UNC Chapel Hill announced Friday it has hired an outside attorney to do a new independent probe of academic irregularities.
UNC has been embroiled in a wide-ranging scandal involving
student athletes since 2010 - when more than a dozen football players
had to sit out all, or part of, the season after allegations of improper
benefits surfaced.
Five people have been indicted on charges
alleging they gave cash and other benefits to players to encourage them
to sign with certain agents when they turned pro.
Separately,
there were allegations athletes got improper academic help, including
plagiarism, tutors who violated rules, and athletes taking no-show
classes for credit.
After an SBI investigation, Orange County
District Attorney Jim Woodall announced in December the indictment of
the former chairman of the African and Afro-American Studies program,
Julius Nyang'oro, on a charge of obtaining property by false pretenses
in December. Woodall alleges the professor took $12,000 for a class he
did not teach. Nyang'oro has pleaded not guilty.
A UNC review of
classes within the department found 54 department classes that had
little or no indication of instruction along with at least 10 cases of
unauthorized grade changes for students who did not do all the work.
The
classes were popular with athletes. They made up about 45 percent of
enrollments. Nyang'oro stepped down from his chairmanship shortly after
UNC began investigating the classes in 2011. He retired in 2012.
In a joint news release
Friday, University of North Carolina President Tom Ross and UNC-Chapel
Hill Chancellor Carol L. Folt said they intend to address any questions
left unanswered during previous reviews with the new probe.
"We -
the UNC Board of Governors, UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees,
Chancellor Folt and I - have said all along that we would re-evaluate
next steps once the SBI had completed its investigation," Ross said.
They've retained Kenneth L. Wainstein, a 19-year veteran of the U.S. Justice Department, to do the probe.
In
addition to the criminal probes of the scandal, in 2012, UNC
commissioned former Gov. Jim Martin to investigate the academic
irregularities.
Martin
said his investigation found no link between the school's athletic
department and the alleged academic fraud. He said there was no evidence
coaches knew what was going on.
In the wake of the scandals,
former UNC Chancellor Holden Thorp stepped down. UNC also fired former
head football coach Butch Davis and former athletics director Dick
Baddour resigned. Both men have said they were not aware of - or were
involved - in any of the irregularities.
After conducting its own
investigation, the NCAA said the school was "responsible for multiple
violations, including academic fraud, impermissible agent benefits,
ineligible participation, and a failure to monitor its football
program."
Penalties imposed by the association included a
one-year postseason ban, reduction of 15 football scholarships, vacation
of records, and three years probation.
UNC also recently made national headlines when CNN reported that too many of its student athletes read poorly.
Jurors on Saturday found a white Florida man guilty of three counts of attempted murder and one other charge for the fatal shooting of a black teenager over loud music, but a mistrial was declared on the most-serious charge against the defendant – first-degree murder.
The jury in the case indicated they were deadlocked
over the first-degree murder charge, prompting the judge in the case to
declare a mistrial on that charge.
Michael Dunn, 47, argued he was acting in self-defense when he shot at an SUV 10 times while parked next to four teens at a Jacksonville, Fla., gas station in November 2012.
The shots killed Jordan Davis, 17, of Marietta, Ga.
Dunn is charged with first-degree murder, three counts of attempted
murder and one count of firing a deadly missile into an occupied
vehicle.
The jury did not reveal the verdicts they reached on
the four lesser counts, and must reconvene to reach a final verdict on
the deadlocked first-degree murder charge.
Judge Russell Healey told the jurors he wanted them to
go back into the jury room and express the weakness of each of their
arguments. He reiterated that the jury can lawfully choose to disagree
on the first-degree murder verdict, and if they do, he will declare a
mistrial on the single count.
The case has been compared to that of George
Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer who was acquitted of murder
in the shooting death of unarmed black teen Trayvon Martin in Florida.
Like the Zimmerman trial, the case has drawn international attention due
to racial overtones and its connection to gun and self-defense laws.
Earlier Saturday, the sequestered jury of 8 whites, 2
blacks, one Asian and one Hispanic resumed deliberations at 9 a.m.,
their 22nd hour of deliberating. A half-hour later they asked if they
could rule whether self-defense was applicable to any of the five counts
individually.
Healey answered that “self-defense or justifiable use of deadly force applies separately for each count.
“Each count has to, by law, be considered separately,”
Healey said, adding that he realized, “It’s not easy to
compartmentalize these things.”
The jury’s question shows they are divided about
whether Dunn’s claim of self-defense justifies his shots on the other
three teens, said NBC legal expert and former U.S. Attorney Kendall
Coffey. Some jurors might feel Dunn assumed Davis presented danger, but
the other three individuals in the car did not, Coffey added.
Among Republicans, there is no more popular general
than David Petraeus, the commander credited for salvaging the Iraq war
and the architect of the counter-insurgency strategy pursued by
President Bush. Petraeus has always shied away from politics, but in a
new book he is quoted lavishing so much praise on Hillary Clinton, he
seems to be endorsing her as a candidate for President.
"She'd make a tremendous president," Petraeus says in the new book "HRC" by Jonathan Allen and Aimee Parnes.
And
for Petraeus, Exhibit A in why she would be a tremendous president is
the very thing for which Republicans most aggressively attack Clinton:
her performance as Secretary of State when the U.S. consulate in
Benghazi, Libya, was attacked.
"Like a lot of great leaders, her
most impressive qualities were most visible during tough times,"
Petraeus tells Allen and Parnes. "In the wake of the Benghazi attacks,
for example, she was extraordinarily resolute, determined, and
controlled."
Petraeus was director of the Central Intelligence
Agency at the time of the attacks, which killed four Americans,
including two who worked for the CIA and the U.S. ambassador to Libya,
Chris Stevens.
The book does not specify what, if anything,
Petraeus had to say about the failure of the State Department to respond
to repeated requests for improved security in Benghazi in the weeks and
months before the attacks.
Petraeus's glowing assessment is
especially interesting given his uneasy history with Hillary Clinton.
She essentially accused Petraeus of lying about progress in Iraq when he
was President Bush's commander there and she was a senator preparing to
run for president.
During a hearing of the Senate Armed Services
Committee in September 2007, Petraeus testified that the surge of
additional troops into Iraq and led to a dramatic decrease in violence.
Then-Senator Clinton said Petraeus's assessment required "a willful
suspension of disbelief."
Clinton's courtship of her erstwhile foe
began shortly after President-elect Obama nominated her as Secretary of
State in 2008. She invited Petraeus, then the military's top commander
for the Middle East, to her home in Washington, D.C., to share a bottle
of wine and talk about the Middle East.
Allen and Parnes write
that the session went so well, she invited him back for another meeting
the following night, and another bottle of wine.
