RandomNumbers
RandomNumbers's JournalContext, from Paiute history, about the Oregon militia attack on Malheur
This is a very interesting read, about the real history behind this contested area.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/01/17/oregon-militia-brings-battle-back-malheur-reservation
Oregon Militia Brings Battle Back to Malheur Reservation
....
The Malheur Indian Reservation was established for the Northern Paiutes in 1872 by President Grant. When Winnemucca arrived a few years later, she reported that Agent Charles Parrish dealt fairly with the Paiutes. Trouble broke out in 1876, however, when President Grants Peace Policy replaced Parrish with a Christian manWilliam Rinehartwho proved a cruel and corrupt leader. The Bannock War soon followed.
The Northern Paiutes found that Winnemuccas heroic fidelity to the US was not rewarded in the aftermath to the Bannock War, when the residents of Malheur were ordered to move to the Yakama Indian Reservation in Washington Territory. At Yakama, where, Winnemucca reported, not an Indian was ever taught the alphabet, Paiutes were denied the education they had received at Malheur. She also reported that her people werent adequately reimbursed for their work and, if paid, were later stripped of their earnings: Yes, poorer in clothes. Poorer in horses. Poorer in victuals; in every thing. We have lost 53 head of horses, and have left 257 head. Our sick have been poorly cared for, and many have died for want of something to eat. Now, can anyone blame us for wanting to go back to our own country? By November 1879 it was reported that no Indians remained at Malheur.
....
She then detailed the horrific move to Yakama:
...
Amid her tears the Princess said: Many a time at night I would see a poor woman come into camp crying, and the civilized women would laugh at her. Why was she crying because she was tired or cold? No; but because her baby was lying in her arms frozen to death! Old men left in wagons over night perished in the cold, and next morning were dumped out on the road with nothing to cover them but the snow. Here the tears choked her utterance for a while, but, continuing, she said: Thrown away as you would treat a hog! When we arrived at Yakima we were turned over like a drove of cattleso many men, women and children.
...
Copyright says I can't post any more from this article. Please go to the link and read it; if you have gotten this far, I am sure you will find it worth your time.
Also, more about the Bannock War, from wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bannock_War
I have to admit I must've slept through this lesson in grade school.
S.2266 - H-1B and L-1 Visa Reform Act of 2015 - Your candidate's position?
I am looking for information regarding each candidate's position on this bill.
The bill is reported has having been co-written by Grassley and Durbin. It is listed as sponsored by Grassley, which is a good thing in a republican controlled congress.
Other co-sponsors are:
Sherrod Brown (D)
Richard Blumenthal (D)
Bill Nelson (R)
Jeff Sessions (R)
More info here:
https://www.opencongress.org/bill/s2266-114/show
I note that the one candidate who is in the Senate and who has an actual opportunity to endorse the bill by co-sponsoring it, has not done so. HOWEVER, it is quite possible that it is better for the bill that Bernie Sanders NOT co-sponsor it. If he co-sponsored it then that brings presidential politics into play. Also notice that it currently has an equal number of D and R co-sponsors, and adding Bernie would throw that out of balance if there wasn't a matching republican. This is probably politically calculated to give the bill the best possible chance of passing. Of course, that then makes it awkward for Bernie to announce direct and complete support for it. But he still should be able to say something.
And I'd like to know what the other candidates have to say about it.
On a side note, when I google "H1B Durbin" in order to find something about it, almost all the articles are from publications that seem to cater to Indians. The only US article I saw was in the Wall Street Journal blog. Excerpt:
In addition, firms that employ more than 50 people and have more than half of their staff on H-1B and L-1 visas would be barred from hiring new workers on H-1Bs.
H-1Bs are for skilled workers, and L-1 visas are for those with specialized knowledge who are transferred to the U.S. within their company.
The U.S. Department of Labor would be able to monitor and penalize firms that dont comply under the proposed law.
