EFTA01159891

Less than a week after Israel and Hamas agreed to a cease fire ending seven weeks of war (because 
calling it an armed conflict is too polite) that killed more than 2200 people of which an estimated 
1800 were innocent civilians the Israeli government announced last Sunday that it would appropriate 
almost 1,000 acres of land (400 hectares) in the Etzion settlement bloc near Bethlehem, in the West 
Bank that would be used to build homes for Jewish settlers and Palestinian officials and others say 
would cause only more friction after the Gaza war. 
Peace Now, an Israeli group which opposes Israeli settlement activities in the West Bank, said the 
appropriation was meant to turn a site where ro families now live adjacent to a Jewish seminary into a 
permanent settlement. Construction of a major settlement at the location, known as Gevaot, has been 
mooted by Israel since 2000. Last year the government invited bids for the building of 1,000 housing 
units at the site. A local Palestinian mayor said Palestinians owned the tracts and harvested olive trees 
on them. Nabil Abu Rdainah, a spokesman for Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, called on Israel 
to cancel the appropriation. "This decision will lead to more instability. This will only inflame the 
situation after the war in Gaza,"Abu Rdainah said. 
Israel has come under intense international criticism over its settlement activities, which most 
countries regard as illegal under international law and a major obstacle to the creation of a viable 
Palestinian state in any future peace deal. "We have long made clear our opposition to continued 
settlement activity," a State Department official said. "This announcement, like every other settlement 
announcement Israel makes, planning step they approve and construction tender they issue is 
counterproductive to Israel's stated goal of a negotiated two-state solution with the Palestinians." 
"We urge the government of Israel to reverse this decision,"the official said in Washington. 
The Obama administration has been at odds with over settlements since taking office in 2009. After 
the collapse of the last round of US-brokered peace talks, US officials cited settlement construction as 
one of the main reasons for the breakdown, while also faulting the Palestinians for signing a series of 
international treaties and conventions. Israel has said construction at Gevaot would not constitute the 
establishment of a new settlement because the site is officially designated a neighborhood of an 
existing one, Mon Shvut, several kilometres down the road. 
This is a blatant land grab. It is definitely counterproductive to any peace initiatives. It only 
reinforces what many Palestinians believe, that Israel and especially the Netanyahu government are 
not interested in a two-state solution and would if they could push every Palestinian out of Palestine. 
Currently some 500,000 Israelis live among 2.4 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East 
Jerusalem, territory the Jewish state captured in the 1967 war. And if Israel is really serious about a 
EFTA01159931

two-state solution and lasting peace it has to stop this and other settlements. I am sorry Israel 
this 
is a No.... No 
As I was doing research last week I ran across an article in The New Republic by Rebecca Leber —
All of the U.S.'s New Electricity in July Came from Renewables - and 0 percent from coal. 
If this is true, it is a potential game-changer as it is evidence that renewable energy is both competitive 
and scalable, as well as the future energy source for the country. And just so you don't think that this is 
just an abnormality, from all of the new electricity generated between January and July, solar and 
wind contributed 51%. 
But getting back to the initial story, last month, a full loo percent of the new electricity generating 
capacity added at the utility level came from wind, solar, and water in the U.S. This counts renewables 
that power utilities in the energy grid—but doesn't include solar installed on the rooftops of homes and 
businesses. Wind and solar added 379 megawatts and 31 megawatts respectively for July, bringing the 
two sources' total installed capacity to 6 percent of the utility sector. 
But natural gas is still the main new source of electricity this year, even if the oil and gas sector saw no 
growth last month. Natural gas accounted for 46 percent of new installations for the first seven 
months of the year, compared to over a quarter each for wind and solar. While natural gas emits less 
carbon emissions than coal, it's not necessarily "cleaner." Its methane emissions—a greenhouse gas—
are 34 times as potent as carbon over the long-run. Which is why that we have to move away from 
fossil fuels as quickly as possible whatever the monetary cost. Still, July was a mind-blowing month 
for renewables and our country. 
EFTA01159932