After Petraeus
was forced to resign as CIA Director over an extramarital affair,
Clinton sent him a note expressing sympathy and harkening back to her
struggles on the other side of an adultery scandal.
Just days away from the deadline to extend the nation's borrowing limit,
Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told House Republicans in a private
meeting not to fight it, according to Roll Call.
Said Boehner: "There's no sense picking a fight we can't win."
Despite calls from House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) to insist on concessions from President Obama, Boehner knows it's not possible without risking default on the nation's debt.
Treasury
Secretary Jacob Lew set a deadline of Friday to pass a bill. He said
that otherwise he would need to take "extraordinary measures" to stretch
out the current borrowing authority until the end of the month.
The
problem now for Boehner is that, like with so many other issues,
Republicans do not have a majority to coalesce around any one plan.
They're a bitterly divided party. They've held two rounds of private
talks as a party but came up empty both times.
The reality is that Boehner may need to rely on Democrats to get the 218 votes needed hike the debt ceiling and avoid default.
Which, of course, is fine with some Republicans.
Rep. Paul Labrador (R-Idaho) told Slate, "I think we should just let the Democrats own the debt ceiling."
But
with that concession, Republicans also give up claim to being
considered a party serious about dealing with the tough issues facing
the country.
House and Senate negotiators have
reached an agreement on a new farm bill that includes a roughly $800
million reduction in annual food stamp funding, a 1 percent cut to the
$80-billion-a-year program.
The 949-page
agreement, announced on Monday by members of the House and Senate
Agriculture Committees, comes after almost two years of congressional
infighting over the $1 trillion farm bill, which outlines federal
spending on a range of agricultural and nutritional issues over the next
five years.
Much of the
political sparring was over the depth and scope of proposed cuts to food
stamps, formally called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP), a program that has rounded out in recent years to include about 1
in 7 Americans. Republican lawmakers were pressing for cuts of no less
than $40 billion over 10 years. President Obama and Senate Democrats
voiced staunch opposition to such slashes, calling for a more modest
trim of $4 billion over the same period.
The
compromise would cut $8 billion from food stamps over a decade and
would do so without ousting any current enrollees from the program,
committee members said. It also largely sidesteps Republican lawmakers’
demands to taper spending with tighter food stamp eligibility
requirements, instead cutting funding through provisions to curb fraud.
The
broad measure also includes an end to expensive and controversial
direct payments to farmers and an expansion of government-backed crop
insurance. Overall, the proposal trims federal spending by about $23
billion over the next 10 years.
The proposed food stamp cuts are
coming at a time when more Americans are on food stamps than at almost
any other time in the past decade. In fiscal year 2006, one year before
the recession curdled the job market, the number of people on food
stamps was about 26,000. As of July 2013, that number is 48 million.
But
how to interpret the surge in food stamp participation has been split
along partisan lines. Republicans have said that the expanding program
is flush with participants who are not in true need, but are rather
taking advantage of loopholes or poor oversight. Democrats, though, have
said that the program has burgeoned with people who have not yet found
their footing after the recession jolted their communities.
In the
new bipartisan agreement, the cuts to food stamps are just a fifth of
those outlined in the Republican-controlled House’s farm bill, passed
last summer. The House’s proposed $40 billion in cuts, to occur over 10
years, had fueled outcry from Democrats and anti-hunger advocates that
some 4 million people would be booted out of the program, according to
estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
The
Democrat-controlled Senate’s version of the farm bill, also passed over
the summer, would have shaved some $4 billion in funds from the food
stamp program, ousting about 400,000 people, according to estimates from
Feeding America.
Committee members said on Monday that the
agreed-upon cuts to the program would save federal dollars without
kicking any current recipients out of the program, largely by addressing
areas of waste and fraud that some congressional members say have
dogged the program for years.
Among the major cost-saving
measures: closing a loophole that had allowed some states to reduce
residents’ federal heating assistance benefits so they qualified for
food stamps. Closing the loophole would reduce, but not entirely cut,
benefits to some 850,000 households, according to CBO estimates.
The
agreement also clamps down on people receiving benefits in multiple
states or under a deceased person’s name, bans lottery winners or anyone
who collects big gambling earnings, and prohibits the Department of
Agriculture from using federal dollars to advertise the food stamp
program and cull new recruits.
On the whole, the compromise dials
back the strict food stamp eligibility requirements that the House had
proposed in its bill. The House legislation would have required adults
between 18 and 50 without dependents to be either employed or enrolled
in a work-training program to collect benefits. It also would have
allowed states to mandate drug testing for food stamp recipients.
But
the agreement does take the food stamp program’s lifetime ban on
convicted drug felons receiving benefits and extends it to include
felons convicted of other, violent crimes, including murder and sexual
assault – an amendment that anti-hunger advocates have called overly
punitive and liable to send recidivism rates surging. The exclusion
applies only to violent felons convicted after the act’s passage, so it
would not throw current convicts out of the food stamp program.
The
agreement also includes provisions for pilot work-eligibility programs,
modeled on those outlined in the House bill, to be launched in up to 10
states.
There is still some
question if the agreement – expected to be introduced on the House floor
on Wednesday – will make it through both the House and the Senate.
Some
Republicans on Monday signaled their intention to vote the agreement
down, calling the trims to food stamp funding far too slight.
“I cannot march backwards and deliver more spending, more regulations and more waste,"
said Sen. Pat Roberts (R) of Kansas in a statement. "What we have today
is a ballooning and expensive set of federal nutrition programs with a
patchwork of eligibility standards, loopholes, and frankly unneeded
give-a-ways to state governments."
In June, the House had voted down a version of the farm bill, backed by Speaker John Boehner
(R) of Ohio, that included $20 billion in cuts to food stamps, in favor
of passing a bill with $40 billion in cuts. Speaker Boehner has expressed his support for the latest agreement, Politico reported.
Meanwhile, some Senate Democrats said the cuts went much too far.
"Only in Washington could a final bill that doubles
the already egregious cuts to hungry families while somehow creating
less total savings than originally proposed be called progress," said
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D) of New York, according to The Washington
Post.
Earlier this week, an analysis
from The Associated Press and University of Kentucky economists found
that the most rapid growth in enrollment in food stamps has centered on
people with at least some college education – suggesting that higher
education, the proverbial ticket above the poverty line, is no longer a
guarantee.
The report also
spotlighted the failure of wages to keep pace with inflation. Even as a
once-dismal job market comes back and unemployment ebbs, employed
Americans are still liable to remain highly dependent on food stamps,
the report said.
