Wednesday, July 23, 2014


News Clips For The Day


Americans more skeptical of climate change than others in global survey
By MICHAEL ROPPOLO CBS NEWS July 23, 2014

A new international survey shows that Americans are more divided and doubtful about climate change than people in other leading countries, even as the scientific evidence supporting it keeps piling up.

Ipsos-MORI, one of the largest market research companies in Great Britain, released its new Global Trends 2014 survey covering data from 200 questions with over 16,000 interviewees in 20 countries. The survey asked about a variety of issues, including technology, the economy, privacy, government and the environment.

When asked if they agreed with the statement, "The climate change we are currently seeing is largely the result of human activity," just 54 percent of Americans surveyed said yes. Although this number indicates a majority, the United States still ranked last among 20 countries in the poll.

The U.S. number was ten points lower than the next lowest countries on the list, Britain and Australia, where 64 percent agreed that humans are causing climate change. China topped the list, with 93 percent of its citizens agreeing that human activity is causing climate change. Large majorities also agreed in France (80 percent), Brazil (79 percent), Germany (72 percent) and other countries.

Similarly, 91 percent of those from China agreed with statement, "We are heading for environmental disaster unless we change our habits quickly." Only 57 percent of Americans thought so -- again, last among 20 nations surveyed.

Keith Gaby, communications director for climate and air at the Environmental Defense Fund, told CBS News that while American opinion is divided, there is some common ground. He noted a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that found 61 percent of respondents believe some type of action is needed against global climate change. Two-thirds in that survey said they either strongly or somewhat supported carbon emission caps.

"But it is true that a very loud minority has made action on climate change more difficult. I think that's because the issue -- which should be judged on science -- has gotten caught up in partisan politics," Gaby told CBS News in an email. "We need to [reopen] a productive, [bipartisan] dialogue about solutions that will help our environment and our economy."

Still, other research has shown that many Americans continue to doubt or even deny the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that that man-made factors are driving it. In April, an Associated Press-GfK poll found only 33 percent of Americans were extremely confident that the average temperature of the world is rising due to the existence of heat-trapping greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. In Gallup's annual environmental poll, 42 percent of respondents said reports of climate change are exaggerated.

Those opinions seem unswayed by mounting evidence like the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which reviewed thousands of scientific studies and concluded that climate change is already impacting everything from coastal flooding to global food supplies.

"Climate change is happening, the signs of it, the impacts, are detectible already," Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, lead author of the U.N. report, told CBS News in March. "If you live in a city, if you live along the coast, or if you eat to live, this is a problem you have to worry about."

Just this week, the evidence continued to accumulate. On Monday, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced it was the warmest June on record worldwide, with temperatures 1.3 degrees higher than the 20th century average. While overall temperatures in the U.S. were just slightly above average last month, a third of the country remains in the midst of severe drought.

The world also just experienced its warmest May on record. Thirteen of the 14 warmest years have occurred in the 21st century.

"Scientists are just reporting what they see. The data on climate change can sound pretty scary, but that's not the fault of scientists," Gaby said.

He urged scientists to continue their efforts to inform the public. "Show the costs to consumers, taxpayers, and business from stronger storms, heat waves, and health impacts. Show coastal communities the best science on sea level rise. Let people know that there are cost-effective solutions."




Ipsos-MORI, one of the largest market research companies in Great Britain, “released its new Global Trends 2014 survey covering data from 200 questions with over 16,000 interviewees in 20 countries. The survey asked about a variety of issues, including technology, the economy, privacy, government and the environment. When asked if they agreed with the statement, "The climate change we are currently seeing is largely the result of human activity," just 54 percent of Americans surveyed said yes. Although this number indicates a majority, the United States still ranked last among 20 countries in the poll. The U.S. number was ten points lower than the next lowest countries on the list, Britain and Australia, where 64 percent agreed that humans are causing climate change. China topped the list, with 93 percent of its citizens agreeing that human activity is causing climate change. Large majorities also agreed in France (80 percent), Brazil (79 percent), Germany (72 percent) and other countries.”