Share of Total Annual Income by Income Bracket Groups 
Includes capital gain 
100% 
75 
50 
0 
1950 
1970 
1990 
1917 
1990 
2012 
22.6% 
Top 1% 
FarrPies with 
incomes above 
$394.000 In 2012 
16.1. 
Next 4% 
$161000. $394.000 
no 
Next 5% 
$114.000. $161.000 
49.6 
Bottom 90% 
Below $114.000 
Source: *Sinkrig a Richer The Evolution of Top Incomes in the United States: by Emmanuel See:. UCEierkeley (Sept 2013) 
PEW RESEARCH CENTER 
Reaganomics/supply-side economics hasn't worked if you are part of the Middle Class, because as the 
graphs in this section shows 20 Percent of the Middle Class Wealth has Evaporated in the past twenty 
years. So if you're one of the millions of those in the middle class who can't shake the feeling that 
you're somehow getting left behind, you're not alone. We've been hearing ad nauseum from both sides 
of the political spectrum that the economy is seeing a tremendous recovery thanks to the policies of the 
current democratic White House or that things are crumbling beneath our feet, never to be rebuilt. Of 
course, that depends on what media sources you choose to digest, but it certainly is a mixed bag. 
Another common narrative is that the middle class is dying, rapidly growing levels of inequality are 
polarizing America to the point where the country will be unrecognizable from an economic standpoint 
in a number of years. That one actually has some merit to it, although it might be a bit hyperbolic. 
But the fact that rampant inequality has taken America hostage is not an idea that is lost on the 
majority of U.S. citizens. As the economy has seen recovery over the past six years following the 
devastating financial crisis and subsequent recession, most people have had to sit back and watch 
almost all of the spoils go to the top few percent. For the rich, stock prices have gone up and executive 
compensation continues to skyrocket, all giving a nice feeling of confidence in the future of the 
American economy. But for everybody else, a still-suffering housing market, stagnating wages, and 
rising debts are still heavy burdens on the middle and lower classes. In fact, according to The 
Washington Post, the middle class is no better off than it was twenty years ago. Somehow, actually, it's 
2O percent poorer. 
EFTA01159933

Figure 1. Change in wealth since 1984 for carious percentiles (in 2013 dollars) 
150% 
100% 
50°o 
00 0
-50% 
-100°0 
14 
'89 
'94 
'99 
'01 
'03 
'05 
'07 
'09 
'II 
'13 
That's right, somehow and somewhere in the past thirty years, after all the Reaganomics, trickle-down 
theories, and two Bush-family presidencies, the core of the American economy has lost economic 
power. While this will naturally lead to pundits on either side of the political spectrum to scream at 
each other whilst digging into the numbers to find someone to blame, it doesn't actually help. Now, 
The Washington Post does note perhaps the most important caveat of these findings: that these things 
tend to be cyclical, and that levels of wealth go up and down over time. What we may be looking at is a 
snapshot in time, where many people may have taken out loans for school or to buy a home, which will 
then be payed back over time. 
The chart above, taken from The Russell Sage Foundation, which put together the study indicating the 
middle class is poorer than it was three decades ago, shows the drops in wealth over time being 
discussed. It's easy to point out when the recession hit in the late 2000s and to a much lesser degree 
during 2001 when growth slowed. But one only needs to look at the median to get a glimpse of the 
strife of the average American. Fabian Pfeffer, Sheldon Danziger, and Robert Schoeni, the study's 
authors, all take note that everyone took a big hit during the recession, and as a result, inequality has 
grown by leaps and bounds. "Wealth losses," the study says, "were not distributed equally. While large 
absolute amounts of wealth were destroyed at the top of the wealth distribution, households at the 
bottom of the wealth distribution lost the largest share of their total wealth. As a result, wealth 
inequality increased significantly from 2003 to 2013; by some metrics inequality roughly doubled." 
The authors don't leave on a very optimistic note either, writing, "the American economy has 
experienced rising income and wealth inequality for several decades, and there is little evidence these 
trends are likely to reverse in the near term." 
The ever-increasing levels of inequality largely flew under the radar up until the most recent recession 
and didn't really enter the mainstream as a narrative until protesters during Occupy Wall Street 
started discussing the '1 percent.' While that movement has since fizzled out, it was successful in 
alerting many middle and low class Americans about the growing issue, many of whom were either not 
aware or not privy to the serious issues inequality arises. Most Americans wouldn't think anything was 
wrong until they could no longer have a pizza delivered or until they couldn't watch the NFL on 
Sundays. As long as there's enough to keep people placated, they usually won't make much of a fuss. 
But finding out that a huge percentage of the population has lost one-fifth of their wealth over the past 
EFTA01159934

