myforeclosureinfo.com

Sunday, May 21, 2006

Andrew Martinez, a former student at the University of California at Berkeley who was better known as “The Naked Guy” in the early 1990s, committed suicide on Thursday. He was 33.

Guards at the Santa Clara County Jail reportedly found Martinez unconscious in a jail cell, with a plastic bag cinched around his neck, at about 11:19 p.m. Wednesday. Martinez was taken to a local hospital where was pronounced dead early Thursday. He had been incarcerated since January 10 on charges of battery and assault with a deadly weapon.

Martinez is best known for attending his classes in the nude in the fall of 1992. He became an instant celebrity, appearing on national television talk shows where he defended his practice as a form of free speech and a challenge to sexual repression in Western society.

Martinez was eventually expelled from UC Berkeley for violating the school’s code of conduct, and Berkeley city officials passed a strict anti-nudity ordinance.

Family and acquaintances report that Martinez had been suffering from undetermined mental illness over the past decade for which he never found comprehensive treatment, and had been in and out of halfway houses, psychiatric institutions, and jail.

Said close acquaintance Bryan Schwartz, a civil rights lawyer in Washington, D.C., “He was a person with tremendous gifts and charisma who could have been a great asset to our society, but instead I feel like society — me included — failed him. It’s such a waste.”

Thursday, October 18, 2007

It can be difficult to be John Reed.

Christopher Hitchens called him a “Bin Ladenist” and Cathy Young editorialized in The Boston Globe that he “blames the victims of terrorism” when he puts out a novel like Snowball’s Chance, a biting send-up of George Orwell‘s Animal Farm which he was inspired to write after the terrorist attacks on September 11. “The clear references to 9/11 in the apocalyptic ending can only bring Orwell’s name into disrepute in the U.S.,” wrote William Hamilton, the British literary executor of the Orwell estate. That process had already begun: it was revealed Orwell gave the British Foreign Office a list of people he suspected of being “crypto-Communists and fellow travelers,” labeling some of them as Jews and homosexuals. “I really wanted to explode that book,” Reed told The New York Times. “I wanted to completely undermine it.”

Is this man who wants to blow up the classic literary canon taught to children in schools a menace, or a messiah? David Shankbone went to interview him for Wikinews and found that, as often is the case, the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

Reed is electrified by the changes that surround him that channel through a lens of inspiration wrought by his children. “The kids have made me a better writer,” Reed said. In his new untitled work, which he calls a “new play by William Shakespeare,” he takes lines from The Bard‘s classics to form an original tragedy. He began it in 2003, but only with the birth of his children could he finish it. “I didn’t understand the characters who had children. I didn’t really understand them. And once I had had kids, I could approach them differently.”

Taking the old to make it new is a theme in his work and in his world view. Reed foresees new narrative forms being born, Biblical epics that will be played out across print and electronic mediums. He is pulled forward by revolutions of the past, a search for a spiritual sensibility, and a desire to locate himself in the process.

Below is David Shankbone’s conversation with novelist John Reed.

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Ray Scott is running for the Family Coalition Party in the Ontario provincial election, in the Algoma-Manitoulin riding. Wikinews’ Nick Moreau interviewed him regarding his values, his experience, and his campaign.

Stay tuned for further interviews; every candidate from every party is eligible, and will be contacted. Expect interviews from Liberals, Progressive Conservatives, New Democratic Party members, Ontario Greens, as well as members from the Family Coalition, Freedom, Communist, Libertarian, and Confederation of Regions parties, as well as independents.

Monday, November 28, 2005

The Australian Government is currently building a “Guantanamo-style detention facility” – a $210 million, 800-bed Immigration Reception and Processing Centre – on Christmas Island, 1400km off Australia’s northwest coast. The project has residents concerned about the prospect of having imprisoned detainees and possible terrorism suspects as neighbours.

Christmas Islanders fear the remote detention facility will be Australia’s very own “Guantanamo Bay.”

