mynewhopeumc.org

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Coinciding with Easter Sunday, Glasgow Cannabis Social Club’s annual 420 event was held on Glasgow Green, under sunny blue skies, and overlooking the river Clyde. Despite the city’s council attempting to revoke permission for the gathering at the last minute, police were happy for it to go-ahead with approximately a dozen officers attending in high-visibility vests.

The Daily Record reported five arrests were made for minor offences, likely smoking and possession of small quantities of cannabis. Taking a less-sensational — and more accurate — line of reporting, the Monday edition of Glasgow’s Evening News stated five were referred to the Procurator Fiscal who is responsible for deciding if charges should be brought.

Official figures provided by the police were that 150 attended. With people coming and going, Wikinews reporters estimated upwards of 200 attended, compared to nearly 700 who had signed up for the event on Facebook. Hemp goods were advertised and on sale at the event, and some attendees were seen drinking cannabis-themed energy drinks.

“I was searched and charged under the Misuse of Drugs Act (which is a lot of bollocks)” one attendee noted online, adding “not fair to happen on a brilliant day like it was, other than that I had a great day!” A second said they were openly smoking and ignored by police, who “were only really focusing on people who looked particularly young”.

Cannabis seeds were openly and legally sold at the event and a hydroponics supplier brought a motortrike towing an advertising trailer. Actually growing cannabis is, however, illegal in the UK.

With the event openly advocating the legalisation of cannabis, speakers put their arguments for this to a receptive crowd. Retired police officer James Duffy, of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, spoke of the failed United States alcohol prohibition policy; stressing such policies needlessly bring people into contact with criminal elements. Highlighting other countries where legalisation has been implemented, he pointed out such led to lower crime, and lower drug use overall.

One speaker, who produced a bottle of cannabis oil he had received through the post, asserted this cured his prostate cancer. Others highlighted the current use of Sativex by the National Health Service, with a cost in-excess of £150 for a single bottle of GW Pharmaceuticals patented spray — as-compared to the oil shown to the crowd, with a manufacturing cost of approximately £10.

Similar ‘420’ pro-cannabis events were held globally.

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Oral Roberts, founder and former faith healer, called an “emergency meeting” to reinstate Richard Roberts as president of Oral Roberts University. Richard stepped down last month when he was accused of illegal political contributions, financial wrong-doing, and wrongful firings in a lawsuit.

On Wednesday Oral called an ’emergency meeting’ for the faculty following the previous “no confidence” vote. At the recent meeting Oral asked for the faculty who were willing to forgive and start fresh to “stand up.” Donald Vance, a professor of Bible studies, said that when no one person at the meeting stood, Oral Roberts asked one of them, “‘Are you not ready to start over?'”

Vance reported, “The faculty member said, “I don’t know what that means, to start over.”

“‘I would think that would be obvious,'” Oral Roberts responded.

After that, Vance stated “No, Chancellor Roberts, it’s not clear, are you asking us to rescind our three motions?” Then Oral Roberts said that the faculty should drop it.

Following the meeting Provost Mark Lewandoswki wrote a letter to ORU Board of Regents promising to step down if Richard Roberts returns as president. Tulsa World reported that the atompshere at ORU is “divise” noting that when Regent chairman George Pearsons, took his position in May he said in an address to the board: “I am standing here today because the Lord clearly spoke to me and said, ‘Do whatever Richard Roberts asks you to do.'”

The school declined to comment on the meetings.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

The mystery of the location of a viewpoint used by English painter John Constable has been solved, after nearly 200 years. The Stour Valley and Dedham Church was painted in Suffolk, England, between 1814 and 1815, but changes to the landscape meant that the spot he chose was not known, despite the best efforts of historians and art experts.

Now the puzzle has been answered. Martin Atkinson, who works for the National Trust as property manager for East Suffolk, used clues from the painting and looked at old maps to track down the viewpoint. Trees had grown, a hedgerow had been planted and boundaries had moved or disappeared, but Atkinson eventually worked out where Constable had stood. He said, “When I discovered that I had worked out the location where Constable painted this particular masterpiece, I couldn’t believe it. All the pieces of the jigsaw finally fitted together.”

Atkinson used an 1817 map of East Bergholt, where Constable grew up, as a reference point, but found that the view would have changed not long after the painting was completed. “The foreground didn’t fit at all, it was quite unusual as we know Constable painted it in the open air so he would have been standing in the scene. The hedgerow in his work no longer exists and there’s another hedgerow that runs across the scene today which wasn’t there. When you stand on the road on which he would have stood, and use the oak tree as a reference point, you see the same view. It’s great to see where an old master stood – and be inspired by the same view,” he said.

Suffolk, where Constable painted many of his finest paintings, is often called “Constable country”. Most, but not all, of the locations that Constable depicted are known. The picture is now housed in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts.