Another study by Environmental Defense Fund showed a slightly different result, with 61% supporting action to reduce carbon emissions, especially a carbon emissions cap. Gaby refers to “a very loud minority” who oppose action on the CO2 issued because of their political leanings. “'We need to [reopen] a productive, [bipartisan] dialogue about solutions that will help our environment and our economy,'" Gaby says. Republicans have long fought restrictions on the amount of pollution in general that power plants and manufacturing plants are allowed to release. It is based on “conservative” economics and in the present time on religion, as fundamentalist Protestants don't trust science in general and depend on God to handle problems. Everything that happens is “God's will.” Many of them believe that the “end of days” is coming at any time now, and such earthly problems as global warming may seem trivial to them.

It is possible that if people around the world support action to combat CO2 and other greenhouse gas proliferation there can be enough of a result without the US, Britain and Australia to slow down global warming. I will continue to track news articles on this subject, including scientific evidence of increased warming. I strongly hope for improvement in the situation.





Wisc. 'Slenderman' victim receives military purple heart
By CRIMESIDER STAFF CBS NEWS July 22, 2014

WAUKESHA, Wisc. -- Nearly two months after a 12-year-old Wisconsin girl was stabbed by her friends who wanted to pay tribute to 'Slenderman,' the victim's family says somebody anonymously donated a military purple heart to the girl. The family wants to thank the donor, reports CBS affiliate WDJT.

A military purple heart is only awarded to veterans who get injured or die during battle.

The family sent a statement to the media, saying, "Our family continues to be so moved by the prayers, well wishes, packages, financial support and purple hearts from around the world. Our little girl has received thousands of purple hearts from numerous countries and from every state in the United States."

The family has reported receiving more than $50,000 in donations in order to help with recovery costs.




Some anonymous American hero has sent his purple heart to this young heroine to honor and encourage her. I think that's beautiful. Others have sent over $50,000 for her healthcare and recovery. Bless them all.





Video Could Hold Clues in Brooklyn Bridge White Flag Mystery
By ABC News via Good Morning America
July 23, 2014

Police are looking for five people seen on surveillance video before bleached-white American flags were added to the poles atop the Brooklyn Bridge.

The group was seen walking on the bridge after 3 a.m. Tuesday. At around 3:30 a.m., the lights that illuminate the U.S. flags on either side of the bridge could be seen flickering and then going out completely. At 5:30 a.m., construction workers noticed that the seemingly-white flags had replaced the American flags, police said.

Officers later made their way up the bridge’s main cables, finding aluminum pans -- secured with zip ties -- covering the lights. The bleached flags were removed, and the traditional American flags were returned.

Brooklyn Bridge White Flag Mystery Deepens

Police admitted they don’t know who committed the security breach or how they accomplished it.

“I’m not particularly happy about the event,” NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton said Tuesday.

NYPD Deputy Commissioner John Miller, who also oversees intelligence and counter terrorism, said tests were being conducted on the two flags.

"At this time, there is no sign of any particular nexus to terrorism or even politics," Miller said. "It could be someone's art project or a statement, but it's not clear what that statement is."

The perpetrators may have had some experience climbing in construction or bridgework, or have previously been up to the bridge’s flag platforms, Miller said.

Either way, authorities said, whoever pulled off the breach was able to scale 276 feet, somehow making it past the locked gates that sit atop the bridge’s steel cables.
Eric Adams, Brooklyn’s borough president, is offering $5,000 for information leading to an arrest.

“This is the Brooklyn Bridge, and the only person who should surrender at this time is the person responsible for the desecration of this flag,” Adams said.

The famed bridge, one of the country’s oldest suspension bridges, was completed in 1883 and connects Brooklyn and Manhattan over the East River.




The insult involved in this makes me angry, but more importantly the Brooklyn Bridge has been the subject of terrorist threats, and this event simply proves that it is possible for someone to gain access to it for terrorist purposes. I hope they catch the people who did it. They have video of a group of four who may have taken down the flag. Perhaps it isn't sufficiently clear to identify individuals for prosecution. A $5,000 reward has been offered for information. Hopefully it will bring in some suspects.







