, sells for $499 new.

“Some of my friends think I wasted my summer but I think it was worth it,” he told The Record of Bergen County, which reported Hotz’s hack Friday.

Hotz heads for college on Saturday. He plans to major in neuroscience — or “hacking the brain!” as he put it to the newspaper — at the Rochester Institute of Technology. 

Posted by SPN on 08/24 at 08:49 PM
NewsScience / Technology • (0) CommentsPermalink

The jury has been selected if Michael Vick goes to trial.

image

Posted by SPN on 08/24 at 09:28 AM
Justice / InjusticeFunny StuffPet People • (1) CommentsPermalink

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

For those who still believe “shrub” deserves to be president

Sic ‘em With the Rally Squad
And other tips for dealing with demonstrators from the Presidential Advance Manual.
By Dahlia Lithwick in Slate Magazine
Posted Monday, Aug. 20, 2007, at 6:36 PM ET

Late last week, the federal government settled a lawsuit with a pair of Texans who were arrested in 2004 for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts at a Fourth of July event in Charleston, W.Va. That’s right, friends, $80,000 (of your taxpayer dollars) will be paid out to Jeff and Nicole Rank, whose suit against Gregory J. Jenkins—former deputy assistant to the president and director of the White House Office of Presidential Advance—has been dismissed.

White House spokesman Blair Jones managed to turn lemons into lemonade with the statement last week that “the parties understand that this settlement is a compromise of disputed claims to avoid the expenses and risks of litigation and is not an admission of fault, liability, or wrongful conduct.” This is, of course, vintage Bush, gloriously reminiscent of that Simpsons episode in which Homer arrives late to collect Bart in the pouring rain after soccer practice, then lectures: “I know you’re mad at me right now, and I’m kinda mad, too. I mean, we could sit here and try to figure out who forgot to pick up who till the cows come home. But let’s just say we’re both wrong, and that’ll be that.”

Because, you see, what the Ranks did wrong was attend an open-to-the-public, taxpayer-sponsored Independence Day speech by the president on the grounds of the state capitol, sporting homemade anti-Bush T-shirts. Their shirts had a red circle and a diagonal bar covering the word Bush. (His said, “Regime change starts at home,” on the back; hers said, “Love America, Hate Bush.") The Ranks neither said nor did anything to disrupt the speech, but when they refused to remove their T-shirts, they were, at the direction of White House event staff, handcuffed, booked, photographed, and fingerprinted, charged with trespassing, and held for several hours in jail. (The charges were subsequently dismissed, and the city of Charleston has apologized.) Nicole Rank was also temporarily suspended from her job with FEMA.

The White House suggestion that, hey, both sides did something bad here, distorts one obvious truth: The only bad thing these citizens did was peacefully disagree with the president in an open political forum. And while Rush Limbaugh and Angelina Jolie may be able to get away with talking exclusively to people who worship them, the president should not.

The details of the Rank lawsuit and the cases involving similarly harassed folks are always fascinating: citizens removed from a Bush event in Denver because of an offensive bumper sticker on their car outside ("No More Blood For Oil"); a Tucson student barred from a Bush event for sporting a Young Democrats T-shirt; Wisconsin citizens forced to unbutton their shirts before attending a Bush speech, only to have an attendee wearing an anti-Bush T-shirt ejected from the event. But the best thing to have emerged from the Rank litigation was the official—if heavily redacted—Presidential Advance Manual (dated October 2002), which, although stamped “SENSITIVE” and not to be “duplicated ... replicated ... photocopied or released to anyone outside of the Executive Office of the President, White House Military Office or United States Secret Service,” is now posted right here at the ACLU’s Web site.

There is so much that is entertaining in the Advance Manual, it’s hard to know where to begin. Sure, it’s not a surprise anymore that it is official White House policy to use staff to foster “a well-balanced crowd,” with well-balanced evidently defined as a subtle melange of those citizens who adore the president and those who revere him. The key to achieving such a balance, according to the manual, lies in “deterring potential protesters from attending events” and “preventing demonstrators.” Nor should anyone be surprised that the president is to be shielded from dissent at taxpayer-funded presidential appearances and at “rallies, roundtables and tours” in equal measure. Only those individuals and groups that are “extremely supportive of the Administration” (emphasis theirs) will be seated in the area between the stage and the main camera platform.