For years, foreign outsourcing companies have used loopholes in the laws to displace qualified American workers and facilitate the outsourcing of American jobs, Mr. Grassley said in a statement. The bill would end these abuses and protect American and foreign workers from exploitation.
Darkness in Paris. (Charlie Pierce)
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a39723/paris-terror-attacks/He quoted freakin' Thomas Merton.
I'm watching the re-air of the forum at this moment (not for long unfortunately, got stuff to do) and this part on why we aren't winning on climate change, where he says Dems tend to "connect the dots and draw a line straight to hell" and the audience doesn't seem to get it, then he quotes Thomas Merton Any appeal that begins from a standpoint of despair is doomed to fail. ... I found this part of his appearance incredibly powerful but wonder if others react similarly?
But gawd, this guy quotes Thomas Merton. I like it.
A question about the bombing of the MSF hospital in Afghanistan
I asked this in another thread and did not get a response.
First, please know that I am a huge supporter of MSF. The questions I'm asking are to fill a gap in my knowledge. Because this part of the story makes no sense to me.
=========================================
Was the MSF facility marked as a hospital? Presumably, in Afghanistan that would have been with a large red crescent symbol, visible from the air. I have seen nothing in any article that I've read (admittedly not a large percentage of what's out there) that indicates the facility was clearly marked, or not.
If it was, why did the pilot bomb it anyway? If it was visibly marked as a hospital, he should have known that any order to bomb that site was an illegal order, and should have responded along the lines of, "negative, the site is marked as a hospital, we can't bomb a hospital". According to my understanding of the laws of war, anyway.
It is wasn't, why wasn't it? Okay, here is where it gets fuzzy for me. Again, by my understanding of the laws of war - which may be completely wrong of course - if a medical facility is marked by a universally recognized symbol such as a red cross or a red crescent, then if a faction attacks it they are violating the laws of war. (Geneva Convention?) But if it is NOT marked, how does it expect that protection? For all that has been posted about "they told the US their coordinates" that STILL does not make it easy for a pilot to recognize while flying a mission. And that visible recognition would be the final protection in case of human error in providing target coordinates. So I wouldn't think that the new technology of GPS would make the need for marking obsolete. On the other hand, some of these groups we're fighting with allegedly ignore the laws of war anyway, and who knows might even deliberately target a hospital if it is so marked. So maybe there are good reasons why hospitals aren't marked any more, or just this particular hospital wasn't marked?
=========================================
I appreciate any thoughtful, informed replies and discussion on this topic.
(I will only be able to check in off and on but I will read all replies when I can.)
It's not "authenticity" it's "charisma" you morons!
And by "morons" of course I mean the morons on MSNBC this morning.
"Authenticity" has a highly positive connotation.
"Charisma" is more mixed, but less valued in a politician, when it is recognized as all an act with no positive substance backing it up. (Bill Clinton is loaded with charisma but when people scratched that surface they found substance as well)
If anything Hillary is far more authentic than Trump and the others from the clown car. With the possible exception of the very non-charismatic Santorum. (Authentic doesn't mean good policies, it just means you have a pretty good idea what they are and they track with how the person has behaved throughout their life.)
Let's be clear, personally I don't find Trump charismatic at all, I think he is a buffoon. But his buffoonery obviously appeals to a big chunk of the republican primary electorate. And that's charisma, not authenticity.
Lawrence Lessig will run for President ... if ...
he gets $1 million in crowdfunding by Labor Day.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/11/9132665/lawrence-lessig-presidential-campaign-finance-reform-equality
...
On his blog, Lessig writes:
But iunfortunately, as this Gawker article succinctly notes:
http://gawker.com/lawrence-lessigs-ideas-are-correct-important-too-bori-1723388005
Still, I think I might chip in a few bucks to his campaign. I would ****LOVE **** to have Lessig on the debate stage with Hillary, Sanders, and O'Malley. (At least in a debate about making our democracy actually work.)