The island’s Shire President, Gordon Thompson, says residents are also worried about the effects the controversial detention centre development will have on the island’s tourism industry. “We’re not building tourism based on a prison tour,” he said, also voicing fears that residents would be barred from areas on the northwest point of the island. He said locals were confused and did not know if the centre would just be used for refugees or as a Guantanamo-style prison. Another resident complained that access to popular fishing and snorkelling spots on the island would be limited.

Department of Immigration (DIMIA) said that when construction of the Christmas Island facility was finished, a review was likely to be taken to close some mainland detention centres such as Baxter in South Australia. “Its (Christmas Island) only use is as an immigration reception and processing centre,” said a DIMIA spokesperson.

Mr Thompson, who is opposed to the imprisonment of refugees, said the centre was being built on the island in an effort to avoid public scrutiny from mainland Australians. “It’s a long way from the mainland where the lawyers and trouble-makers are,” he said. “We’ll be kept away from it.”

A resident of eight years, two as shire president, Mr Thompson said he did not trust the federal Government because it ignored the concerns of the 1500-strong community. “There’s a sense the Commonwealth will do what it wants,” he said. “You’ve got to be a little suspicious of a government that lets its own people be held in Guantanamo Bay, like David Hicks. People here have that feeling that when something big is being built away from the media – it’s not fishy, it’s smelly.”

Mr Thomson said the Shire council were not notified when the current Christmas Island detention centre reopened last week to detain seven West Timorese asylum seekers.

Azmi Yon, president of the island’s Malay association, has lived for 37 years on the island and wants the federal Government to leave it alone. He said locals were confused and did not know if the new centre would just be used for refugees or as a Guantanamo-style prison. “We need something from them in black and white to say what it is,” he said. “Tell us something, don’t keep us in the dark.”

Mr Yon said the island was home to a harmonious group of Chinese, Malays and Europeans who respected each other’s cultures. “Why disturb an isolated and unique environment when you can (build the centre) somewhere else?” he said.

Mothballed Detention Centre Reopened

A group of seven asylum seekers were transported by DIMIA to Christmas Island last week. One detainee, his wife and infant children have been allowed to live in the community under new detainment laws. However, three other asylum seekers remain the sole inhabitants of the current Christmas Island detention centre – reopened for the seven from Indonesian West Timor on November 17.

Refugee advocates, Democrats and Greens senators said the recent West Timorese asylum seekers had been “shunted” to the remote facility at a massive cost, raising more doubts about the Howard Government’s promise not to detain children.

Democrats senator Andrew Bartlett, who visited a previous group of 52 Vietnamese asylum seekers in December last year, said he was especially alarmed to learn that children were still being detained despite the Government’s promise that children would only be detained as a last resort.

“We want to know exactly what the cost has been to unnecessarily fly these people over to Christmas Island and why, seeing that they managed to arrive within the accepted migration zone and should be processed here,” Senator Bartlett said. “The only possible reason this family has been transferred to such a remote location is the very deliberate intention of the Government to deny these people proper processing of their claims and to prevent them from accessing adequate legal and other support. It is also assists the Government to keep the family away from media attention or public scrutiny.”

Australian Greens Senator Kerry Nettle says the Government should suspend the construction of the Christmas Island detention centre and review the necessity of the facility. “At a time when the Government claims to be reforming its immigration detention system, it is increasing its capacity to lock people up,” Senator Nettle said. “After the recent scandals and abuses, the public want alternatives to detention, but the Government insists on building more empty prisons.”

According to Immigration Department figures provided at the November 2005 Senate Estimates:

* The current immigration detention centres – Baxter, Villawood, Maribyrnong, Perth, Port Augusta and the existing Christmas Island facility, already have a capacity to hold 1,688 people and they have contingency places for 667 more people, bringing the total capacity to 2,355.

*Port Hedland has a capacity to hold 820 people and is costing $3 million a year to be ready to reopen.