Islamist Taliban insurgents claimed responsibility for the attack in the upscale Wazir Akbar Khan district, which hosts many embassies and restaurants catering for expatriates.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) said its representative in Afghanistan was one of the dead, and the United Nations said three of its staff were killed as well. Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said two Canadians died in the attack but it was not clear if they were in addition to the deaths reported by the IMF and U.N.
"Such targeted attacks against civilians are completely unacceptable and are in flagrant breach of international humanitarian law," U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said. "They must stop immediately."
General Ayoub Salangi, an Afghan deputy interior minister, said between 13 and 15 people, mostly foreigners, were killed but their nationalities were not immediately clear.
Afghan security forces arrive at the scene of an explosion in Kabul January 17, 2014. At least 13 pe …
A Taliban spokesman said that those killed were German nationals. In Berlin, the Foreign Ministry said it could not confirm that Germans were involved.
State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said none of the dead included U.S. Embassy staff in Kabul.
The attack took place during a busy dinner time on a Friday evening when expatriates in Kabul tend to eat out. The heavily fortified diplomatic district also houses many wealthy Afghans and business people. Bursts of gunfire followed the attack.
"First there was a suicide attack near a restaurant for foreigners where a man detonated his explosives attached to his body, and then possibly one or two insurgents entered the restaurant," one Afghan security source said.
IMF representative Wabel Abdallah, a 60-year-old Lebanese national, was killed in the explosion, the IMF said. He had been leading the Fund's office in Kabul since 2008.
Afghan security forces arrive at the scene of an explosion in Kabul January 17, 2014. REUTERS/Omar S …
"This is tragic news, and we at the fund are all devastated," IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said in a statement. "Our hearts go out to Wabel's family and friends, as well as the other victims of this attack."
Interior Ministry spokesman Sediq Sediqi said three suicide bombers had approached the building, one of whom detonated his bomb whereas the other two were shot by security forces.
On Friday night, gunfire continued for about 20 minutes after the blast and the main road leading to the area was cordoned off.
After the explosion, two gunmen stormed into the restaurant and started shooting at people dining there, security sources said, adding that foreign casualties had been taken to an international military camp in eastern Kabul.
In a nearby hospital, those wounded from the attack screamed and some people cried, pressing scarves against their faces to stifle sobs, as doctors administered treatment. One man, the son of an Afghan victim, kicked the wall as he howled in grief.
Afghan security forces arrive at the scene of an explosion in Kabul January 17, 2014. REUTERS/Omar S …
"One of the restaurant's cooks was injured," said Abdul Bashir, a doctor. "Two dead bodies have been taken to the morgue."
Hashmat Stanekzai, a spokesman for Kabul police, said earlier that an operation to clear the building was under way.
"The clearance operation is still ongoing. Our security forces are not inside the restaurant yet," he said. "There might be some insurgents inside so we have to act carefully to avoid possible casualties."
TOUGH TIME
The attack as most foreign forces are preparing to leave Afghanistan this year after more than a decade of war and almost daily attacks.
An Afghan policeman keeps watch at the scene of an explosion in Kabul January 17, 2014. REUTERS/Omar …
Security concerns have been rising ahead of an April presidential election when Afghans will choose a successor to President Hamid Karzai, an event likely to be targeted by the Taliban insurgents.
Security remains a major concern as Afghanistan and the United States struggle to agree on a key bilateral security pact, raising the prospect that Washington may yet pull out all of its troops this year unless differences are ironed out.
Two years ago, the United States ended its military mission in Iraq with a similar "zero option" after the failure of talks with Baghdad.
Karzai is still deliberating whether to allow some U.S. troops to stay to help his nation regain calm and stability after years of conflict. If no agreement is reached, Afghan forces would be left to fight the insurgents on their own.
In the state of Michigan, it is legal to openly carry a handgun. However, when a police officer in Grand Rapids responded to a March 3 call about a man doing exactly that, he drew his weapon and ordered the man to the ground.
Screengrab via MLive.com video
The interaction was captured on video and will likely be used as evidence in a federal lawsuit filed by open-carry advocate Johann Deffert. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. district court in Grand Rapids, lists Police Chief Kevin Belk, Officer William Moe and two other officers as defendants.
Though the video only captures part of the incident, the police car’s dash cam captures minutes of audio. Police first dispatched an officer to investigate a “suspicious person” with a holstered firearm.
“It does look like he’s got a handgun on,” Moe can be heard telling a dispatcher in the video. The officer also suggests the man is “talking to nobody.”
With traffic stopped, Moe drew his firearm and ordered 28-year-old Deffert to the ground.
“Do not move. Why do you have a handgun on you?” the officer asked.
“It’s my constitutional right to defend myself,” Deffert replied.
Later in the video, Deffert continuously informed the officer that he was not a felon and he was legally openly carrying his gun.
“I gotta make sure you’re not a felon, right?” the cop replies.
“Actually, you don’t. That’s not necessary. I can show you the penal code…” Deffert says.
Shortly later, the officer added: “Is that what you do on a Sunday, you want to stroll down the road?”
Deffert again told the officer that “it’s not against the law.”
“It’s illegal for you to stop me for it in the state of Michigan,” Deffert is then heard telling Moe in the footage.
“I’m not breaking a law. … I’m just walking,” he added, telling the officer that he was returning home from the New Beginnings restaurant.
“You’re talking to yourself. You’re going down the road here with a loaded handgun.Could I just think, maybe, you might be some kind of a nut?” Moe barked back. He also tells Deffert that he needs to check his criminal and mental health history.
The officer eventually released Deffert, telling him, “you’ve got everybody fired up around here today.” He was not charged with a crime.
City Attorney Catherine Mish defended the officer’s action, calling the response “very reasonable.” She argued that Deffert was acting strange and talking to himself near a church service.
Deffert’s attorney, Steven Dulan, told MLive.com that his client’s constitutional rights were violated when he was unlawfully detained by police.
The city is calling for the lawsuit to be dismissed based on “reasonable suspicion.”
“The stop, pat-down search, and brief detention of plaintiff were supported by reasonable suspicion and/or other legal cause,” assistant city attorneys Margaret Bloemers and Kristen Rewa wrote.
Obama: Won't wait for legislation to advance 2014 priorities - Yahoo Finance
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
Jan 14 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Tuesday he would not wait for Congress to pass legislation to advance his policy priorities this year and said he was "getting close" to finishing a review of U.S. surveillance practices - to be unveiled on Friday.
Obama, speaking to reporters during a cabinet meeting at the White House, foreshadowed his upcoming State of the Union address and what appeared to be a new messaging strategy by emphasizing his ability to take executive actions without approval from lawmakers.
"We are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we're providing Americans the kind of help that they need," he said.
"I've got a pen, and I've got a phone. And I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions ... and I've got a phone that allows me to convene Americans from every walk of life," he said.