three decades, while many suspected that it had probably grown, may be enough to shake some people 
out of their cocoons, and force them to pay attention to some of the major economic issues of the day. 
Essentially, the American economy — or any economy, for that matter — depends heavily on a 
balancing act between the rich and the poor, and by providing opportunities for the less-fortunate to 
climb out of poverty using the tools provided to improve their standing, namely education and 
training. But as the cards become more heavily stacked against the poor, their prospects become more 
and more grim, at which point unrest can take hold. Many people may be fairly shocked to learn that 
while they suspected their assets and wealth had appreciated over the past few decades, they instead 
find themselves lagging further behind than before. This can have long-standing effects as those 
caught on the bottom will grow to resent the individuals prospering. 
The chart at the top from Pew Research shows the overall creep of the wealthiest classes into overall 
wealth distribution, meaning that the problem is still growing, and as the authors of The Russell Sage 
Foundation study note, it doesn't look like it will stop any time soon. Now members of the middle 
class can pin a percentage on how deeply the past three decades of economic cycles have eroded their 
wealth. So for those of you who still believe that the markets will fix things, the answer is that you are 
wrong. Markets can be manipulated to the benefit of those at the top especially when government 
policies over oversight have been relaxed. Couple this with unbridled greed and the past three decades 
have shown the makings of greater and greater inequality. And the only thing that will reverse this 
trend are stringent economic policies that ensure that the maximum number of people benefit and not 
just those at the top. 
****** 
Britain Raises Terror Threat Level 
EFTA01159935

Last week when I was in London, Prime Minister David Cameron pledged Friday to plug gaps in 
Britain's armory to combat terror, describing the extremist threat posed by the Islamic State group as 
being more dangerous than even that of al-Qaida. Cameron's remarks came just moments after 
authorities raised Britain's terror threat level to severe, the second-highest level. The decision was 
related to developments in Iraq and Syria, but there was no information to suggest an attack was 
imminent. "What we are facing in Iraq now with ISIL is a greater threat to our security than we 
have seen before," Cameron said, using an abbreviation for a longer name the Islamic State previously 
used: the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant. 
He told reporters that while the Taliban facilitated al-Qaida terrorism, the Islamic State group is 
"effectively a state run by terrorists." He said the ambition to create an Islamist caliphate isn't 
something that could be ignored. "We could be facing a terrorist state on the shores of the 
Mediterranean and bordering a NATO member," he said, referring to Turkey. Intelligence and 
security services now believe around 500 Britons have gone to fight in Syria and potentially Iraq. 
Some of the plots are likely to involve fighters who have traveled from Britain and Europe to take part 
in fighting in the Middle East. 
British police have appealed to the public to help identify aspiring terrorists after the killing of an 
American journalist focused attention on extremism in the U.K. The involvement of a person of 
British nationality in James Foley's beheading underscored the need to identify those who might travel 
abroad to fight or are at risk of being radicalized. The attack on a Jewish museum in Brussels also 
underscored the willingness of the members of the group to attack Europeans. British authorities say 
around 70 arrests have been made in the first half of the year for a variety of offenses, including 
fundraising, preparing for terrorism acts and traveling abroad for terrorist training. The police say 
such arrests are being made at a rate five times greater than 2013. One action Cameron outlined was 
the possibility that passports could be taken away. He said further measures would be described in the 
House of Commons on Monday. 
Britain also wants to revive a directive to enable police and security services to share passenger records 
in the European Union. Concerns about civil liberties have stalled the measure in the European 
Parliament. "The root cause of this threat to our security is quite clear," Cameron said. "It is a 
poisonous ideology of Islamist extremism that is condemned by all faiths and faith leaders." Britain 
raised the country's terror threat level from substantial to severe just before Cameron held his news 
conference. The threat level means a terrorist attack is considered highly likely. 
Home Secretary Theresa May said the decision by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center was made on 
the basis of intelligence and independent of the Cameron and his Cabinet. "Severe" is the second-
highest of five levels. The last time the rate was raised to severe was in September 2010 - in response 
to the attempt to detonate a bomb on a U.S. passenger plane over Detroit. It was last raised to the 
highest level, or critical, in June 2007, after a car on fire was driven into the Glasgow Airport terminal 
building and — separately — two devices were found in cars in central London. 
On July 7, 2005, four suicide bombers attacked the London transit system at rush hour and killed 52 
commuters and injured hundreds. Christian Leuprecht, a security expert at the Royal Military College 
of Canada and Queen's University, said that though officials said there was no specific threat made, it 
is likely that data flowing to the Britain's intelligence agencies caused them concern. I have a concern 
with this because I remember the UK in the early 1970s when there was a wave of IRA bombings. 
When the IRA bombed The Hardrock Café and Harrods, as well as killing a prominent member of the 
EFTA01159936