[edit]

Sunday, November 1, 2009

With two by-elections coming up in Australia, many minor parties and independents will be looking to gain a seat in the House of Representatives. Zahra Stardust (real name Marianna Leishman) is the candidate for the Australian Sex Party.

Wikinews reporter Patrick Gillett held an exclusive interview with Ms Stardust, candidate for the Bradfield electorate.

“In an area that claims 50 years of conservative representation from white, heterosexual, able-bodied, suited, male protagonists, the Australian Sex Party is excited to a provide modern outward looking female candidate with social justice credentials to restore a historical imbalance in the electorate’s policy focus”, the 26 year old human rights advocate, burlesque dancer and trapeze artist said in a press release.

The electorate was vacated by former opposition leader Brenden Nelson.

((Patrick Gillett)) Why do you want to get into parliament? / Why do you represent your party?

I am delighted and thrilled I am to be representing the Australian Sex Party, whose policies on sex, gender, human rights and equality are very close to my heart. We believe that the personal is political, and we’re serious about sex and the way that it directly affects individuals in areas of health, censorship, discrimination, workplace, education and equality.

Rarely do we hear politicians speaking in positive or open-minded terms about issues relating to sex, sexuality and gender. Much rhetoric in Australian politics in fact uses particularly moralising or religious discourses that are governed by heteronormative, patriarchal and hegemonic ideals. Indeed, our party needed an electoral commission ruling that it s’ name was not ‘obscene’. In this climate, we aim to disrupt, expose and eliminate the plethora of taboos and stigmas, shame and isolation around sex, sexuality, and gender, to advocate for wider equality and freedom from harm for all Australians.

((PG)) What would the three main policies you are taking into this by-election be? / How would you address these policies?

We’re proud to announce that the Australian Sex Party has policies in a diverse number of areas. We are concerned about child protection and education- we would like to convene a Royal Commission into child sex abuse in religious institutions, and assist develop global approaches to child pornography, whilst importantly, establishing a national sex education curriculum for children, an internet education scheme for parents, a uniform classification scheme for non-violent erotica, introducing R and X ratings for computer games, and return Internet censorship to parents and individuals.

One of our fundamental concerns is equality – including paid maternity leave, ensuring equal numbers of women in Parliament, legalisation of abortion, enacting more comprehensive federal anti-discrimination laws in line with the Australian Human Rights Commission recommendations, creating total equal rights in all areas of the law for gay, lesbian and transgender people, overturning discriminatory laws in the Northern Territory banning Indigenous people from possessing erotic media, and ensuring the sexual rights of the elderly and people with a disability.

((PG)) Sending asylum seekers to Indonesia: good or bad? / Is the Australian dollar’s near parrity with the UD dollar a sign that the Australian economy is healthy, the US economy in chaos or both? / How do you rate the governments economic stimulus package? / Should it be wound back? / Is Kevin Rudd a better Prime Minister than John Howard? / Is the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme an effective solution to climate change? Why? / Is there a better solution?

As a party in its infancy who is not yet in the House of Representatives, we are focusing predominantly on niche issues relating to sex and gender, in which we have expertise. We look forward to formulating policies on wider issues in the public discourse such climate change, the economy and refugee issues if and when the occasion arises. Currently we are seeking to raise awareness of important topics that are remain hidden or absent from the public political agenda.

However, we would make the following comments in response to your questions. For a country that prides itself on multiculturalism, we believe that instead of utilizing law and order rhetoric that stigmatises people who have every right under international law to seek asylum, we should see this instance as an opportunity to welcome the incredible cultural diversity asylum seekers can bring to our country, and to open up discussion about the root causes of refugee and immigration movements, such as climate change, civil war, famine and persecution. Despite being elected largely because of their compassion and empathy towards refugees and asylum seekers, Rudd’s ‘hard line’ approach is reminiscent of John Howard’s stance in this area and risks creating a disillusioned public. We urge the Rudd Government to call on Indonesia to sign and ratify the Refugee Convention if it continues to fund detention centres there, and press for asylum seekers to be processed on the mainland with view to Australia being a progressive role model in the international community, as opposed to maintaining its current detention policies which continue to seek attention from human rights bodies worldwide.

((PG)) Why should the electorate vote for you?

There is a lot of lip service paid currently paid by the major political parties to gender equality that is not followed through with substantive policy and law reform. We know that the vast numbers of Australians are tolerant, respectful, celebratory people, with their individual backgrounds, preferences and lives, and we hope to seek resonance with people in Bradfield electorate who care about social justice issues and injustices in areas of health, education, censorship, workplace relations and child protection. We hope to represent people in Bradfield who support the human rights, respect, dignity and equality of all people, no matter what gender, sexual preference, race, class, ability, or any other factor.

I have experience working with the United Nations Population Fund in Eritrea on sexual and reproductive health programs, with UNIFEM Australia on gender, development and discrimination, and with the Kimberley Land Council in the area of Native Title. I have worked at Wirringa Baiya Aboriginal Women’s Legal Centre with victims of sexual assault and domestic violence and campaigned with Amnesty International, Mahboba’s Promise and Oxfam Australia. I am a proud member of the Gay/Lesbian/Bi-sexual/ TIQ community and believe in equal rights for all members of the community.

