José Cláudio Ribeiro da Silva fought against illegal loggers and had received death threats but was refused police protection Six months after predicting his own murder, a leading rainforest defender has reportedly been gunned down in the Brazilian Amazon. José Cláudio Ribeiro da Silva and his wife, Maria do Espírito Santo, are said to have been killed in an ambush near their home in Nova Ipixuna, in Pará state, about 37 miles from Marabá. According to a local newspaper, Diário do Pará , the couple had not had police protection despite getting frequent death threats because of their battle against illegal loggers and ranchers. On Tuesday there were conflicting reports from about whether the killing happened on Monday night or Tuesday morning. A police spokesperson said there were reports of a “double homicide” at the settlement called Maçaranduba 2. In a speech at a TEDx event in Manaus, in November , Da Silva spoke of his fears that loggers would try to silence him. “I could be here today talking to you and in one month you will get the news that I disappeared. I will protect the forest at all costs. That is why I could get a bullet in my head at any moment … because I denounce the loggers and charcoal producers, and that is why they think I cannot exist. [People] ask me, ‘are you afraid?’ Yes, I’m a human being, of course I am afraid. But my fear does not silence me. As long as I have the strength to walk I will denounce all of those who damage the forest.” Roberto Smeraldi, founder and director of the environmental group Amigos da Terra, who worked with Da Silva in the Amazon, said he had been in a meeting with Brazil’s president, Dilma Rousseff, discussing changes to the forest code when the news broke of Da Silva being killed. “He was convinced he would be killed one day,” Smeraldi said. He added that Da Silva had been “very active” in the fight against illegal forest burning and logging. According to Brazilian media reports, Rousseff has asked her chief of staff, Gilberto Carvalho, to offer support to the murder investigation. “We now have another Chico Mendes,” said Felipe Milanez, an environmental journalist from São Paulo, referring to the Amazonian rubber-tapper who became an environmental martyr after his murder in 1988. Milanez said that in a recent phone conversation with Da Silva’s wife she had suggested the situation was “getting very ugly”. Milanez added: “He knew the threats were very real. He was scared.” A 2008 report compiled by Brazilian human rights groups listed Da Silva as one of dozens of Amazon human rights and environmental activists “considered at risk” of assassination. Brazil Forests Tom Phillips guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Authorities urged to do more to get people out of harm’s way as new violent storm forecasted The authorities in the Missouri town devastated by the worst tornado in modern history tested their warning sirens on Tuesday amid calls for better alarm systems to get people out of reach of violent storms. At least 117 people were killed when the town of Joplin took a direct hit from a tornado. Hundreds of others remain missing in the town, which saw 30% of its buildings flattened. Seventeen survivors have been found in the rubble of the town, officials said, but recovery operations were affected by violent weather. Two emergency workers were struck by lightning on Monday. With forecasts of a new violent storm system heading for Oklahoma and south-western Missouri, the head of the national weather service said the authorities needed to do more to get people out of harm’s way. “We need to ask ourselves, what can we do to protect Americans?” Jack Hayes, the federal agency’s director, said. “I have to say, it’s not enough. We have to do more.” The national weather service is considering introducing smartphone warnings and other systems to increase its warning capability. Storm sirens sounded more than 20 minutes before the tornado hit Joplin just before 6pm on Sunday – more than the 13- or 14-minute average warning time, said Greg Carbin, the meteorologist who heads the weather service’s storm prediction centre. That should have been ample time to get to cover. But forecasters are growing concerned that people – especially those living in tornado-prone areas of the south and central United States – are becoming blase about warnings, or that the warnings are not getting through in time. Increasing the warning lead time might even make the problem of complacency worse because it would also affect accuracy of forecasts, said Carbin. “That is something we grapple with all the time,” said Carbin. “If we want to push the envelope with respect to predictions are we also going to overwarn or cry wolf too often? I would argue that there may be some signs we are already doing that.” However, Missouri’s governor, Jay Nixon, suggested some people in Joplin could not hear the tornado sirens over strong winds and heavy rain. “When the pressure caused those alarms to go off, there was so much rain, so much hail many of the folks couldn’t even hear it,” he said. There were similar complaints after last month’s deadly tornadoes in Alabama and other southern states when thunderstorms blew down powerlines and