Thursday, April 29, 2010

US Treasury: New 100 dollar bill needs 3D tech

http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Horizons/2010/0421/US-Treasury-New-100-dollar-bill-needs-3D-tech

US Treasury: New 100 dollar bill needs 3D tech
On Wednesday, the US Treasury introduced a new 100 dollar bill, which is slated to go into circulation early in 2011. The new 100 dollar bill includes a "3D Security Ribbon" and a color-changing inkwell.
Matthew Shaer / April 21, 2010

Benjamin Franklin gets to stay. So does the official stamp of the Federal Reserve System. But the rest of the $100 bill – the most frequently counterfeited note, according to government officials – is getting a radically revamped look. On Wednesday, the US Treasury took the wraps off of a new $100 bill, which Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner says would be exponentially more difficult for criminals to copy.

"As with previous US currency redesigns, this note incorporates the best technology available to ensure we're staying ahead of counterfeiters," Mr. Geithner says in a statement. So what's so great about the new $100 bill, anyway? In a word: state-of-the-art science. The new $100 bill gets an array of security features, including an image of the Liberty Bell which reportedly changes color from copper to green when the note is tilted.

But the biggest upgrade is a blue "3D Security Ribbon." That's right: the same 3D craze that swept through movie theaters, television screens, and video game systems, is now coming to the pocket of a well-heeled American near you. US Treasury says the 3D ribbon would appear on the front of new $100 notes, which are set to enter circulation in February 2011.

The strip contains a series of images of bells and digits; tip the note, and the images come into 3D relief. And you don't even need a pair of those dorky 3D glasses to make sure you're looking at a genuine Benjamin. "It only takes a few seconds to check the new $100 note and know it's real," says Larry R. Felix, Director of the Treasury's Bureau of Engraving and Printing.

US Puts World On Fast Track To 'Great War'

By Gerald Celente
KINGSTON, NY, 20 April 2010 -The United States-initiated wars and punitive foreign policies intended to bring hostile regimes to heel, are guaranteed to escalate current wars while turning simmering conflicts into new wars.

The major premise of this Trends Journal® is that the US has put the world on a path that, if not diverted in time, will lead to the first "Great War" of the 21st century.

The "Great War" will not occur by spontaneous combustion. A deadly mix of incendiary policies, deliberate provocations, incessant warfare and widespread "collateral damage" (millions of dead civilians) has brought the world to the brink.

The combination of ingredients is verifiable, irrefutable and willfully concocted by mixologists in the laboratories of power: Presidents, Prime Ministers, Generals, Chief Executive Officers and International Financiers.

This consortium of mad political scientists, rabid war hawks and money junkies ­ pathologies masked by red-carpet trappings, medal-heavy chests and executive privileges ­ are leading the world to war.

But it is the mass of individuals who believe in them, and follow them, who will pay the price of war in both money and lives.

The Celente Solution: While the ingredients may all be in place, the outcome is not yet inevitable. The course of history can be changed. This issue of the Trends Journal® analyzes the destructive and incendiary actions and policies that are not being recognized for what they are, and explores the possibilities for averting the "Great War." For all its complexity, the choice is stark: Renaissance or Ruin.

While the world's grievous problems are ostensibly the mainstay of the world's media, to date, no mainstream source is warning about an impending global conflict.

Given the accuracy of so many past Celente forecasts, it might be wise to pay heed to this one! To request a copy of this extraordinary issue of Trends Journal® or to schedule an interview with Gerald Celente, please contact:

Bibi Farber
Media Relations
845.331.3500 ext 1
bibifarber@trendsresearch.com

Report: SEC staffers watched porn as economy crashed

Robalini's Note - Quick quiz, guys. You work for the SEC. Do you:

A. Try everything possible to stop the worst economic disaster since The Great Depression from happening
B. Search the Internet for lesbian videos starring Savanna Samson or Teanna Kai

Thought so. So I must defend the SEC on this one...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/23/sec.porn/

Report: SEC staffers watched porn as economy crashed
April 23, 2010
SEC employees spent hours looking at porn sites on their work computers, according to an internal report.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
SEC investigation: Dozens of employees, contractors surfed porn sites on work computers
Staffers violated government-wide ethics rules, report finds
Report: Incidents occurred while country was teetering on verge of financial collapse

(CNN) -- As the country was sinking into its worst financial crisis in more than 70 years, Security and Exchange Commission employees and contractors cruised porn sites and viewed sexually explicit pictures using government computers, according to an agency report obtained by CNN.

"During the past five years, the SEC OIG (Office of Inspector General) substantiated that 33 SEC employees and or contractors violated Commission rules and policies, as well as the government-wide Standards of Ethical Conduct, by viewing pornographic, sexually explicit or sexually suggestive images using government computer resources and official time," said a summary of the investigation by the inspector general's office.

More than half of the workers made between $99,000 and $223,000. All the cases took place over the past five years.

"It is nothing short of disturbing that high-ranking officials within the SEC were spending more time looking at pornography than taking action to help stave off the events that brought our nation's economy to the brink of collapse," said Rep. Darrell Issa. The Republican is the ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

"This stunning report should make everyone question the wisdom of moving forward with plans to give regulators like the SEC even more widespread authority," he said. "Inexplicably, rather than exercise its existing regulatory enforcement authority, SEC officials were preoccupied with other distractions."

SEC spokesman John Nester said the employees involved have been disciplined or are being disciplined. Some have been suspended or dismissed, he said, adding that the SEC has further increased penalties for misusing government resources in recent months.

"We will not tolerate the transgressions of the very few who bring discredit to their thousands of hardworking colleagues," he said.

The investigation came to light on the same day President Obama gave a speech in lower Manhattan, calling for reform in the finance industry.

On Capitol Hill, the Senate is working on a financial reform bill that would set up regulatory oversight of the financial industry's practices with the goal of preventing another Wall Street meltdown like the one in 2008 that launched the U.S. recession.

The bill includes an "early warning" system intended to spot signs of crisis, as well as a $50 billion liquidation fund created with money from banks and other finance industry corporations to ensure an orderly transition in closing down failing entities. It was recently approved by the Senate's Banking and Agricultural committees. The House passed its version of the bill in December.

The inspector general's report includes specific examples of misuse by employees.

A regional office staff accountant tried to access pornographic websites nearly 1,800 times, using her SEC laptop during a two-week period. She also had about 600 pornographic images saved on her laptop hard drive.

Separately, a senior attorney at SEC headquarters admitted to downloading pornography up to eight hours a day, according to the investigation.

"In fact, this attorney downloaded so much pornography to his government computer that he exhausted the available space on the computer hard drive and downloaded pornography to CDs or DVDs that he accumulated in boxes in his office," the inspector general's report said.

Financial Regulation & Regulatory Capture

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2010/04/financial_regulation_regulator.html

Financial Regulation & Regulatory Capture
Simon Johnson and James Kwak
April 16, 2010

The White House and Democrats in Congress have begun pushing in earnest for a package of financial reforms. But will it be enough to stop Wall Street from causing another meltdown?

To find out what real financial reform needs to look like, Bill Moyers turns to Simon Johnson and James Kwak, the co-authors of 13 BANKERS: THE WALL STREET TAKEOVER AND THE NEXT FINANCIAL MELTDOWN.

The problem, according to Kwak, is that the legislation currently doesn't address the central problem of the crisis, that America's banks have grown 'too big to fail.' In fact, the problem has gotten worse, with just six banks holding assets in excess of 63% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. Kwak explains that the crisis actually made the surviving banks more powerful, "I think what's remarkable is that it used to be maybe eight or nine banks. But what's happened over the last two years, as Simon is saying, is that these banks have gotten bigger, because they've bought each other. They've become more powerful. And they have an even stronger market position in some key markets like credit cards, mortgages, equity underwriting, and derivatives."

Johnson argues that for reform to work, policy makers and regulators must reject the belief that Wall Street knows what's its doing, that its interests are always aligned with the nation as a whole, "The idea that we need Wall Street with its current structure — and a disproportionate economic power that implies — to somehow make this economy work and drive entrepreneurship, that idea is nonsense. This is why we wrote the book, all right? There's plenty of evidence on this issue. We go through it. If you want a faith based economy in this regard, you can disregard the evidence."

Senator Brown and the 'Volcker Rule'

Johnson and Kwak believe Congress should pass a law capping the size of the banks, to keep them from becoming so large that their failure threatens the world economy. This approach has been dubbed the 'Volcker Rule,' after Paul Volcker, the well-respected former Federal Reserve chairman who has pushed hard for its inclusion. Senator Sherrod Brown from Ohio has introduced an amendment to the bill that would do just that, reading in part that, "No bank holding company may possess non-deposit liabilities exceeding 3 percent of the annual gross domestic product of the United States."

The Six Big Banks

The names of the six banking behemoths are no doubt familiar to most Americans. The four largest by assets — Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup — hold 39 percent of American's deposits.

The six biggest commercial banks by deposit:
Bank of America, $817.9 billion
JPMorgan Chase Bank $618.1 billion
Wachovia Bank $394.2 billion
Wells Fargo Bank $325.4 billion
Citibank $265.9 billion
U.S. Bank $151.9 billion
Source: FDIC

James Kwak

James Kwak is the co-author, along with Simon Johnson, of 13 BANKERS: THE WALL STREET TAKEOVER AND THE NEXT FINANCIAL MELTDOWN, and the co-founder/co-author of THE BASELINE SCENARIO. Kwak is currently a student at the Yale Law School. Previously, he was a management consultant at McKinsey and Company and co-founder of a successful software company. Kwak received an A.B. in Social Studies from Harvard College and an M.A. and a Ph.D. in History from the University of California, Berkeley.