Ex-Prosecutor Allegedly Hired Hitman to Take Out Rival
By ABC News via Good Morning America
July 23, 2014

A former Michigan prosecutor turned defense attorney is behind bars, accused of trying to hire a hitman to take out a rival attorney.

Clarence Gomery, 59, has been charged with homicide, solicitation of murder. He was arraigned last week, and a preliminary examination is scheduled for July 28.

His alleged target was Chris Cooke, a fellow attorney he was battling in civil court. Police say Gomery offered a man $20,000, plus another $1,000 to buy a gun to kill Cooke, but instead of shooting Cooke, the prospective hitman turned Gomery in to authorities.

Cooke says he is “eternally grateful” that Gomery’s alleged plot was foiled.

“I think God intervened to a degree, and there was a very ethical person who came forward,” Cooke said.

Grand Traverse County Sheriff Thomas Bensley was also thankful that authorities were contacted.

“Had he not come forward, Mr. Gomery may have very well found someone else to carry out his plan, and we’d be investigating a murder, not this instance,” Bensley said.

Prosecutors allege that Gomery targeted Cooke because he was representing another man who was suing Gomery over a real estate deal.

Gomery’s attorneys have argued that the married father and grandfather is not a financial flight risk because he’s declared bankruptcy.

Additionally, Gomery had no prior criminal history.

But Judge Michael Stepka called the facts of the case “significant and disturbing,” and set the bail at $5 million.

“I’m concerned for the safety of the public. I’m concerned for Mr. Cooke,” Stepka said.
Cooke said he is looking for the judicial system to run its course.

“I believe the right thing will occur, and the system will do its job,” he said.

If convicted on the solicitation of murder charge, Gomery could face a possible life sentence.





“Clarence Gomery, 59, has been charged with homicide, solicitation of murder. He was arraigned last week, and a preliminary examination is scheduled for July 28. His alleged target was Chris Cooke, a fellow attorney he was battling in civil court. Police say Gomery offered a man $20,000, plus another $1,000 to buy a gun to kill Cooke, but instead of shooting Cooke, the prospective hitman turned Gomery in to authorities.”

This looks like a case of a man who was worried about his finances, and chose to try to save himself by murder. Interestingly, he focused on the attorney who was arguing the lawsuit against him rather than the plaintiff himself. However it went, it is to me a case of complete abrogation of basic morals, rather than something like insanity. He didn't physically attack the man, but cleverly sought to stay in the background by hiring it done. Unfortunately for him, the man he chose to do the act had a conscience and turned him in to the police. Good for him!





Black Leaders Worry About Low Turnout in November – ABC
Las Vegas – July 23, 2014

Civil rights leaders at the NAACP annual convention in Las Vegas on Tuesday worried that dwindling African-American turnout in November could lead to the expansion of voter-identification laws that make it harder for that community to vote in subsequent contests.

In 2012, blacks turned out at a higher rate than whites for what is believed to be the first time in American history and helped re-elect President Obama. But in the prior midterm election, in 2010, blacks turned out at a much lower rate, and Republicans won control of the House of Representatives and many state and local offices.

Jotaka Eaddy, the NAACP's voting rights director, told a panel on black turnout and voter suppression that "as a result we saw a wave of voter-suppression laws." Eaddy said 22 states passed laws stiffening requirements on the identification needed to vote, a move that disproportionately affects poor and minority voters.

Added the Rev. William Barber, an NAACP board member: "We're in a position to have 2010 all over again unless we do something about it."

Polls have shown that Democrats, including black voters, are far less enthusiastic about the coming midterm elections than Republicans, who could win control of the U.S. Senate. President Obama has said that Democrats have to learn to mobilize voters in non-presidential elections.

One way blacks have been motivated is by warnings of Republican attempts to limit their ability to vote. Republicans say they are only trying to stamp out voter fraud, but Democrats have highlighted the efforts to mobilize black voters. That effort continued Tuesday as speakers noted that the upcoming election will occur as the Voting Rights Act has, in their view, been gutted by a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

NAACP President Cornell William Brooks said in an interview that because turnout generally drops among all groups in midterm elections, each vote has an even bigger impact — making voter protections more critical.

