Friday, December 8, 2017

Today, a federal judge heard the first of several lawsuits filed against the U.S. government over the Bear’s Ears National Monument.

Yesterday, the Utah Dine Bikeyah, a Navajo nonprofit, posted the fourth and latest of several lawsuits against the Trump Administration over plans announced Monday that would split the Bears Ears National Monument into several smaller parcels and greatly reduce its overall size. The Conservation Lands Foundation, Archaeology Southwest, Friends of Cedar Mesa, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Access Fund, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation are all co-plaintiffs in the suit.

“President Trump has literally dismembered our sacred Bars Ears monument that five Tribes have worked tirelessly for many years to protect in order to preserve our culture and way of life,” reads a statement by Mary Benally of Utah Dine Bikeyah.

On Monday, shortly after the announcement, representatives of the five Native American tribes of the Bears Ears Inter-tribal Coalition, the Hopi, Pueblo of Zuni, Navajo Nation, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, and Ute Indian Tribe announced plans to sue the administration of sitting United States President Donald Trump over the shrinking of protections on a Utah monument area that is home to Native American ruins and artifacts. Ten environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, National Resources Defense Council, and Wilderness Society are also filing lawsuits regarding another monument area, also in Utah. President Trump publicly announced his plans to redesignate both sites on Monday.

In a visit to Utah on Monday, President Trump announced plans to break up the Bears Ears National Monument into three smaller areas similarly reduce the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. The coalition claims that the Antiquities Act of 1906 forbids the president from doing this. “The President was plainly aware that he lacked the authority to revoke a monument and is thus transparently attempting to evade that strict limitation by purporting to reduce it but, as described herein, the President’s action must be viewed as a revocation, particularly with respect to all objects not included in the two ‘new’ monuments,” the official filing argues.

In his announcement, President Trump said, “The families and communities of Utah know and love this land the best, and you know the best how to take care of your land. You know how to protect it. And you know best how to conserve this land for many, many generations to come,” and called the original designation government overreach.

According to documents acquired by The Washington Post, a uranium consortium called Energy Fuels Resources had engaged a professional lobbying firm to convince the Trump Administration to reduce the size of the monument so that it could access the uranium deposits inside. Uranium is the raw material used as fuel in nuclear power plants, and the only uranium mill in the United States is just outside Bears Ears. Secretary of the Interior Zinke says this was not a factor, however: “This is not about energy,” he said on Tuesday. “There is no mine within Bears Ears.”

Navajo Nation President Russel Bageye called the decision “an open invitation for mining companies to come in and start mining uranium and other minerals in the area.” Many uranium mines have been opened on or near Navajo land. Most were never cleaned properly and the land and water remain heavily contaminated.

There is some legal precedent for a president shrinking a national monument—Woodrow Wilson shrank the Mount Olympus National Monument during the early 20th century, but no court cases ever rejected or endorsed the decision.

Although the specifics were not confirmed until Monday, the fact that the administration had plans to reduce protections on Bears Ears and Escalante in some way has been public knowledge, and the Bears Ears Inter-tribal Coalition had already been planning to sue. In a statement issued Thursday, Nov. 30, President of the Navajo Nation Russel Beyaye said, “At the very least, President Trump should have consulted with the original local governments of the Bears Ears region: our five Indian Nations. Instead, our many requests for consultation were ignored. An action to diminish the Bears Ears National Monument in any way will be an action against the Navajo Nation and the Navajo people who have worked so tirelessly to protect these lands.”

“The tribes view this as an affront to themselves and their own self determination,” said attorney for the Native American Rights Fund Natalie Landreth earlier this month in the Salt Lake Tribune. “All of us, all five tribes will be suing jointly the day he makes an announcement.”

Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante were declared protected areas by then-Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, and both are home to artifacts and archeological sites. Bears Ears had a problem with looters before President Obama declared it a national monument. The changes will split the monuments up into many smaller parcels and reduce the overall protected area by more than a million acres collectively. According to some White House documents, protected status will be “confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects identified” as in need of protection.

The Antiquities Act gives the sitting U.S. President the authority to set aside spaces already within federal territory that he feels are in danger without requiring approval from Congress, for example, by prohibiting industrial development and motor vehicle access. Over the past century, legal scholars and a U.S. attorney general have claimed that the Act does not permit a sitting president to reverse a previous president’s decision.

Several Republicans, including Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, support the president’s decision: “I believe his proclamation, following Secretary [of the Interior] Zinke’s fair, thorough, and inclusive review, will represent a balanced solution and a win for everyone on all sides of this issue.”