British Royal Family, Lord Mountbatten and somehow the country survived. So why is there so much 
hysteria over ISIS who are currently fighting wars in two counties and now being besieged by Syrians, 
Iraqis, Kurds, Turks and Iranians as well as being bombed by America war planes and drones? 
Yes, ISIS is dangerous. But they are being overblown into Bogymen who are no larger threats to the 
United Kingdom and the United States than inner city gangs, economic inequality, crumbling 
infrastructure, inadequate healthcare and the lack of education for many of our young people. And 
maybe we should try to address the underlying reasons why disillusioned young men and women feel 
the need to give their lives to a radical terrorist organization. Because as dangerous as ISIS is, the 
disillusionment of these young people is the most dangerous of all. So if David Cameron wants 
address home grown terrorism, he and others should address the underlying causes. 
In 1963 James Baldwin released a series of essays in a book titled The Fire Next Time as the 
bookseller Amazon describes — A national bestseller when it first appeared in 1963, The Fire Next 
Time galvanized the nation and gave passionate voice to the emerging civil rights movement. At once a 
powerful evocation of James Baldwin's early life in Harlem and a disturbing examination of the 
consequences of racial injustice, the book is an intensely personal and provocative document. It 
consists of two "letters," written on the occasion of the centennial of the Emancipation Proclamation, 
that exhort Americans, both black and white, to attack the terrible legacy of racism. Described by The 
New York Times Book Review as "sermon, ultimatum, confession, deposition, testament, and 
chronicle...all presented in searing, brilliant prose," The Fire Next Time stands as a classic of our 
literature. 
So when I came across Bob Herbert op-ed last week in The Huffington Post - The Fire This Time 
- I was better equip to really understand and appreciate one of the passages in Baldwin's masterpiece, 
"I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate 
is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain." With many Americans believing that the country has 
moved into a post-racial America because of the election of Barrack Obama, Herbert points out in the 
summer of 2005 when these same people were stunned when legions of poor black people in desperate 
circumstances seemed to have suddenly and inexplicably materialized in New Orleans during the 
flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina. Expressions of disbelief poured in from around the nation: 
"How can this be happening?" "I had no idea conditions were that bad." "My God, is this America?" 
EFTA01159937

