Monday, December 30, 2013
Whole Foods has announced that it will be opening its long-awaited Gowanus store on December 17th this year. In addition to putting the usual organic and artisan products on it shelves, the new location at 214 3rd Street will bring the local food trend to new heights with a 20,000 square foot rooftop farm right on top of the building. It doesn’t get more local than that!
The rooftop farm was made possible thanks to a partnership with Gotham Greens, a Greenpoint-based rooftop farm. The two organizations are calling the endeavor the first commercial-scale greenhouse farm and say that it will help reduce the carbon emissions spent on transporting food from far away sources. The elevated greenhouse will grow high-quality, pesticide-free produce all year round to be sold at the bustling supermarket below.
Other attractions at the grocery store will include a bar with 16 different types of beer on tap. The store will also have its own ramen shop headed up by ramen master Yuji Hariguchi for eat-in and take-out options. It opens a little too late for Thanksgiving, but people in the Gowanus area will have a tasty and green treat to look forward to just a month later.
Read more at http://isupportorganic.blogspot.com/2013/12/super-market-selling-food-from-its-huge.html#WuYQHBzKwRBgFf1V.99
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Teacher suspended for alleged comment
Several students report racial remark to an African-American
Gil Voigt, a science teacher in Ohio, has been suspended for allegedly making the comment to an African-American teen boy with presidential aspirations.
Monday, the Fairfield Board of Education suspended science teacher Gil Voigt. He has 10 days to request a hearing before the school board or a referee.
Voigt, who is white, is accused of telling an African-American male student, We do not need another black president after the student said he would like to become president.
The incident occurred on Dec. 3, with several other students present, according to a report from Assistant Superintendent Roger Martin, who conducted a disciplinary hearing on the matter.
It isn't the first time the 14-year Fairfield teacher has been disciplined. He received a verbal warning for making an inappropriate racial comment in 2008. That year he also received a verbal warning for improper use of
Last year he received a verbal warning after allegedly calling a student stupid and belittling him. He received a written warning last month for failure to use the adopted curriculum.
This is a rare occurrence. This is the first time I've faced it since being named assistant superintendent (in 2011) Martin said.
In his report, Martin said he believed four students were interviewed who corroborated the student Voigt was speaking to.
Following a complaint by the students parents, the teen was removed from Voigts class, Martin said.
We intend to uphold board policies and to hold teachers accountable for the essential functions of the
teacher job description, Martin said.
Voigt is accused of violating board policies related to staff ethics, staff-student relations and harassment.
Voigt was not present at the meeting and could not be reached on Monday for comment.
According to the report, Voigt said his statement was misquoted by the student, who he said was not a very good student and was troublesome in class.
Voigt has been a Fairfield teacher since 2000. Before that he taught seven years in North Carolina, two years in Florida and six years in the Cincinnati Public Schools. ■
Link: No More Black Presidents
Wednesday, December 25, 2013
Someone I know works closely with a Jewish businessman. *One day, the two had an honest conversation, in which the Jewish man asked, “Do you know what my Jewish friends call the black community?”
My friend said, “No, what do they call us?”
He replied, “We call you liquid money. The same way that water falls out of a man’s hands, money typically seeps out of a black person’s hands the same way. Your community gets money and immediately gives it all away to people who aren’t black. *We see that as a huge business opportunity.”
He then used the example of many black people on payday or when we get our tax refunds. *He noted how we’ll go to an Indian business to cash the check, an Asian hair salon, a corner store owned by Arabs and a department store owned by whites. *He explained how, when it’s all said and done, these other business people are waiting like hungry animals to eat our bank accounts as if we are the prey.
This is not an attack on Jewish people, but a lesson on how ignorant we look when we keep giving all of our money away. *Part of the New Paradigm Construct is to help all of us understand the importance of finding ways to keep money in our own communities, the same way you plant a seed from a piece of fruit in order to grow more fruit in your garden. If you’re always waiting for someone else to feed you, you are typically an inch or two away from starvation.
It’s something to think about. Here’s the lesson:
1) In America, you have no almost no power if you don’t own something. *There is no pride in a platform on which you sit if it can be taken away from you on a second’s notice. *You have been seduced into believing that you have real power, when the truth is that you do not.