"Off-year elections only emphasize the degree to which we need a full and robust Voting Rights Act," Brooks said.



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday effectively struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 5-to-4 vote, freeing nine states, mostly in the South, to change their election laws without advance federal approval.
The court divided along ideological lines, and the two sides drew sharply different lessons from the history of the civil rights movement and the nation’s progress in rooting out racial discrimination in voting. At the core of the disagreement was whether racial minorities continued to face barriers to voting in states with a history of discrimination.

“Our country has changed,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.”

The decision will have immediate practical consequences. Texas announced shortly after the decision that a voter identification law that had been blocked would go into effect immediately, and that redistricting maps there would no longer need federal approval. Changes in voting procedures in the places that had been covered by the law, including ones concerning restrictions on early voting, will now be subject only to after-the-fact litigation.
President Obama, whose election as the nation’s first black president was cited by critics of the law as evidence that it was no longer needed, said he was “deeply disappointed” by the ruling.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg summarized her dissentfrom the bench, an unusual move and a sign of deep disagreement. She cited the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and said his legacy and the nation’s commitment to justice had been “disserved by today’s decision.”
She said the focus of the Voting Rights Act had properly changed from “first-generation barriers to ballot access” to “second-generation barriers” like racial gerrymandering and laws requiring at-large voting in places with a sizable black minority. She said the law had been effective in thwarting such efforts.
The majority held that the coverage formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, originally passed in 1965 and most recently updated by Congress in 1975, was unconstitutional. The section determined which states must receive clearance from the Justice Department or a federal court in Washington before they made minor changes to voting procedures, like moving a polling place, or major ones, like redrawing electoral districts.

Section 5, which sets out the preclearance requirement, was originally scheduled to expire in five years. Congress repeatedly extended it: for five years in 1970, seven years in 1975, and 25 years in 1982. Congress renewed the act in 2006 after holding extensive hearings on the persistence of racial discrimination at the polls, again extending the preclearance requirement for 25 years. But it relied on data from the 1975 reauthorization to decide which states and localities were covered.
“Congress — if it is to divide the states — must identify those jurisdictions to be singled out on a basis that makes sense in light of current conditions,” he wrote. “It cannot simply rely on the past.”

The decision did not strike down Section 5, but without Section 4, the later section is without significance — unless Congress passes a new bill for determining which states would be covered.
It was hardly clear, at any rate, that the court’s conservative majority would uphold Section 5 if the question returned to the court in the unlikely event that Congress enacted a new coverage formula. In a concurrence, Justice Thomas called for striking down Section 5 immediately, saying that the majority opinion had provided the reasons and had merely left “the inevitable conclusion unstated.”

The Supreme Court had repeatedly upheld the law in earlier decisions, saying that the preclearance requirement was an effective tool to combat the legacy of lawless conduct by Southern officials bent on denying voting rights to blacks.
Critics of Section 5 say it is a unique federal intrusion on state sovereignty and a badge of shame for the affected jurisdictions that is no longer justified.
In the 2004 election, the last before the law was reauthorized, the black registration rate in Mississippi was 76 percent, almost four percentage points higher than the white rate. In the 2012 election, Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “African-American voter turnout exceeded white voter turnout in five of the six states originally covered by Section 5.”

In her written dissent, Justice Ginsburg said that Congress was the right body to decide whether the law was still needed and where. Congress reauthorized the law in 2006 by large majorities; the vote was 390 to 33 in the House and unanimous in the Senate. President George W. Bush, a Republican, signed the bill into law, saying it was “an example of our continued commitment to a united America where every person is valued and treated with dignity and respect.”
“For a half century,” she wrote, “a concerted effort has been made to end racial discrimination in voting. Thanks to the Voting Rights Act, progress once the subject of a dream has been achieved and continues to be made.”
“The court errs egregiously,” she concluded, “by overriding Congress’s decision.”