Herbert: People found themselves staring at the kind of poverty they thought had been largely wiped 
out decades earlier. President George W. Bush seemed as astonished as anyone. He made an eerie, 
oddly-lit, outdoor appearance in the city's French Quarter on the evening of September 15 to announce 
that his administration would wage an all-out fight against the economic distress that continued to 
plague so many African Americans. If you had listened to his announcement on the radio, you might 
have thought you were hearing the ghost of Lyndon Johnson. Poverty in America, said Bush, "has 
roots in a history of racial discrimination which cut off generations from the opportunity of 
America." He added, "We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action." 
Anyone who took Bush's pledge seriously would have ended up disappointed because nothing of the 
sort happened. The poor black people of New Orleans faded back into the invisibility from which they 
had come. It was ever thus: Some tragic development occurs; the media spotlight homes in on black 
people who had previously been invisible; instant experts weigh in with their pompous, uninformed 
analyses; and commitments as empty as deflated balloons are made. This time it's Ferguson, Missouri, 
in the spotlight. And you can bet the mortgage that this time will be no different. 
The precipitating events that cause these periodic national spasms can vary widely -- the flooding of 
New Orleans, the assassination of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the beating of Rodney King. 
But these tragedies all emerge from the same fetid source -- the racism embedded in the very 
foundation of America. And it's that racism -- stark, in-your-face, never-ending, frequently murderous 
-- that has so many African-Americans so angry and frustrated, so furious, so enraged. Black people all 
across America, not just in Ferguson, are angry about the killing of Michael Brown. And they remain 
angry over the killing of Trayvon Martin. And many are seething over the fatal chokehold clamped on 
the throat of Eric Garner by a cop on Staten Island in New York — a cop who refused to relent even as 
Gamer gasped, "I can't breathe, I can't breathe." 
They are angry about all those things, but they are also angry and frustrated about so much more. Here 
are just a few of the complaints. Black people are angry about voter suppression -- the relentless, 
organized, years-long effort to prevent African-Americans from freely exercising their fundamental 
right to cast a ballot for the candidates of their choice. That effort was bolstered immeasurably and 
given a veneer of legitimacy last year by the Supreme Court's vile and destructive evisceration of the 
Voting Rights Act. 
Blacks are angry and bitterly frustrated over the way so many were targeted and victimized by 
predators in the housing and finance industries, and the disproportionate suffering that African-
Americans endured in the subsequent housing meltdown and the recession. And they are angry about 
being left so far behind in the so-called economic recovery. 
Blacks hold a variety of views about the job that Barack Obama has done as president. Most are very 
supportive; some have been disappointed. But nearly all are furious at the high levels of racism and 
personal venom that have characterized so much of the opposition not just to the president's policies 
but to him personally. Most blacks I know have taken that as an affront to themselves, as well as an 
appalling affront to the president, and the resentment they feel is off the charts. 
And, yes, there is profound anger and resentment at the myriad hateful ways that blacks are treated 
throughout the criminal justice system. I will never forget traveling to Avon Park, Florida, a few years 
EFTA01159938

ago to cover the case of an African-American girl in kindergarten who was arrested by the police, 
handcuffed and taken to the police station in the back seat of a patrol car because she had thrown a 
tantrum in the classroom. When I interviewed the police chief, I expressed amazement that this had 
happened to a six-year-old. His reply came in an instant: "Do you think this is the first six-year-old 
we've arrested?' 
Handcuffing the child had proved difficult. "You can't handcuff them on their wrists because their 
wrists are too small," the chief explained, "so you have to handcuff them up by their biceps." 
These are just a very few of the many deep concerns harbored by black Americans. (Others include the 
chronic under-funding and wholesale dosing of public schools in black neighborhoods; the continued 
widespread discrimination in employment and housing; and the humiliating, debilitating racist 
encounters, large and small, that nearly all black people face at one time or another, and that many 
blacks face on a daily basis.) 
Despite all the rhetoric, the deepest concerns of blacks are seldom acted upon in any sustained, 
effective way. Most of the time, they are not even taken seriously. So the anger and the resentment 
intensifies, month after month, year after year, like gases in pressurized containers, until at some point 
they blow. That's what has happened in Ferguson. And the trouble in Ferguson is likely to continue, off 
and on, indefinitely. Because the likelihood of a successful prosecution of the cop who killed Michael 
Brown is very slim. 
The idea that America had reached some level of post-racism with the election of Barack Obama was 
always delusionary. But it was true that great strides had been made in the half-century or so that 
followed the civil rights movement. Now, because of the persistence of racism and a relaxation of the 
fight against it, we are moving backwards. Ferguson is just the latest illustration. 
There is no reason to believe that government officials at the federal, state or local level will take the 
critical steps necessary to begin turning these tragic and explosive matters around. Government 
officials have a horror of honestly engaging anything that has to do with race. I can't imagine the 
required leadership coming from any place other than the black community itself. 
What is needed right now is a national gathering of some of the brightest and most committed African-
American men and women to begin devising strategies to fight back in a coherent and sustained way 
against the racial injustice that still permeates this society. Let that be the first step toward the 
development of a new cadre of black leadership to carry this fight forward. 
In the absence of such leadership, it will be extremely difficult to avoid new outbreaks of the kind of 
violence and incoherence that we've seen in Ferguson. And there is always a danger of such outbreaks 
spiraling into something much worse, something completely out of control. I remember Newark and 
Detroit in 1967, and the devastation that followed the death of Dr. King, and Los Angeles in 1992, and 
on and on. 
EFTA01159939