weather service systems, leaving mobile phones as the only means of communication, Bob Henson of the University Corporation of Atmospheric Research said. “People tend to confirm a warning themselves before acting. Did the sirens go off? What is the TV meteorologist saying? What are my family and friends Does it look like a tornado is approaching?doing?” he said. Fast-changing conditions also lead people to underestimate the danger or assume they have more time to get to safety. And, Henson wrote in a recent blog, there may be no readily safe haven anyway. “As with other tornado outbreaks across the southern US, it’s likely that a disproportionate number of deaths occurred in mobile homes, which are not designed to withstand major tornadoes or other severe wind and water hazards.” Missouri United States Natural disasters and extreme weather Suzanne Goldenberg guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
British aircraft join heaviest bombardment of Tripoli so far and commanders prepare to deploy Apache helicopters Ministers have agreed to step up the scale and intensity of military action against Libya while privately admitting there is now a danger the conflict could drag on for months, well-placed Whitehall officials have told the Guardian. As British aircraft joined the heaviest bombardment so far of the Libyan capital Tripoli and HMS Ocean prepared to head for the country’s coastal waters with Apache attack helicopters on board, officials said the coalition was attempting to apply psychological pressure on the Gaddafi regime as well as depriving it of equipment. Government sources made clear the Apaches were being sent to Libya, and the intention was to use them, despite Nick Harvey, the armed forces minister, insisting in the Commons that no final decision had yet been taken. The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, told a London news conference on Monday night that the opposition had organised a legitimate and credible interim council that was committed to democracy. The US has invited the council to set up an office in Washington. “Their military forces are improving and when Gaddafi inevitably leaves, a new Libya stands ready to move forward,” she said. However, British officials made plain that while they hoped the Gaddafi regime would collapse soon, they did not hold out much expectation it would do so. RAF Tornados, armed with 230kg (500lb) guided bombs, on Tuesday attacked a military vehicle depot within Gaddafi’s large Bab al-Aziziyah complex in the centre of Tripoli, the Ministry of Defence said. As the result of the shockwaves, plaster was reported to have fallen from the ceilings in a hotel where foreign reporters were staying, about 1.2 miles (2km) away. A Nato official said the facility had been used to attack civilians. “It is definitely, in terms of one target, the largest and most concentrated attack we have done to date,” a Nato official in Brussels told Reuters. “This complex is where members of the Gaddafi regime, not only military but hit squads, were based in the early days of the violent suppression of the popular uprising, and it has been active ever since.” A Libyan government spokesman said three people had been killed and 150 wounded, and that the casualties were local residents. In London, Harvey told MPs that while “no decision” had yet been taken to use Apaches, the advantage of using the helicopters was that they could “strike moving targets with greater precision”. He dismissed the widely-held view that the use of Apaches in close-quarter attacks would be a significant escalation in military operations. “The targets would remain the same” and it was “simply a tactical shift”, Harvey told MPs. Asked about the estimated £1bn cost of the conflict to the UK if it continued into the autumn, he said the chancellor had made clear the cost would be met by the Treasury. The minister was summoned to the Commons to answer an urgent question tabled by the shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, following reports that military commanders had decided to deploy the Apaches following a green light from the National Security Council chaired by David Cameron. HMS Ocean, with four Apaches on board, is expected off the Libyan coast within a week. The helicopters, armed with Hellfire missiles and 30mm cannon, will be used to mount a 16-mile buffer zone around the port city of Misrata, defence officials said. After the Commons exchanges, Murphy said: “Parliament has not written the government a blank cheque on Libya and ministers should never keep the British public in the dark over major military decisions. The deployment of attack helicopters would represent a significant moment and an escalation of the conflict.” Libya Military Middle East Africa Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Mahmoud Abbas must be prepared to accept Jewish state alongside Palestinian state, Israeli PM says in hardline speech Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, has spurned American pressure to make a significant gesture towards peace to stave off international support for a declaration of Palestinian independence by telling the US Congress that the Palestinians want a country in order to continue