Other groups, including the clothing retailer Patagonia have also announced plans to sue. Patagonia, which sells outdoor clothing and equipment, argues that by reducing the size of areas where customers would use the company’s products, the government is denying Patagonia business. However, the Inter-tribal Coalition’s lawsuit was the first one filed.

“The tribes feel it was important to file first, to be ahead of the line, to make it very clear that this is not just a conservation issue,” said attorney Natalie Landreth of the Native American Rights Fund, which is representing the coalition. “To them, it is a tribal sovereignty issue.”

This comes days after President Trump was condemned by the National Congress of Native Americans for his use of the term “Pocahontas” during ceremony meant to honor Navajo Code Talkers, Native American men who developed and used a Navajo language-based military code for the U.S. military forces during World War II. “Pocahontas,” is President Trump’s nickname for Democrat Elizabeth Warren, a reference to Warren’s claims that her family has Native American ancestry. The ceremony was held in front of a picture of former president Andrew Jackson, who presided over the Trail of Tears in the early 1800s, in which thousands of Cherokee perished in a forced migration west.

[edit]

Sunday, February 17, 2008

In a press release today, California-based Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. indicated that it has voluntarily recalled just over 143 million pounds (65 million kilograms) of raw and frozen beef products, which is considered to be the largest single recall of beef products in U.S. history. The move follows an investigation by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) into allegations of animal cruelty and mishandling of cattle destined for the human food chain.

The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) had determined that beef products produced by the Chino, California company were unfit for human consumption as the cattle had not received “complete and proper inspection.”

The recall has been designated as Class II, which the USDA describes as “a health hazard situation where there is a remote probability of adverse health consequences from the use of the product.”

On Friday, Secretary of Agriculture Ed Schafer indicated that charges had been laid against employees of the plant alleged to have taken part in the mistreatment of cattle. “Today [Friday], the San Bernardino District Attorney filed felony animal cruelty charges against two employees who were terminated by Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Company,” said Schafer. “It is regrettable that these animals were mistreated and I am encouraged and supportive of these actions by the San Bernardino District Attorney in response to this mistreatment.”

The USDA learned of the possible inhumane handling of non-ambulatory (disabled) cattle at the packing plant on January 30 and has since suspended activities at the plant. “We continue to conduct a thorough investigation into whether any violations of food safety or additional humane handling regulations have occurred,” said Secretary Schafer in a press release. “On February 8, our Office of the Inspector General took the lead on the investigation. At that time, USDA extended the administrative hold on Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Company products for the National School Lunch Program, the Emergency Food Assistance Program and the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations while the investigation continues,” said Schafer.

The FSIS reported that Hallmark/Westland had not contacted the FSIS public health veterinarian, as required, when cattle became ill or disabled after undergoing ante-mortem (slaughter) inspection, putting the company out of compliance with FSIS regulations. “Because the cattle did not receive complete and proper inspection FSIS has determined them to be unfit for human food and the company is conducting a recall,” explained Secretary Schafer.

The cruelty charges stem from an undercover video that reportedly showed sick cattle being moved by crews using forklifts.

“Words cannot accurately express how shocked and horrified I was at the depictions contained on the video that was taken by an individual who worked at our facility from October 3 thru November 14, 2007,” said Steve Mendell, President, Westland Meat Co. and Hallmark Meat Packing. “We have taken swift action regarding the two employees identified on the video and have already implemented aggressive measures to ensure all employees follow our humane handling policies and procedures. We are also cooperating with the USDA investigators on the allegations of inhumane handling treatment which is a serious breech of our company’s policies and training.”

The USDA stressed that it is “extremely unlikely” that the cattle involved were at risk for Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad-cow disease due to the employment of multiple safeguards. The USDA felt the recall was required, however, as the plant had allegedly violated USDA regulations.

The recall involves raw and frozen beef products produced on various dates from February 1, 2006 to February 2, 2008. For further information about the recall, consumers, media, and distributors are encouraged to contact Hallmark/Westland’s Plant Manager Stan Mendell or Food Safety Consultant Steve Sayer at (909) 590-3340 or the FSIS website, www.fsis.usda.gov.

Sunday, August 2, 2009

Food deliveries from the RMT were allowed into the Vestas plant in Newport, England yesterday, but were cut off by Vestas management this afternoon.

