The Headline Says It All

From the BBC:

Alleged Maori plot against whites

Maori activist Tame Iti remains behind bars after the police raids
Prosecutors in New Zealand have accused a group of Maori activists arrested on Monday of planning a violent campaign against the country's white majority.

...

Police arrested 17 people on Monday, during anti-terror raids targeting Maori and environmental activists.

Whoa...serious business. Environmentalists are getting caught up too! So why exactly are the Maori (or at least, a fringe group of Maori) waging war on the white man?

Police Association president Greg O'Connor said the operation was a "reality check" for New Zealanders who dismissed the threat of home-grown terrorism.

"This operation has been triggered by credible intelligence of a serious threat to New Zealand's safety and security, and the Police Association fully supports the actions taken by police yesterday," he said.

"We need to realise there are fringe elements in our society, as in all others, that draw inspiration and encouragement from extremist activities overseas that most of us would find horrifying," he added.

No mention of why the Maori in New Zealand might be motivated to take such actions...hmm....

{Note: No, I am not condoning terrorism in any form. Protest is cool, but not when you start endangering others. But I find it a bit strange to discuss a plot against White New Zealanders and then reveal no motive...}

Who Killed the Radio Star?

The RIAA was the first and the Copyright Board is getting in on the action.

One would think that will all the problems arising from the decline in CD sales, all parties in the music industry would be willing to embrace new technology and work with consumers to find solutions, right? Wrong!

From today's Washington Post:

Web Radio Seeks Resolution
Senate Hearing to Take Up Royalty Fees for Online Stations

By Catherine Rampell
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 24, 2007; Page D02

Internet radio webcasters are hoping a Senate hearing today will renew legislators' interest in their negotiations with the recording industry over royalty fees.

The hearing, held by the Senate Commerce Committee, will focus on the future of radio, the number of women and minorities who own radio stations, expansion and protection of community radio, and other aspects of a medium that is rapidly changing through technological advances and the recording industry's crumbling business model. The most contentious of these issues, though, involves what online radio stations will pay in order to sustain both innovations in radio and the artists whose music they feature.

Webcasters have argued that a royalty fee schedule set by the Copyright Royalty Board last spring would put online radio stations, and the independent musicians whose work they often play, out of business. This spring, legislators from the House and Senate proposed legislation to set Internet radio royalty rates at the lower levels used for satellite radio and jukeboxes, but then asked webcasters and copyright holders to try to negotiate a compromise.

Webcasters have been negotiating since July with SoundExchange, the organization that collects royalties on behalf of music copyright owners, over a new fee schedule. Webcasters say they are growing impatient with delays in the discussions.

"We made a royalty rate proposal on Aug. 23, and we have not heard a reply back," said Jonathan Potter, executive director of the Digital Media Association, which is negotiating on behalf of a group of 27 large Internet radio providers. "With this hearing we're now working to gather support for the Internet Radio Equality Act." The House version of the bill has 143 sponsors; its Senate counterpart has five.

SoundExchange said that discussions are continuing and that the organization has been meeting with individual webcasters to better understand their finances.

"We're moving as fast as we can considering there are so many parties involved," said Richard Ades, a spokesman for SoundExchange.

SoundExchange has already proposed a fee schedule that is lower than the Copyright Royalty Board's rates for commercial webcasters whose annual revenue is less than $1.25 million, and Ades said about 30 companies have accepted it. SoundExchange and the Digital Media Association also agreed in August to cap the total amount of per-channel fees that a Web service would have to pay, an issue that was of particular concern for webcasters such as Pandora that have millions of channels set up by individual users.

Still, webcasters say that even if there are favorable results to the negotiations, they are hoping for long-term legislation that will force all radio platforms -- including traditional AM/FM radio, which does not currently pay any royalties to SoundExchange -- to pay the same rates.

"We are in a strange situation of offering services that compete directly with terrestrial and satellite radio but have a different rate structure," said Tim Westergren, chief strategy officer and founder of Pandora. "There needs to be parity if we are going to survive."

Can we be honest for a second? My generation has gotten accustomed to hearing music for free. Through radio, through music videos, online, illegally downloaded, borrowed - we are accustomed to it. Sure, we might pay a token rate to listen. I'm happy to shell out a few dollars on Itunes, or pay less than $5.00 a month for services. But all these schemes to monetize online music and make crazy money are just going to end up biting the music industry in the ass.