Simon Johnson

Simon Johnson is the Ronald A. Kurtz (1954) Professor of Entrepreneurship at MIT's Sloan School of Management, a position he has held since 2004. He is also a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, D.C., and co-founder of a Web site on the global economic and financial crisis, THE BASELINE SCENARIO and "The Hearing," a new economics blog at washingtonpost.com. He is co-director of the NBER project on Africa and President of the Association for Comparative Economic Studies (term of office 2008-09). He is also a contributing editor at the HUFFINGTON POST.

From March 2007 through the end of August 2008, Professor Johnson was the International Monetary Fund's economic counsellor (chief economist) and director of its research department. At the IMF, Professor Johnson led the global economic outlook team, helped formulate innovative responses to worldwide financial turmoil, and was among the earliest to propose new forms of engagement for sovereign wealth funds. He was also the first IMF chief economist to have a blog.

In 2000-2001 Professor Johnson was a member of the US Securities and Exchange Commissions Advisory Committee on Market Information. His assessment of the need for continuing strong market regulation is published as part of the final report from that committee.

Johnson is an expert on financial and economic crises. As an academic, in policy roles, and with the private sector, over the past 20 years he has worked on crisis prevention, amelioration, and recovery around the world, in both relatively rich and relatively poor countries. His work focuses on how policymakers can limit the impact of negative shocks and manage the risks faced by their countries.

Johnson has worked with most of the leading research organizations focused on global economic stability. He remains a Research Associate at the NBER, a CEPR Research Fellow, a BREAD affiliate, a member of the Advisory Group at the Center for Global Development (CGD) in Washington D.C., a member of the International Advisory Board of CASE in Warsaw, and a non-resident Research Fellow at the Asian Institute for Corporate Governance of Korea University. In 2006-07, he was a Visiting Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, D.C.

Recent papers have appeared or are forthcoming in THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, THE JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, THE JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, and THE JOURNAL OF FINANCE. He is on the editorial board of THE JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, THE REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, THE JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE ECONOMICS, and CLIOMETRICA (a new journal of historical economics and econometric history).

His Ph.D. is in economics from MIT, while his M.A. is from the University of Manchester and his B.A. is from the University of Oxford.

At memorial service for West Virginia miners

http://wsws.org/articles/2010/apr2010/obam-a26.shtml

At memorial service for West Virginia miners
Obama preaches reconciliation with coal bosses
By Jerry White
26 April 2010

President Obama delivered a eulogy on Sunday for the 29 coal miners killed in the April 5 explosion at the Upper Big Branch Mine in Montcoal, West Virginia. The remarks, filled with religious and patriotic rhetoric, were aimed at concealing the criminal responsibility of the mine owners and the complicity of federal and state agencies that allowed miners to work in a deathtrap.

The audience at the Beckley Convention CenterSome two thousand people—including co-workers, family members, friends and workers from other mines—came to the Beckley Convention Center, about 35 mines from the scene of the disaster, to honor their fallen loved ones and comrades. Obama and the state Democratic Party establishment, however, had other motives.

Billed as a service to promote “hope and healing,” the event was aimed at dissipating the anger of miners and their families against Massey Energy and other mine owners. The talk was of reconciliation and forgiveness. The miners, Obama declared, died in pursuit of the “American dream.”

“All of West Virginia is in pain and not without some anger,” US Senator Jay Rockefeller said before the president’s remarks, “But we will bind together as a community because that is what West Virginians do. We will find a way to go on.”

This was an unmistakable appeal to “bind together” with the coal bosses, including Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship who rather than being tried and sentenced for the deaths of 52 miners at his operations over the last decade sat in the audience.

In addition to Rockefeller, US Senator Robert Byrd and Governor Joe Manchin, both Democrats, were also in attendance. The West Virginia Democrats, like their Republican counterparts, have long been in the pockets of Big Coal. If the miners were to conduct a mass struggle to defend themselves, these politicians would quickly shelve their sympathy for “hard-working miners” and dispatch the state police to arrest them.

In his remarks, President Obama repeated the self-serving theme stated over and over by the media to justify the continued carnage in the coalfields: that mining is a dangerous occupation and disasters are a just a normal part of life in the Appalachia coalfields.

“Most days, they would emerge from the dark mine, squinting at the light,” Obama said. “Most days, they would emerge, sweaty, dirty, dusted with coal. Most days, they would come home. Most days, but not that day.”

“They knew there were risks,” he said, “and so did their families. They knew their kids would say a prayer at night before they left. They knew their wives would wait for a call when their shift ended saying everything was ok.”

Such a presentation is designed to conceal the fact that there were real people responsible for the deadly conditions in the mines. The explosion at the Upper Big Branch mine—the deadliest coal mine disaster in 40 years—was not an “Act of God,” but the inevitable result of the willful disregard of the most basic safety precautions by Massey management, which was determined to extract as much coal out of the mine as possible. Moreover, federal Mine Safety and Health Administration regulators, appointed by the president himself, are also responsible because they allowed the mine to continue operating despite ample warnings of an impending disaster.

Corporations look at the death of miners as little more than collateral damage in pursuit of ever greater levels of profit. For Obama, however, the miners died while trying to realize the “American Dream.”

“All the hard work. All the hardship. All the time spent underground. It was all for their families,” Obama said. “For a car in the driveway. For a roof overhead. For a chance to give their kids opportunities they never knew; and enjoy retirement with their wives. It was all in the hopes of something better. These miners lived—as they died—in pursuit of the American dream.”

It would be more honest to say they lived and died as part of the American nightmare. Miners in the area were forced to take their lives in their own hands in an effort to escape the poverty that prevails in West Virginia, the third poorest state in the nation, lagging only behind Mississippi and Louisiana.

In an interview with the New York Times, a foreman at the Upper Big Branch Mine described the brutal conditions workers faced in the mine, where each day methane levels were double or triple the allowable levels. “Have you ever been scared for your life, when you go to work in the morning—daily. That’s what went on down there. Daily. I’ve had guys come to me and cry. Grown men cried because they’re scared,” he said.

Describing Massey’ s top management, he added, “They don’t care about nobody down there. I heard them make a statement that a man is like a roof bolt. You bend him till he breaks, then you get another one.”

Miners and friends attending the service related similar experiences to the WSWS.

The president made no reference to this damning evidence or the accumulated safety regulations that were ignored by Massey and not acted on by federal regulators. Knowing full well that these deadly conditions would continue not only at Massey but throughout the industry, he continued, “How can a nation that relies on its miners not do everything in its power to protect them? How can we let anyone in this country put their lives at risk by simply showing up to work? By simply pursuing the American dream?

“We cannot bring back the 29 men we lost,” he added. “They are with the Lord now. Our task, here on Earth, is to save lives from being lost in another such tragedy. To do what we must do, individually and collectively, to assure safe conditions underground. To treat our miners like they treat each other--like a family. Because we are all family and we are all Americans and we have to lean on each other.”

Miners have heard such pronouncements time and again. After the 2006 disaster at the Sago Mine that killed 12 West Virginia miners, Democratic and Republican politicians swore to improve safety conditions and hold the coal operators accountable. Instead, measures were taken that provided the owners a vast loophole to escape fines and continue operating their unsafe mines. Nothing of any substance has changed in the transition from a Republican to a Democratic administration.

Obama’s remarks make clear that there will be no attempt to hold accountable those responsible for the deaths of the 29 miners, including Massey Energy and its CEO Don Blankenship. The investigation launched by the federal government will merely be another whitewash.

While various politicians and the news media have attempted to present Massey as a “bad apple” in an otherwise safe and conscientious industry, deaths and injuries are occurring in other mines as well.

On Friday, a 28-year-old miner was killed just eight miles west of Beckley, in Eccles, West Virginia, when he was crushed between a continuous mining machine and the mine wall. The mine is owned by International Coal Group, which also owns the Sago Mine.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

The Wild One


http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-wild-one,40222/

Better Late Than Never?
The Wild One
Nathan Rabin
April 19, 2010

When I was 14, I spent a month in a mental hospital. As recounted in my memoir, I was horrified to discover that I had somehow landed in the sole television-free psychiatric ward in the known universe. TV and films had led me to believe that people in mental hospitals did nothing but watch TV, when not lurching about in circles and accusing people of stealing their thoughts. Nevertheless, the powers-that-be considered television an unnecessary distraction, and possibly even a source of entertainment and pleasure, so it was consequently verboten.

Nevertheless, one day every month, a television and VCR would be wheeled into the ward to provide a reward for the institution’s highest achievers. I, alas, did not fall into that category, so I did not get to see the movie of the month: 1953’s The Wild One. The selection surprised me. I’d never seen The Wild One, but I certainly knew of it. and from everything I’d heard, it seemed like the kind of rebellious, hip, cool, anti-authoritarian movie that would drive the glowering, authoritarian killjoys who ran the ward into an apoplectic rage.

I knew of The Wild One as the source of one of film’s most notorious, widely quoted (and mocked) catchphrases. When asked what he’s rebelling against, Marlon Brando famously sneers, “Whaddya got?” I knew it as an iconic image: an impossibly young, gorgeous Brando, clad in the official greaser outfit of blue jeans, a white T-shirt, and a black motorcycle jacket, leaning insouciantly against his hog with an enigmatic look on his face.

At 14, I wondered why such a sexy, dangerous, edgy movie, a film banned in Great Britain for 14 years due to its explosive content, was being shown to mental patients. Yet even as I grew up to become a cinephile and then a Brando obsessive—not to mention the originator of the Great Gazoo Theory—I never got around to seeing The Wild One. Until now. Better late than never, eh?