*The infamous Woomera Detention Centre holds 800 and costs $2.6 million to keep mothballed.

Senator Nettle said: “Australia’s total immigration detention capacity is already 3,975 people. The locals on Christmas Island are opposed to this facility, yet the Government is wasting $210 million on another empty prison. Is the government planning to increase the number of people in detention and deport people from the mainland to Christmas Island?”

Environmental Concerns

There has also been environmental concerns about the development. The detention centre site is adjacent to prime “Abbotts booby” habitat, in the north-west corner of the island, and is surrounded by the Christmas Island National Park.

Endangered Abbott’s Boobies nest in tall rainforest trees immediately to the north, south and south-east of the site, and their proximity puts the species at the mercy of turbulence generated by the passage of wind across the clearing.

The National Park encloses the entire range of at least 35 endemic species, more than any other Australian protected area. It is part of the network of habitats of migratory species that Australia must protect under international agreements such as the Japan-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (JAMBA) and the China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (CAMBA).

The Wilderness Society have said, “There are several serious environmental concerns with the selection of this site, not least of which was the selection process itself, the Howard government’s self-exemption from environmental scrutiny normally required under the EPBC Act, and its commitment to best practice environmental measures during construction of the detention centre.”

Research has shown that Abbott’s Boobies nesting within 300 m of clearings experience significantly lower breeding success than birds nesting further away. At last count, 36% of breeding sites across the island were located within this 300 m danger zone.

The centre, under construction since January this year, is not due to be operational until late 2006.

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Vietnamese officials have reported that at least 22 people were killed by Typhoon Ketsana, which brought torrential rainfalls and heavy flooding to the central areas of the country.

“According to our official count as of Tuesday afternoon from the local authorities, the typhoon killed 22 people,” said an unnamed official from the country’s national flood and storm committee.

170,000 people were evacuated ahead of the typhoon, which brought peak winds of 90 miles per hour (144 kilometres per hour). Typhoon Ketsana had earlier battered the Philippines, killing over two hundred people there.

Ketsana made landfall in the afternoon on Tuesday, 37 miles south of Danang, the National Weather Center reported.

Flights departing and arriving at the Hue and Danang airports were cancelled due to inclement weather, and fishing boats were ordered to return to shore.

Several of the casualties from the storm were due to falling trees and power lines. Truong Ngoc Nhi, the vice governor of the Quang Ngai province, south of Danang, said that “there’s a blackout across our entire province. Streets are strewn with fallen trees and utility poles. It looks like a battlefield.”

Provincial disaster official Nhuyen Minh Tuan said that “the rivers are rising and many homes are flooded, and several mountainous districts have been isolated by mudslides.”

Friday, July 17, 2009Following similar threats by workers at New Fabris and Nortel, workers at JLG in Tonneins, France, threatened to blow up several platform cranes. The JLG factory announced in April 2009 that it will fire 53 of its 163 workers by the end of 2009, while the remaining 110 jobs will not be secure over the next 2 years.

JLG Tonneins was acquired in 2006 with its parent JLG Industries, a maker of aerial work platforms, by the U.S.-based Oshkosh Corporation. Despite being hugely profitable in the past, production has been much reduced since 2008 with the contraction of the construction industry and lower demand for its products. Despite excellent past results the new American management demanded sweeping cuts at the company.

In the view of locals, “the company’s actions are a disgrace given the expensive perks, such as official cars, for its corporate fat cats, compared to the sacrifice, silence, and dignity demanded by the company of those it has made redundant.”

The management offered severance pay of € 3,000 (US $4,200), however the workers demanded a severance package commensurate with “the wealth that their labor has generated.” Worker’s delegates requested a “supra-legal” payment of € 30,000, on Thursday 16 of July the management responded with a counter offer of € 16,000. On Thursday night the worker’s actions secured the € 30,000 settlement initially demanded.

[edit]