2) If we never learn the value of supporting of black-owned businesses, we are always going to be disappointed. *We are going to have the highest unemployment rates, the lowest wealth levels and the greatest degrees of frustration. *When I had a three hour personal conversation with Min. Louis Farrakhan (followed by a nine-hour closed economic summit a month later), one point that he made (which I agree with entirely) is that black people can learn a great deal from watching how the Jewish community handles it’s wealth. *In order for us to grow as a people, we must realize this important fact: *Our money is our power and we cannot give it all away.
Black Chinese Out Of Africa
For many years Black historians and Afrocentrists have said that the first inhabitants of China were black Africans.
"The Negroid races peopled at some time all the South of India, Indo-China and China. The South of Indo-China actually has now pure Negritos as the Semangs and mixed as the Malays and the Sakais."( H. Imbert, "Les Negritos de la Chine").
“Even the sacred Manchu dynasty shows this Negro strain. The lower
part of the face of the Emperor Pu-yi of Manchukuo, direct descendant of the Manchu rulers of China, is most distinctly Negroid. Chinese chroniclers report that a Negro Empire existed in the South of China at the dawn of that country's history".( Professor Chang Hsing-Lang , "The importation of Negro Slaves to China under the Tang Dynasty A.D. 618-907)
“There is evidence of substantial populations of Blacks in early China. Archaeological studies have located a black substratum in the earliest periods of Chinese history, and reports of major kingdom ruled by Blacks are frequently in Chinese documents." (Kwang-Chih Chang, The Archaeology of Ancient China, (Yale University Press) and Irwin Graham, Africans Abroad (Columbia University Press).
But after hundreds of years of the worldwide spread of the doctrine of white superiority and the inferiority of black Africans and their descendants. This notion that blacks were the original inhabitants of China was poo, pooed by white scientists and others and even by some blacks.
But in 2005, a Chinese DNA specialist, Jin Li, leading a team of Chinese and other scientists, proved through
DNA tests that indeed the first inhabitants of China were black Africans.
The DNA Evidence
Li said he was trying to prove that the Chinese evolved from homo erectus independently of all other humans. He collected DNA samples from 165 different ethnic groups and over 12000 samples in China and Asia to test his theory. Li said he was taught through China’s education system that there was something special about Chinese, and because he was Chinese, he was hoping to prove that the Chinese developed independently of all other humans.
But surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise that proved not to be true!
Li’s team focused on a single genetic marker that appeared about 80,000 years ago in Africa. Anyone carrying that marker would have recent African ancestors and could not be descended from the more ancient Homo Erectus. Li and his team found that early humans belonged to different species but modern humans descended from the East Africans species.
Li Hui, a scientist on Li’s team, said, that 100,000 years ago groups of humans started leaving Africa moving through South and Southeast Asia into China, and that 65 branches of the Chinese groups studied carry similar DNA mutations as the people of Southeast Asia.
Jin Li, another scientist on Li's team, said “we did not see even one single individual that could be considered as a descendant of the homo erectus in China, rather, everybody was a descendant of our ancestors from Africa."
Li was asked how he as a Chinese felt about what he found. He said “after I saw the evidence generated in my laboratory. I think we should all be happy with that. Because after all, modern humans from different parts of the world are not so different from each other and we are very close relatives.” (Amen Brother!) Li’s team was composed of an international group of scientist from China, Russia, India, Brazil and other nations. This was a 5 year project to study the geographic and
genealogical routes tracing the spread and settlements of ancient and modern humans.
Now DNA tests prove, what the Afrocentric historians have been asserting for years is true, that all modern human originated on some part of the African continent. Believe It Or Not, (or for some of you, read em and weep)
I'll leave you with the wise words of Richard Leaky,
"If you get to the stage where you can persuade people on the evidence, that it's solid, that we are all African, that color is superficial, that stages of development of culture are all interactive, then I think we have a chance of a world that will respond better to global challenges." Richard Leaky, Paleoanthropologist
Saturday, December 21, 2013
A mural depicting an American drone in Sana, Yemen’s capital. A strike last week on a wedding convoy killed at least 12 people.
WASHINGTON — In some respects, the drone strike in Yemen last week resembled so many others from recent years: A hail of missiles slammed into a convoy of trucks on a remote desert road, killing at least 12 people.
But this time the trucks were part of a wedding procession, making the customary journey from the groom’s house to the house of the bride.