Those tragedies did not occur in a vacuum and it's important to understand that. History tells us that it 
won't be long before another Michael Brown, or Eric Garner, or Trayvon Martin is thrust upon us. The 
emergence of effective black leadership to guide us over the long haul is America's only defense against 
such outrages, and against what James Baldwin so accurately characterized as the fire next time. 
America often puts a band-aid on a wound expecting everything to heal. The country has systemic 
problems that it chooses to ignore. And as such, things are only getting worse. To cure these problems 
require serous investment in education, especially early education, healthcare, decent housing and 
most of 
Jobs.... Jobs... Jobs.... When there is 50% unemployment of males in race or in any 
country, it is a power keg ready to erupt. So why are so many people surprised 
I'm not.... And 
this is why this is my rant of the week.... 
WEEK's READINGS 
I am a 15-year-old immigrant who came to 
America because gangs murdered my family. 
All I want to do is stay and learn 
This is what it's like to be a child detained at a holding facility in the US border crisis. This is what its like to be afraid to go south again. This is my 
undocumented limbo 
When my father was murdered by gangs in El Salvador when I was seven, I thought nothing could get 
worse. But then the gangs started threatening me, too, and beating up my brothers. I couldn't go to 
school because the gangs there would come after me, and I wasn't safe at home because the other 
gangs there came after all of us. There was nothing the police would or could do. 
EFTA01159940

I was constantly under threat, as were my siblings. So in June 2013, scared of this situation, we made 
the decision to go to the United States — to try to escape the violence. I was 14, and my brothers were 
nine and 12. 
We were all frightened to go, and we knew that it was very risky and dangerous. But it was riskier to 
stay where we were. 
Still, fleeing El Salvador was scary: we knew there were lots of bad people who kidnap and capture 
travelers along the way to America, so we never really felt safe. We took buses, cars and taxis to get 
through Guatemala and Mexico, and everything looked so strange. 
Through it all, I just kept thinking about our father's murder, and our cousin's murder, about all the 
bad people who wanted to hurt us in El Salvador, and prayed that we would find somewhere safe in 
America. 
But when we got to the border, we had to make a choice. We were told that we probably wowouldn'tet 
caught if we traveled through the desert, but people die there, and we were just children. So we went 
through the immigration checkpoint at Tijuana and were detained. 
The American border agents handcuffed us, even my youngest brother, which was scary because none 
of us had ever been handcuffed before. We didn't know what would come next. We didn't know if they 
would just send us back right away, if we would even have a chance to tell our story to anyone, to make 
them understand, or if we would ever have any chance of living in the United States. 
We were in the immigration holding center for about two days, and only then were we moved to a 
shelter for children, where we stayed for about two weeks. There, we were able to go to school, and the 
workers at the shelter helped us out a lot. 
But that's also when they told us about the court that would decide if we get to stay in America, 
because of how we got here. We got very worried, because we were thinldng to ourselves, 'Wow we 
have to go to a court, and we don't have a lawyer!" 
After we were released from the shelter in July 2013 to await our date with the judge, we went to 
Washington so we could be with my mom. I had not seen her since she had been forced to flee El 
Salvador years ago (also because of the gangs). Seeing my mom again was the best day I had had in so 
long. I finally felt safe. 
I've been attending high school, just like any other American teenager. Because our teachers don't 
speak a lot of Spanish, they're having us use the Rosetta Stone program — so each day we learn a bit 
more. It's been difficult, but I'm really loving being so excited about school. This year, I've had 
excellent grades — as have my brothers — so it's helped us feel better about our decision to leave, 
despite all the troubles. 
EFTA01159941