We urge people to look at our website, which is absolutely overflowing with fabulous information, news articles, media releases, and videos from around the globe. We look forward to meeting with, hearing from and working with members of the Bradfield electorate about their experiences, desires and priorities in these areas and how we can best help make real political and social change, and provide nuanced representation for a beautifully diverse electorate.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Crown Office are staying quiet about possible prosecutions after an inquiry found medical failures caused three deaths at NHS Lanarkshire.

In response to a specific question as to the possibility of prosecutions, a Crown Office spokesperson told Wikinews today that “The three deaths were fully investigated by the Procurator Fiscal and reported to Crown Counsel [laywers] to consider. Crown Counsel concluded that, given the facts and circumstances of the deaths, a Fatal Accident Inquiry (FAI) was the appropriate forum to consider the circumstances of the deaths.” It was further noted that “[a] FAI cannot make any findings of fault/blame against individuals.”

However, Crown Office did not specifically rule out prosecutions for offences such as cuplable homicide despite the spokesperson noting this was a direct response to such a question. They also declined to comment on National Health Service care as “it would not be appropriate to comment on the provision of NHS services” and entirely ignored questions about Crown Office satisfaction in the inquiry’s outcome and the length of time it took to reach a conclusion. The inquiry wrapped up last week but the deaths were in 2006.

Agnes Nicol, George Johnstone, and Andrew Ritchie died within a three-month period following keyhole surgery to remove their gall bladders.

Later expanded to look at all three deaths, the inquiry initially established to look into the case of Nicol, 50, who received surgery in late 2005. A surgeon at Wishaw General Hospital mistakenly cut her bile duct and her right hepatic artery. Whilst suturing her portal vein, her liver was left with 20% of its normal blood supply; the errors were not discovered until her transfer to liver specialists at Edinburgh’s Royal Infirmary.

By then, her liver was seriously damaged. She developed septicaemia, dying from multiple organ failure in March 2006.

Johnstone, 54, underwent the same procedure at Monklands District General Hospital on May 9, 2006. A consultant surgeon accidentally damaged, possibly severing, his bile duct. He died two days later in intensive care from the combined effects of multiple organ failure and a heart ailment.

Ritchie, 62, died in intensive care a week after an operation in June 2006. He died from intra abdominal haemorrhage caused by errors during the surgery.

Different surgeons were involved each time and the inquiry, under Sheriff Robert Dickson, found no evidence of poor training or inadequate experience. Dickson noted that in each case there was lack of action on a “growing body of evidence that there was something fundamentally wrong with the patient” and surgeons failed to contemplate their own actions as potentially responsible. He agreed with two professors that it may have been possible to save their lives “had the post-operative care been to the standard which they expected, and had there been a proper management plan which staff could have worked to” and noted that all the patients suffered from a lack of adequate medical notes being available after their surgery. He described the care as having “clear faults”.

NHS Lanarkshire apologised and said improvements had been made regarding “these types of cases” as well as with document management. Wikinews got in touch seeking details of the changes made but the health trust failed to respond.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

It can be difficult to be John Reed.

Christopher Hitchens called him a “Bin Ladenist” and Cathy Young editorialized in The Boston Globe that he “blames the victims of terrorism” when he puts out a novel like Snowball’s Chance, a biting send-up of George Orwell‘s Animal Farm which he was inspired to write after the terrorist attacks on September 11. “The clear references to 9/11 in the apocalyptic ending can only bring Orwell’s name into disrepute in the U.S.,” wrote William Hamilton, the British literary executor of the Orwell estate. That process had already begun: it was revealed Orwell gave the British Foreign Office a list of people he suspected of being “crypto-Communists and fellow travelers,” labeling some of them as Jews and homosexuals. “I really wanted to explode that book,” Reed told The New York Times. “I wanted to completely undermine it.”

Is this man who wants to blow up the classic literary canon taught to children in schools a menace, or a messiah? David Shankbone went to interview him for Wikinews and found that, as often is the case, the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

Reed is electrified by the changes that surround him that channel through a lens of inspiration wrought by his children. “The kids have made me a better writer,” Reed said. In his new untitled work, which he calls a “new play by William Shakespeare,” he takes lines from The Bard‘s classics to form an original tragedy. He began it in 2003, but only with the birth of his children could he finish it. “I didn’t understand the characters who had children. I didn’t really understand them. And once I had had kids, I could approach them differently.”

Taking the old to make it new is a theme in his work and in his world view. Reed foresees new narrative forms being born, Biblical epics that will be played out across print and electronic mediums. He is pulled forward by revolutions of the past, a search for a spiritual sensibility, and a desire to locate himself in the process.

Below is David Shankbone’s conversation with novelist John Reed.