What I learned is that while Brando’s performance was sexy, dangerous, and edgy, the film itself is anything but. The first sign that The Wild One is not the incendiary cinematic Molotov cocktail of my 14-year-old mind’s overactive imagination comes with an opening crawl breathlessly announcing:

THIS IS A SHOCKING STORY. IT COULD NEVER TAKE PLACE IN MOST AMERICAN TOWNS—BUT IT DID IN THIS ONE.

IT IS A PUBLIC CHALLENGE NOT TO LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN.

Not very rock ’n’ roll, right? The film that would inspire the legend of James Dean—whom Brando famously dismissed as “wearing my last year’s wardrobe and using my last year’s talent,” a not-so-subtle intimation that Dean ripped off his Wild One persona for Rebel Without A Cause—opens on a Reefer Madness note of frothing hysteria.

Brando and his gang come roaring into a sleepy small town—just like yours!—with a swagger in their steps and their mouths fixed in permanent sneers. At first, they’re content merely taking in a motorcycle race, but before long, they’re engaging in dangerous stunts like crossing the track while the race is still in progress. This predictably upsets the denizens of this small town, one of whom confronts the gang with the withering barb, “What’s the matter with you chowderheads? You in such a big hurry to die?”

Of course, the outlaw outfit is anything but helpless. They return fire in a silly war of words by deriding the town as being full of “squares” who are too “chicken” to “drag [Brando’s character] a hundred yards for beers.” Brando’s sidekicks—all of whom seem to have been imported from a Bowery Boys programmer, and who devote most of their time and energy to drunken clowning—are full of praise for his motorcycle skills, crowing, “He can really go. He can really screw it on.”

Soon the gang is running amok, drag-racing for beers, back-sassing authority figures, stealing racing trophies, and generally causing havoc for good, decent people. It isn’t until Brando spies pretty waitress Mary Murphy at a diner that the film begins to feel like something more than a hysterical biker exploitation movie. While the rest of his gang is outside cracking jokes, Brando embodies a powerful internal calm.

He’s quiet and borderline genteel, dancing a discreet little two-step to a jazzy number on the jukebox, giving Murphy the trophy he’s stolen from the race, and generally letting his body language and piercing glance wordlessly convey sentiments and hungers too raw and subversive for a 1953 studio film. It’s that incongruous tenderness, the glimpse at the scared, sensitive little boy beneath the adult badass, that makes Brando so magnetic.

Back at the diner, Brando continues to hit on Murphy. When she asks where Brando’s gang is headed, he answers with a vexed, existential, “Oh man, we’re just gonna go!” Later, he continues, “On the weekends we go out and have a ball.” Alas, it isn’t always easy communicating a hipster mindset to a square, as evidenced by Murphy’s clueless retort, “Do you just ride around, or do you go on a picnic of some sort or something?”

I’m not entirely sure, but I suspect that line was meant to foreshadow the film’s never-filmed sequel, The Wild One: A Picnic Of Some Sort. You will not believe how Brando packs a pic-a-nick basket! Yes, he’s smarter than the average motorcycle hoodlum! Alas, not even Brando at his sexiest can sell a line like “A picnic? Man, you are too square. I have to straighten you out.”

Brando communicates exclusively in a hipster patois that was probably already comically dated back in 1953, delivering stream-of-consciousness jive talk about how “You’ve gotta stay cool, you’ve gotta wail. You got to put somethin’ down. You got to make some jive.” He’s the original white Negro, a bebop jazz musician, at heart too hip for this square world.

His cohorts likewise communicate like cartoon beatniks. In this clip, they lay some heavy jive on a daddy-o straight out of Squaresville, ya dig? A real L 7. The old man behind the bar and his customers inhabit the same diner, but they seem to exist in different universes and speak different languages. Oh, and also Brando delivers his signature line.

Then Lee Marvin rumbles into town as the head of a rival motorcycle gang, and I thought, “Here comes Lee Marvin. Thank God. He’s always drunk and violent.” So you can only imagine how horrified I was when Marvin and Brando inexplicably start singing about painting wagons. Or maybe I’m getting this confused with a later Lee Marvin effort.

Marvin delivers a big, boozy star turn full of malevolent humor and free-floating malice. The Wild One seems to be spinning its wheels until Marvin’s arrival, at which point it kicks into high gear. After Marvin gets arrested, Brando’s gang decides to spring him from jail, and the film finally begins to generate real suspense. There’s a great sequence where a fat townsman who has made the mistake of antagonizing the gang looks outside and sees only menacing headlights piercing the darkness, and hears the ominous revving of motorcycle engines preparing for an attack.

The Wild One then shifts gears, as a crazed militia seeks out Brando and beats him to a bloody pulp. The real menace, the film suggests, lies not with leather-clad bad boys sneering at authority, but rather with law-and-order types intent on punishing nonconformity, brutes with no respect for due process or our nation’s fine legal system. The Wild One’s superior second half occupies a world of creeping shadows and paranoia, heavy with intimations of violence.

Brando, you see, is merely misunderstood. He’s the hate that hate made, an abused child who grew up to be a rebel full of incoherent rage. Behind the hatred lies a murderous desire for love. He’s less the villain than a tortured antihero who is framed for the murder of an old man by a town eager to bring him down for who he is, how he looks, how he dresses, and what he drives, not because of his actions.

Laslo Benedek is credited as the director of The Wild One, but its real auteur is Stanley Kramer, a prolific producer and director who specialized in dour, heavy-handed message movies about Important Social Issues, like Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner. Accordingly, The Wild One is half atmospheric film noir/contemporary Western, and half solemn, campy message movie about the perils of mob justice, motorcycle gangs, and the plague of misunderstood, alienated youth.

Much of The Wild One feels clichéd and laughable today, but that’s partially because the film was popular and influential enough to transform many of its core elements into endlessly recycled conventions: Brando’s iconic greaser garb and petulant pout, the sinister motorcycle gang that comes rumbling into a small town with nothing but bad intentions, the star-crossed romance between the brooding, enigmatic drifter and the local good girl.

The Wild One is divided against itself: It’s square and hip, super-cool and crazy hokey. It marked a seminal moment in the evolution of American cool, and showed multiple generations how to be a badass. Brando’s biker was rock ’n’ roll before Alan Freed coined the term, a consummate punk decades before the Ramones bit his fashion sense.

So why, of all the movies in all the mental hospitals in the world, did some mystery person choose The Wild One as our monthly mental-hospital reward? Was it because it ultimately preached the futility of rebellion? Or was it because they thought we would recognize and embrace Brando’s sneering cyclist as one of our own, a lost little boy adopting a series of outlaw poses? There’s a reason the image of Brando in his leather jacket and jeans has ricocheted through pop culture for the last 57 years, even as The Wild One curdled into kitsch: The character and performance proved iconic and enduring, not the sometimes-riveting, often-ridiculous movie in which they’re trapped.

THE LIFE, WORK, AND INFLUENCE OF CHARLES FORT

http://www.forteanswest.com/lowfiguesteditorial-SkylaireAlfvegren0410.html

L.O.W.F.I's Guest Editorial
The League of Western Fortean Intermediatists presents...
THE LIFE, WORK, AND INFLUENCE OF CHARLES FORT
by Skylaire Alfvegren

"Every science is a mutilated octopus. If its tentacles were not clipped to stumps, it would feel its way into disturbing contacts." -- Charles Fort

There is a man, largely undiscovered by the modern world, whom I, and many others, believe made one of the most significant contributions to the world of science. Had it not been that he vehemently opposed modern scientists and their methods, his work might be enjoying a greater popularity than it does. Had this man decided to write about completely different topics, he would be hailed as a fabulous literary character. Here was a peculiar fellow. Charles Fort devoted 26 years of his life to compiling documented reports of scientific anomalies from journals and newspapers from all around the world. He lived in dire poverty so that truth could prevail. His life's work may one day be of great scientific worth, should the established scientific community ever muster the courage to approach it.

Anomalies. This is what Fort trafficked in. Reports of prehistoric beasts frolicking in the world's oceans. (Loch Ness, Champ, Storsjon Animal). Ancient artifacts found in improbable places (Roman coins in the deserts of Arizona, Chinese seals found buried deep in the forests of Ireland, small statues of horses discovered in pre-Columbian Venezuela). Falls of things other than rain from the sky (red rains in 1571 England, 1744 Genoa; a rain of "73 organic formations, particular to South America" in France in 1846). Unidentified aerial phenomena (excluding Ezekiel's Biblical description. Fort's list contains the first known report of a so-called "UFO", dating from 1779). These are but a few of the subjects Fort spent his lifetime collecting reports of. This anomalous data are roped together under the banner of "Forteana”, a term which probably does not exist in any dictionary, because that which it pertains to isn't supposed to exist at all.

He who championed underdogs, has been and will likely continue to be, one of the greatest underdogs of all time. For he has not a baseball team or brooding thespians to compete with, but the entire history of the scientific world. His work spat in the face of conventional scientists. There is much going on around us that defies explanation. Fort amassed reports of events seen by humans around the world countless times, which, none the less, have been dismissed. The data he collected were excommunicated by science, which acts like a religion. "The monks of science" he wrote, "dwell on smuggeries that are walled away from event-jungles- Science has done its utmost to prevent whatever science has done" (the Book of the Damned, p. 245). His legacy, his collection of data lies before us. It is indisputable, and yet still ignored. The reports he gathered could make any enemy of science acquire a renewed enthusiasm for the subject. In his four published works, the Book of the Damned (1919). New Lands (1923) Lo! (1931) and Wild Talents (1932) we find over 1,200 documented reports of occurrences which orthodox science refuses to attempt to explain. Explanation was not Fort's purpose. He merely presented the data, sometimes with his own speculations, sometimes with tongue in cheek. While anomalies can be entertaining, they can also be deeply disturbing, for they undermine the foundations of science, the idea that every thing in this world is rational and under control. Articles like those collected in Fortean Times and the INFO Journal (International Fortean Organization), two publications which continue Fort's work, prove that things are not under our control, nor will they ever be. Many people, including scientists, find this discomforting and so ignore that which they cannot explain.