The Dec. 12 strike by the Pentagon, launched from an American base in Djibouti, killed at least a half-dozen innocent people, according to a number of tribal leaders and witnesses, and provoked a storm of outrage in the country. It also illuminated the reality behind the talk surrounding the Obama administration’s new drone policy, which was announced with fanfare seven months ago.
President Obama on Drones
Although American officials say they are being more careful before launching drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan and elsewhere — and more transparent about the clandestine wars that President Obama has embraced — the strike last week offers a window on the intelligence breakdowns and continuing liability of a targeted killing program that remains almost entirely secret.
Both the Pentagon and the C.I.A. continue to wage parallel drone wars in Yemen, but neither is discussed publicly. A Pentagon spokeswoman declined to comment about the Dec. 12 strike, referring a reporter to a vague news release issued last week by the government of Yemen, written in Arabic.
It remains unclear whom the Americans were trying to kill in the strike, which was carried out in a desolate area southeast of Yemen’s capital, Sana. Witnesses to the strike’s aftermath said that one white pickup truck was destroyed and that two or three other vehicles were seriously damaged. The Associated Press reported Friday that the target of the strike was Shawqi Ali Ahmad al-Badani, a militant who is accused of planning a terrorist plot in August that led to the closing of more than a dozen United States Embassies. American officials declined to comment about that report.
At first, the Yemeni government, a close partner with the Obama administration on counterterrorism matters, said that all the dead were militants. But Yemeni officials conceded soon afterward that some civilians had been killed, and they gave 101 Kalashnikov rifles and about 24 million Yemeni riyals (about $110,000) to relatives of the victims as part of a traditional compensation process, a local tribal leader said.
Yemeni government officials and several local tribal leaders said that the dead included several militants with ties to Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, but no one has been able to identify them. Some witnesses who have interviewed victims’ families say they believe no militants were killed at all.
The murky details surrounding the strike raise questions about how rigorously American officials are applying the standards for lethal strikes that Mr. Obama laid out in a speech on May 23 at the National Defense University — and whether such standards are even possible in such a remote and opaque environment.
In the speech, the president said that targeted killing operations were carried out only against militants who posed a “continuing and imminent threat to the American people.” Over the past week, no government official has made a case in public that the people targeted in the strike posed a threat to Americans.
Moreover, the president said in May, no strike can be authorized without “near certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured” — a bar he described as “the highest standard we can set.”
At the time, administration officials said that authority over the bulk of drone strikes would gradually shift to the Pentagon from the C.I.A., a move officials said was intended partly to lift the shroud of secrecy from the targeted killing program.
But nearly seven months later, the C.I.A. still carries out a majority of drone strikes in Yemen, with the remote-controlled aircraft taking off from a base in the southern desert of Saudi Arabia. The Pentagon strikes, usually launched from the Djibouti base, are cloaked in as much secrecy as those carried out by the C.I.A.
“The contradictory reports about what happened on Dec. 12 underscore the critical need for more transparency from the Obama administration and Yemeni authorities about these strikes,” said Letta Tayler of Human Rights Watch, who has done extensive research in Yemen about the drone strikes.
The very fact that the drone strike last week targeted an 11-vehicle convoy — a much larger group than Al Qaeda would typically use — suggests that the new American guidelines to rule out civilian casualties may not have been followed in this case.
And the confusion over the victims’ identities raises questions about how the United States government gathers intelligence in such a contested region and with partners whose interests may differ sharply from those of the Obama administration.
The area where the strike occurred, in the central province of Bayda, is almost completely beyond the control of the Yemeni government, and is populated by tribes whose recurring feuds can easily become tied up in the agendas of outsiders.
Over the past two years, the Saudi government — which for decades has used cash to maintain a network of influence in Yemen — has increased its payments to tribal figures in Bayda to recruit informers and deter militants, according to several tribal leaders in the area. This shadowy system appears to contribute to the secretive process of information-gathering that determines targets for drone strikes, a process in which Saudi and Yemeni officials cooperate with Americans.
But Saudi and American interests diverge in important ways in Yemen. Many of the militants there who fight in Al Qaeda’s name are expatriate Saudis whose sole goal is to bring down the Saudi government.
Because of the program’s secrecy, it is impossible to know whether the American dependence on Saudi and Yemeni intelligence results in the killing of militants who pose a danger only to Arab countries.