The manual cautions that event staff “must decide if the solution would cause more negative publicity than if the demonstrators were simply left alone,” but it’s also full of ingenious ideas for dealing with a flare-up of dissent. Among the White House tactics are the subcontracting of censorship to event “rally squads” composed of helpful “college/young republican organizations, local athletic teams, and fraternities/sororities.” (What, no mathletes?) These obliging rally squads can then “use their signs and banners as shields between the demonstrators and the main press platform.” The use of a “long sheet banner ... in strategic areas around the site” is similarly smiled upon. Lest you believe that the Big Brother sheet represents the full extent of the speech suppression, however, the manual provides that, “As a last resort, security should remove the demonstrators from the event.”

The Advance Manual’s finest moments come in its urgent, earnest drive to protect not just the television cameras but also the president himself from the ugliness of the dread “demonstrators.” Certainly, “if it is determined that the media will not see or hear” demonstrators, event staff can ignore them. But event staff must involve themselves in “designating a protest area preferably not in view of the event site or motorcade route.” In other words, all this suppression of dissent isn’t just to create a puppet show for the cameras. It’s also about sock puppets for the president, who—if he could just be shielded from the mean T-shirts—might still believe his approval ratings soar into the mid-90s. The Ranks’ peaceful protest at the West Virginia state capitol somehow became an act of “trespassing” only because the president was there.

It’s disturbing enough to learn from the Advance Manual that the White House has adopted an official policy of shouting down or covering up dissenting viewpoints with large sheets in order to deceive Americans at home into believing the president is universally adored. But that this official policy also exists to protect the tender sensitivities of the president himself is beyond belief.

George W. Bush is certainly entitled to choose his White House advisers, attorneys general, counselors, friends, and pets based solely on the their inability to tell him no. The rest of us have increasingly come to question the wisdom of such insularity. We just can’t do it in his presence.

Dahlia Lithwick is a Slate senior editor.

Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2172500/

Copyright 2007 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC

Posted by Nuttshell on 08/21 at 02:49 PM
Blogging • (1) CommentsPermalink

Here’s the video of Dick Cheney explaining why it makes no sense invading Iraq.

Posted by SPN on 08/21 at 01:12 PM
PoliticsNews • (2) CommentsPermalink

Friday, August 10, 2007

Plastic bags are killing us

The most ubiquitous consumer item on Earth, the lowly plastic bag is an environmental scourge like none other, sapping the life out of our oceans and thwarting our attempts to recycle it. I’ve really struggled with this but I guess I need to get off the fence.—Nuttshell

Aug. 10, 2007 | On a foggy Tuesday morning, kids out of school for summer break are learning to sail on the waters of Lake Merritt. A great egret hunts for fish, while dozens of cormorants perch, drying their wings. But we’re not here to bird-watch or go boating. Twice a week volunteers with the Lake Merritt Institute gather on these shores of the nation’s oldest national wildlife refuge to fish trash out of the water, and one of their prime targets is plastic bags. Armed with gloves and nets with long handles, like the kind you’d use to fish leaves out of a backyard swimming pool, we take to the shores to seek our watery prey.

Dr. Richard Bailey, executive director of the institute, is most concerned about the bags that get waterlogged and sink to the bottom. “We have a lot of animals that live on the bottom: shrimp, shellfish, sponges,” he says. “It’s like you’re eating at your dinner table and somebody comes along and throws a plastic tarp over your dinner table and you.”

This morning, a turtle feeds serenely next to a half submerged Walgreens bag. The bag looks ghostly, ethereal even, floating, as if in some kind of purgatory suspended between its briefly useful past and its none-too-promising future. A bright blue bags floats just out of reach, while a duck cruises by. Here’s a Ziploc bag, there a Safeway bag. In a couple of hours, I fish more than two dozen plastic bags out of the lake with my net, along with cigarette butts, candy wrappers and a soccer ball. As we work, numerous passersby on the popular trail that circles the urban lake shout their thanks, which is an undeniable boost. Yet I can’t help being struck that our efforts represent a tiny drop in the ocean. If there’s one thing we know about these plastic bags, it’s that there are billions and billions more where they came from.

The plastic bag is an icon of convenience culture, by some estimates the single most ubiquitous consumer item on Earth, numbering in the trillions. They’re made from petroleum or natural gas with all the attendant environmental impacts of harvesting fossil fuels. One recent study found that the inks and colorants used on some bags contain lead, a toxin. Every year, Americans throw away some 100 billion plastic bags after they’ve been used to transport a prescription home from the drugstore or a quart of milk from the grocery store. It’s equivalent to dumping nearly 12 million barrels of oil.