FORT'S LIFE

Fort was born on the 6th or 9th of August, 1874, in Albany, New York, to Victorian parents. “His mother died when he was four, from complications of the birth of his second brother Raymond. After two years, his father bought a new house. Fort hated intolerance, and the severe Victorian upbringing he and his brothers received may have instilled in him a defiance which would carry on into his adulthood, one that may have compelled him to champion the material found in his books: the ignored but not defeated. At 13, his father remarried a member of a prominent Albany family, but the boys' cruel treatment did not subside. When they became too old to beat, they were imprisoned in a small, windowless room and starved.

Fort enjoyed church, but shot spit wads at the bald heads and small children there. He would confess his little sins to the keeper, Mrs. Lawson, for they kept him awake if he didn't. He had a keen interest in science which was put off by a series of failed experiments his teacher attempted to perform. With ambitions of becoming a naturalist, Fort began a collection of the birds he claimed with his slingshot, mounting the specimens and preserving their organs. While he was the sliver in his teachers' foot in school, a smug little skeptic, at home Charles read voraciously on subjects such as languages, natural history, geography, and taxonomy. His interests varied greatly and his inquisitiveness was rare in one so young. What he did not learn in school he pursued with a rare, determined passion. He forged his grades and his fondness for writing was encouraged by his uncle and teacher, John Hoy. Eventually he clamored into the office of the newspaper the Albany Democrat. After submitting his first assignment, the copy reader gave it back, saying, "the puzzle editor isn't in just now." The story was printed after Fort cultivated a more legible style of handwriting (Knight, p.21). Soon he was assigned to cover the local courthouse. Once he decided he was a man, he began drinking and gambling. He wrote peculiar little stories and sold them to the Brooklyn World. He was 17.

When his father died, Fort was sent to live with his grandfather. Now 18, he smoked, drank and consorted with fallen women, all in the dubious hope of gaining experience which would enrich his writing career. Unsatisfied, he abandoned school to work full time on the Brooklyn World. Within a year he was editing a weekly that two ex-employees of the paper had begun in Queens. When the Woodhaven Independent met its demise, he decided to use the $25 he received each month from his guardian to finance a trip around the world, all to "accumulate an experience and knowledge of life that would fit me to become a writer" and "to put capital in the bank of experience."

Two years he spent collecting impressions of the world, gathering coconuts on the island of St. Helena in Africa, traipsing through Nova Scotia, sleeping in parks in England, sharing trains with cowboys in New Orleans. Upon his return to New York in 1896, he wrote "30,000 miles—nothing more to see—only 21, but for now the work of a master!" Soon he met up with a paralyzed ex-world traveler whose advice Fort seemed to take to an extreme. "I, too, have always had that interest in life," the man said. "Lord! Lord! such a mistake! You don’t want to know something about everybody, but everything about somebody. I never begun to learn about life until I was cooped up here with my wife and (daughter) Maggie." Fort wrote: "One cannot ignore a truth when one has passed through all the errors below it." He knew, as Damon Knight put it, "that one should not scatter one's self upon all life, but center upon some kind of life and know it thoroughly" (Knight, p. 33). Thus ended his first lesson. It appears that Fort had contracted malaria in South Africa. He ran into Anna Filing, who had known Fort since she was 13, and she nursed him back to health. In October they were married. They were separated only by his death 35 years later. After a honeymoon in Maine, they returned to tenement life in New York. She never read, but cooked well. He wrote for magazines about his wretched neighbors. He took 25,000 notes on all kinds of subjects but decided they weren't what he wanted and destroyed them, an impulsive task which he was to repeat many times throughout his life. For 20 years they lived on the edge of poverty. He couldn't look for work when it rained for the holes in his shoes; they broke chairs for fire wood; visits where made to the pawn shop. Fort sold stories to newspapers. He collected 40,000 more notes from every scientific journal he could find and began to see an unsuspected pattern.

In 1905, he came to Smith's Magazine with a batch of his stories, which editor (and influential author) Theodore Dreiser called the "best humorous short stories I have ever seen produced in America." He went on to call Fort "a new and rare literary star". Only in a financial sense was Fort an unsuccessful writer. Although he eeked out a living as a journalist, much of his writing was too quirky to publish. By December of 1907, Fort wrote "my mind [is] filled with pictures of cutting my throat or leaping out of the window head first." Biographer Damon Knight says of his character: "He was built like a walrus; an utterly peaceable and sedentary man. He lived quietly with his wife, had almost no visitors or went out, and owned no telephone—he spent his mornings working at home, afternoons at the library, and went out with his wife to the movies almost every night."

Fort's father died in 1912, leaving his estate to Charles’s blind stepmother, which was inherited by Raymond when she died the following year. The Outcast Manufacturers was published in 1909, the only one of his ten known completed novels to be published. It never received the attention it deserved, as a realistic novel ahead of its time. He resumed his "grand tour", scouring the world's newspapers and filling shoeboxes with notes he had taken in a shorthand of his own invention.

By 1915 he had collected several tens of thousands of notes, and began two books, X and Y. By now Fort was completely frustrated by the publishing industry, and becoming increasingly soured by the scientific community as well. He decided that in science, there were only cranks and believers, and so he became a crank. In X, he proposed that life on earth had been controlled by some force on Mars. In Y he told of a sinister civilization which existed at the South Pole, and that Kasper Hauser, a mystery man who suddenly appeared in Nuremburg in 1828, was actually a visitor from Y-Land. In writing Dreiser, he said "You have at least one thing to be thankful for — I could've begun with A."

In May of 1916, Fort's uncle died, leaving him a share of the estate, enabling him to buy a few pieces of furniture, and at the age of 42, he was relieved of having to earn a living. Unsatisfied, he rewrote Y. Even though he began his serious career with two books filled with what we must call "crackpot theories", we know that the information in his four published non-fiction works, while incredible, can all be verified. Why would a man sacrifice his life to write about things which he did not believe in the validity of?

Fort quickly overcame his temporary insanity and burnt the manuscripts of X and Y which Dreiser had taken to many publishers, all of whom rejected it for one reason or another. Fort began work on the Book of the Damned, so titled because any datum that did not fit one scientist's view or the collective paradigm was ignored, suppressed, discredited or explained away, and was therefore "damned." Dreiser demanded that his personal publisher put the book out, and threatened to leave when told it would lose money. With the Book of the Damned, Fort now arrived at the idea that if there are unsuspected patterns in the universe, they can be found in the data that does not fit known patterns. He distrusted established categories, because every system excludes other systems which may be equally as valid. Individuals can only see what they are looking for. He questioned Euclid, Newton and Darwin, and wrote with an amazing wit and boundless insight.

Ben Hecht, who went on to become a major screenwriter in the 1930's, made a review of the book when it was published in 1919. "Fort has made a terrible onslaught upon the accumulated lunacy of 50 years... He has shot the scientific basis of modem wisdom full of large, ugly holes... I am the first disciple of Charles Fort. Henceforth, I am a Fortean." (The words Fortean and Forteana, while popular among his followers, are not to be found in dictionaries.) Booth Tarkington asked, "Who in the name of frenzy is Charles Fort? People must turn to look at his head when he walks down the street; I think it's a head that would emit noises and explosions, with copper flames playing out from the ears."

With the Book of the Damned, the material Fort is known for began to emerge. He questioned all authority and went on to reject it. He was not opposed to the scientific method or science in general, but to the narrow-minded views on which they were largely based. He became the defender of discarded data. With threads of his own speculation and wit, he stitched the yarns of his books together. "The interpretations will be mine, but the data will be for anybody to form his own opinions on." (Book of the Damned, p. 17). In the quantities he had collected, the data spoke for themselves.

The next year Fort fell into a deep depression and again undertook his ritual of note-burning, which now numbered over 40,000. In 1921, he and Anna set sail for London, where they lived within blocks of the British Museum for eight years. He undertook his "grand tour" several more times, gathering new subjects and finding new correlations on each trip. He now wrote New Lands, the least successful and most sour of his books. In the introduction, Tarkington wrote: "Here indeed was a brush dipped in earthquake and eclipse; though the wildest mundane earthquakes are but earthquakes in teapots when compared to what goes on in the visions conjured up before us by Mr. Charles Fort." Published in 1923, New Lands is a continuation of the Book of the Damned, with heavy emphasis on astronomy. In it he openly attacks the pomposity of astronomers, who "are led by a cloud of rubbish by day and a pillar of bosh by night."

In 1929 he returned to New York to work on Lo! It was published in 1931, and began to explain the "underlying oneness" that he discovered pervaded his data. "One measures a circle," he said, "beginning anywhere." After all, he collected data because they correlated with other data. For instance, Fort discovered that aerial phenomenon (storms), meteors, luminous appearances in the sky--occur at the time of earthquakes with an implausible frequency (Lo!, p. 48). He completed Wild Talents, a further continuation of inter-related data (this time with a paranormal bend) in 1932, while enduring gradual blindness and weakness. Mere weeks after publication, he was admitted to a hospital on May 3 where he died within a few hours. He left 60,000 notes, which are housed in the rare books department of the New York Public Library.

