Posted By: Watchman,rumormillnews.com
Actually, this reminded me of my early years, when I lived in a house just off the OSU campus in Columbus, Ohio that we shared with a large fluctuating population of hippies, yippies and “straights.” My daughter Zoe just recently interviewed me on the subject for a college paper. The interview brought back lots of memories:
1. How extensive were your interactions with people who were considered “hippies”?
Well, I lived in a house with them, briefly dated a girl who followed the lifestyle, observed both non-political “lifestyle” types (“hippies”) and political types (“yippies”) at close range for several years.
2. How would you describe these people? (appearance, behavior, etc.)
I am tempted to say, “stoned” and leave it at that, because drug use was a common thread with hippies and yippies. Any drugs. All drugs. All the time. They were the largest class of absolute stoners I ever met in my life. The interesting thing was that they tried to convince themselves and others that drug use was, in and of itself, a socially uplifting experience. The whole “Tune in, turn on, drop out” mantra was designed to codify a lifestyle as a cultural and political statement, which I suppose it was but it was based fundamentally on narcissism rather than a functional social structure. That is, they were for dope, as long as they could borrow it from somebody and “free sex” (rather than “free love”) as long as they weren’t held to any commitment (a Crosby, Stills and Nash lyric of the time covered it, “if you can’t be with the one you love, love the one you’re with,” love being sex and permanently confused in the hippie’s mind as the same thing, which it isn’t). Indeed, the whole point was sex rather than love. They were all for what they called “communal living” as long as they didn’t have to pay the rent, wash the clothes, buy the food, pay the utilities or absorb any of the million responsibilities of work and finance that it takes to keep a household running. (I lived in an old Victorian house on 14th Avenue in the University District of Columbus, Ohio with a fluctuating population of hippies, yippes and “straights” for more than a little while. The hippies were, almost to a man or woman, grasshoppers. The straights and, in one case, a yippie, were the “ants” that kept us from being evicted.) In appearance they differed little from the average university student of the time, tie-dyes and bell bottoms, tee shirts, long hair and facial hair on the guys (and the women’s legs). The “women’s liberation movement” manifested itself among the females chiefly by the absence of bras and the provision of free birth control pills at the “women’s clinic” just off campus. As far as “behavior,” well, they were stoners, which for us straights was either hysterically funny or tediously boring.
3. Did you have any friends who were hippies?
Sure. You don’t think I could put up with that kind of behavior for very long in people I DIDN’T like, do you?
4. Did they ever talk about promiscuity or recreational drug use?
Talked, did, talked some more, did some more, changed partners, changed back. It was their raison d’être.
5. When do you think the height of the hippie movement was?
1967 – 1969. By 1970, they were tiring of the lifestyle and forced to face some of the unpleasant side effects of the lifestyle: overdoses, STDs, inability to maintain loving relationships in a milieu that demanded unfettered sex.
6. Did they ever talk about their views on Civil Rights or the Vietnam War? And if so, what were their opinions of them?
You’ve got to remember that these were essentially, except for the yippies, unpolitical people and frankly cultural ignoramuses and historical amnesiacs. They might go to an anti-war demonstration on a lark because everyone else was going but they found getting stoned at a rock concert to be more fun and even talked themselves into the proposition that getting stoned at a rock concert and shouting “F-CK!” along with Country Joe and the Fish WAS a political act. The Black Panthers or other serious political folks made them wet their pants (or panties) and when the tear gas started getting thrown around during the spring of 1970, the hippies and even the yippies were NOWHERE to be found. Hell, even the fraternities of jocks on 15th Avenue fought the cops in May of 1970. The stoners just stayed off the streets and complained about the pepper fog drifting in their windows.
By Tara MacIsaac, Epoch Times and Frederic Roukema, Epoch Times | In a 2005 interview with Science Channel, Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin seemed to say he saw an unidentified flying object (UFO) that followed Apollo 11 on its 1969 moon mission and may have contained aliens.
In a recording of the video uploaded to YouTube, Aldrin recalls his experience and his conversation with mission control: “[There was] something out there that was close enough to be observed, and what could it be?