Obama began last year with high hopes of making progress on gun control, immigration reform, and other issues after giving an inaugural address that rallied his base and set an aggressive tone for his second term.
But the year concluded with few legislative achievements. His gun control efforts largely failed and an immigration reform bill passed in the Senate but stalled in the House of Representatives.
White House officials, while referring to 2014 as a "year of action," have already played down the prospect of getting a lot of laws passed and told reporters that they would not measure the year's success by the administration's list of legislative victories.
Obama again listed immigration reform as a priority for the year. He will need Congress to turn his goals on that issue into law. The president also emphasized his goal of getting the U.S. economy to recover faster.
"The message to my cabinet - and that will be amplified in our State of the Union - is that we need all hands on deck to build on the recovery that we're already seeing. The economy is improving, but it could be improving even faster," Obama said.
"And I am absolutely confident that in 2014, if we're all working in the same direction and not worrying so much about political points but worrying much more about getting the job done, that we can see a lot of improvement this year," he said.
Republican speaker of the House John Boehner, whose support Obama will need for the administration's legislative priorities, said the president had lost focus on the economy.
"If the president's serious about wanting to improve the prospects for our economy - and higher wages and better jobs - all he has to do is pick up the phone and call Democrat leaders in the Senate and ask them to move one of these dozens of bills that we've sent over there that would help put Americans back to work," Boehner said.
On a separate issue, Obama is scheduled to make a speech on Friday outlining his decisions on how to reform controversial surveillance activities by the National Security Agency that were made public through revelations by former U.S. contractor Edward Snowden.
Asked if he had finished his NSA review, Obama said: "It's getting close."
Iran nuclear deal to take effect January 20 - Yahoo News
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
Iran and the United States said Sunday that a landmark deal Tehran struck with world powers on its disputed nuclear programme will take effect from a January 20 target date.
Under the deal reached in November, Tehran agreed to curb parts of its nuclear drive for six months in exchange for receiving modest relief from international sanctions and a promise by the so-called P5+1 powers not to impose new measures against its hard-hit economy.
"Both sides reached the same interpretation on how to implement the agreement and the first step will be executed from January 20," Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Abbas Araqchi said, quoted by IRNA news agency.
The White House was quick to confirm the news but President Barack Obama warned there was still a rough road ahead before a comprehensive solution can be nailed.
"Beginning January 20th, Iran will for the first time start eliminating its stockpile of higher levels of enriched uranium and dismantling some of the infrastructure that makes such enrichment possible," it said.
Obama said in the same statement: "With today's agreement, we have made concrete progress. I welcome this important step forward, and we will now focus on the critical work of pursuing a comprehensive resolution that addresses our concerns over Iran's nuclear programme.
"I have no illusions about how hard it will be to achieve this objective, but for the sake of our national security and the peace and security of the world, now is the time to give diplomacy a chance to succeed."
After two days of exhaustive talks, Iran and the European Union agreed Friday on how to implement the deal on containing Tehran's nuclear programme.
The EU represents the P5+1 -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- in the decade-long nuclear negotiations.
Head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation Ali Akbar Salehi speaks in Tehran on November 11, 2013 …
New generation nuclear centrifuges
On Friday Araqchi had said solutions were found for unspecified points of disagreement but that each country must approve the deal for it to take effect.
On Sunday IRNA quoted him as saying: "Finally today we reached an agreement with P5+1 on how to implement the first phase of the agreement."
"The agreement and solutions we found in Geneva were accepted by six countries and on this side, the relevant bodies made the necessary evaluation and also gave them their approval," the website of state television quoted him as saying.
Iran and world powers have held several sessions of talks in Vienna and Geneva to fine-tune the deal in the past weeks and the target date of January 20 was reached at the last round in Geneva.
Diplomats said there were three main hurdles at the last session of negotiations, namely over a new generation of Iranian nuclear centrifuges which could potentially enable Tehran to purify uranium to a weapons-grade level.
Western nations and Israel have long suspected Iran of pursuing a nuclear weapons capability alongside its civilian programme, charges Tehran strenuously denies.
Iran's nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi defended Tehran's "right" to carry out reasearch on advanced centrifuges.
"Advanced centrifuges, which are Iran's right (to use), were one of the points of disagreement raised by the other party," Salehi was quoted as saying by Fars news agency.
In August, Iran said it has about 19,000 centrifuges, including 1,000 of new P-2 generation, confirming figures from the UN watchdog overseeing its nuclear drive.
Among the main points of the November deal, Iran agreed it will not enrich uranium over five percent for the duration of the six months and committed to neutralise its entire stockpile of uranium enriched to 20 percent.
It also agreed to allow daily site inspections of its Fordo and Natanz enrichment facilities by experts from the UN nuclear watchdog IAEA as well as hand over information about the design of the Arak reactor.
In return, the P5+1 said it will ease sanctions in what the White House has described as a "limited, temporary, targeted, and reversible" manner to the tune of about $7 billion.
Meanwhile an agreed amount of revenue from sanctioned Iranian oil sales abroad would be repatriated.
The latest round of talks in Geneva came as Iranian President Hassan Rouhani voiced concern at the slow pace of implementation and called on the countries to respect their commitments.
Iraq's Maliki threatens to cut funds if Kurds pipe oil to Turkey - Yahoo News
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki threatened on Sunday to cut Kurdistan's share of the federal budget if the autonomous region exports oil to Turkey via a new pipeline without central government consent.
The Kurdistan Regional Government said last week that crude had begun to flow to Turkey and exports were expected to start at the end of this month and then rise in February and March.
"This is a constitutional violation which we will never allow, not for the (Kurdistan) region nor for the Turkish government," Maliki told Reuters in an interview.
He reiterated Baghdad's insistence that only the central government has the authority to manage Iraq's energy resources.
"Turkey must not interfere in an issue that harms Iraqi sovereignty," Maliki said.
The central government and the Kurds differ over how to interpret the constitution and share revenue from the world's fourth-largest oil reserves. The Kurds are in theory entitled to 17 percent although they frequently complain they get less than that.
Maliki said the Kurds had not met their budgeted commitment to export 250,000 barrels per day of oil in 2013, with the revenue going to the national treasury, but that so far the government had not retaliated by reducing their share of the budget.
"We did not do that as we did not want to affect the Kurdish people and we were looking to find acceptable solutions...that would preserve national unity and the national wealth, but this year the situation looks difficult," Maliki declared.
Referring to a dispute over the costs of oil companies operating in Iraqi Kurdistan, he said: "We have been telling these companies...give us the oil and we will pay your costs, but they did not deliver, so there will be no payments."