Only 1 percent of plastic bags are recycled worldwide—about 2 percent in the U.S.—and the rest, when discarded, can persist for centuries. They can spend eternity in landfills, but that’s not always the case. “They’re so aerodynamic that even when they’re properly disposed of in a trash can they can still blow away and become litter,” says Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste. It’s as litter that plastic bags have the most baleful effect. And we’re not talking about your everyday eyesore.

Once aloft, stray bags cartwheel down city streets, alight in trees, billow from fences like flags, clog storm drains, wash into rivers and bays and even end up in the ocean, washed out to sea. Bits of plastic bags have been found in the nests of albatrosses in the remote Midway Islands. Floating bags can look all too much like tasty jellyfish to hungry marine critters. According to the Blue Ocean Society for Marine Conservation, more than a million birds and 100,000 marine mammals and sea turtles die every year from eating or getting entangled in plastic. The conservation group estimates that 50 percent of all marine litter is some form of plastic. There are 46,000 pieces of plastic litter floating in every square mile of ocean, according to the United Nations Environment Programme. In the Northern Pacific Gyre, a great vortex of ocean currents, there’s now a swirling mass of plastic trash about 1,000 miles off the coast of California, which spans an area that’s twice the size of Texas, including fragments of plastic bags. There’s six times as much plastic as biomass, including plankton and jellyfish, in the gyre. “It’s an endless stream of incessant plastic particles everywhere you look,” says Dr. Marcus Eriksen, director of education and research for the Algalita Marine Research Foundation, which studies plastics in the marine environment. “Fifty or 60 years ago, there was no plastic out there.”

Following the lead of countries like Ireland, Bangladesh, South Africa, Thailand and Taiwan, some U.S. cities are striking back against what they see as an expensive, wasteful and unnecessary mess. This year, San Francisco and Oakland outlawed the use of plastic bags in large grocery stores and pharmacies, permitting only paper bags with at least 40 percent recycled content or otherwise compostable bags. The bans have not taken effect yet, but already the city of Oakland is being sued by an association of plastic bag manufacturers calling itself the Coalition to Support Plastic Bag Recycling. Meanwhile, other communities across the country, including Santa Monica, Calif., New Haven, Conn., Annapolis, Md., and Portland, Ore., are considering taking drastic legislative action against the bags. In Ireland, a now 22-cent tax on plastic bags has slashed their use by more than 90 percent since 2002. In flood-prone Bangladesh, where plastic bags choked drainage systems, the bags have been banned since 2002.

The problem with plastic bags isn’t just where they end up, it’s that they never seem to end. “All the plastic that has been made is still around in smaller and smaller pieces,” says Stephanie Barger, executive director of the Earth Resource Foundation, which has undertaken a Campaign Against the Plastic Plague. Plastic doesn’t biodegrade. That means unless they’ve been incinerated—a noxious proposition—every plastic bag you’ve ever used in your entire life, including all those bags that the newspaper arrives in on your doorstep, even on cloudless days when there isn’t a sliver of a chance of rain, still exists in some form, even fragmented bits, and will exist long after you’re dead.

Grand efforts are under way to recycle plastic bags, but so far those efforts have resulted mostly in a mass of confusion. A tour of Recycle Central in San Francisco makes it easy to see why. The plant is a Willie Wonka factory of refuse. Located on a bay pier with a stunning view of the downtown skyline, some 700 tons of discarded annual reports, Rolling Rock bottles, Diet Coke cans, Amazon.com cardboard boxes, Tide plastic detergent bottles and StarKist tuna fish cans surge into this warehouse every weekday, dumped from trucks into a great clattering, shifting mound. The building tinkles and thumps with the sound of thousands of pounds of glass, aluminum, paper, plastic and cardboard knocking together, as all this detritus passes through a dizzying network of conveyor belts, spinning disks, magnets and gloved human hands to emerge as 16 different sorted, recyclable commodities, baled up by the ton to be shipped or trucked away and made into something new again. It’s one way that the city of San Francisco manages to divert some 69 percent of its waste from landfills. But this city’s vaunted recycling program, which is so advanced that it can collect coffee grounds and banana peels from urbanites’ apartment kitchens and transform them into compost used to grow grapes in Napa Valley vineyards, simply cannot master the plastic bag.