Some Yemeni officials have also hinted that the timing and target of the drone strike last week may have been influenced by a devastating attack two weeks ago on the Yemeni Defense Ministry in which 52 people were killed, including women, children and doctors at the ministry’s hospital.
That attack ignited a desire for revenge in Yemen’s security establishment and also damaged Al Qaeda’s reputation in Yemen, leaving the group hungry for opportunities to change the subject. Both parties, in other words, may have had reasons to manipulate the facts, both before and after the drone strike.
American officials will not say what they knew about the targets of the strike last week. But in the past, American officials have sometimes appeared to be misinformed about the accidental deaths of Yemeni civilians in drone strikes.
In one example from Aug. 1, a drone strike killed a 28-year-old man who happened to hitch a ride with three men suspected to have been Qaeda members. According to a number of witnesses, relatives and local police officials, the man, Saleh Yaslim Saeed bin Ishaq, was waiting by a gas station late at night when the three men stopped in a Land Cruiser and agreed to give him a ride.
Mr. Ishaq’s ID card and belongings were found in the burned wreckage of the vehicle, and the local police — who confirmed that the other three dead men were wanted militants — said he appeared to have been an innocent person whose presence in the car was accidental.
When contacted about the strike, American officials said they were aware only of the three militants killed. Yet the details of Mr. Ishaq’s death, and an image of his ID card, were published at the time in newspapers and on websites in Yemen.
Friday, December 20, 2013
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Wouter Bosson also known as Dr. Death was head of the apartheid governments chemical and biological program
The sun rises behind the U.S. Capitol Dome early in the morning before the ceremonial swearing-in of President Barack Obama during the 57th Presidential Inauguration in Washington, Monday, Jan. 21, 2013. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya)
Yesterday we reported on the virtual sweeping-under-the-rug of the death of Dione Payne, 16, of Dayton, Ohio. The Dayton Daily News, one of the only local sources to report on the rape, and beating death of the youth seemed more interested in focusing on the “troubled past” of the victim, instead of the past of the murderers.
Michael A. Geldrich, 36, and Michael J. Watson, 39, are both being held in the Warren County Jail for the December 1 beating death of the young Payne.
Miami Valley Hospital workers discovered that Payne had been sexually assaulted during the attack. Hospital personnel contacted Middletown police and stated the teen had been sexually assaulted, according to the police report. But thus far, no rape charges have been brought, and hate crime charges have been dismissed point blank by Franklin Police Chief Russ Whitman, who said there is “no evidence” that there was a racial motive to the rape and murder of this 16-year-old African American.
To add insult to injury, some local media reports have fixated on a checkered history of the juvenile: possessing narcotics, and even allegations that he had fired gun shots in the past. They talked about morbid comments made on his Facebook
account before the day he was raped and beaten to death. They even called the 16-year-old out for getting arrested for littering. What they did not do was explain why the police have ruled out a racial motive to the attack, and why the Franklin City Prosecutor has neither pursued hate crime charges, nor even charged the attackers with rape.
These questions still remain unanswered. But there is more that we can do besides reading about this frustrating account and getting on with our day in silence. What can you do? Well for starters, contact the Franklin City Prosecutor:
Steven M. Runge
Franklin Municipal Court
1 Benjamin Franklin Way
Franklin Ohio, 45005
Franklin Municipal Court
1 Benjamin Franklin Way
Franklin Ohio, 45005
Ask him why these criminals have not been charged for raping the 16-year-old boy who they murdered. Also ask why hate crime charges are being excluded, when this does not seem to have been a common practice for these drug buyers to rape and beat-to-death previous people who they have tried to procure narcotics from.
Are these charges being brushed off because there were drugs potentially involved, or for some other reason that neither the police, the City of Franklin nor the local media are reporting.
SPREAD THE WORD and get people involved. Tell everyone you know who thinks this 16-year-old rape and murder victim deserves justice, in spite of his “troubled past”.
After eight years of a hardline narrative in Iran based on confrontation and resistance, Rouhani’s team is now leading Tehran with a different narrative that preaches constructive interaction with the world and backs it up with concrete actions like the interim nuclear deal it struck in Geneva. But the pendulum can easily shift again. Hardliners are waiting for Rouhani to fail so they can return to the forefront of Iranian politics. Choices that the West makes today will help deﬁne Iran’s internal and external outlook going forward.