FORT'S INFUENCE

Most critics were baffled by the content and whimsical style of Fort's work. With tens of thousands of pieces of data, it is impossible to go into any great deal of explanation or introduction to his work in so short an essay. A random look through Fort's works might include: falls of substances and organic matter from the sky, including: alkali, asbestos, ashes, axes, beef, birds, bitumen, blood, brick, butter, carbonate of soda, charcoal, cinders, coal, coffee, beans, fish, gelatin, hay, insects, iron, larvae, leaves, lizards, manna, nostoc, sand, silk, snakes, spider webs, sulfur, turpentine, turtles, water and worms; documented cases of spontaneous human combustion; unidentified flying objects and unknown bodies seen in space; reports of poltergeist phenomena and paranormal abilities; unexplained appearances and disappearances of living things (especially humans); and evidence of discoveries of America before Columbus, stigmatic wounds, mass hysteria and manias, wild men, teleportations, visions and miracles, modern objects found encased in ancient rocks; accounts of things seen in the sky since biblical times; unexplainable swarms of insects or animals, phantom bullets, things seen in the ocean, storms associated with earthquakes and volcanoes, various animals being in places with no explanation for being there; and so forth and so on.

Not surprisingly, a cult grew around this eccentric visionary. In 1931, a year before his death- Dreiser, Tiffany Thayer and Aaron Sussman founded the Fortean Society, which Fort himself refused to join. He had expressed his objections to such a group as early as 1926, saying that the great majority of persons attracted would be the ones they wouldn’t want. The Society enjoyed much success in its early years, and if Fort was snubbed by the scientific community, he may have found solace from the number of literary figures who admired his work and were members of the Society. The list included: Booth Tarkington, Clarence Darrow, Oliver Wendell Holmes, John Cowper Powys, Havelock Ellis, Alexander Walcott, Eric Dingwall and Eric Frank Russell.

Science's exclusion of incredible data is not a new thing. Things once considered complete nonsense, have occasionally been proven true within 50 or 100 years. Voltaire scorned the idea of fossils; Lavoisier told the Academy of Sciences in 1769 that only peasants believed that stones fell from the sky, so meteorites were not accepted until 1803. Space flight was considered complete fantasy until the 1930's. Ball lightening has recently been rescued from the realm of folklore, transformed into the promising field of plasma physics. We still do not have a conclusive theory to explain the demise of the dinosaurs. Why do we pretend to have all of the answers?

Fort's impact on the scientific community, now, as then, appears miniscule. Orthodox scientists cannot accept anomalous data and are frequently blind to it. There are no absolutes. I find the established scientific community's ignorance and complete disregard ludicrous. Perhaps it is due in part to his ridicule of scientists in his books. Truth be told, I have found few endorsements of serious scientists in any related writings. "I conceive of nothing in religion, science or philosophy," he said, "that is more than the proper thing to wear for a while. Witchcraft always has a hard time, until it becomes established and changes its name." (Wild Talents, p. 118). I believe that Fort's outrageous and constant ridicule, while he may have felt it justified, damaged his chances for recognition. For you can dislike his whimsical writing style, disregard his own theories, but you can not argue with his data.

THE CONTEMPORARY INFLUENCE OF FORT

In researching this paper, I spoke to four professors from local universities to discover Fort's influence, if any, on science. An anthropology professor, while polite and helpful, hadn't a clue as to who Fort was; an astronomy professor who appeared to believe I was making Fort up, suggested I contact someone in Arizona; a physics professor. Dr. Haufmann, who seemed to blame me for his unfamiliarity with Charles Fort. The end of my research came from Dr. Gould, a physics professor at UCLA. He had no offhand recollection of Fort, but promised the name was floating in his brain somewhere. He was 90% certain, however, that he was the only member of the Department of Physics and Astronomy who had even heard of him.

While scientific acceptance eludes him, there are a number of individuals and publications that keep his spirit alive by continuing to keep up with reports of contemporary anomalies. In 1965 Ronald J. Willis founded the International Fortean Organization (INFO) in order to continue and expand the original Fortean Society. [as I wrote this in 1995, issue # 72 of its journal had just been completed.] INFO encourages members to send clippings from local newspapers of anomalous stories. The Fortean Times was first published in 1973 in England to continue the work begun by Fort. In 1991, they published a collection of personal favorites--stories culled from 2,700 pages of impossibilities. As the editor of FT says, there are two usual respondents to anomalies--debunkers and cranks. Fort didn't demand belief from his readers. He suspended disbelief in favor of temporary acceptance until further evidence came along one way or another.

Virtually all of the board members of INFO, and authors in the field make their money through some other (usually related) profession, like psychology, zoology, journalism, etc. As one would expect, most of the writing in the field is a spare-time, labor of love effort. Those who have become more mercenary in their pursuit have almost invariably sacrificed scholarly integrity.

Contemporary Forteans pursue varied careers. Hynek was a scientist, as was Vallee. John Keel was a journalist/screenwriter. Ivan T. Sanderson, who was a zoologist and for many years worked as professional animal collector for zoos and museums, discovered dozens of new species through his work. He also wrote a number of highly regarded popular science books. (He considered himself first and foremost a cryptozoologist.)

Contemporary authors like Charles Berlitz, William Corliss, Jenny Randles and Brad Steiger have kept alive the tradition and spirit of Fort’s writing and research. As Forteana seems to be a major taboo in all fields of science, it is impossible for young scientists to openly pursue any subject considered as such. Those who are publicly involved in anomalies research are or were invariably secure in their tenure or retired, such as cryptozoologists Roy Mackal and Grover Krantz and Mayan expert David H. Kelley. The only academics who can pursue Forteana are folklorists who must follow the dogma that their material consists of stories whose truth or falsity is irrelevant. (Rickard. p. 5).

Fortean Times and Fate Magazine (which takes a more sensationalistic approach), make a little money on their publications. INFO is a non-profit organization devoted to continuing serious, intelligent investigation into the world of anomalies. They have correspondents all over the globe, most of whom hold degrees in some scientific discipline. [Former] INFO secretary Michael Shoemaker says that true believers have lost any scholarly credibility by becoming such--which is opposed to Fort's doctrine of open-minded skepticism, the idea that tentative acceptance is preferable to belief. I am amazed by the dedication and intelligence of those who currently pursue Forteana. Decades after his last book was published, Fort and his works remain enigmas.

I am disappointed that more mainstream attention isn't paid to Fort's work. (Excluding the dearth of television shows with the “unknown" angle, which in a way pay homage to Fort, but usually ignore his principles). Fort's books are valuable but sadly neglected. If more individuals discovered his writings, I'm positive it would alter their perceptions of science greatly. And should some bold young scientist challenge one of the ancient ideas which dictate scientific thought, it might alter science itself.

Time to cut ties with Big Ben - no matter what

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbeUpqe2asHxTzx8jqDj-2rG0MwwD9F80N4G0
Time to cut ties with Big Ben - no matter what
TIM DAHLBERG (AP)
4-22-10

I'm not so sure what "comprehensive behavioral evaluation" means, though the last time I remember one being ordered for a star athlete they came back with the conclusion that, yes, Mike Tyson did have some psychological issues.

My guess is they'll find Ben Roethlisberger has some issues, too, though we may never know to what extent. But, at the risk of sounding presumptuous, I would suggest the psychological evaluation NFL commissioner Roger Goodell ordered Wednesday for the Steelers quarterback begin with this question:

Why, in a Georgia bar crowded with young women who might relish the chance to spend some time alone with a football star, would you be so interested in one who says she tried her best to say no?

The answer to that surely would interest the attorney for a woman who accused Roethlisberger of luring her up to a Lake Tahoe hotel room and raping her two years ago. Indeed, Roethlisberger's whole mental state should be of great interest in that case, if only because attorneys for Roethlisberger have insisted all along that it was the alleged victim who had mental issues, not him.

They played hardball, writing in one court filing that the lawsuit was "based on the fantastical imaginings of a desperate woman with significant credibility issues." Unlike her, they said, "Mr. Roethlisberger is armed with the truth."

The Steelers apparently accepted that — so much that coach Mike Tomlin and the team's director of football operations lined up with Roethlisberger at a press conference where he angrily denied the accusations.

The fans did, too, cheering him on as if nothing had happened.

Now, with sordid allegations of a different night of debauchery fresh in their minds, some fans apparently have issues of their own. I found that out the other day when I suggested in a column that they would welcome back Roethlisberger with open arms from any suspension.

Seems like the people of Pittsburgh are now taking the whole thing personally.

And that might make it easier for the Steelers to do what they should have done by now — get rid of Roethlisberger while the getting is still somewhat good.

"You are right — we supported Ben the first time around because the details were sketchy, the allegations came so late after the incident itself and the accuser's credibility was questionable at best," Steelers fan Ian Riggins wrote in an e-mail. "This second allegation, though, throws the first into a different light. Suddenly, Ben is no longer a superstar athlete who makes poor decisions that allow him to be ripe for cash grabs."

I'll leave the last part for the psychologists and the attorneys to figure out. I do know this: Roethlisberger is an awfully lucky man right now even if he misses a few games next season and loses $2.8 million from his $102 million contract.

Not that Goodell should have come down harder on him. The commissioner went about as far as he could in suspending him for up to six games to begin the season, considering Roethlisberger doesn't face criminal charges.

A better punishment might have been starting the suspension in the middle of the season when it really counts. But that would have been penalizing the Steelers when their only crime was believing in their quarterback.

Now that Goodell has acted, it's time for the Steelers to take some action of their own. The talk about the Rooneys being a family of integrity determined to run a team with integrity has to be more than just talk.