Maliki said it was unfair to expect Baghdad to pay the oil firms' costs plus the Kurds' 17 percent budget share, when they had failed to meet their export target and oil revenue was not being channeled through the government.
Crude from Kurdistan used to be shipped to Turkey through a Baghdad-controlled pipeline, but exports via that channel dried up a year ago from a peak of around 200,000 bpd due to a row over payments for oil companies operating in the region.
Since then, the Kurds have been exporting smaller quantities of crude to Turkey by truck whilst laying their own independent pipeline, which was completed late last year.
Maliki met with Kurdish members of the Iraqi parliament later on Sunday and said he wanted to resolve the dispute through negotiation. A delegation from Kurdistan is due in Baghdad later this week to study the issue.
TURKISH ENVOY MEETING
Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister for Energy Hussain al-Shahristani summoned Turkey's consul in Baghdad on Sunday and reiterated his objection to Ankara's role in exports from Kurdistan.
Shahristani also said that Ankara had prevented representatives of the Iraqi oil ministry from supervising exports from Turkey's Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, as previously agreed.
"The government of Iraq holds the Turkish side legally responsibility for this act and reserves the right to demand compensated all damages resulted," Shahristani said in a statement.
Iraqi Kurdistan has prospered over the past decade, largely escaping the violence that has afflicted the rest of the country following the U.S. invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.
Officials in Baghdad say the pipeline sets a dangerous precedent for other Iraqi provinces to pursue their own independent oil policies, potentially leading to the break-up of Iraq. U.S. officials have echoed that view.
Kurdish leaders publicly say they are committed to remaining part of a federal Iraq, rather than seeking secession, but oil is a highly sensitive issue in volatile relations with Baghdad.
Companies that have risked exploring for oil in Iraqi Kurdistan had welcomed its plans to pipe oil to Turkey as a signal they might begin to generate export income from their investments, despite Baghdad's objections.
Those companies include Gulf Keystone, Genel Energy, Norway's DNO, Hungary's MOL and Britain's Petroceltic and Afren.
Feds recognize same-sex couples in Utah - Yahoo News
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
The U.S. attorney general said Friday that the federal government would recognize same-sex unions in Utah, marking the latest significant show of support for gay marriage from the Obama administration.
The action means that more than 1,000 same-sex couples who were married in Utah in the last month can file federal taxes jointly, get Social Security benefits for spouses and request legal immigration status for partners, among other benefits.
The declaration by Attorney General Eric Holder marked the latest chapter in the legal battle over same-sex marriage in Utah that has sent couples and state officials on a helter-skelter wave of emotions over the last three weeks.
A federal judge overturned Utah's ban on same-sex marriage on Dec. 20, and hundreds of couples got married. The U.S. Supreme Court intervened this week and put a halt to the weddings until the courts sort out the matter. That led Utah to declare it would not recognize the weddings, would allow couples to continue to receive whatever benefits they had obtained before the high court ruling.
Utah leaders reiterated previous statements Friday that the state would not recognize same-sex weddings, meaning couples will remain in limbo as they are allowed to receive federal benefits but are limited at the state level. The Mormon church weighed in again Friday, issuing a statement instructing local leaders that same-sex wedding ceremonies and receptions are prohibited in their churches and reiterating their belief that homosexuality is not condoned by God.
But for same-sex couples who have lived through a wave of emotions, the show of support from the federal government provided validation and turned a rally at the Utah state capitol into a raucous celebration.
Among the hundreds of people who packed the capitol rotunda for the midday rally were Seth Anderson and Michael Ferguson, the first gay couple to legally marry in Utah following the Dec. 20 ruling. They said they were elated to hear they would be allowed to file taxes jointly and enjoy the benefits afforded any married couples.
People held signs that read, "Two moms make a right," ''Love is love" and "Marriage is a human right — not a heterosexual privilege" and "We are Family" played through loudspeakers.
Holder said the families should not be asked to endure uncertainty regarding their benefits while courts decide the issue of same-sex marriage in Utah.
President Barack Obama welcomed Holder's determination, said White House spokesman Jay Carney. He said he didn't know whether Obama specifically discussed the issue with Holder before the decision, but added the President has publicly expressed his support for same-sex marriage and equal rights for all Americans. Obama publicly came out in support of gay marriage in May 2012.
Holder's decision came days after Utah officials said they would not recognize the marriages. The office of Gov. Gary Herbert told state agencies this week to put a freeze on proceeding with any new benefits for the newly married gay and lesbian couples until the courts sort out the matter. But the state attorney general's office has told local clerks to finish paperwork for same-sex marriages completed before the Supreme Court issued a temporary halt.
In a statement Friday afternoon, Herbert's office issued a statement that said Holder's announcement was unsurprising, but state officers should comply with federal law if they're providing federal services.
Attorney General Sean Reyes did not have an immediate comment on Holder's announcement.
More than 1,000 gay and lesbian couples took home marriage licenses from local clerks after a federal judge overturned Utah's same-sex marriage ban on Dec. 20. Utah voters approved the ban in 2004.
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court put a halt to same-sex marriages in Utah while the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals considers the long-term question of whether gay couples have a right to marry in Utah.
State agencies aren't supposed to revoke anything already issued, such as a marriage certificate or a driver's license with a new name, but they are prohibited from approving any new marriages or benefits. State officials said the validity of the marriages will ultimately be decided by the appeals court.
Holder's declaration marked the latest chapter in the legal battle over same-sex marriage in Utah that has sent couples and state officials on a helter-skelter wave of emotions over the last three weeks.
Federal government agencies have previously confirmed that same-sex couples in other states are entitled to federal benefits, but this is the first time Holder has come out publicly and issued this kind of guidance, said Douglas NeJaime, a professor of law at the University of California, Irvine.
"Symbolically, it's an important step that the federal government has taken," NeJaime said.
But it's not surprising, he said. The federal government has been making clear for several years that same-sex marriages should be honored.
"The fed government has been pushing up against the states that do not recognize same-sex marriages already," NeJaime said. "This is another step in that direction."
Holder said in a video on the Justice Department's website that the government will coordinate among agencies in the coming days to make sure Utah couples get the federal benefits they are entitled to.
Laura Fields, who retired from the Air Force in 2006, said her new wife can now get a military identification card that will allow her to take advantage of benefits offered military spouses, such as health coverage and access to commissaries and exchanges on the base to buy food and household items at a discount.
Until now, Fields said she has had to carry an extra insurance policy to cover her partner of five years. They live in a small city outside Hill Air Force Base in northern Utah and married on Christmas Eve in Salt Lake City.
Ken Kimball knows how the federal recognition of gay marriage helps out. He and his spouse, Miguel Santana, have saved $14,500 in the past two years filing joint tax returns after they married in Washington D.C. They live in Salt Lake City now and got married again recently to make sure it was valid in Utah.