the conflict, not end it. Netanyahu had been under pressure from the White House to outline immediate and practical steps towards peace after Barack Obama warned him that the US was increasingly unable to shield it from growing frustration over what is seen as Israel’s intransigence. But while Israeli officials had billed the speech as intended to “garner major international attention” and shift the ground from under the Palestinians attempts to win UN recognition for a state at a vote in September, Netanyahu remained largely uncompromising. The Israeli PM told an overwhelmingly sympathetic Congress that it is the Palestinians themselves, led by Mahmoud Abbas, who are the main obstacle to peace. “Why has peace not been achieved? Because so far the Palestinians have been unwilling to accept a Palestinian state if it meant accepting a Jewish state alongside it,” he said. “President Abbas must do what I have done. I have stood before my people and I have said I will accept a Palestinian state. It’s time for President Abbas to stand before his people and say: I will accept a Jewish state. “Those six words will change history … With those words, I will be prepared to make a far-reaching compromise.” Palestinian officials accused Netanyahu of grandstanding for Congress, and said his demands for an immediate recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, rather than as part of an overall peace deal, was yet another obstacle to an agreement. “What came in Netanyahu’s speech will not lead to peace,” said Abbas’s spokesman, Nabil Abu Rdainah. Netanyahu said he recognised that a peace agreement would require Israel to give up some of the Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, known to Israelis as Judea and Samaria. But he rejected the contention that Israelis had no legitimate claim to the West Bank. “In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers,” he said, to a standing ovation. “We’re not the British in India. We’re not the Belgians in [the] Congo. This is the land of our forefathers. “But there is another truth. The Palestinians share this small land with us. We seek a peace in which they will be neither Israel’s subjects nor its citizens.” Netanyahu repeated previous assertions that he was prepared to make what he called “painful sacrifices” that would involve a partial pullout from the West Bank while retaining control of larger Jewish settlements that he described as suburbs of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. He said that Israel recognised that a Palestinian state had to be large enough to be politically and economically viable, but added that Israel “will not return to the indefensible boundaries of 1967″. “Israel will be generous on the size of the Palestinian state, but will be very firm on where we put the border with it,” he said. Netanyahu’s at times belligerent tone is not likely to persuade countries considering how to vote at the UN on Palestinian statehood, particularly European governments. He said that support for any such move would undermine not further the cause of peace. “The Palestinian attempt to impose a settlement through the United Nations will not bring peace. It should be forcefully opposed by all those who want to see this conflict end,” said Netanyahu. “Peace cannot be imposed; it must be negotiated.” Netanyahu addressed the dramatic changes in his region by saying that “an epic battle is now underway in Middle East between tyranny and freedom” that “holds out the promise of a new dawn of freedom”. But he said that the world should remember how quickly the hope of freedom was snuffed out after the Iranian revolution in 1979. “The Middle East stands at a fateful crossroads and I pray that the people of the region choose the path less travelled, the path of liberty,” he said. Netanyahu’s speech, and particularly his emphasis on no return to the 1967 borders, was not only a snub to Obama, but a recognition that he has largely outmanoeuvred the White House over recent months. At Obama’s first meeting as president with Netanyahu two years ago, the US president demanded an immediate halt to settlement construction as a first step to a swift and comprehensive peace settlement. The Israeli prime minister openly defied the pressure to the alarm of some in his own country who feared that he could not afford to alienate Washington. But the stand paid off for Netanyahu. Obama has since backed away from the demand on settlements. The resignation of Obama’s Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, this month marks the reemergence of a traditional and more cautious White House approach to the conflict. Mitchell had pressed the administration to outline its own plan for a peace settlement if there was no progress between the two sides, a strategy that initially won favour among senior officials keen to break the deadlock that permitted Israel to continue expanding Jewish settlements in the occupied territories and tightening its grip on Jerusalem. In Mitchell’s place has reemerged his deputy, Dennis Ross, who has served three US presidents as Middle East envoy. Ross has been criticised as being too close to Israel. His deputy at earlier negotiations, Aaron David Miller, once described him as acting as “Israel’s lawyer”. Bassam Abu Shareef, a political adviser to the last Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, has said that Mitchell quit because of the “extreme bias” and obstructiveness of Ross. Israel Palestinian territories Binyamin Netanyahu US Congress Middle East US foreign policy United States US politics Obama administration Barack Obama Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