“Mike [Collins] decided he thought he could see it in the telescope and he was able to do that. When it was in one position, it has a series of ellipses. But when you made it real sharp, it was sort of L-shaped. That didn’t tell us very much.
“Obviously the three of us were not going to blurt out, ‘Hey Houston, we’ve got something moving alongside of us and we don’t know what it is; can you tell us what it is? We weren’t about to do that, because we know that those transmissions would be heard by all sorts of people and who knows what somebody would have demanded? That we turn back because of aliens, or whatever the reason.”
Thinking the object might have been the S-IVB rocket stage, the crew asked Houston how far away it was. The S-IVB was 6,000 nautical miles away. “We really didn’t think we were looking at something that far away,” Aldrin told the Science Channel.
He said the crew decided they wouldn’t talk about it anymore until debriefing.
In a posting on the NASA website, astrophysicist David Morrison reported that he spoke with Aldrin after this interview.
Aldrin told Morrison the quotes were taken out of context. Aldrin told Morrison, and also said on Larry King Live in 2007, that what they saw was likely a panel separated from the spacecraft as various stages dropped off—a normal procedure.
Edgar Mitchell flew in Apollo 14 to the moon in 1971, and is known as the sixth person to walk on the moon. He told WPTV he is certain aliens have been watching us and that the government is aware.
“I don’t know how many or where or how they’re doing it, but they’ve been observing us and here for quite some time. We see these craft all the time,” he said.
“I believe what I’m saying and I cite the evidence that I know,” Mitchell said.
Many websites and blogs interested in extraterrestrial life have cited a transcript said to have been leaked by a NASA employee after the Apollo 11 lunar landing.
The conversation takes place between the Apollo 11 crew, mission control, and an unnamed professor.
The name of the NASA employee is given as Otto Binder, a famous science fiction author, casting doubt on the transcript.
“Apollo 11” is quoted: “These babies are huge … You wouldn’t believe it. I’m telling you there are other spacecraft out there … lined up on the far side of the crater edge.
“They’re on the moon watching us.” Read more…
by Stephen Lendman,thepeoplesvoice.org – Just societies erect statues to do so. They bestow tributes. America persecutes its best. Lynne is a longtime human rights champion. She deserves high praise, not punishment.
She remains unjustifiably imprisoned. She’s there for her powerful advocacy. She devoted her professional life to defending society’s most disadvantaged. She did it because it matters. She’s dying. She has Stage Four cancer. Prison authorities denied her request for compassionate release. Duplicitous reasons were given. A second request was submitted. No action so far was taken.
Obama wants her dead. A stroke of his pen could release her straightaway. Compassion isn’t his long suit. Nor is justice.
On November 13, Rutgers School of Law honored Lynne. She received the Arthur Kinoy Award. Imprisonment kept her from accepting it in person. More on the giant of a man it represents below.
Lynne commented on her Rutgers Law School days. She “showed up in September 1971.” It was weeks before her 32nd birthday. She “embarked on (her) legal career” later than most other students.
At the time, she was a New York City librarian. In the 1960s, she and likeminded activists lost educational bureaucratic battles. She decided to wage them and others legally.
She attend Rutgers School of Law. She showed up “all but broke,” she said. She got what her grandchildren call a “free ride.” Admissions liked her “militant background.”
Orientation day featured Arthur Kinoy. His voice wasn’t memorable, said Lynne. But “(o)h! his words” were powerful “so long ago.”
Lynne called him a “Civil, Human Rights warrior and Innovator and Creative Force of the Law.” More on him below.
She “came home that day with (her) heart and mind full of dreams – all inspired by Arthur.”
He lit the flame. It flourishes in Lynne to this day. She’s undaunted. She’s totally committed for justice.
Shortly after her unjustifiable 2002 arrest, Kinoy spoke at Yeshiva University’s Cardozo School of Law. It’s named after Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo (1870 – 1938).
In 1932, he succeeded Oliver Wendell Holmes. At the time, The New York Times said “seldom, if ever, in the history of the Court has an appointment been so universally commended.”