Just my two cents.

Californians Taken Care of During Time of Crisis; Evokes Bitter Memories of Katrina

dnA has it so right.

From the Washington Post article (title linked):

In Washington, President Bush said California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) had assured him that he was receiving the help he requested from federal agencies.

"I assured him that if he needs anything and we're able to provide it, we'll do so," Bush told reporters. He called the relief effort "well coordinated."

Too bad Hurricane Katrina was the testing ground. Oh, and what does the article say about Katrina?

Bush, who was sharply criticized for his sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, will visit the region on Thursday

.

Just...why?

If I lived in the Philly, I would be pissed at Yahoo and Travel & Leisure:

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Philadelphia is home to the least attractive people in the United States, a survey of visitors and residents showed on Friday.

The city of more than 1.5 million people was also found to be among the least stylish, least active, least friendly and least worldly, according to the "America's Favorite Cities" survey by Travel & Leisure magazine and CNN Headline News.

About 60,000 people responded to the online survey -- at www.travelandleisure.com -- which ranked 25 cities in categories including shopping, food, culture, and cityscape, said Amy Farley, senior editor at the magazine.

For unattractiveness, Philadelphia just beat out Washington DC and Dallas/Fort Worth for the bottom spot. Miami and San Diego are home to the most attractive people, the poll found.

Just beat out DC? Blow me! DC is not ugly!

But Farley pointed out the results don't mean people in Philadelphia are ugly or the city is a bad place to visit.

"We were asking people to vote on attractiveness, not unattractiveness. Travel & Leisure editors believe there are a lot of attractive people in Philadelphia," she said.

"The relative attractiveness of its residents is only a minuscule factor in evaluating a city's merit."

Philadelphians' self-esteem has been undermined by national surveys showing they are among the fattest people in the United States. The American Obesity Association ranked the city in the top 10 for overweight people every year between 2000 and 2005.

And sporting pride in a city known for the fierce loyalty of its fans has been hurt by not having had a national champion in any of its four main sports since the 76ers won the National Basketball Association title in 1983.

Hugo Chavez and Venezuela

Is Hugo Chavez turning into a dictator?

The current issue of Adbusters seems to think so. While I am not well versed enough in Latin American politics to comment, but I have been checking out the headlines to check out what is happening in Venezula.

I came across this piece in the BBC news feed (title linked) that seems to confirm some of the dictator worries:

Venezuela's parliament, dominated by supporters of President Hugo Chavez, has begun its final debate on proposed changes to the constitution.
The changes would remove term limits for the presidency, and extend the term of office from six years to seven.

Mr Chavez on Tuesday added 25 amendments to a previous 33 passed by Congress, including proposals to detain citizens without charge in emergencies.

If passed, all the measures will be put to a popular referendum in December.

If Venezulean voting is free and democratic, then extending the term of the presidency should not be a problem. (Then again, does any country currently have free and democratic voting? I know the USA lost that title a while ago...)

The article continues:

There are no opposition politicians in the Venezuelan National Assembly, since most of the anti-Chavez parties boycotted the last election in 2005.

However, several members of parliament have questioned the way these late changes have been introduced, calling it constitutional fraud.

And what does Chavez want? According to the article:

Among the other changes to the constitution proposed by Mr Chavez are:


*Bringing in a maximum six-hour working day

*Cutting the voting age from 18 to 16

*Increasing presidential control over the central bank

*Strengthening state economic powers, allowing the government to control assets of private companies before a court grants an expropriation order.

New News on Obesity

The UK has decided that "Obesity 'not individuals' fault.'"

Or at least so says the BBC, in the title linked article. The article goes on to explain:

Individuals can no longer be held responsible for obesity and government must act to stop Britain "sleepwalking" into a crisis, a report has concluded.
The largest ever UK study into obesity, backed by government and compiled by 250 experts, said excess weight was now the norm in our "obesogenic" society.

Dramatic and comprehensive action was required to stop the majority of us becoming obese by 2050, they said.