But our court date is in September, so we're more concerned than ever. We still don't have a lawyer. 
We don't know what to tell the immigration judge. We don't know what the American laws are like. We 
can't defend ourselves in front of a judge if we don't even know the language, let alone the laws of this 
country. We really want to stay in the United States, but it feels like, if we go to the judge without a 
lawyer, it's almost certain that he'll send us back to our home country no matter what we say. 
We have the chance for a better future here, a future that we can't have in El Salvador: there's so much 
violence there, and the opportunities to get ahead in life — education, work — just aren't safe because of 
the violence. All we're asking for is help: the help of an attorney, so that we can have a chance to stay 
and access opportunities that will help us be better and help society. 
We just want to go to school and work hard and not have to worry about being hurt or killed, the way 
we would back home. 
As told to Rafael Noboa y Rivera, in Spanish. "Ashley" is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Northwest 
Immigrants Rights Project in a class action lawsuit against the US government for the right to be represented by a lawyer in her 
deportation hearing. 
Salt intake is too high in 181 of 187 countries 
around the world 
EFTA01159942

For those of you who like me enjoy French fries, potato chips (and I don't mean the sissy kind) and an 
occasional blended margarita with salt, we are not alone because Tufts University researchers have 
determined, with an average of 3.95 grams of sodium consumed per person per day--nearly double the 
two grams daily recommended by the World Health Organization. The taste for soy in Asia, stews in 
Eastern Europe and bread and processed food in the United States leads to 1.65 million deaths 
annually from diseases attributable to excess sodium consumption, a major cause of high blood 
pressure the world over, according to a study published Thursday in the New England Journal of 
Medicine. Forty percent of those deaths occurred before the age of 70, and 84 percent were in low- and 
middle-income countries. The death rate, mainly from heart disease and stroke, was lowest in Kenya 
(four deaths per million adults) and highest in Georgia (1,967 deaths per million). 
In 181 of 187 countries for which data was available, adults consume too much sodium, the researchers 
concluded. Adults in only a handful of African nations -- notably Kenya, Cameroon and Gabon -- were 
able to keep their sodium consumption below the recommended level. Nearly 10 percent of all deaths 
from cardiovascular causes were attributed to excess sodium intake. "One in .10 is quite large," said 
Dariush Mozzafarian, dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, 
who led the research. He noted the "enormous rates of stroke in China, Eastern Europe and Central 
Asia." 
Reduction of sodium intake leads to lower blood pressure and may result in fewer deaths. "What needs 
to be done is to have a national, coordinated policy" on salt in food for the United States, Mozzafarian 
said. The FDA has said it plans to work with the food and beverage industries to voluntarily reduce salt 
in food, an approach that has shown some success in the United Kingdom, Mozzafarian said. 
Consumers need to "stand up and ask the government to do something about sodium in the food 
supply," he said. In contrast to the recommendations of the WHO, the American Heart Association 
and other groups, a large study in the same edition of the New England Journal of Medicine reported 
that consumption of three to six grams of salt a day was associated with "a lower risk of death and 
cardiovascular events than was either a higher or lower estimated level of intake." 
The study suggested that people who consumed fewer than three grams of sodium daily faced a 27% 
higher risk of death or a heart attack or stroke, underscoring the degree to which the proper amount of 
salt intake remains a controversial subject. The Tufts researchers collected information on salt intake 
in 66 countries that account for 94.1 percent of the world's adult population and modeled it for the 
rest. They estimated that regional average sodium consumption ranged from a low of 2.18 grams to a 
high of 5.51 grams, with the greatest salt consumption in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. 
EFTA01159943