There's no need to wait for a psychological evaluation to figure out what to do. No need to groom another quarterback to take his place.

No need to con some other team out of high draft picks to ease the pain of him leaving.

Just send him packing and spare an entire city any more pain and disappointment.

"Believe me Pittsburghers are very proud of their city, the Steelers, and the Rooneys, and are willing to do what it takes to wait for a new leader even if it means losing," Dr. Glenn Bickert, a Pittsburgh native who now lives in California, wrote in another e-mail. "I know it's hard for people to understand the disapproval of Ben's behavior by the average Pittsburgher, but you'll see that their resentment runs deep."

If it really does, the people of Pittsburgh deserve a big pat on the back for choosing character over wins. If it really does, then the Rooneys only have one choice:

Get rid of Roethlisberger now. Otherwise, the fans may end up running him out of town themselves.

Tim Dahlberg is a national sports columnist for The Associated Press. Write to him at tdahlberg@ap.org

The ‘Idiot’ That’s Boosting Broadway

http://www.newsweek.com/id/236696

The ‘Idiot’ That’s Boosting Broadway
The acclaimed Green Day album comes to the stage, and drags rock and roll along with it.
Jeremy McCarter
Apr 20, 2010

On second thought, maybe the Beatles didn't kill the Broadway musical. For half a century, theater folk have cursed rock and roll—including a certain diabolical quartet from Liverpool—for driving show tunes from American hearts and turntables: out went The Sound of Music, in came the sound of acid trips and fornication. Hair and Rent made it to the stage, but they felt like exceptions to the rule. They didn't give you much reason to imagine a time when pop music would enjoy a robust and ongoing presence on Broadway. That is, they didn't help you to see the last couple of seasons coming.

If you could unscrew the lids of Broadway's theaters around 9 o'clock tonight, this is what you'd hear: the Afrobeat of Fela Kuti, the Europop of Abba, doo-wop from Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons, proto-rock from Johnny Cash and Elvis Presley, and mixed-up hits from hair bands like Foreigner, Journey, and Whitesnake. Then there's the music written explicitly for the stage: the soul of Memphis; the hip-hop and salsa of In the Heights, which won the Tony Award for best musical; and the rock score of Next to Normal, which just won the Pulitzer Prize. Like never before, the traditional sound of a Broadway orchestra shares the Great White Way with all sorts of once-anathema pop styles, packed together like stations on the dial.

American Idiot is the latest musical to join them, and probably the loudest. Based on Green Day's 2004 album-length rock opera of the same name, the punk-pop show tells the story of three disaffected young men trying—with the help of sex, drugs, and battered guitars—not to lose their minds in George W. Bush's America. Under the direction of Michael Mayer (who co-wrote the show's libretto with Green Day frontman Billie Joe Armstrong), it has raucous energy and frequently spectacular stagecraft. It doesn't hold together as well as it should, but there's still something entirely welcome going on here.

Unlike too many of its predecessors, American Idiot isn't trafficking in nostalgia—the material is too new (and too bleak) for that. Nor does orchestrator Tom Kitt trade the album's jagged edges for a Broadway-friendly pseudopop mire. In other words, the show makes the case that there need not be a chasm between the music that people hear on Broadway and the music they hear, well, everywhere else. With the arrival of Green Day and its punk-pop opera, Broadway takes another step toward the cultural relevance it lost half a century ago—another step back from the wilderness.

To understand how a trio of rock stars from Oakland could be good for Broadway, it helps to appreciate what a filthy art form the theater is, and has always been. Exorbitant ticket prices conceal—but can't erase—the wonderfully vulgar DNA of every show that reaches these stages: they're descended from the satyr play, the leggy blonde kick line, the seedy vaudeville routine. Theater is a magpie art that needs to refresh itself constantly with the energy that's sloshing around society. When it doesn't, you end up with the Broadway musical of the last few decades: an era in which Sondheim couldn't write his darkly brilliant musicals fast enough to arrest Broadway's slide into a bloated, self-referential style that made the place verge on being a punch line.

Two recent shifts have allowed Broadway to catch up to the music of the last 50 years. The first is generational: the people putting on shows, and buying tickets to shows, have grown up with rock. (In fact, the most telling sign of a new audience's arrival wasn't a rock show per se: The fact that Avenue Q, a dirty puppet show that riffed on Sesame Street, could sustain a six-year Broadway run meant that something major had shifted.) The other reason that pop musicals are thriving is that gifted artists have worked out a production style that suits the new material—no small feat when you realize how ridiculous the phrase "the new Broadway musical from Green Day" would have sounded just a few years ago. Even now it's a little crazy.

Lucky, then, that when it comes to bravura stagecraft, American Idiot represents the state of the art. Scenic designer Christine Jones has erected towering walls of rock posters studded with TV screens, like a madhouse constructed entirely of media—just right for a show in which a character bemoans "this hurricane of f--king lies." Lighting designer Kevin Adams (like Jones, a veteran of Spring Awakening) pops off explosions of color all around you, which means the show doesn't just look different from other musicals—it's a different sensation to watch it.

You get the same feeling from the charismatic cast, who spare you the massively awkward sight of actors pretending to play musical instruments. Johnny (John Gallagher Jr.) doesn't just howl Green Day's lyrics of disaffection when he flees the suburbs for big-city adventures: he accompanies himself on acoustic guitar, making the early choruses of "Wake Me Up When September Ends" a plaintive solo ballad. His friends Will (Michael Esper), who gets stuck in the burbs, and Tunney (Stark Sands), who marches off to war, find chances to do the same. Backed by the onstage band, the show has the energy—and frequently the look—of a rock concert, which suits its evocations of helplessness, alienation, and rage.

Yet for all the audacious spectacle and terrific cast, it still leaves you wanting. Mayer and Armstrong add little dialogue to the lyrics, which aren't as resonant as they seem to think. They give you little reason to care about Johnny, who fancies himself the Jesus of Suburbia, or his drug troubles, or his girl (Rebecca Naomi Jones). If this sounds familiar, it's because the charge of weak storytelling has been leveled at most of the 21st-century pop musicals. I've never bought the complaint that pop songs can't sustain a character or carry emotional weight the way show tunes can (cf. Lennon-McCartney, Stephin Merritt, etc., etc.). In fact, the predicament of pop musicals seems to differ only slightly from the predicament of all musicals from Show Boat on: namely, that getting words and music in sync to tell an emotionally weighty story is a damned tricky business. Oscar Hammersteins are few and far between.

Maybe the best news about the arrival of Green Day—and the sonic expansion of Broadway that the band embodies—is that the next young Hammerstein might be a little easier to find. There's no telling where the outward grasp that Broadway has shown in the last couple of years will end, but it shows no signs of slowing down. A theater scene that's willing to assemble the 21st-century musical from every corner of the culture is bound to be an exciting place, even if it's a rowdy mess. No, especially if it's a rowdy mess.

The Complete Monty Python's 16 Ton Megaset: Flying Circus


http://www.buzzflash.com/store/items/2132

Sale: The Complete Monty Python's 16 Ton Megaset: Flying Circus: 16 DVDs, 1749 Minutes. 35% BuzzFlash Discount Includes Postage and Handling.
The Full Monty Python Series

Min. Donation: $65.00 (FREE Shipping*)

Retail is $100.00. The difference includes shipping and handling costs. Thank you for your support.

BuzzFlash.com's Review (excerpt)

"This unassuming case is packed with 16 tons of funny: 14 discs of MONTY PYTHON’S FLYING CIRCUS, packed with every episode from the program’s four year run, plus 2 MONTY PYTHON LIVE! discs featuring--well, you figure it out. While to the uninitiated they may look like ordinary .65 oz. digital video discs, due to the unique physics of comedy (it’s like quantum but with fewer dead cats), each disc actually weighs a full metaphoric ton! Please remember to lift with your knees. This 16-Ton Megaset contains every single episode of MONTY PYTHONG’S FLYING CIRCUS--four years of blood, sweat and blancmange--jammed into slivers of plastic the size of a tea plate and MONTY PYTHON LIVE!--Legendary live performances, the 20-year celebration of Monty Python Parrot Sketch Not Included, and the all-German Monty Python’s Fligender Zirkus episode #1 squashed like pancakes. Sad, really. Jump right to your favorite sketches in The Flying Circus with this index! Disc 1: The Funniest Joke in the World, The Wrestling Episode, and Nudge Nudge, Disc 2: Art Critic, Silly Job Interview, and Crunchy Frog, Disc 3: Dead Parrot, Lumberjack Song, and Vocational Guidance Counselor, Disc 4: Undertaker’s Film, Upperclass Twit of the Year, and Albatross, Disc 5: The Ministry of Silly Walks, The Spanish Inquisition, and Complaints, Disc 6: The Bishop, Blackmail, and Dung, Disc 7: Attila the Nun, Silly Vicar, and Exploding Penquin on the TV Set, Disc 8: Scott of the Antarctic, Dirty Hungarian Phrase-book, and Exploding Blue Danube, Disc 9: Icelandic Saga, Fish-Slapping Dance, and Argument Clinic, Disc 10: ‘Blood, Devastation, War, and Horror’, Mount Everest - Hairdresser Expedition, and Gumby Brain Specialists, Disc 11: Cheese Shop, A Naked Man, and The Olympic Hide and Seek Final, Disc 12: Elizabethan Pornography Smugglers, Kamikaze Scotsman, and Penguins, Disc 13: Montgolfier Brothers, Department Store, and RAF Banter, Disc 14: Hamlet and Ophelia, Mr. Neutron, and Most Awful Family in Britain, Disc 15: Live at the Hollywood Bowl, Monty Python Live at Aspen, Disc 16: Parrot Sketch Not Included, Monty Python’s Fliegender Zirkus: German Episode #1"

Additional Features:

* The complete 14-disc megaset plus the two-disc Monty Python Live
* Meet the Chaps
* Pythonisms Glossary
* Gillianimations
* Art Gallery
* Troupe Career Highlights
* Trivial Quest
* Useless Tidbits
* Monty Python's Fliegender Zirkus: German Episode #1
* Post-Python Troupe Highlights
* Pythonisms
* Bleeding Critics
* Confusing Musings

To order by CREDIT CARD or PAYPAL, click one of the "Add To Cart" buttons next to the amount you would like to contribute.