Protesters at the Isle of Wight factory celebrated the delivery of supermarket bags filed with groceries, which entered with a police escort. This morning, the sixteen remaining occupiers were told to prepare a list of items for future deliveries. But, according to “Mark”, an occupier in the Vestas plant, this afternoon Vestas management reversed their decision, terming the August 1 food delivery a one-time “goodwill gesture” and saying food would no longer be allowed in. The food delivery followed a formal complaint by the RMT that denying the occupiers food was a violation of their human rights. The people inside the factory have been conducting their occupation since July 20, in protest against the closure of the factory, which produces wind turbine blades for the generation of wind power, and the loss of 625 jobs in the Isle of Wight and nearby areas.

Mark went on to praise the “brave people” who have circumvented the security ring around the plant in order to get food and other items to the occupiers. An electric kettle thrown at the end of a rope up to the occupiers is said to be working well. Mark also noted that Louise Christian, a prominent British human rights lawyer, is now representing the Vestas occupiers.

While the number of occupiers at the Vestas plant — originally nearly thirty, now only sixteen — have dwindled, Mark says the ones who remain are “very determined” and furthermore hold no ill will toward their co-workers who have left the occupation. In particular, the occupiers offered sympathy for Luke Paxton, who they say left the occupation due to a combination of personal issues and malnutrition brought on by the deprivation of food. Paxton, Mark said, has the remaining occupiers’ “full support” and continues to campaign for the Vestas workers.

Mark also clarified the origins of the occupation. In contrast to claims that green socialist group Workers’ Climate Action were behind the occupation, Mark presented a more nuanced picture: the Vestas workers’ initial contacts were with veterans of the occupation of Visteon‘s auto parts plants, with the AWL, SWP and Socialist Party becoming involved later with “quite a big involvement” from all groups. Members of Workers’ Climate Action attended Vestas workers’ meetings and gave their opinions, but, Mark says, a committee organised by the workers and composed of workers was making all the decisions.

Mark also strongly rejected the support of Solidarity, a “nationalist trade union” closely associated with the BNP. In a July 24 statement, Solidarity backed the Vestas workers, with union executive member David Kerr saying “We are behind the Vestas workers 100 per cent. British jobs must be protected.” Mark, in reply, told Wikinews: “We do not want their support…they go against a lot of the things people believe in here. We have Polish workers with us. They’re our friends.”

Most of the Vestas occupiers remain independent of trade unions, with only three of the sixteen people inside being members of any union.

Mark closed with a message of solidarity with the occupiers of two Thomas Cook branches in Dublin, Ireland, whose employees began a sit-in at their offices on Friday after the announcement of surprise closures. “We fully support what you’re doing. Don’t back down…do not be pushed around, do not be intimidated”.

The Vestas occupiers have also exchanged messages of solidarity with SsangYong Motor Company in South Korea. Workers at SsangYong have been occupying their factory since May 22 in protest against a 36% cut in employees there.

The occupation continues accompanied by a warning of increased union unrest in Britain. Neil O’Brien of centre-right think tank Policy Exchange told The Daily Telegraph that, while labour unrest had increased, the current state of affairs is “nothing compared to what is going to happen once the brakes are slammed on public spending.”

Wednesday, December 13, 2017

On Monday, US-based tech company Apple, Inc. confirmed acquisition of UK-based song identification application Shazam. According to reports, the deal is worth US$400 million.

“We are thrilled that Shazam and its talented team will be joining Apple […] and we can’t imagine a better home for Shazam to enable us to continue innovating and delivering magic for our users.”, Shazam spokesperson Giovanni Bossio said. Shazam has over one hundred million users.

Founded in West London in 1999 by Avery Wang, Chris Barton, Dhiraj Mukharjee, and Philip Inghelbrecht, Shazam creates a “digital fingerprint of the audio” and recognises a song, and provides other information including artist’s name, album, lyrics, release year and record label company. It also provides links to music streaming services including Apple Music, Google Play Music and Spotify. Shazam generates revenue from advertisements and commission from streaming services.

Shazam is integrated with Apple’s voice assistant Siri. Apple spokesperson Tom Neumayr said, “Apple Music and Shazam are a natural fit, sharing a passion for music discovery and delivering great music experiences to our users. We have exciting plans in store, and we look forward to combining with Shazam upon approval of today’s agreement.” Apple Music has about 27 million subscribers, while its competitor Spotify has about 60 million.

California-based company Apple, Inc. acquired Dr. Dre’s Beats Electronics three years ago for US$3 billion.