[Side note: Umm...isn't there the chance these standards are slightly off? I read recently that the WHO lowered the threshholds for overweight and obese in the USA after comparing our standards to that of other countries. But how do we start comparing Americans to other countries? I was reading a manga recently in which one of the title characters was an abnormally tall girl. Her height? 5"7.]

Obesity, the authors concluded, was an inevitable consequence of a society in which energy-dense and cheap foods, labour-saving devices, motorised transport and sedentary work were rife.

If Bloggers Don't Mean Anything to the News...

...then why are we being censored?

Quite a bit of the mainstream media likes to turn their noses up at the blogosphere, even as more and more mainstream figures launch their own blogs, or begin blogging for profit. Go figure.

The title linked article from the BBC is actually a special report, detailing the crackdown on blogging across the globe:

Bloggers are now finding themselves prey to censorship from repressive governments as much as journalists in traditional media, a report says.

Reporters Without Borders' annual study of press freedom says China is one of the worst offenders, having imprisoned 50 people for postings on the internet.

I surfed over to the Reporters Without Borders site to see where America ranks.

48 United States of America

WTF? I didn't think it was that bad...

The report goes on to say:

There were slightly fewer press freedom violations in the United States (48th) and blogger Josh Wolf was freed after 224 days in prison. But the detention of Al-Jazeera’s Sudanese cameraman, Sami Al-Haj, since 13 June 2002 at the military base of Guantanamo and the murder of Chauncey Bailey in Oakland in August mean the United States is still unable to join the lead group.

*sigh* Fucking...well, there are a few people I could curse, but I'd rather not end up in jail unless it is worth it, so...

Blogging is serious business. Let's keep an eye out to make sure our rights aren't being compromised...

So, the unanswered question is...

What is going on with white kids?

Why are they so quick to shoot up a school?

MTV News has a headline that makes the sad irony of this situation screamingly obvious:

Cleveland School Shooter Fit Sadly Predictable Profile: Bullied Loner From Troubled Home

The obvious warning signs were all there: a troubled, violent young man who had been teased by peers and vowed revenge, who fit the stereotypical image of a "goth" loner and who warned some peers that he would shoot up his school.

Asa Coon, 14, the young man who went on a shooting spree at Cleveland's SuccessTech Academy on Wednesday morning fit the profile we've come to know from previous deadly school shootings. Schoolmates told CNN that after Coon was beaten up on Monday for saying "F--- God" during an argument with another student, he threatened, "I got something for y'all" (see "14-Year-Old Gunman Shoots Four, Commits Suicide At Cleveland High School").

Check out all the warning signs leading up to this:

While officials have not said definitively what might have set Asa Coon off, neighbors told CNN that the young man had been constantly teased and may have snapped because of the bullying. "Shut up, shut up! I hate this school!" Coon said as he began firing, according to an account given to The New York Times by a SuccessTech sophomore who was in a fourth-floor classroom during the spree. The 5-foot-5-inch teen was described in 911 calls as a "kind of chubby" goth who wore long black trench coats and black fingernail polish and was often mocked by his peers for his style of dress, prompting him to brag frequently about his plans to target those who teased him. As a white teen who dressed in black clothing, a dog collar and chains at a predominantly black school, Coon stood out among his peers, according to reports.

According to the Times, court records show that Coon's mother called police after he slapped her and swore at her when she tried to break up a fight between him and his twin sister in February 2006. A juvenile-court magistrate said Coon was ordered to anger-management sessions and he continued to be abusive toward his mother, at one point ramming his body into his mother's head during a meeting with his probation officer.

Records also show that he was rushed to the hospital a month later following a suicide attempt at a mental health facility he'd been sent to after he was charged with domestic violence in the altercation with his mom. He was suspended for 10 days in April 2006 for trying to injure another student and Cleveland CBS affiliate WOIO TV also reported that court records show that Coon exhibited bipolar tendencies and that he refused to take medication for his condition.

So, let's see...

We have bullying.

We have depression.

We have suicidal behavior. (And if you don't care abput your own life, how can you care for the life of others?)

Prior instances of violence.

Possible mental health problems.

Unstable family environment.

It appears that no one is wondering what would motivate this kid to shoot up his school. Apparently, all the signs are there.

What saddens me is I feel this epidemic will still get worse. With social services and arts programs being cut from budgets, and the increased pressure to achieve at all costs, I really feel for the kids coming up in this era.