Both Kimball and Santana come from Mormon families, like many in Utah.
Nearly two-thirds of Utah's 2.8 million residents are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Mormons dominate the state's legal and political circles. The Mormon church was one of the leading forces behind California's short-lived ban on same-sex marriage, Proposition 8.
On Friday, church leaders issued a statement instructing local leaders that same-sex wedding ceremonies and receptions are prohibited in their churches. Leaders also reiterated their belief that homosexuality is not condoned by God.
"Changes in the civil law do not, indeed cannot, change the moral law that God has established," the statement said. "God expects us to uphold and keep His commandments regardless of divergent opinions or trends in society. His law of chastity is clear: sexual relations are proper only between a man and a woman who are legally and lawfully wedded as husband and wife."
Leaders said they and others who oppose same-sex marriages are entitled to express their views without fear of retribution. Likewise, the church urged its members to be kind and respectful to proponents of same-sex marriage.
Church leaders support the state's appeal of the Dec. 20 ruling from the federal judge that struck down Utah's ban on same-sex marriages.
Sticking up for the poor and disadvantaged may not be the Republican trademark, but several key Republicans in Congress – particularly those who are presidential possibles for 2016 – are working to change that image.
Among the Republicans speaking out about poverty are Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, and House majority leader Eric Cantor of Virginia. They are presenting their ideas at a time when Democrats are challenging the GOP on the issue of economic inequality (think benefits for the long-term jobless and the minimum wage) and remembering the 50th anniversary of President Lyndon Johnson’s “war on poverty.”
Republicans on the Hill are by no means united in their approach to helping the poor and the shaky middle class, but several themes are emerging. Here are five ideas prominent Republicans are putting forward.
Speak with compassion. The GOP knows it has an image problem when it comes to kindness and humanity. A Republican National Committee review of the 2012 campaign cited “the perception that the GOP does not care about people” as a “major deficiency.” A simple place to start is to change the language. Representative Ryan, speaking last May at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, acknowledged that Democrats are “speaking to a need – a need for security in a world of growing complexity.” Then he added, “The fact is, we also have to speak to this need.”
That’s why Ryan, the former vice presidential running mate to Mitt Romney, has been touring inner-city neighborhoods, formulating his antipoverty ideas, and talking about those ideas in public – for instance, at a Newseum event on poverty with NBC news anchor Brian Williams on Jan. 9 and in a Brookings Institution speech on Jan. 13.
Less Washington, more jobs. Free enterprise is the greatest job creator there is, but the federal government is a huge impediment to job growth, Republicans say. Senator Rubio, the son of immigrants, echoed many Republicans Jan. 8 when he said in an antipoverty speech that a simpler tax code, fewer federal regulations, and a lower national debt would allow “free enterprise to flourish.”
But Rubio has a more radical idea to achieve social mobility and to help people get the skills they need to work in today’s information-based economy. Standing beneath the frescoes of the Senate’s ornate Johnson room (named for President Johnson, who had also served as a Senate majority leader), he proposed Jan. 8 to take most of the federal government's antipoverty programs, transfer the funds to a single agency, and then disperse those funds to the states to work with.
States and localities best understand the needs and conditions, and they are the best generators of innovative solutions, he said. Legislation that embodies Rubio’s idea is still under construction, but the senator has suggested that long-term jobless insurance and food stamps might be candidates ripe for dismantling and redistributing funding to the states.
School choice. Republicans see education as key to social and economic mobility, as do Democrats. The Head Start preschool program for low-income families, for instance, began as a "war on poverty" initiative on Johnson's watch. But the two political parties diverge over how best to employ education to help people advance. Representative Cantor, in prepared remarks for a speech at the Brookings Institution Jan. 8, said “school choice is the surest way to break” the cycle of poverty, emphasizing not only the need for more charter schools but also vouchers for private education. His goal is to provide school choice to every child in America within 10 years.
While many Democrats favor public charter schools, they bristle at vouchers, arguing that they undermine public education.
Enterprise zones. This is not a new idea. Republican Jack Kemp, the late New York congressman, in the 1980s championed targeting impoverished areas for development and special treatment, as did President Reagan. Now, President Obama has chosen five “promise zones” for government help through tax incentives, education grants, and housing assistance.
Enterprise zones are being pushed by Sen. Rand Paul (R) of Kentucky, but he calls them “economic freedom zones.” His focus is on almost eliminating taxes in economically distressed areas such as Detroit. And he’s talking taxes of all kinds: corporate, income, payroll, and capital gains. "What we hope to do is create taxes so low that you essentially are able to bail yourselves out, by having more money accumulate in the area over time," Senator Paul said last month.
Build stronger communities. Americans are giving, loving, and resourceful people, and those impulses need to be encouraged in communities, says the GOP's Ryan. He cites tale after tale of people and communities pulling together, from the case of his widowed mother to neighborhoods he has visited.
“We want everyone to have a chance in life – a chance to be happy. And we’re happiest when we’re together. We want to be together. It’s in our nature. We feel it in our bones,” he said in his May speech. That togetherness takes shape in the church meeting, the neighborhood watch, the food bank, the small business, he said. “The more we work together – out of our own free will – the stronger we become.”
JohnButts@JBMedia _ Reports: Cyndee Phoenix (pictured) thought she had found the perfect home in a Hamilton County, N. J., residential community to live in with her elderly parents and sister. But what Phoenix did not know and now claims was not revealed to her by the developer, Lennar Homes Corp, who promoted promises of a “wonderful lifestyle,” was that she and her family would be tormented by a neighbor who would threaten, intimidate and make racist remarks.
She is suing the developer for “knowingly concealing” that her future neighbor was a “dangerous individual,” according to Courthouse News.
Phoenix closed on her home last October and moved in a month later. Lennar Homes reportedly warned the neighbor in question, Kevin Elville Potter, about his alleged harassing behavior, requesting that he cease his hostile conduct.
The 53-year-old recent home buyer says she met Potter before she actually moved into her home. She was visiting the developer’s sales office one day and happened upon Potter when he was ranting about the lack of landscaping services to a sales rep. The rep later told Phoenix that Potter was no longer entitled to services because his home’s coverage period had expired. After Phoenix had closed on the home, she discovered that Potter was in fact no longer receiving services because of his alleged aggression towards the workers who showed up to perform their duties.
According to documents filed in Atlantic County Court, Potter began his harassing ways soon after Phoenix moved in. Potter allegedly made “death threats to plaintiff’s sister, spit in the direction of Phoenix’s family members, made snide and racist comments about plaintiff, has taken pictures of plaintiff’s guests and stared them down in attempts to intimidate them and continued blocking plaintiff’s driveway with his parked cars.”