Monday, August 3, 2009

Employees of two Thomas Cook travel agency offices in Dublin, Ireland have occupied their offices in response to management’s announcement of earlier closure dates for the sites. On Friday, July 31, 40 employees at the Thomas Cook store in Grafton Street began an occupation protest after the sudden announcement of the store’s immediate closure; workers at the store had previously been told, when the closures were announced on May 12, that the businesses would remain open until September 6. The day after, employees at the Thomas Cook-owned Direct Holidays store in nearby Talbot Street began their own occupation. A third Thomas Cook store in the capital, in North Earl Street, closed without incident; according to one employee who spoke to Wikinews, this is because the North Earl Street store was closed up and stripped out while employees were at home, leaving the workers to find an empty space instead of an office when they arrived for work the next morning.

Employees are demanding an improved redundancy package from Thomas Cook and allege a string of abuses by management. Thomas Cook management has offered the employees five weeks’ redundancy pay for every year worked at the company, in excess of the minimum two weeks’ pay per year worked required by Irish employment law, and says that the Grafton Street location had been losing money for five years. Employees, demanding eight weeks’ pay, counter that the company realised a profit of £400 million in the past fiscal year, of which €4 million originated from Ireland; and that Thomas Cook’s UK & Ireland chief, Manny Fontenla-Novoa, was given a bonus of €7 million earlier this year. 60 jobs would be lost in the closure of the two stores, which constitute all of Thomas Cook’s retail operation in the Republic of Ireland; a further 17 jobs were lost in the closure of the North Earl Street store.

Before the occupations began, workers at Thomas Cook’s locations, who are members of trade union the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) had voted unanimously to strike, alleging that the closures were being done without sufficient consultation of staff by Thomas Cook management. Caroline Cullen, accounts assistant and TSSA staff representative at the Grafton Street location, characterises the behaviour of Thomas Cook management as “intimidation”. When the consultation period had finished, she said, Thomas Cook management sent Simon Robinson, an executive director of the company, and a male colleague of his to close the office. The presence of the Thomas Cook executives, two high-ranking, business-suited men, in an office where forty-two of forty-four employees are women is itself intimidating, Cullen asserts; she says that Robinson furthermore attempted to “bully” the employees into accepting the five-week redundancy offer by saying that if they did not accept, they would receive only the statutory minimum. “You cannot live on 5 weeks”, says Cullen. “Travel agents are closing every week. There’s a hiring freeze at the banks. There are no jobs out there…We need 8 weeks to live on for the next two years while we look for jobs.” The extra three weeks’ redundancy pay would, she estimates, cost Thomas Cook €400,000.

A series of TSSA demonstrations against Thomas Cook took place throughout July. Trade union Unite in Ireland has offered its support for the occupiers and says it will take place in demonstrations scheduled for Monday morning.

Thomas Cook has accused the TSSA of making use of “dirty tactics”, according to a statement from Thomas Cook UK & Ireland CEO Pete Constanti. A court order has been delivered to the Grafton Street office requiring the occupiers to turn the keys over to Thomas Cook management. The TSSA, meanwhile, says that Thomas Cook is “riding roughshod over the right to take industrial action by marching staff into a room and telling them they are going to close immediately”.

Cullen says that the occupation began spontaneously. “We didn’t think it would go so far”, she told Wikinews, but when the closure of the office was announced, the staff “opened the windows and started screaming, ‘we’re not moving, we’re not moving’. We haven’t moved since.”

Monday, August 3 is a bank holiday in Ireland. Both sides in the dispute have delivered ultimata: Thomas Cook management demands that all staff return to work on Tuesday morning as usual or else the offer of five weeks’ pay will be reduced to the statutory two weeks’ pay, while the TSSA says that if Thomas Cook management do not produce a better redundancy offer by Tuesday then the business will face a boycott by the TSSA’s 800,000 members.

Ireland’s Socialist Party and Dublin MEP Joe Higgins have declared their support for the Thomas Cook occupiers, with a press release on Higgins’ official webpage saying

Socialist Party members have been leafletting Dublin over the weekend promoting demonstrations in support of the Thomas Cook employees. The smaller Socialist Workers Party has also declared its support and conducted demonstrations for the occupiers.

Cullen said that the support of the Dublin community has been “absolutely fantastic”. People are bringing the occupiers fresh-baked scones and cakes and donating money, while morale inside the occupied store is “brilliant”. In contrast to the occupation at Vestas in England, where employees have been inside the factory continuously for two weeks, Thomas Cook employees have a chance to go home for a few hours or sleep in one of five rooms at a nearby hotel, although many do sleep in the office overnight. Nearby businesses are providing the occupiers with food at discount prices and, again in contrast to Vestas, the police and security are not interfering with the arrival of food and drink. Thomas Cook management have cut off telephone and internet access to at least some of the affected offices, but employees stay in touch with the outside world via their personal mobile telephones.