“But in the prior midterm election, in 2010, blacks turned out at a much lower rate, and Republicans won control of the House of Representatives and many state and local offices. Jotaka Eaddy, the NAACP's voting rights director, told a panel on black turnout and voter suppression that "as a result we saw a wave of voter-suppression laws." Eaddy said 22 states passed laws stiffening requirements on the identification needed to vote, a move that disproportionately affects poor and minority voters.”

I hate this long-running tendency by Republicans to try to keep black people from voting, but I don't see a good reason for black or Hispanic voters to have a huge problem with getting a picture ID. Most states, even if they have required ID, must have some alternative proof at the polls to just a drivers license, as many people don't drive, especially in cities. The drivers license bureau, at least in Florida, will issue upon request a “non-driver's ID” if the citizen produces a birth certificate. The fee to get this ID will probably be small. To get a birth certificate it is generally necessary to write the county of birth and request one. If there is a charge it will be a small one. The NAACP used to be very active in the communities to do things like lead marches and register voters. Hopefully they will become more active again.

I would like to see local black leaders go to homes in the neighborhood to help people get their birth certificate, send letters to the state to ask for reinstatement of the right to vote in the case of felons who have served their time, and get them fully registered. They need to do that well ahead of the polling day and also try to solve problems like transportation to the polling site. The group ACORN was punished for certain practices in their community organizing, so the means used must be legal.






White House Adviser: Cease-Fire Should Include Demilitarization Of Gaza – NPR
by EYDER PERALTA
July 23, 2014

A top White House adviser says any cease-fire agreement between Israel and Palestinians must include the demilitarization of Gaza.

In an interview with NPR's Steve Inskeep, White House adviser Tony Blinken said "that needs to be the end result."

"There has to be some way forward that does not involve Hamas having the ability to continue to rain down rockets on Israeli civilians," Blinken said.

Steve then asked if this means the U.S. endorsed Israel's demand that Hamas give up its weapons.

"One of the results, one would hope, of a cease fire would be some form of demilitarization, so that again, this doesn't continue, doesn't repeat itself," Blinken said. "This is what we've seen happen multiple times over the past few years, which is these rockets coming from Gaza, which Hamas controls, as well as more recently the tunneling to Israel with terrorists trying to infiltrate Israel. And no country can accept that. So that needs to be the end result of this process."

Of course, this is news because Hamas is unlikely to accept that demand and adding it as a condition to a cease-fire agreement may mean this current conflict may be prolonged.

Aaron David Miller, a well-known Middle East analyst and vice president for new initiatives at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, wrote in Foreign Policy that the demilitarization of Gaza is "on the far end of the outcome spectrum."

He continues:

"This would mean a cessation of hostilities far different than in previous rounds of fighting. It would require a fundamental change in Gaza's political situation brought about either by military or diplomatic means. …

"It would also require someone to assume real responsibility for Gaza. A transformed and defanged Hamas is hard to imagine. But if Israel forcibly tried to dismantle Hamas as an organization, there would likely be massive casualties on both sides. And in these circumstances neitherEgypt, let alone the Palestinian Authority, could ride into Gaza on the backs of Israeli tanks amid the carnage.

"Demilitarization is impossible without a diplomatic solution by which Hamas agrees to give up its weapons in exchange for a fundamental change in the economic and political conditions in Gaza, perhaps a kind of mini Marshall Plan."





Aaron David Miller of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars recommends “a kind of mini-Marshall Plan” in which Gaza agrees to demilitarization and Israel to changes in the “economic and political conditions in Gaza,” as a basis for a cease-fire agreement. Everyone agrees that Hamas' attacks by air and even by underground tunneling are unacceptable, but many also think Israel should stop aggressive moves toward Palestine as well, such as Israel's colonizing Palestinian territory, even if it is disputed territory. Perhaps that could lead to real peace between the two enemies. I certainly hope so. Many Islamic radicals in the world have their eyes on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as grounds for their own jihad being continued against the West. Peace in Palestine could have a good feedback reaction among other world conflicts.