I publish an "Editorial and Opinion Blog", Editorial and Opinion. My News Blog is @ News . I have a Jazz Blog @ Jazz and a Technology Blog @ Technology. My domain is Armwood.Com @ Armwood.Com.
What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White
Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.
This video clearly demonstrates how racist America is as a country and how far we have to go to become a country that is civilized and actually values equal justice. We must not rest until this goal is achieved. I do not want my great grandchildren to live in a country like we have today. I wish for them to live in a country where differences of race and culture are not ignored but valued as a part of what makes America great.
Friday, May 31, 2013
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Gitmo: Examine chief’s ‘fitness for command,’ DoD attorneys tell Hagel — MSNBC
Gitmo: Examine chief’s ‘fitness for command,’ DoD attorneys tell Hagel — MSNBC
Prosecutor tapped to head FBI known for role in Bush-era surveillance standoff - U.S. News
Prosecutor tapped to head FBI known for role in Bush-era surveillance standoff - U.S. News
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Walmart Workers Launch First-Ever 'Prolonged Strikes' Today | The Nation
Walmart employees are on strike in Miami, Massachusetts and the California Bay Area this morning, kicking off what organizers promise will be the first “prolonged strikes” in the retail giant’s history. The union-backed labor group OUR Walmart says that at least a hundred workers have pledged to join the strikes, and that some workers walking off the job today will stay out at least through June 7, when Walmart holds its annual shareholder meeting near Bentonville, Arkansas.
Read more: http://www.thenation.com/blog/174551/walmart-workers-launch-first-ever-prolonged-strikes-today#ixzz2UjyFDhRo
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Kerry Presses Nigeria on Human Rights - NYTimes.com
Kerry Presses Nigeria on Human Rights - NYTimes.com
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Why DOJ didn't need a 'super search warrant' to snoop on Fox News' e-mail
If attorney general Eric Holder wanted to perform even a momentary Internet wiretap on Fox News' e-mail accounts, he would have had to persuade a judge to approve what lawyers call a "super search warrant."
A super search warrant's requirements are exacting: Intercepted communications must be secured and placed under seal. Real-time interception must be done only as a last resort. Only certain crimes qualify for this technique, the target must be notified, and additional restrictions apply to state and local police conducting real-time intercepts.
But because of the way federal law was written nearly half a century ago, Holder was able to obtain a normal search warrant -- lacking those extensive privacy protections -- that allowed federal agents to secretly obtain up to six years of email correspondence between Fox News correspondent James Rosen and his alleged sources.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
In Plain Sight - Poverty In America NBC News
In Plain Sight
Ginsburg says Roe gave abortion opponents target
Ginsburg says Roe gave abortion opponents target
UK's New Defamation Law May Accelerate The Death Of Anonymous User-Generated Content Internationally
UK's New Defamation Law May Accelerate The Death Of Anonymous User-Generated Content Internationally
Saturday, May 11, 2013
How prison keeps many Americans locked into poverty — MSNBC
How prison keeps many Americans locked into poverty — MSNBC
Friday, May 10, 2013
Apple deluged by police demands to decrypt iPhones
Apple deluged by police demands to decrypt iPhones
NYC lawmakers consider allowing non-citizen immigrants to vote — MSNBC
NYC lawmakers consider allowing non-citizen immigrants to vote — MSNBC
Thursday, May 09, 2013
Hispanic Caucus rips Heritage immigration study as ‘ugly racism' - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
Rep. Rubén Hinojosa (D-Texas), the chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, called the group’s study “ugly racism and xenophobia dressed up in economic hyperbole” after learning of the dissertation
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/298485-chc-chairman-rips-heritage-immigration-report-as-racism-and-xenophobia#ixzz2SqfimlQJ
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
Hispanic Caucus rips Heritage immigration study as ‘ugly racism' - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
State pays civil rights group for trying to overcharge for records
State pays civil rights group for trying to overcharge for...
Wednesday, May 08, 2013
Co-Author of New Immigration Study Says Latinos not as Intelligent
The Heritage Foundation, a think tank where very little legitimate research occurs.
Sunday, May 05, 2013
Morehouse, Spelman alums reflect on sometimes tense history
Morehouse, Spelman alums reflect on sometimes tense history
Saturday, May 04, 2013
Mayor Bloomberg on Stop-and-Frisk
Mayor Bloomberg on Stop-and-Frisk
Thursday, May 02, 2013
How Barbaric Is Forced Feeding? « The Dish
How Barbaric Is Forced Feeding? « The Dish
China Accused of Denying Care to Chen Guangcheng’s Nephew - NYTimes.com
China Accused of Denying Care to Chen Guangcheng’s Nephew - NYTimes.com: "BEIJING — Human rights advocates have accused the authorities in eastern China of denying urgent medical care to the jailed nephew of the blind dissident Chen Guangcheng, a move they say is aimed at punishing Mr. Chen for his continued antigovernment activism abroad after his daring escape to the United States Embassy in Beijing last year. "
(Via.)
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s Bush v. Gore regrets: She shouldn’t have retired. - Slate Magazine
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s Bush v. Gore regrets: She shouldn’t have retired. - Slate Magazine: "ustice Sandra Day O’Connor should never have retired from the Supreme Court. She is an 83-year-old with plenty of energy, which she expends hearing lower-court cases, giving speeches, and making me want to tear my hair out by talking like the sensible moderate-liberal she refused to be consistently on the court. Why didn’t O’Connor voice these views when she had power? I’m prompted to my hair tearing by O’Connor’s statement to the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board that, oh, maybe it wasn’t such a hot idea for the Supreme Court to have decided the 2000 presidential election by taking Bush v. Gore and issuing the ruling that ended the Florida recount. Here are her musings, as the Tribune reported: ‘ ‘It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue,’ O’Connor said last Friday. ‘Maybe the court should have said, ‘We’re not going to take it, goodbye.’ ’ The case, she said, ‘stirred up the public’ and ‘gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation.’ ‘Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision,’ she said. ‘It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn’t done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day.’ ’ What is with that weird disembodied ‘it’? That word allows O’Connor to distance herself from a decision she was very much a part of. Replace every ‘it’ with ‘we.’ Or even with ‘I,’ since O’Connor could have swung the 5-4 ruling in the opposite direction by switching sides."
(Via.)
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s Bush v. Gore regrets: She shouldn’t have retired. - Slate Magazine
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s Bush v. Gore regrets: She shouldn’t have retired. - Slate Magazine: "Justice Sandra Day O’Connor should never have retired from the Supreme Court. She is an 83-year-old with plenty of energy, which she expends hearing lower-court cases, giving speeches, and making me want to tear my hair out by talking like the sensible moderate-liberal she refused to be consistently on the court. Why didn’t O’Connor voice these views when she had power? I’m prompted to my hair tearing by O’Connor’s statement to the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board that, oh, maybe it wasn’t such a hot idea for the Supreme Court to have decided the 2000 presidential election by taking Bush v. Gore and issuing the ruling that ended the Florida recount. Here are her musings, as the Tribune reported: ‘ ‘It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue,’ O’Connor said last Friday. ‘Maybe the court should have said, ‘We’re not going to take it, goodbye.’ ’ The case, she said, ‘stirred up the public’ and ‘gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation.’ ‘Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision,’ she said. ‘It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn’t done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day.’ ’ What is with that weird disembodied ‘it’? That word allows O’Connor to distance herself from a decision she was very much a part of. Replace every ‘it’ with ‘we.’ Or even with ‘I,’ since O’Connor could have swung the 5-4 ruling in the opposite direction by switching sides. "
(Via.)