Ask John Jurinek, the plant manager at Recycle Central, what’s wrong with plastic bags and he has a one-word answer: “Everything.” Plastic bags, of which San Franciscans use some 180 million per year, cannot be recycled here. Yet the hopeful arrow symbol emblazoned on the bags no doubt inspires lots of residents to toss their used ones into the blue recycling bin, feeling good that they’ve done the right thing. But that symbol on all kinds of plastic items by no means guarantees they can be recycled curbside. (The plastic bags collected at the recycling plant are trucked to the regular dump.) By chucking their plastic bags in the recycling, what those well-meaning San Franciscans have done is throw a plastic wrench into the city’s grand recycling factory. If you want to recycle a plastic bag it’s better to bring it back to the store where you got it.

As the great mass of recyclables moves past the initial sort deck on a series of spinning disks, stray plastic bags clog the machinery. It’s such a problem that one machine is shut down while a worker wearing kneepads and armed with a knife spends an hour climbing precariously on the disks to cut the bags out, yielding a Medusa’s hair-mass of wrenched and twisted plastic. In the middle of the night, when the vast sorting operation grinds to a halt to prepare for the next 700-ton day, two workers will spend hours at this dirty job.

Some states are attacking the recycling problem by trying to encourage shoppers to take the bags back to grocery stores. California requires large grocery stores and pharmacies that distribute the bags known in the trade as T-shirt bags—those common polyethylene bags with two handles, usually made from petroleum or natural gas—to take them back for recycling, and to print instructions on the bags to encourage shoppers to return them to the stores. San Francisco Environment Department spokesperson Mark Westlund, who can see plastic bags lodged in the trees on Market Street from his second-story office window, is skeptical about the state’s ability to get shoppers to take back their bags. “We’ve had in store recycling in San Francisco for over 10 years, and it’s never really been successful,” says Westlund, who estimates that the city achieved only a 1 percent recycling rate of plastic bags at the stores. “People have to pack up the bags, bring them into the store and drop them off. I think you’d be more inclined to bring your own bag than do that.”

Regardless, polyethylene plastic bags are recyclable, says Howie Fendley, a senior environmental chemist for MBDC, an ecological design firm. “It’s a matter of getting the feedstock to the point where a recycler can economically justify taking those bags and recycling them. The problem is they’re mostly air. There has to be a system in place where they get a nice big chunk of polyethylene that can be mechanically ground, melted and then re-extruded.”

So far that system nationwide consists mainly of supermarkets and superstores like Wal-Mart voluntarily stockpiling the bags brought back in by conscientious shoppers, and selling them to recyclers or plastic brokers, who in turn sell them to recyclers. In the U.S., one company buys half of the used plastic bags available on the open market in the United States, using about 1.5 billion plastic bags per year. That’s Trex, based in Winchester, Va., which makes composite decking out of the bags and recycled wood. It takes some 2,250 plastic bags to make a single 16-foot-long, 2-inch-by-6-inch plank. It might feel good to buy decking made out of something that otherwise could have choked a sea turtle, but not so fast. That use is not an example of true recycling, points out Carol Misseldine, sustainability coordinator for the city of Oakland. “We’re not recycling plastic bags into plastic bags,” she says. “They’re being downcycled, meaning that they’re being put into another product that itself can never be recycled.”

Unlike a glass beer bottle or an aluminum can, it’s unusual that a plastic bag is made back into another plastic bag, because it’s typically more expensive than just making a new plastic bag. After all, the major appeal of plastic bags to stores is that they’re much cheaper than paper. Plastic bags cost grocery stores under 2 cents per bag, while paper goes for 4 to 6 cents and compostable bags 9 to 14 cents. However, says Eriksen from the Algalita Marine Research Foundation, “The long-term cost of having these plastic bags blowing across our landscape, across our beaches and accumulating in the northern Pacific far outweighs the short-term loss to a few.”

Of course, shoppers could just bring their own canvas bags, and avoid the debate altogether. The California bag recycling law also requires stores to sell reusable bags. Yet it will be a sad irony if outlawing the bags, as San Francisco and Oakland have, doesn’t inspire shoppers to bring their own canvas bags, but simply sends them to paper bags, which come with their own environmental baggage. In fact, plastic bags were once thought to be an ecologically friendly alternative to cutting down trees to make paper ones. It takes 14 million trees to produce the 10 billion paper grocery bags used every year by Americans, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. Yet suggesting that plastic bags made out of petroleum are a better choice burns up Barger from the Earth Resources Foundation. “People say, ‘I’m using plastic. I’m saving trees,’” he says. “But have you ever seen what Shell, Mobil and Chevron are doing down in the rain forests to get oil?”