To order by SNAIL MAIL, send a check to:
Support
BuzzFlash.com
P.O. Box 618354
Chicago, Illinois 60661-8354

Please include your e-mail address (if you have one) with your check!
We only use it to communicate with you about your order.

# Format: Box set, Color, Closed-captioned, Subtitled
# Language: English (Unknown)
# Region: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only.)
# Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
# Number of discs: 16
# Studio: A&E Home Video
# Run Time: 1749 minutes
# ASIN: B0009XRZ92

YouTube Song of the Week

Funkadelic - Maggot Brain

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh3bleXWaCk

Great Quotes: Mark Twain

“I am said to be a revolutionist in my sympathies, by birth, by breeding and by principle. I am always on the side of the revolutionists, because there never was a revolution unless there were some oppressive and intolerable conditions against which to revolt.”

Great Quotes: South Park, Part Two

http://www.spscriptorium.com/Season11/E1108script.htm

Liane: It started about four days ago, Doctor, and every day he seems to get worse.

Cartman: Puh-pussy!

Liane: Oh...

Cartman: Pussy! Cock! Shit!

Liane: Oh dear... I was checking out the Internet and ih, it almost seems like his symptoms are like those in something called "Tour, Tourette's Syndrome"?

Cartman: Tourette's Syndrome? What is that, Mommy? Butthole! Titties! Balls!

Doctor: That doesn't seem likely. Tourette's is a hereditary disease; it doesn't just suddenly start.

Cartman: (pause) Cocksucker!

Doctor: On the other hand, Tourette's does often develop later in a child's life, getting progressively worse.

Cartman: Oh wuh, well that's it! Shithead! Asshole! Mexican sticky balls!

Liane: Oh Doctor, can you help him?

Doctor: We don't know very much about Tourette's I'm afraid. But we will give your son all the help we can.

Cartman: But what about school, Doctor? The teachers and the principal, they won't understand that I can't control what I say.

Doctor: Don't worry, young man. We'll make sure everyone understands your disease and gives you the compassion you deserve.

Cartman: Ohohh, that's awesome. Thank you. (pause, points finger at doctor) Faggot!

Lady Gaga Recording "Bigger, Better" New Music

http://www.spin.com/articles/lady-gaga-recording-bigger-better-new-music

Lady Gaga Recording "Bigger, Better" New Music
William Goodman on April 21, 2010

Lady Gaga is preparing to return with a follow-up to her smash debut, The Fame, and according to Akon, the R&B star who signed Gaga to his Kon Live record label in 2008, the "Poker Face" pop star's new music is "bigger and better" than anything she's recorded to date.

"She records while she's on the road," Akon told Vibe of Gaga. "I'm flying out to Europe to work on some new records with her. Gaga's just like me. She has a tour bus with a studio in it. Some of the songs I've heard are going to be crazy."

Akon also praised Gaga's individuality and artistic vision. "All I'm doing at the end of the day is listening to the tracks Gaga has written and approving them for her album," he added. "She has producers that she works with outside of myself and they are coming up with some incredible records. But the beauty of it is she knows exactly what she wants. So it just makes it easier for me."

Gaga is already on track for another banner year. She's selling out her Monster's Ball tour worldwide and recently set a record with her music video "Bad Romance," which has become the most watched video in YouTube history with nearly 180 million visits.

In addition, she is scheduled to headline Lollapalooza this August in Chicago's Grant Park alongside Green Day, the Strokes, and reunited grunge rockers Soundgarden.

INSIDIOUS


http://www.squidlord.com/home/writings/insidious

INSIDIOUS
Michael McCloskey

Leaked stories of strange new rules and codes of behavior indicate something's gone sour in the deep space retreats of the superrich corporate execs. Some say that it's only the eccentricities of the powerful leaders of capitalistic society. But others speak of dark, twisted rituals, human slavery and illegal experiments in banned technologies.

Bren Marcken is a robot handler and strategist on a special team of the United Nations Space Force, formed to occupy the corporate space stations and seize their technological secrets. To accomplish the mission, he's been authorized to field artificial intelligences that he considers just as dangerous as the enemy.

Chris Adrastus is an aggressive young executive whose careful machinations have carried him to a high position at the powerful European Union company, Vineaux Genomix. Instead of finding satisfaction, he's become disillusioned with what he discovers at the top of the executive world.

Aldriena Niachi is a covert operative of Black Core, a Brazilian software company with a global sphere of influence. She's about to find out what Black Core will do for a technological lead. Do some kinds of knowledge come at inordinate cost, even for a supercorporation?

This title is available in softcover and electronic formats at Amazon, Barnes&Noble, BooksAMillion, iUniverse, and others.

"I thought the story was fresh, intriguing, it captured my interest and after a while I couldn't put the book down."
-Michael Goll

"I like visions of the future that are dark, and Insidious fits that bill -- I loved the ending."- I. Kirnos
"...its universe has properly defined constraints, a background that makes sense in a human way, and a plot that makes you hunger for more."
- Maarten Hofman

"Insidious is a real page-turner: it has a fascinating central mystery whose resolution really took me by surprise and, if that's not enough to keep you reading, plenty of suspense. I just *had* to find out how it all turned out."
- T. O'Neill

"D- Ridin' Obama:" Boondocks Creator Aaron McGruder Throws a Bomb

http://blackagendareport.com/?q=content/d-ridin-obama-boondocks-creator-aaron-mcgruder-throws-bomb-0

"D- Ridin' Obama:" Boondocks Creator Aaron McGruder Throws a Bomb
Wed, 04/21/2010
"Boondocks" creator Aaron McGruder, whose pointed satires of BET were banned from TV stations in 2008 is at it again. Season 3 clips of "Boondocks" are being released, depicting fictional and real rappers Thugnificent and Will I Am singing "D* Riding Obama" are making the rounds, and causing a stir. What the Boondocks satire says, and how the black elite and the black community receives it tell a lot about us.
by BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon

To see the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08S4poMGvwA

In his time and place, West Africa of the 1970s and 80s, Fela Anikulapo Kuti was a dangerous man. There were plenty of other dissenting and dissatisfied people, tens of millions of them. But only Fela could denounce and mock and deride the military governments and their corporate masters, and have tens of millions of people dancing to it. That's the power of satire and timely political art.

Boondocks creator Aarom McGruder is no Fela, not yet anyway, but his past work and pre-season released clips of real and fictional rappers Will I Am and Thugnificent singing "D* Riding Obama" point him firmly in that direction. In Boondocks' season 2, back in 2008 McGruder showed a willingness to denounce and viciously skewer BET with two episodes that Cartoon Network refused to air. The banned episides were leaked and thanks to the web, went instantly viral.

D* riding, for those who may not know, is metaphorical and current urban slang for the old fashioned sycophancy, something that was already old when the pharaohs were young, the lavishing of undue and excessive praise and flattery upon someone perceived to be in a position of power at the moment. To keep this article G-rated, I won't explain the metaphor itself, somebody else can do that. But McGruder, who is very much in control of which parts of his work are released pre-season, is asking Black America an important question. Is Black America getting any use out of this First Black President thing? Or are we being pimped?

In some quarters, anything short of loud praise of the president is unopular. Tavis Smiley was literally hounded off the air for raising the most mild questions about the president's --- at that time the presidential candidate's --- allegiance to the African American community. And many commentators, pundits and quite ordinary people hasten to point to the racist Tea Partyers as reasons to stifle any and all criticism of the Obama presidency, lest we give his racist opponents heart. We're glad to see that McGruder is keeping it authentic.

Black America still exists, and so does the black internal conversation, despite the stranglehold of corporate media which generally limits that conversation to its own marketing needs. McGruder has been able, for the time being, to break through that barrier and tell some truths to a wide audience for a little while. Word is that Boondocks Season 3 will be its last. We have to wonder whether any of this year's episodes will be banned, as were the BET pieces in 2008. For that, and to find out whether Aaron McGruder ever does manage to be as dangerous to the powers that be as Fela in his own time and place, we'll just have to wait and see

"The Coming Population Crash": The overpopulation myth

http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2010/04/19/population_crash_ext2010/index.html

Monday, Apr 19, 2010
"The Coming Population Crash": The overpopulation myth
How feminism and pop culture saved Earth from getting too crowded -- and are helping to avert planetary catastrophe
By Margaret Eby

People have been worrying about the world’s pending overpopulation for more than two centuries. Robert Thomas Malthus sounded the alarm in 1797 with "An Essay on the Principles of the Population," which predicted mass starvation and went on to influence the likes of Charles Darwin and Margaret Sanger. Paul Ehrlich’s 1968 book, "The Population Bomb," forecast a similar fate; if the population kept rising unchecked, Earth’s resources would buckle. Many of today’s environmental thinkers, such as broadcaster (and "Planet Earth" narrator) David Attenborough, have called for drastic measures to limit the planet’s population before it’s too late.

