SpeakOut is Truthout's treasure chest for bloggy, quirky, personally reflective, or especially activism-focused pieces. SpeakOut articles represent the perspectives of their authors, and not those of Truthout.
Since the Woolwich attack on soldier Lee Rigby, much has been written and spoken about the courage of Amanda Donnelly, her daughter Gemini Donnelly-Martin and Ingrid Loyau-Kennett, the three women at the scene. They were seen coming to the aid of Lee Rigby, as well as speaking to the suspects. In the days after that attack the women were referred to by newspapers as 'heroic' and the 'Angels of Woolwich'. As someone who has never been in such as situation, like many others, I can only imagine the types of thoughts and feelings the women must have been experiencing while interacting with the suspects.
However, the involvement of women in the incident at first glance may not seem an important issue to discuss. Closer inspection, though, reveals interesting parallels in how gender has become a weapon of choice for the media and Islamists in the war over public opinion.
With the tagline "The Magazine for Men," it is almost unsurprising that Portmagazine, a British quarterly, celebrated "A New Golden Age: The Increasing Importance of Print Media" (Summer/13) by putting six white men on its cover. Not surprising, but also not excusable.
To introduce interviews with the editors of the magazines New York,Bloomberg BusinessWeek, the New York Times Magazine, Vanity Fair, Wired and GQ, Port editor Dan Crowe wrote:
For our current cover story we thought it would be the right time to champion print, and put the editors we admire on the cover of Port. FromVanity Fair's Graydon Carter to the New York Times' Hugo Lindgren, we feature the editors running the best magazines in the world.... These editors are producing magazines that are bold, confident, sexy, smart and growing.
Professor Hilary Jones showcased her book, "The Métis of Senegal: Urban Life and Politics in French West Africa," at Source Booksellers June 22, in Midtown Detroit.
Jones, an associate professor of history at Florida International University in Miami, felt it was very important to debut her first book in her hometown of Detroit.
"For me this is where it started," Jones said. "I feel like I grew up with people who instilled in me the importance of books and reading. It was very important for me to do this here."
Jones, a proud product of Detroit Public Schools, says her love for history and African history began with a project from her French teacher as a student at Cass Technical High School.
he City of Berkeley filed a claim Wednesday in the action brought by the federal government in May to seize the property used by Berkeley Patients Group at 2366 San Pablo Avenue in Berkeley, California. Berkeley Patients Group has been providing medical marijuana to patients within the City since 1999. It is in full compliance with the City of Berkeley's medical marijuana ordinance, regulations, and zoning laws.
U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag of the Northern District of California has used federal asset forfeiture laws to target and close numerous medical marijuana dispensaries, even when those dispensaries have long track records of working with the cities in which they are located, responsibly providing medical marijuana to patients, and complying with state and local law.
US hacker-troll-activist Andrew Auernheimer, AKA Weev, has appealed his March conviction for unauthorized access of AT&T's web site in violation the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The conviction, and the CFAA - the ever-debated "worst law in technology," per Columbia Law Professor Tim Wu - are a convenient and apt way to contemplate America's treatment of the "other" in national security, and to recognize its tendency to criminalize what it cannot subdue.
Weev is in trouble for, essentially, accessing public data, available to anyone, a whole bunch of times. You might also say he's in trouble for pissing off the FBI. Both are true, probably - Weev queried AT&T's servers over and over with an automated program, each time accessing public information; for years he has flipped a bird to both authority and good taste. Over the course of doing so - no passwords, no "hacking," really - he picked up the email addresses of some powerful (and in many cases powerfully awful) people. As a result of this fairly major screw up on the part of AT&T, who brushed off Weev and a colleague when approached about the breach, he went to Gawker with the information, then got locked up.
Chief Justice John Roberts deceptively altered an earlier Supreme Court decision, misapplied another, and erroneously described the Tenth Amendment in writing the majority opinion that ruled the key section of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional. What he did generally has gone unnoticed in the subsequent articles that have been published about the decision. This article provides a detailed analysis of what he did, and why that makes his decision legally and constitutionally wrong. However, the Court did not take away another provision that gives the Act some significant enforcement power.
In ruling the key provision of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the 5-4 Supreme Court majority in Shelby County v Holder 579 US, also attempted to reanimate right wing ideas that courts long ago extinguished. In so doing he employed a line of reasoning that was deceptive and erroneous. Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, in a lengthy and biting dissent, described his approach as an exercise of "hubris," potentially "capable of much mischief."
By now the world knows the name of the young woman who was the last person to speak to Trayvon Martin: Rachel Jeantel. Rachel has been thrown head on into the public eye in a way that NONE of us would ever want for ourselves. Imagine what it must be like: a high school student talking on the phone to one of your friends like you would normally do...then all of a sudden your friend is dead and your world is turned into a legal whirlwind! Watching her tell the story of the last time she spoke to her friend Trayvon was painful. Watching defense attorney Don West questioning her, often times it was easy to forget that Zimmerman is the one who is on trial and not Ms. Jeantel. Rachel was judged very harshly by the public as people generally have a way of being overly critical, judgmental and just plain mean. Judging Rachel as if she should have been born ready to testify in court and to play any part in this legal system who is in no way on her side. What I saw was a young woman who knew the defense team was against her and out to discredit her, she knew that Don West had a particular impatience and dislike for her. Many people highlighted her behavior and her dislike and impatience for Don West but that feeling was definitely not one sided. She knew it, she felt it and she wasn't afraid to show it to the world with her famous response—"that's real retarded, sir". She was standing up for herself and I was proud of her for doing so.
The government's knowledge of the lives of individuals is little more than the equivalent to a children's coloring book compared to the library that private companies have on everyone.
Doubt that? Just open your mail any day; chances are good you'll have more junk mail—the corporations prefer to call it "direct mail"—than anything else. Check your email; if you're not being spammed hourly, you are probably one of the few people in the U.S. who is living in an underground bomb shelter with no access to the outside world.
And don't complain. You caused this.
Last week in the Trayvon Martin trial one of the more explosive moments came when Rachel Jeantel uttered the words "Creepy Ass Cracka" (translation...Cracker) in her account of Trayvon's description of his soon-to-be murderer. When Rachel recounted this epithet, the courtroom went dead silent while the social media channels exploded with chatter. Pundits, both on and offline, grabbed a hold of this moment and rode it until the proverbial wheels fell off, most failing to see the significance of this statement and even fewer exploring the historical accuracy of Trayvon's haunting description.
It would be a mistake for those of us who are engaged in social justice movements to allow the argument to be merely reduced to nigger vs. cracker. Indeed, Don Lemon of CNN did a brief informal poll where he asked both Blacks and Whites on the streets of New York about which term was more offensive. Not surprisingly, all who were asked which term they felt was more offensive universally responded that it was the "n-word."
Over one hundred professional economists have signed on to a petition in support of H.R. 1346, the "Catching Up to 1968 Act of 2013." The act, sponsored by Congressman Alan Grayson of Florida, would raise the federal minimum wage from its current level of $7.25 to $10.50 per hour, the approximate level it would have been if the 1968 minimum wage had kept up with inflation. The act also indexes the minimum wage to inflation, ensuring that the real value of the minimum wage would no longer deplete in the way that it has over the past decades.
The petition, signed by economists from dozens of universities and research institutes, explains how a minimum wage employee working full time at the current rate earns $15,080 a year -- 19 percent below the poverty line for a family of three. Raising the minimum wage to $10.50 would "deliver much needed living standard improvements to 45 million U.S. workers and their families."