Gordon Bennett, an executive in the San Francisco Bay chapter of the Sierra Club, agrees. “The fundamental thing about trees is that if you manage them properly they’re a renewable resource,” he says. “I haven’t heard about the oil guys growing more oil lately.” Still, as the plastic bag industry never tires of pointing out, paper bags are heavier than plastic bags, so they take more fossil fuels to transport. Some life cycle assessments have put plastic bags out ahead of paper, when it comes to energy and waste in the manufacturing process. But paper bags with recycled content, like those soon to be required in San Francisco and Oakland, use less energy and produce less waste than those made from virgin paper.

The only salient answer to paper or plastic is neither. Bring a reusable canvas bag, says Darby Hoover, a senior resource specialist for the Natural Resources Defense Council. However, if you have to make a choice between the two, she recommends taking whichever bag you’re more likely to reuse the most times, since, like many products, the production of plastic or paper bags has the biggest environmental impact, not the disposal of them. “Reusing is a better option because it avoids the purchase of another product.”

Some stores, like IKEA, have started trying to get customers to bring their own bags by charging them 5 cents per plastic bag. The Swedish furniture company donates the proceeds from the bag sales to a conservation group. Another solution just might be fashion. Bringing your own bag—or BYOB as Whole Foods dubs it—is the latest eco-chic statement. When designer Anya Hindmarch’s “I am not a plastic bag” bag hit stores in Taiwan, there was so much demand for the limited-edition bag that the riot police had to be called in to control a stampede, which sent 30 people to the hospital.

-- By Katharine Mieszkowski in Salon Magazine

Posted by Nuttshell on 08/10 at 06:48 PM
Blogging • (0) CommentsPermalink

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

The people of Darfur cannot afford another delay.

Last August, when the UN Security Council authorized a
peacekeeping mission for Darfur, we thought the wait for
peacekeepers had finally come to an end.

A year later, stalled by Sudanese objections, that peacekeeping
force has still not been deployed. Never in the history of the
United Nations has it failed to deploy such a mission once
authorized.

Today the UN Security Council authorized another peacekeeping
force: a hybrid United Nations-African Union force mandated to
protect civilians and humanitarian operations in Darfur.

The people of Darfur cannot afford another delay. Click the link
below now to send a message to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
and urge him to press world leaders to contribute to peace in
Darfur, and to stand behind their commitments.
http://ga6.org/campaign/un_resolution/ixxiiskrqxe7km8?

Every nation in the world has something to offer this
peacekeeping mission. Some will need to contribute troops. Some
will need to give funds. Some will need to use diplomatic and
economic pressure to make the Sudanese regime fulfill its
promise to accept this force.

But all nations must work to ensure that this time, the UN
upholds its commitment to the people of Darfur.

Click the link below to sign the petition to Secretary-General
Ban and tell him that the people of Darfur have waited long
enough. It is time to act!
http://ga6.org/campaign/un_resolution/ixxiiskrqxe7km8?

Once you’ve signed the petition, please forward this message to
your friends and family and ask them to join you in taking
action.

As always, thank you for helping urge our world leaders into
action for the people of Darfur.

Colleen Connors
Save Darfur Coalition

-----------------------------------------------------

Donate to Help Save Darfur
Help build the political pressure needed to end the crisis in
Darfur by supporting the Save Darfur Coalition’s crucial
awareness and advocacy programs. Click the link below now to
make a secure, tax-deductible online donation.
https://secure.ga6.org/08/savedarfur/nypMjcwp1AFk3?

-----------------------------------------------------
The Save Darfur Coalition is an alliance of over 180
faith-based, advocacy and humanitarian organizations whose
mission is to raise public awareness about the ongoing genocide
in Darfur and to mobilize a unified response to the atrocities
that threaten the lives of more than two million people in the
Darfur region. To learn more, please visit
http://ga6.org/ct/D1Mjcwp1Sui6/

Posted by SPN on 08/01 at 10:16 AM
Justice / InjusticeReligion / SpritualityInternationalRacism / Prejudice • (0) CommentsPermalink
Page 1 of 1 pages