Cullen said that a chance for a peaceful resolution to the situation, without the involvement of the Gardai, was up to Thomas Cook management. “Thomas Cook have the chance to come to the table and talk to us. It’s in their hands, they still have the chance to come back.”

Pauline McManigan, a TSSA member and employee at Thomas Cook subsidiary Direct Holidays’ shop in Talbot Street, echoed Cullen’s sentiments. “John Kinnane [Thomas Cook’s managing director for Direct Holidays] has made things extremely difficult for all staff. He has intimidated staff, bullied staff and used abusive language toward female staff”, telling one employee today to “fuck off” in response to a query. Kinnane refused to recognise the TSSA as representing the Direct Holidays staff; without union representation, Direct Holidays staff “were not in any position to consult with senior managers who had their own hidden agenda and proved this when they closed the consultation down when staff said there were other matters that needed to be discussed.” Kinnane, she said, made threats similar to Robinson’s in order to get employees to vote for the five-week redundancy package.

McManigan says that Kinnane has demanded Direct Holidays’ staff return to work on Tuesday as normal. “That’s not gonna happen”, she replies, noting that the Direct Holidays staff did not trust Thomas Cook management not to close and strip out the store while the employees were not present. McManigan gave the following statement:

Saturday, April 23, 2005

The interview below was conducted by Pingswept over the phone with Emily Levan on April 21, 2005. Levan lives in Wiscasset, Maine, with her husband and daughter, and she ran in the Boston Marathon women’s race on April 18, 2005.

To summarize for our readers, you recently came in 12th in the Boston Marathon, right?

That is correct.

You were the first American finisher.

Yes.

There was also a Russian woman who lives in the US who finished ahead of you.

You know, I believe it is, I’m not actually positive, but I think you’re right. There’s often a lot of foreign runners that live and train in different parts of the US for a variety of reasons. Some live in Colorado and might train at high altitude, or they might have coaches in the US.

OK, but as far as you know, for straight up Americans, people who were born here, who have lived here for long periods of time and are not going anywhere special to train, you were the first finisher.

That is correct.

So congratulations, that’s very impressive. In the rest of your life, my understanding is that you are going to nursing school.

I am. I’m at the University of Southern Maine in Portland. and I have been going to nursing school for a couple years now. I’m just going part time right now because of the baby and other things going on in my world.

Your baby is currently one and a half?

She’s fifteen months.

Fifteen months, so one and one quarter. 1.25, sure.

Hopefully I’ll finish up nursing school in December. That is the tentative plan.

So you’re almost done.

I just have a couple classes left. I’ll take one class this summer and two classes in the fall.

You ran the Boston Marathon originally two years ago?

Actually, I ran it for the first time in 99. I’ve run it four times. I did run it two years ago as well.

You ran it two years ago, and you also came in twelfth then, if not the top American finisher then. You were the fourth?

I think third or fourth. I can’t remember exactly.

How long were you actually training for this marathon in particular?

I’d say about 4 months. I typically try to train about four months for each race. It depends a little bit on what kind of shape I’m in leading up to the training. Four months is usually the time frame I shoot for.

And how many miles a week were you doing–I assume you peaked somewhere right before the marathon.

At the peak, I have a month or six week period where I’ve built up to my peak training, and I was probably doing between 90 to 100 miles a week.

Was there a lot of variation in your day to day mileage, or was it pretty much you’re doing 1/7th of that mileage every day?

There’s definitely variation, probably more so in the type of workout that i did each day. For example two days a week I would do a speed workout, so I might be doing mile repeats, which just means that I do a mile in a specific time, and then I might jog for a couple minutes and then another one and another one. I’d do a series of eight mile repeats on that specific workout day. My other speed workout would be a marathon pace run, so I might run 8 or 10 miles at my marathon pace. If my marathon pace is 6 minute miles, I’d do a two mile jog warm up, and then I might do 8 or 10 miles at a six minute pace, and then a two mile cool down.

So you maybe end up running 14?

Sometimes what I would do on those speed workout days– on those days I might end up with about 14 miles. On some other days, I might run twice during the course of the day. Say in the morning, I might run eight miles, and then in the afternoon I might do six or eight more miles.

Wow.

Those days tend to be a little bit more mellow. More of kind of a maintenance run, a little bit of a recovery day. I try to have a recovery day after every hard workout.