Democrat Senator Clarence Dill called Hoover’s appointment “the finest act of his career as president.”
He was considered one of the Court’s “Three Musketeers.” The others were Louis Brandeis and Harlan Stone. They represented the Court’s liberal wing.
Kinoy’s 2002 address, said Lynne, “reminded us all that cases like (hers) are won not only in the courts but on the streets.”
“Still true today,” she added. “(E)specially for her.” Kinoy honored her. He did so by calling her a “People’s Lawyer.” It was his “highest praise,” said Lynne.
Coming from him it mattered. Lynne said she wasn’t a great student or scholar. She got “mediocre grades except (in) classes (she) loved, Kinoy, Slocum, Smith.” Read more…
Dear CJE -Fast food workers are striking today for higher pay in more than 100 cities. This is the latest in a surge of actions that may finally narrow our nation’s vast economic divide and the Institute for Policy Studies is proudly supporting these dynamic grassroots efforts with bold research and analysis.
Our latest report documents how fast food CEOs gorge on huge taxpayer-subsidized bonuses while their rock-bottom wages force many of their workers to rely on public assistance. The Guardian, Salon, Huffington Post, and several other outlets covered our findings on this dual taxpayer burden, which I also encourage you to read about in Sarah Anderson’s OtherWords op-ed.
The DC City Council just unanimously approved increasing the District’s minimum wage to $11.50 an hour and paid sick leave for all employees — including restaurant servers and other tipped workers. Shortly before this breakthrough vote, IPS co-hosted an event withRestaurant Opportunities Centers United, a leading champion of restaurant workers. An IPS op-ed that ran in dozens of newspapers pointed out that the CEO of Darden, the world’s largest full service restaurant chain, earns more in two hours than his company pays the servers who are earning the $2.13 federal tipped minimum wage for a full year’s work.
And in a new article in The Nation, Sarah Anderson and Sam Pizzigati highlight creative ballot initiatives by health care workers in California and Massachusetts that would rein in pay for hospital executives. We’re also helping to mobilize support for a new rule requiring corporations to disclose the ratio between CEO and worker pay. More than 116,000 individuals and organizations have urged the SEC to adopt this constructive measure.
After three decades of growing inequality, change is on the way. Together, we can swing the pendulum toward economic justice.
Institute for Policy Studies
BY MATTHEW RICHARDS,inthesetimes.com
Occupy has left some Millennials questioning their place in social movements
We just woke up in this world, and we’ve been robbed of all normalcies, and we’ve had a vague itching sense for a decade of our lives that this isn’t the way the world is supposed to work. That we have the ability to do better.
In October 2011, Matthew Richards was arrested in Veteran’s Memorial Park in his hometown of Manchester, N.H., after he and several other Occupy activists refused to leave the park when it closed. At his March 2012 trial, he explained that he “felt morally obligated to stay in the park” and that “miracles can happen when people … make a decision to take their power back through acts of refusal.” A jury found him guilty of criminal trespass. He was sentenced to 90 hours of community service.
“I was so excited to be heard by a jury, because I felt that if I was heard by people from my city, they would understand that this was the silencing of dissent and the curbing of free speech,” Richards says. “When they returned the verdict, my heart just sank. I was lost.”
Occupy was the source of both intense hope and despair for Richards. In the following essay, adapted from a piece that originally appeared on his Facebook page, Richards grapples with what the movement meant and whether Occupy’s unfulfilled promises are a lost cause or the seeds of the different world whose promise he glimpsed two years ago.
To foster a robust dialogue about the future direction of the movement, we asked a number of politically savvy people, young and older, to respond to Richards’ essay, to explore the role of social movements in creating political change and to tell us why we have reason to be hopeful—or not. —The Editors
In September 2011, some 1,000 protesters, answering the call of Adbusters magazine, converged upon Wall Street to confront the most powerful economic forces in the world. The symbolism of this action was clear: If Wall Street will not give us a fair democracy through the political system, we will create it ourselves. read more…