The complaint also describes how Phoenix is so “afraid to leave her home” and “is constantly living in fear” that she was forced to hire a security guard because the family was also allegedly stalked by Potter. Phoenix claims that her security guard was even harassed by Potter, who once reportedly followed the employee for 15 miles on the freeway.
Phoenix is reportedly seeking damages for fraud, consumer fraud, misrepresentations and omissions, and violations of New Jersey’s Planned Real Estate Development Full Disclosure Act.
Accuser finds more old messages in Bragg general's sex case :: WRAL.com
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
A soldier who had an affair with a Fort Bragg general found numerous emails and voice messages from him on an old phone last month, prompting a delay in his court-martial.
Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair faces charges that include forcible sodomy, indecent acts, violating orders and adultery. His court-martial was scheduled to begin Tuesday but has been pushed back to March 4.
The charges stem from allegations that Sinclair twice sexually assaulted a captain with whom he had a three-year affair and that he had inappropriate relationships with five other women, including some subordinates.
The former captain, who served with Sinclair in Iraq and Afghanistan, said during a pre-trial motions hearing Tuesday that she found an iPhone that she stopped using years ago in a cluttered box on Dec. 9. She found messages from Sinclair, including some under his alias of "Nathan," and immediately turned the phone over to Army investigators.
Defense attorney Richard Scheff asked why she bothered to charge up the phone and examine its content in the first place. She said she wanted to see if there was any evidence on it that either military prosecutors or Sinclair's defense team would need during the court-martial.
"I was very overwhelmed with what I found on the phone," she said.
The content of the messages wasn't detailed in court on Tuesday.
In previous hearings, Col. James Pohl, the military judge handling the case, has ruled that Sinclair's emails could be used as evidence.
State Attorney Moves To Revoke Marissa Alexander’s Bond | News One
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
Florida Special Prosecutor Angela Corey has filed a motion to revoke the bond of Marissa Alexander, claiming she violated conditions of her parole by running errands, reports First Coast News.
As previously reported by NewsOne, Alexander, a 33-year old Jacksonville mother of three, has spent the last 2 years behind bars serving time for a domestic violence dispute during which she fired a warning shot at her estranged husband, Rico Gray, Sr. who admitted that he had threatened to kill her.
“If my kids weren’t there, I knew I probably would have tried to take the gun from her,” Gray said. “If my kids wouldn’t have been there, I probably would have put my hand on her.” When Alexander’s defense attorney asked him what he meant by “put my hand on her,” Gray replied, “probably hit her. I got five baby mammas and I put my hands on every last one of them except for one.”
After rejecting a 3-year plea deal offered by Corey, Alexander was sentenced to 20 years to life in jail.
A new bond hearing was initially scheduled for Nov. 13 — because a judge ruled that there were errors in the jury instructions — but was pushed back to January 15, 2014. Alexander was granted a pretrial release on Nov. 27 after agreeing to the following special conditions:
• Remain under the supervision of the pretrial services program at all times
• Subject to electronic monitoring through the CTC at all times
• Remain on home detention until completion of her case and will be allowed to leave her residence except for court appearances, medical emergencies and to satisfy any requirements of PSP or the CTC
• Report all required court appearances and all required appointments with he PSP or its designated service provider
• Alexander cannot change her residence without prior notice and approval by the PSP or its designated service provider
• Cannot have contact with, nor communicate by any means with Rico Gray, Sr., Pernell Gray and Rico Gray, Jr.
• Alexander shall abide by all court orders in the divorce proceedings involving Rico Gray, Sr., including all orders that pertain to child custody, exchange of child custody for visitation shall be facilitated by a third party
• Alexander shall not possess any firearms, nor shall there be any firearms in her residence at any time during her pretrial release
• Shall not consume any alcoholic beverage or drug not prescribed by a physician
• Must abide by all rules and regulations for the PSP and the CTC including random drug testing
• Alexander shall be subject to warrantless searches of her residence by CTC officers or any JSO officer conducting such a search at the direction of CTC personnel, to ensure compliance with her pretrial release conditions
Alexander’s bond was set at a total of $200,009 for three separate charges.
NewsOne contributor, Attorney and Legal Analyst Eric L. Guster, who can frequently be seen sparring with HLN’s Nancy Grace over high-profile cases,said the laundry list of conditions is standard in a case such as Alexander’s:
“Although [the conditions of release] seem extensive, those are typical stipulations for a person in that situation,” Guster said. “Since she has been found guilty once and now may go to trial again, the court has a duty to protect all parties, witnesses and Marissa herself. Therefore, the requirements of her bond are similar to those similarly situated.”
A hearing for Corey’s motion accusing Alexander of violating her parole conditions is scheduled for Friday at 9 a.m.
Gun Violence in America | WOLB Talk 1010
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
Three years ago on January 8th, a mass shooting in Arizona took the lives of 6 innocent people and nearly killed U.S. Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. Since then, mass shootings and urban gun violence have plagued this country. When Congresswoman Giffords was shot, gun reform advocates were sure that there would be change in Washington, with members of Congress seeing one of their own as a victim of the senseless violence. But many bills failed to advance. Since then, nothing changed, and the senseless violence has continued to permeate through communities across the country.
Almost two years later in December 2012, the world stopped when a gunman entered an elementary school and killed 26 people, including 20 children. It seemed like the time to pass sensible laws. Even Congressional Members who were members of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and represented communities in pro-gun ownership states were committed to introducing reform. But the bi-partisan bills failed to pass and no further serious attempts have been introduced.
With each New Year comes the promise of a new opportunity – a chance to do something differently, an opportunity to improve. We have an opening to address gun violence and on January 8th, the National Action Network’s (NAN) Youth Move will memorialize the past shootings and repurpose the day as the National Youth Day of Action Against Gun Violence.
On this day, NAN chapters and other advocacy organizations will come together for community discussions and agenda setting to tackle gun violence and create opportunities for conflict resolution.
The sad fact is that urban gun violence often takes a backseat to the stories about mass shootings. Many legislators don’t take notice to the violence seen in major cities like Chicago, New York, Miami, and L.A. It’s seen as an urban problem, something that doesn’t infiltrate the lives of people with education, opportunity or money; categories that many legislators fall in to.
When a mass shooting happens, it normally affects just about anyone and can happen just about anywhere – school, church, the mall, a movie theater — however, to the families of victims of urban gun violence, the pain is no less and the urgency is just as great.
The families of Lloyd Morgan Jr., Hadiya Pendleton, or Deidra Smith never expected to lose their loved one to a senseless shooting — but all three people are victims of urban gun violence, leaving only their memory as a guiding light to the rest of us to be resolved to peace so that others don’t share their fate.