Do you think that all of your training could fit into four hours a day? Do you think that’s true?

You mean the workouts for a specific day? Probably even less than that. Depending on the day a little bit, probably between 2 or 3 hours. Usually on Sunday I would go out and do a long run, and that would be a 20 or 22 mile run, all in one fell swoop and that usually takes two and a half hours.

So that explains how you’re able to do this, as well as go to nursing school, as well as have an extremely young child. I assume you talk to your friends occasionally.

I try to at least– have some sort of social life. This is not a job, so it’s not something that I do 8 hours a day. It’s something that I fit in with all the other obligations, things that I like to do too. I like to be able to pursue other interests as well.

You live on a road with no one else near by. Do you pretty much just run from your house every day?

The winter is harder because with the baby, I often end up running with a treadmill down in the basement. Brad, my husband, has pretty long hours at the farm, and especially in the winter months, it’s hard to find daylight when he’s able to watch Maddy, so I ended up running a lot on the treadmill this winter, as opposed to last summer, I would take her with me. I have one of those baby joggers, and that was great. I could just leave right from the house, and I could take her. She would be pretty happy to go eight or ten miles with me. Typically what I do when I go outside, I just go right from the house. The roads are so pretty around here. We’re pretty secluded, so I don’t have to worry too much about crazy drivers.

Do you ever try to go find big hills to run up and down?

I do. In the past, I have done a hill workout as a part of my training, usually early on in the training during the first six weeks or 2 months of the training I do a hill workout and I would find some place close by that I could find a warm up jog and run to and then do a hill workout. If I couldn’t find one within a couple miles, I would drive to it. It’s a little bit harder now with Maddy because I don’t have as much leeway and freedom with when I go running and where I go running. I’m a little more limited.

You’d have to load up the cart, er, the carriage into the car.

I’ve done that sometimes. Sometimes it’s easier to go straight from home. Running with the jogger up hills is not an easy thing to do.

When you’re in the race, you feel like, “Hey, I’m not even pushing a kid anymore.” Heartbreak Hill without the kid is substantially easier, I suppose.

Yeah.

Do you know most of the elite runners in the race? You know who they are, but are you friends with them, or not really?

It’s funny–I know who people are, but I don’t run that many races to really get to know that many of the runners. If you’re a professional runner, and that’s your job, a lot of those people travel in the same circles. They run the same races and they have the same schedules in terms of when they compete. I pick out a couple of races each year to focus on and because of that, I don’t get to know as many of the runners. As time goes on, you do get a little bit you do get a little more familiar with people.

During the race, do you talk to the other runners, or do you just run along and think things like, “I wish I were at the end right now”?

I think that really depends I find that if I’m feeling good and the run is going well, then it’s easier for me to talk to people, just because you’re feeling strong, and you’re not focusing so much on “I’m not doing so great.” I might talk to some folks along the way. Sometimes if someone passes me, I’ll encourage them and say “Good job, go get them,” and just stuff like that. I certainly find I’m not carrying on lengthy conversations with people because you’re expending energy that should be focused on the race itself. I enjoy getting to know folks along the way and knowing what pace they’re hoping to run.

In races other than the Boston Marathon do you find that you have good competition? I don’t really know what the running scene in Wiscasset, Maine, is like at all, but I imagine that being the fastest female marathon runner in the United States, you might not find a whole lot of competition. You say that you encourage people when they pass you, but having read some of the other interviews with you on the web, it doesn’t seem like people pass you very often.

It definitely depends on the race. Like I said before, I don’t run that many races. At this point, what I’m trying to do is to find races that are competitive so I can be pushed by competition. For example, when I ran the Maine Marathon last fall, there wasn’t a whole lot of competition. That just gets hard. I ran alone for most of the race. Running 26 miles at a fast pace all by yourself without anyone around you to help push you and motivate you, can be pretty hard. Because of that, as I’ve been looking toward the future and thinking about which races I want to do, I’ve been targeting races that will have a little more competition. That’s why Boston was one that I wanted to shoot for and I’m thinking about in the fall going to Chicago because they’ve got a pretty competitive marathon. It’s also a pretty flat course, so people tend to run pretty fast times there.

Most people run a couple of minutes faster in Chicago, right?

Yeah, exactly. And I’ve heard good things about the race too, so I’m looking forward to that.

Have you thought about running internationally?