As for other candidates stealing his ideas, each of them have already included some bits in their platform. But the difference is, there is absolutely no doubt that Lessig really means it when it comes to comprehensive electoral reform.
Lessig for President: https://lessigforpresident.com/
A message from David Macdonald to all supporters of the Cecil Appeal (also maybe good news re: cubs)
This is from the site Jimmy Kimmel mentioned. After he mentioned it, of course the site crashed for awhile because it couldn't handle the flood. Hopefully everyone wanting to donate will return and try again when it is less busy.
http://www.wildcru.org/news/macdonald-cecil-appeal/index.html
(Emphasis added)
We are deeply grateful for the hundreds of messages of support you have sent the value people attach to lions and wildlife conservation inspires us. We hope to keep in touch with you all as the months go forward. Many people ask about the fate of Cecils cubs we are keeping watch. As you probably know, the natural law in lion society is that when a male dies and his weakened coalition is usurped, the new incoming males kill their predecessors cubs. This may not happen because Cecils brother is still holding the fort. Meanwhile, because of the heavy flow of traffic to our website, some people trying to make donations have been told "please come back later" we beg you not to forget us, and do please try again later make a note in your diary to try again tomorrow or the next day, or contact Hannah Curwell-Parry in the UK or David Stiles in the USA and we will get back to you. We depend on donations for all of our work. We are working with the University technical people to try and increase the capacity of the website. Once again, we thank you for your support and inspirational commitment to wildlife conservation.
If everyone who is outraged by this tragedy donates even a small amount to conservation, some good can come of this.
What's asbestos doing in kids' crayons?
There is no safe level of asbestos exposure.
OK, so maybe your child isn't going to be breathing in crayons, and the asbestos just might stay put. Then again, contaminated crayons could release microscopic fibers as they are worn down, the EWG contends, adding that the average child uses 730 crayons by the age of 10.
...
All of the crayons and toys that contained asbestos were imported from China. (The complete results are available at www.asbestosnation.org.)
...
Astoundingly, this wasn't the first time asbestos had been found in either product. Contaminated crayons were found in 2000, and toy crime-scene kits tested positive for asbestos in 2007.
After the previous findings, American crayon manufacturers pledged to stop using talc. But did everyone else? That's why the EWG tested the products again. This time around, Lunder said, no American-made products tested contained any asbestos.
The National Cancer Institute has concluded that "overall evidence suggests there is no safe level of asbestos exposure."
So plenty of people are concerned.
Philip Landrigan, professor of pediatrics and preventive medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, called the presence of asbestos in toys "an unacceptable risk." Landrigan, who reviewed the study, but was not involved in it, is an asbestos expert and former senior adviser to the Environmental Protection Agency on children's environmental health.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/health/kidshealth/20150719_What_s_asbestos_doing_in_kids__crayons_.html
==================================================
Also at the Environmental Working Group's own site:
http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2015/07/asbestos-your-children-s-toys
The suspected origin of the asbestos in the items that tested positive is talc, a binding agent in crayons and an ingredient in fingerprint powder. Asbestos deposits are frequently found in talc mines and may contaminate talc products. Although the crayons pose a lower risk than the powders, scientists agree that there is no safe level of asbestos exposure.
The dangers of asbestos have been public since the 1970s. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has known about asbestos in crayons for 15 years, and eight years ago asbestos was found in another brand of fingerprint toy. Shockingly, these products are legal in 49 statesonly Connecticut bans asbestos in childrens toys.
This is cool - O'Malley gives keynote at ESRI conference
http://www.pe.com/articles/esri-773871-malley-conference.htmlVideo:
http://video.esri.com/watch/4147/keynote-governor-martin-omalley
I'm guessing that O'Malley's invitation to keynote this conference was due to his use of GIS in the Maryland StateStat system.
I give O'Malley a huge plus over the other candidates for his apparent grasp of technology and vision towards its effective use in good governance.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHome country: US
Member since: Sat Jun 4, 2005, 09:56 AM
Number of posts: 17,600