The US president and wife Michelle’s first day in the UK included meeting the Queen and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge at Buckingham Palace
Continue reading …HEARTLESS: As Cantor’s tornado comments show, that’s the word for today’s Republicans
May 24, 2011 No Commentenlarge In recent days we have talked a lot about Rep. Paul Ryan and his band of House Republicans championing a draconian and disastrous budget plan that will end Medicare as we know it . It is not very difficult to discern how cruel this plan is. Ryan’s plan will force seniors to pay more than twice as much out-of-pocket , and slash half a trillion in benefits and services through Medicaid , putting insurance companies back in charge of health care and nursing home benefits for tens millions of seniors and families. The word that comes into mind when you read about this plan is an old-fashioned one: HEARTLESS. It’s the word that comes to mind when you hear the latest from Republican Leader Eric Cantor , who is out there saying Congress will not pay for the heart-breaking and unprecedented tornado disaster relief in Missouri unless spending is “cut from somewhere else”: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Monday that if Congress passes an emergency spending bill to help Missouri’s tornado victims, the extra money will have to be cut from somewhere else. “ If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental ,” Mr. Cantor, Virginia Republican, told reporters at the Capitol. The term “pay-fors” is used by lawmakers to signal cuts or tax increases used to pay for new spending. This kind of heartlessness axes initiatives that strengthen the middle-class and protect senior citizens, students and the poor. And now they are publicly flaunting their collective state of minds — even when it comes to areas where Americans have always come together to do the right thing and help one another, like natural disasters, or catastrophic health events. This is just the logical outcome of the politics embodied in the Ryan budget proposal and embraced eagerly by our insane, Tea Partying Republican Party. One such Republican, as Karoli just pointed out , is Rep. Rob Woodall: “Hear yourself, ma’am. Hear yourself,” Woodall told the woman. “You want the government to take care of you, because your employer decided not to take care of you. My question is, ‘When do I decide I’m going to take care of me?’” Steve Benen notes why Woodall’s callous comments are significant : This is important rhetoric. Woodall is obviously something of an extremist, but at least he’s presenting the Republican agenda in stark, cold terms. His remarks come at the intersection of candor, callousness, and conservatism — seniors who worked for companies that don’t offer benefits to retirees are out of luck. If they didn’t save enough to cover their own medical bills, they’ll just have to suffer or go to some other country. The last thing Woodall wants to do is “save” Medicare. He prefers a system in which Medicare doesn’t exist and seniors fend for themselves. What’s that word again? HEARTLESS.
Continue reading …
Leading medical economist says health service’s spending power set to fall by 0.9% in real terms David Cameron’s pledge to increase the NHS budget in real terms has been challenged by a leading health economist who claims the service’s spending power is set to fall. The NHS budget in England will be 0.9% lower by 2014-15 than it was in the financial year that ended last month, Professor John Appleby writes in the British Medical Journal. Although ministers are giving the service more cash in each of the remaining four years of this parliament, inflation will mean its purchasing power is eroded so much that it will drop, he says. Appleby, chief economist at the King’s Fund health thinktank, contradicts Cameron and health secretary Andrew Lansley’s repeated promises to deliver year-on-year rises in real terms. They claim the NHS will receive an extra £11.5bn over the next four years thanks to protecting the health budget, increasing it from £103.8bn in 2010-11 to £114.4bn by 2014-15. Appleby does not dispute the cash increases but insists that “by 2014-15 the amount of money the NHS has to spend in real terms, its purchasing power, will have gone down by 0.9%.” He based his predictions on Treasury estimates of inflation in the economy as a whole, and the likelihood of NHS staff pressing for pay increases once the current three-year freeze ends in 2013. The Department of Health rejected Appleby’s claim. “In England, the NHS budget is due to rise by £11.5bn over the next four years. This financial year, starting April 2011, the NHS in England is getting £2.6bn extra cash, or 3% extra. The spending review announced real terms increases every year in the NHS in