Not at this point, no. It’s hard to find the time to travel to races, and It gets expensive too. A lot of my family members say, “Wouldn’t it be great to do the London Marathon or the Paris Marathon,” because they like coming to watch. At this point, I think I’m going to stick closer to home. I’ve got a few races, like I was mentioning Chicago, here in the States that I’d really like to do. Maybe once I’ve done those, I might think about something else, it really just depends. A lot of it’s a time issue, because I have other things that I’m pursuing and it gets hard to spend too much time traveling off doing different races.

Do you know Alan Culpepper?

Oh, yeah, yeah.

You at least know of him, right?

Yes, exactly.

Have you ever been in any races against him?

This was the first race that I had run in that he ran in. He was the fourth overall male finisher. That’s a really good showing for an American male. I’ve read a lot about him in different running magazines and just heard a lot about him through running circles. But this was the first time that I’ve actually seen him run. It was neat because in this particular race, they start the women’s elite group about 25 minutes ahead of the rest of the start.

29 minutes actually, I believe.

That’s right, 29 minutes. So, I didn’t see a male runner until pretty close to the end, so it was really neat to see–I think I saw the top five male finishers because they passed me in the last couple miles. It was really interesting–there’s all these cars and press and motorcycles, policemen, so I could tell when the first male was coming up behind me because there was a lot more going on on the course. Alan Culpepper was one of the ones that passed me in the last mile or two. It was pretty neat to see him finishing strong.

You might not be able to beat him in a race but do you think you could maybe, I don’t know, beat him in a fist fight? He’s pretty skinny, right? He only weighs 130 pounds.

I don’t know. I don’t know. I wouldn’t make any bets on it at this point.

No?

No.

OK. Have you thought about doing things longer than a marathon? Like a 50 K or a 100 K?

At this point, I haven’t because I’ve gotten into the marathon, and I’ve really been enjoying that so far. I feel like I still have some room to improve and grow in the marathon, but I think at some point I’d really like to do one of those ultra-type races. For the next several years, I’ll stick towards the marathon distances. Once that competitive part of my life is over, I might move on to something different.

Based on your age, are you likely to peak around now, or you maybe have a few years to go before your legs start to fall off?

Before I can’t walk anymore? I don’t know. It’s really interesting because for marathoning you’ve got a longer life span than in a lot of competitive sports. The fifth place female finisher in Boston this year was over forty. You can still be competitive into your forties. I’m not sure if I’ll keep doing it that long– at least another 3 years or so. One thing in the back of my mind looking at is the Olympic Trials for 2008. I’m looking at that time frame right now. If I want to keep running competitively after that, then I’ll assess things from there.

That sounds good. When you came in as the first American finisher, did you get any certificates or cash or a medal or anything like that?

Yeah, actually, I won $2100.

Oh, great– two thousand bucks!

Which is pretty nice.

That’s a lot of baby clothes.

I know– or a lot of shoes. The shoe expense is pretty expensive, and I’ve been trying to find a shoe company that might give me some shoes.

I would think–couldn’t you just call up New Balance and say, “Hey, look, I’m pretty good, why don’t you give me some shoes?”

Well, this past November, after I ran New York– I usually wear Asics or New Balance– I wrote to both of those companies. I sent them a little running resume. I said I’d be interested in pursuing some sort of sponsorship opportunity, and they both wrote back and said, “Sorry, we don’t have any space or funds available at this time.” I was a little disappointed by that, because I was hoping to at least get someone to help me out with my shoes.

Yeah, at least some sneakers.

But in addition at Boston, they do have these crystal vases that they give out for the top 15 finishers, so I got a little piece of hardware there too.

So you get to put flowers in that.

I had some flowers in it; they’ve wilted so I decided to compost them.

Oh, that’s good.

Yeah, send them back to the earth, you know.

Has anyone else tried to interview you? Local paparazzi following you?

I hide in my car for most of the day. I did some local interviews–with the local NBC affiliate, and I’m going to do an interview tomorrow with the ABC affiliate in Portland, and some affiliated newspaper interviews as well.

You’re officially famous, then.

I don’t know. I guess. It’s been pretty busy.

Has anyone asked you for an autograph yet?

No. No autograph seekers yet, no.

Maybe in the Yellowfront Grocery in Wiscasset? “Hey, I know you!”

“I saw you on TV!” No, not yet.

That’s surely coming. The Chewonki Foundation, which is where you live, recently had Eaton Farm donated to it.

Yes.

And they’re planning on making a 12 mile long trail that runs from approximately your house to Wiscasset.

Oh, you know more about this than I do, that’s great.