But according to the veteran environmental writer Fred Pearce, they’re all wrong. In his latest book, "The Coming Population Crash: And Our Planet's Surprising Future," Pearce argues that the world’s population is peaking. In the next century, we’re heading not for exponential growth, but a slow, steady decline. This, he claims, has the potential to massively change both our society and our planet: Children will become a rare sight, patriarchal thinking will fall by the wayside, and middle-aged culture will replace our predominant youth culture. Furthermore, Pearce explains, the population bust could be the end of our environmental woes. Fewer people making better choices about consumption could lead to a greener, healthier planet.

Salon called Fred Pearce in his London office to talk about the reasons behind our population peak, the high cost of our aging world, and how TV helped save the planet.

Why write about the population debate now?

I’ve noticed an upsurge in interest in the topic. When I’m giving a lecture on climate change or water, I’ll get a question from somebody that says, "Yes, what about population? If we don’t solve the population problem, then we can’t solve any of these issues." The way that some environmentalists discuss population transfers the blame for global environmental issues onto poor people in countries where they’re still breeding a lot. It becomes a problem of overbreeding Indians or Africans rather than overconsuming Europeans or Americans. It troubled me ethically, and I wondered, "OK, is this true?"

Well, is it true?

Global environmental problems are not, and will not, be mainly a problem of overbreeding Indians or Africans. First, their birthrates are coming down fast, with Indian women, for instance, having fewer than three children on average today; and even African women have falling fertility. And secondly, because overbreeding -- in the sense of women having more than replacement levels of children -- is almost entirely in countries with a very low per-capita footprint on the planet. For instance, the carbon emissions of one American is the same as that of 20 Indians, 30 Pakistanis, 40 Nigerians and 250 Ethiopians. If, as economists suggest, the world economy will grow by 400 percent by 2050, then no more than a tenth of that will be a result of population growth. The issue is consumption, and that puts the onus right back on the conspicuous consumers to do something about their economic systems, not least before more developing countries follow the same model.

So these worries about overpopulation are unfounded?

When Paul Ehrlich wrote his famous book ["The Population Bomb"], women were having an average around the world of five or six children; now they’re having an average of 2.6. Fertility rates around the world have halved. That’s not just true in Europe and North America; they’re way below replacement levels in most of East Asia now. Not just China but Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Burma have replacement rates of fertility or below. Around the world, fertility rates have been coming down really sharply. So the population bomb as we’ve conceived it before really isn’t there. There’s still population growth going on, but that’s going to stabilize.

How does feminism play into all this?

Feminism, I suspect, is as much a consequence of falling fertility as a cause, though I am sure they reinforce each other. If you only need to have two or three children to secure the next generation, that is what women will do. And that gives them more options for a wider role in society. I think the reproductive revolution and the feminist revolution through the second half of the 20th century have gone together. On the one hand, thanks to advances in sanitation and medicine, women no longer need to have five or six children to make sure that two of them will live to adulthood. On the other hand, we've had the push for women’s rights in the workplace. The consequence of that is we now have many more women taking their proper role in society in so many ways, arguably for the first time in millennia.

What are some other factors that led to the population bust?

I'd say the advances in healthcare are the No. 1 factor. But there are cultural factors, too. The spread of ideas about different lifestyles for women outside the home has accelerated all these trends. TV is a huge influence here, probably more so than what we normally regard as education. Urbanization is a factor. When you’re in the countryside, your kids are an economic resource very early. They can help in the fields, they can look after the animals; there are piles of stuff they can do from the age of 4 or 5. Kids are an economic resource, which is why rural families tend to be larger.

But once you’re in cities, kids are an economic drain for much, much longer. They can’t help out in the fields because you haven’t got any fields. If they’re going to get a job, they’ve got to be educated, and in most countries that costs money. And having done all that, as soon as the kids are an economic resource, they probably leave home and set up on their own anyway. Economics that used to favor having children now favor not having children.

Should we be discouraging women in high-poverty, high-population areas from having children?

In short, no. It won't work and will end up being coercive. By and large, women want to have fewer children, even in high-poverty areas, and provided some basic conditions are met -- access to contraception, obviously -- they will do it. There are numerous examples. They don't need persuading. The holdouts are generally communities with perceived serious "survival issues" like Palestinians in Gaza and ultra-Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem, or those where it is in their interests to have more children, like in parts of rural Africa, or where there are overbearing patriarchies that prevent access to contraception. Conversely, encouraging women in low-fertility countries to have more children won’t work without draconian measures. For proof of that, see the failure of the Catholic Church: It ends up encouraging patriarchal social norms that push women toward ultra-low fertility, such as in Italy.

What do you think that the world will look like in 100 years?

Well, a gradually falling population would in general reduce global environmental threats, depending on consumption patterns. It could go lots of ways. It’ll be a society in which older people have longer lives and much healthier lives, with an average age in the 40s. I think there’s going to be a huge premium on healthier older age.

The aging of the population is clearly going to have a huge effect on our economy. How are we going to pay for it?

We have to harness older people as a resource. Their wisdom and knowledge is a huge resource, whether it is middle-class professionals becoming consultants when they retire, or looking after grandchildren so their own children can work. They are the social glue running things. All of this needs to be harnessed. Yes, the old will have to work longer. Why not? We will need to work harder on medical technology to ensure that the old stay fitter longer. Much of the reproductive revolution happened by keeping young kids from dying. Now we need another revolution to keep the old fitter for longer.

I think aging will be beneficial, too. The old tend to be less addicted to the ephemeral and disposable. They value things that last. They often value things that don't involve consumption, but "softer" things that bring enjoyment, like families. We need more of that. I think my mantra about being "older, wiser, greener" is a likely outcome.

So, you think the crash is probably going to be a good thing?

Yes, I think declining population can be a good thing so long as it isn't too precipitate. Current fertility rates in parts of Europe could see whole populations basically shrivel up and die. That could be too disruptive. But a "soft landing" could be good.

If chaos theory taught us anything, it’s that societies head off in all kinds of directions we couldn’t predict. Fifty years ago, if we had taken a slightly different path in industrial chemistry and used bromine instead of chlorine, we’d have burned out the entire ozone layer before we knew what the hell was going on, and the world would have been very different. There’s always scary stuff out there that we may not know about. You can’t predict the future. You can just try and plan for it.

Leftists to Elie Wiesel: Occupied Jerusalem can't be holy

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1164718.html

22/04/2010
Leftists to Elie Wiesel: Occupied Jerusalem can't be holy
By Akiva Eldar, Haaretz Correspondent

Jerusalem must be shared by both Israelis and Palestinians, a leftist activist group said Thursday, in response to Nobel Prize laureate Elie Wiesel's ad in the Washington Post last week.

"For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics," Wiesel wrote in the ad, titled "For Jerusalem." To this, the group responded by saying that as long as the city remains occupied it cannot be holy.
Advertisement

"It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture - and not a single time in the Koran...the first song I heard was my mother's lullaby about and for Jerusalem," Wiesel had written.

Wiesel also wrote that Jews, Christians and Muslims were able to build their homes anywhere in Jerusalem and that only under Israeli sovereignty had freedom of worship for all religions been assured in the city.

"The anguish over Jerusalem is not about real estate but about memory," he wrote.

In the open letter made public Thursday, activists in the Just Jerusalem group, which includes Israel Prize laureates Avishai Margalit, Zeev Sternhell as well as former Knesset Speaker Avraham Burg, said they wanted to express their "frustration, even outrage" at Wiesel's letter, saying that "Jerusalem must be shared by the people of the two nations residing in it."

"Only a shared city will live up to the prophet's vision: Zion shall be redeemed with justice," the letter said.

The letter's signatories said that their "Jerusalem is concrete, its hills covered with limestone houses and pine trees; its streets lined with synagogues, mosques and churches." They added that that Wiesel's Jerusalem, on the other hand, was "an ideal, an object of prayers and a bearer of the collective memory of a people whose members actually bear many individual memories."

"Our Jerusalem is populated with people, young and old, women and men, who wish their city to be a symbol of dignity - not of hubris, inequality and discrimination. You speak of the celestial Jerusalem; we live in the earthly one," the letter said.

The letter's signatories also said that the reason they found Wiesel's ad so troubling wasn't only "because it is replete with factual errors and false representations, but because it upholds an attachment to some other-worldly city which purports to supersede the interests of those who live in the this-worldly one."

"For every Jew, you say, a visit to Jerusalem is a homecoming, yet it is our commitment that makes your homecoming possible. We prefer the hardship of realizing citizenship in this city to the convenience of merely yearning for it," the letter said.

Jerusalem, the letter continued, was not, as Wiesel claimed in his ad, above politics since "contemporary Jerusalem was created by a political decision and politics alone keeps it formally unified."

"Second, your attempt to keep Jerusalem above politics means divesting us of a future. For being above politics is being devoid of the power to shape the reality of one's life," letter writers continued.

The signatories culminated their response by appealing Wiesel to visit Jerusalem for himself, thus seeing "with your own eyes the catastrophic effects of the frenzy of construction."

"You will witness that, contrary to some media reports, Arabs are not allowed to build their homes anywhere in Jerusalem. You discover see the gross inequality in allocation of municipal resources and services between east and west," the writers said.

"We will take you to Sheikh Jarrah, where Palestinian families are being evicted from their homes to make room for a new Jewish neighborhood, and to Silwan, where dozens of houses face demolition because of the Jerusalem Municipality?s refusal to issue building permits to Palestinians."

The letter culminated by reiterating the chant used by Sheikh Jarrah activists in their weekly rallies: "Nothing can be holy in an occupied city!"