England”, said a spokesman. But John Healey, Labour’s shadow health secretary, said: “Labour raised the shortfall in health spending at the time of the budget. But this is now hard proof by independent experts that David Cameron is breaking his promise to give a real rise in funding to the NHS, and it will add to the pressure he’s already putting on the health service through his huge top-down reorganisation.” Meanwhile, the leaders of consortiums of GPs in England are strongly opposed to having a local hospital consultant on their board, a snapshot survey for the health website Pulse found. That could prove problematic as the Commons health select committee and the British Medical Association both back the idea, while Cameron has appeared sympathatic to the idea. Consortium chairs believe it would produce a conflict of interest to give places to consultants whose hospitals have contracts with the GPs. The NHS Confederation, which represents 95% of the NHS’s employers in England, wants major changes to the health and social care bill as part of the government’s “listening” exercise. While it welcomes key elements of it and the need for some reform generally, it says the case for a big overhaul “has yet to be clearly made” and that it does not address the NHS’s serious financial challenges. NHS Health David Cameron Public sector cuts Public services policy Public finance Denis Campbell guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Leading medical economist says health service’s spending power set to fall by 0.9% in real terms David Cameron’s pledge to increase the NHS budget in real terms has been challenged by a leading health economist who claims the service’s spending power is set to fall. The NHS budget in England will be 0.9% lower by 2014-15 than it was in the financial year that ended last month, Professor John Appleby writes in the British Medical Journal. Although ministers are giving the service more cash in each of the remaining four years of this parliament, inflation will mean its purchasing power is eroded so much that it will drop, he says. Appleby, chief economist at the King’s Fund health thinktank, contradicts Cameron and health secretary Andrew Lansley’s repeated promises to deliver year-on-year rises in real terms. They claim the NHS will receive an extra £11.5bn over the next four years thanks to protecting the health budget, increasing it from £103.8bn in 2010-11 to £114.4bn by 2014-15. Appleby does not dispute the cash increases but insists that “by 2014-15 the amount of money the NHS has to spend in real terms, its purchasing power, will have gone down by 0.9%.” He based his predictions on Treasury estimates of inflation in the economy as a whole, and the likelihood of NHS staff pressing for pay increases once the current three-year freeze ends in 2013. The Department of Health rejected Appleby’s claim. “In England, the NHS budget is due to rise by £11.5bn over the next four years. This financial year, starting April 2011, the NHS in England is getting £2.6bn extra cash, or 3% extra. The spending review announced real terms increases every year in the NHS in England”, said a spokesman. But John Healey, Labour’s shadow health secretary, said: “Labour raised the shortfall in health spending at the time of the budget. But this is now hard proof by independent experts that David Cameron is breaking his promise to give a real rise in funding to the NHS, and it will add to the pressure he’s already putting on the health service through his huge top-down reorganisation.” Meanwhile, the leaders of consortiums of GPs in England are strongly opposed to having a local hospital consultant on their board, a snapshot survey for the health website Pulse found. That could prove problematic as the Commons health select committee and the British Medical Association both back the idea, while Cameron has appeared sympathatic to the idea. Consortium chairs believe it would produce a conflict of interest to give places to consultants whose hospitals have contracts with the GPs. The NHS Confederation, which represents 95% of the NHS’s employers in England, wants major changes to the health and social care bill as part of the government’s “listening” exercise. While it welcomes key elements of it and the need for some reform generally, it says the case for a big overhaul “has yet to be clearly made” and that it does not address the NHS’s serious financial challenges. NHS Health David Cameron Public sector cuts Public services policy Public finance Denis Campbell guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Ed Schultz talked to former Republican Governor of Minnesota Arne Carlson about the record Tim Pawlenty actually had as the state’s governor compared to the rhetoric we’re hearing from him on the campaign trail now. You can read more in the Carlson’s op ed here — The Presidency: A Bit Short is Pawlenty : One thing is certain about Monday’s Presidential announcement by former Governor Tim Pawlenty: he will not bring up the fact that he presided over one of the larger tax increases in Minnesota’s history. Yes, that is quite correct. During his two terms as Governor, property taxes rose a stunning $2.5 billion – more than the previous 16 years combined (see note below). To further amplify this enormous growth consider this fact: in the 8 years prior to Governor Pawlenty, property taxes rose some $716 million. Compare this to the $2.5 billion increase during the Pawlenty years. That is an approximate 250 percent increase. But this data also illustrates the close relationship between state and local spending in Minnesota. All too often, state budget cuts simply translate into increased local costs. This is particularly true when considering school financing and local government aids. Further evidence of this can be seen in the fact that from 2003 to today, Minnesota has been rolling from deficit to deficit and in spite of warnings from Moody’s concerning the folly of short-term fixes, Governor Pawlenty continued to achieve budget balance by employing the following: ➢ Borrowing over $1 billion from the tobacco settlement – money designated for health care. ➢ Taking over $2 billion from the federal stimulus funds. ➢ Borrowing over $1.4 billion from K-12 education funding. ➢ Borrowing over $400 million from the Healthcare Access Fund for low-income families. ➢ Accelerating tax payments. ➢ Delaying bill payments. ➢ Engaging in accounting shifts. In the process, Moody’s lowered Minnesota’s bond rating. Go read the rest and Think Progress’ The Wonk Room has much more on Pawlenty here — FACT CHECK: Pawlenty’s ‘Truth’ Campaign Is Already Littered With Lies : This morning, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (R) formally announced his candidacy for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination in Des Moines, Iowa, promising Americans “ a different approach ” to his campaign and potential presidency. “I am going to tell you the truth. The truth is, Washington’s broken,” Pawlenty declared. “It’s time for new leadership. It’s time for a new approach. And, it’s time for America’s president – and anyone who wants to be president – to look you in the eye and tell you the truth.” From there, Pawlenty preceded to list various “truths” about the state of the nation, many of which appear — on closer examination — to be either completely untrue or grossly exaggerated: They’ve got a long post there I don’t want to just copy and paste, so go read the rest as well.
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Ed Schultz talked to former Republican Governor of Minnesota Arne Carlson about the record Tim Pawlenty actually had as the state’s governor compared to the rhetoric we’re hearing from him on the campaign trail now. You can read more in the Carlson’s op ed here — The Presidency: A Bit Short is Pawlenty : One thing is certain about Monday’s Presidential announcement by former Governor Tim Pawlenty: he will not bring up the fact that he presided over one of the larger tax increases in Minnesota’s history. Yes, that is quite correct. During his two terms as Governor, property taxes rose a stunning $2.5 billion – more than the previous 16 years combined (see note below). To further amplify this enormous growth consider this fact: in the 8 years prior to Governor Pawlenty, property taxes rose some $716 million. Compare this to the $2.5 billion increase during the Pawlenty years. That is an approximate 250 percent increase. But this data also illustrates the close relationship between state and local spending in Minnesota. All too often, state budget cuts simply translate into increased local costs. This is particularly true when considering school financing and local government aids. Further evidence of this can be seen in the fact that from 2003 to today, Minnesota has been rolling from deficit to deficit and in spite of warnings from Moody’s concerning the folly of short-term fixes, Governor Pawlenty continued to achieve budget balance by employing the following: ➢ Borrowing over $1 billion from the tobacco settlement – money designated for health care. ➢ Taking over $2 billion from the federal stimulus funds. ➢ Borrowing over $1.4 billion from K-12 education funding. ➢ Borrowing over $400 million from the Healthcare Access Fund for low-income families. ➢ Accelerating tax payments. ➢ Delaying bill payments. ➢ Engaging in accounting shifts. In the process, Moody’s lowered Minnesota’s bond rating. Go read the rest and Think Progress’ The Wonk Room has much more on Pawlenty here — FACT CHECK: Pawlenty’s ‘Truth’ Campaign Is Already Littered With Lies : This morning, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (R) formally announced his candidacy for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination in Des Moines, Iowa, promising Americans “ a different approach ” to his campaign and potential presidency. “I am going to tell you the truth. The truth is, Washington’s broken,” Pawlenty declared. “It’s time for new leadership. It’s time for a new approach. And, it’s time for America’s president – and anyone who wants to be president – to look you in the eye and tell you the truth.” From there, Pawlenty preceded to list various “truths” about the state of the nation, many of which appear — on closer examination — to be either completely untrue or grossly exaggerated: They’ve got a long post there I don’t want to just copy and paste, so go read the rest as well.
Continue reading …