I don’t know if it’s going to start right at your front door; you might have to cut through the woods a little bit.

That’s OK, I can do that.

Have you run on trails at all, or is it just, “I want to run on the pavement because I don’t want to twist an ankle”?

I’m not a big trail runner. Maybe it’s because I’m not used to running on trails. Now it would be much more difficult, because I have the baby with me. The baby jogger has some nice wheels on it, but I don’t know if it could handle trail running.

Yeah.

It’s a nice change of pace every once in a while. I don’t worry too much about twisting an ankle–you just have to be careful. I figure I can walk out my door and step in a pothole and twist my ankle, so I don’t worry too much about that. That goes along with being alive in our world. We’ll see. I’m going to have to look into that 12 mile trail.

Because 12 miles, you do that there and back, you’ve got a marathon on your hands.

There you go.

What’s your next target? Can you walk right now?

If I train well, I’m usually not sore. Especially on the long runs, my body gets used to running for that length of time and sure, I’m running faster during the marathon than I do on my long runs, but I think my body tends to adjust to the rigors. It’s usually a good sign if a few days afterwards I don’t have any major soreness. I certainly feel like I’ve done something significant.

Yeah, I can imagine feeling too.

No major aches or pains.

That’s great. What’s your next race? Do you have one targeted? Is it Chicago?

Yeah, I think the next marathon will be Chicago in the fall. there’s a 10 K race, the Beach to Beacon, you may have heard of it.

In Portland?

It’s actually in Cape Elizabeth. It’s put on by Joan Benoit Samuelson. It’s in August, so I’ll probably do that one and then shoot for the fall marathon.

Well, I think that’s all my questions.

Nice, well, thanks for calling. I appreciate it.

Sure, well, thanks for running so fast.

No problem.

Thursday, March 5, 2009

After hours of hearing arguments in the case questioning the legality of the ban on same-sex marriages in California, in the United States, the state’s Supreme Court deferred ruling on the ban, known as Proposition 8. The court could issue a ruling in the next 90 days.

Opponents of the ban were fighting to have the law overturned— saying it was unconstitutional for the state to have banned same-sex marriages. Californians voted in November 2008 to ban same-sex marriages, leaving the nearly 20,000 married same-sex couples wondering if their marriages, which were legal at the time they were married, would be voided.

“Prop 8 opponents would have the court choose between the inalienable right to marry and the right of the people to change the constitution as they see fit, and what I’m picking up from the oral argument in this case is this court should willy-nilly disregard the will of the people,” Justice Joyce Kennard said while addressing Shannon Minter, the lawyer representing the opponents of the ban.

One of the petitioners in the case against Proposition 8, Robin Tyler, told Reuters that she thinks “they [the court] are going to uphold our marriages and they are going to uphold Proposition 8, and it’s a loss.”

In June 2008, the state supreme court ruled that the ban was unconstitutional. Between that time, and November 2008, 18,000 same-sex couples were legally married in California. Currently in the United States, same-sex marriages are only legal in Connecticut and Massachusetts.

Sunday, May 18, 2008

A man who hijacked a domestic flight over Afghanistan has been found to be working for British Airways.

34-year-old Nazamuddin Mohammidy was one of nine men who forced the Ariana Airlines airliner to divert to the United Kingdom’s Stansted Airport in 2000. A standoff followed for the next 70 hours with the men, who had guns and hand grenades, threatening to kill all 160 on board unless asylum was granted to them. The men ultimately gave themselves up to police and SAS.

Mohammidy was jailed for 30 months but he and the other eight had their convictions overturned by the Court of Appeal, claiming the Taliban was subjecting them to “medieval and brutal tyranny” forcing them to flee. They went on to win a High Court case to prevent their deportation.

It has since emerged that British Airways have employed Mohammidy to clean their offices, including a training center one mile from Terminal 4 at Heathrow Airport. It came to light when police officers stopped him near Terminal 5 believing he may be an unlicensed taxi driver, but he was able to suppply a worker’s pass. He is now facing unrelated charges concerning an alleged assault on his landlord.

The Conservatives have used this as an opportunity to attack the current Labour government. Shadow home secretary David Davis said “It would be an outrageous and potentially devastating breach of security if a former hijacker had access to British Airways property near the airport and a pass allowing him access to secure areas. Days after it was revealed that foreign airside workers at our airports do not have to pass proper security checks it is clear the Government do not have a grip on airport security.”

British Airways say he did not have a pass to allow him onto the tarmac at Heathrow and did not work inside the airport, but he could get into some secure company areas.