We have a new year, a new opportunity to work on getting Congress to pass reform bills. Young people are leading this effort, and it’s their goal that adults will see them and follow suit. These young people want to live without fear. They want to walk in their neighborhoods and not worry that a simple misunderstanding by strangers could mean the end of their life because they turned the wrong corner.
We owe it to them to do everything we can to support their efforts. We owe it to ourselves to not mourn another friend, family member, or loved one because we didn’t stand up when we had the chance. It’s a new year; we need a peaceful resolution to the problem of gun violence that is gripping this nation. What better way to do it than to pledge this year to peace.
Zamata is the late night sketch show’s first black female cast member since the biracial Maya Rudolph departed in 2007.
Executive producer Lorne Michaels got heat when he added six new cast members at the start of this season, but none were black women. The problem became more glaring when “Scandal” star Kerry Washington hosted in early November. Washington's opening sketch even poked fun at the issue; with her presence, “SNL” was able to portray key figures like Michelle Obama and Beyonce.
After Washington’s hosting gig made clear how much the show needed a black woman in the cast, Michaels did something he’s never done before: He held targeted auditions with female African-American comedians.
Zamata beat out two dozen other hopefuls. The University of Virginia grad trained at the Upright Citizens Brigade (a major feeder to “SNL”) and has performed at comedy festivals and created videos for College Humor. She also appeared on ABC's hidden-camera summer series, "Would You Fall For That?"
/WOULD YOU FALL FOR THAT? - From the creators of âWhat Would You Do?â comes âWould You Fall for That?â â a one …
Ani DiFranco Cancels 'Righteous Retreat' at Former Slave Plantation | Yahoo Music - Yahoo Music
JohnButts@JBMedia - Reports:
Ani DiFranco's fans have spoken ... and she's heard them loud and clear. The feminist folk singer has nixed her "Righteous Retreat" after receiving complaints about the gig being held at Nottoway Plantation in Louisiana, where hundreds of slaves once toiled and which is now owned by the conservative Paul Ramsey Group.
"I have heard you: all who have voiced opposition to my conducting a writing and performing seminar at the Nottoway Plantation," DiFranco wrote Sunday in a post on her blog. "I have decided to cancel the retreat."
That retreat had offered fans a chance to "develop one's singular creativity" through various workshops with DiFranco for four days at a price tag of more than $1,000.
In her blog post, DiFranco went on to claim that when she agreed to participate, she didn't know the exact location, only that it would be "not too far outside of New Orleans," making it possible for her to come home to her own bed each night. Once she discovered it was going to be held at "a resort on a former plantation, I thought to myself, 'whoa,' but I did not imagine or understand that the setting of a plantation would trigger such collective outrage or result in so much high velocity bitterness."
That "collective outrage" DiFranco was referring to included a slew comments on the event's now-deleted Facebook page, or a change.org petition calling for her to cancel the event.
The petition, launched by Sara Starr of Chapell Hill, North Carolina, says that "holding a workshop even on a plantation in a town founded by racists ... is insulting to black feminists and black queer individuals and is a very blatant display of racism on [DiFranco's] part."
By Sunday, more than 2,500 people had signed the petition asking DiFranco to cancel the event, with many leaving comments, such as Blaise Parker of Athens, Georgia. "Ani, this is some bulls--t," Parker wrote. "I have admired you and supported you financially for almost half my life. I am seriously disappointed."
In an attempt to placate her outraged fans, DiFranco explained why she pulled the plug on the event. "Let me just concede before more divisive words are spilled," she wrote. "I obviously underestimated the power of an evocatively symbolic place to trigger collective and individual pain. I believe that your energy and your questioning are needed in this world. I know that the pain of slavery is real and runs very deep and wide. however, in this incident I think is very unfortunate what many have chosen to do with that pain. I cancel the retreat now because I wish to restore peace and respectful discourse between people as quickly as possible."
Instead of moving the retreat to another location, DiFranco has completely canceled it. The blanket cancellation also means she won't be paying a visit to the Roots of Music, a New Orleans music school for underprivileged youths.
Here's the rub. DiFranco points out that the site of the Roots of Music also has ties to slavery, but she adds, "I believe that the existence of Roots of Music in this building is transcendent and it would have been a very inspiring place to visit."
Lest fans continue to question DiFranco's views on racism, the singer-songwriter actually backed out of an appearance on the "Late Show With David Letterman" back in 2001, after being told she could not perform her politically charged song "Subdivision" — a composition centering around racial tension and its devastating effects on urban America.
An elderly American man kidnapped and believed to be held captive by Al Qaeda for more than two years has a direct message for PresidentObama: He wants to come home.
Warren Weinstein, 72, delivered the message in a new video released by Al Qaeda's media wing. Weinstein, who suffers from a heart condition and requires medication, is seen wearing a grey jump suit slouching in a chair, with a grey wall behind him. He asks Obama to negotiate directly for his release.
"Mr. Obama, you're a family man," Weinstein says
"You understand the deep mental anxiety and anguish that I have been experiencing for these past more than two years. And therefore I'm appealing to you on a humanitarian basis, if nothing else, and asking that you take the necessary actions to expedite my release and my return to my family and to my country."
It's the first proof of life video of Weinstein in more than a year when Al Qaeda released a similar video. In that video, Weinstein suggested he would be killed unless the U.S. government met his captors' demands, which included releasing all prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. They also demanded an end to all U.S. drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere.
Unlike the previous video, today's video shows Weinstein sporting a thick graying beard and trimmed moustache. It's not possible to determine the state of Weinstein's health from the video alone, but he appears forlorn, his eyes watering at several points, admitting he's not in good health and that "the years have taken their toll."
American Al-Qaeda Captive Warren Weinstein Seeks Obama's Help (ABC News)
The video was emailed anonymously to a handful of reporters in Pakistan, along with a letter that was allegedly written by Weinstein himself. In the letter, he asks the media to "mount a campaign to get the American government to actively pursue my release and to make sure that I am not forgotten and just become another statistic."
The letter is signed "Cordially yours, Warren Weinstein."
State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki released a statement saying, "We're working hard to authenticate this latest report, but we reiterate our call that Warren Weinstein be released and returned to his family. Particularly during this holiday season - another one away from his family - our hopes and prayers are with him and those who love and miss him."
Weinstein was working as a contractor for USAID in 2011 when gunmen broke into his home in the Pakistani city of Lahore, Pakistan's second largest city. U.S. officials have long believed he was quickly spirited away to the lawless tribal region along Pakistan's border with Afghanistan. In previous audio tapes, Al Qaeda's new leader , Ayman Al Zawahiri, implied that he was directly holding Weinstein captive.