Last week a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinians was agreed ending their seven-week conflict 
in Gaza appeared to be holding early on Wednesday as the focus shifted to securing an arrangement 
for the long term. No dear victor emerged from what had become a war of attrition between the 
Middle East's most powerful armed forces and the dominant llamas militant movement in the Gaza 
Strip. Exacting a heavy toll in Palestinian lives and property, Israel said it dealt a strong blow to 
Hamas, killing several of its military leaders and destroying the group's cross-border infiltration 
tunnels. But Israel also faced persistent rocket fire for nearly two months that caused an exodus from 
a number of bother communities and became part of daily life in its commercial heartland. 
Palestinian and Egyptian officials said the deal, which was mediated in Cairo and took effect on 
Tuesday evening, called for an indefinite halt to hostilities, the immediate opening of Gaza's blockaded 
crossings with Israel and Egypt and a widening of the territory's fishing zone in the Mediterranean. A 
senior official of the Islamist group llamas, which runs Gaza, voiced willingness for the security forces 
of Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the unity government he formed in 
June to control the passage points. Both Israel and Egypt view llamas as a security threat and are 
seeking guarantees that weapons will not enter the territory of i.8 million people. Under a second 
stage of the truce that would begin a month later, Israel and the Palestinians would discuss the 
construction of a Gaza sea port and Israel's release of Hamas prisoners in the occupied West Bank, 
possibly in a trade for body parts of two Israeli soldiers believed held by llamas, the officials said. 
After the ceasefire began, crowds and traffic filled the streets of Gaza. Car horns blared and recorded 
chants praising God sounded from mosque loudspeakers. Celebratory gunfire killed one Palestinian 
and wounded 19 others, hospital officials said. "Today we declare the victory of the resistance, today 
we declare the victory of Gaza," llamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said. Israel gave a low-key 
response to the truce, saying it would facilitate the flow of civilian goods and humanitarian and 
reconstruction aid into the impoverished territory if the "open-ended" ceasefire was honored. And 
then I read William Booth's article in The Washington Post last weekend - The U.N. says 7 in to 
Palestinians killed in Gaza were civilians. Israel disagrees. 
EFTA01159944

In it he pointed out that although the hostilities have ended, the war in Gaza now continues in a battle 
between databases to determine who was killed and why. The most contested number, the one that 
attracts the most stubborn insistence and ferocious rebuttal, is not the total fatalities on the 
Palestinian side, the more than 2,100 dead in the Gaza hostilities. The controversy centers instead on 
the ratio of civilians to combatants, or as the Israelis call them "terrorist operatives." This number will 
help shape public opinion about the way the war was waged, its cost in human life and whether the 
hostilities were worth the casualties. In its most recent count, the U.N. Office for the Coordination of 
Humanitarian Affairs reports that 2,104 Palestinians were killed in Gaza, including 1,462 civilians, 
among them 495 children and 253 women. Those U.N. numbers would mean that 69 percent of the 
total killed were civilians. 
By contrast, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said this week that Israeli forces had killed 
"approximately 1,000 terrorists," which would mean that far fewer of the 2,104 Palestinian dead were 
civilians — roughly 52 percent. Israeli military forces pride themselves on being "the most moral army 
in the world." The Palestinians say Israeli bombardment was frequently indiscriminate or directed at 
targets where the risk of civilian casualties was high. In Israel, critics charge that the U.N. numbers 
are inaccurate and biased, in part because the United Nations bases its reports on numbers generated 
by human rights groups working in Gaza, which they say cannot be trusted. 
But why is this being contested? Whether the ratio is the Israeli assessment of 48 to 52 percent of 
terrorists to civilians or the UN's much higher assessment that a much larger ratio of civilians died 
during the conflict, the fact that almost five hundred children were killed and both sides are jockeying 
over ratios as if this will give them moral and political cover is despicable. The fact that complete 
neighborhoods have been obliterated and both sides are fighting over numbers instead of trying to 
work together, independently or through third parties to do whatever possible to allay the hardship of 
hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians living in this area is also despicable. And worse of all, the 
fact that both sides are trying to claim a "win" when somewhere between 1200 to 180o innocent 
civilians lives were taken from them because leadership on both sides failed to protect them borders on 
genocide that both sides are party to. War is failure and until societies understand this, conflicts like 
this will continue. 
As I wrote last week, "more than 2000 people have died in Gaza since the beginning of this most 
conflict began. And it is estimated that almost 1800 have been innocent civilians. This is criminal. 
Life is important everywhere, a Palestinian life is no less precious as an Israeli life. And people on both 
sides are to blame, so this conflict has to stop because an eye for an eye blinds everyone." And now to 
then continue the fight over numbers of percentage of terrorist to civilians, when millions of innocent 
civilians have been terrorized for seven weeks and almost 500 children were senselessly killed, is the 
most despicable of all.... More importantly nothing is going to change.... 
"Inequality matters," Bill Moyers said in a recent essay. "You will hear people say it doesn't, but 
they are usually so high up the ladder they can't even see those at the bottom." The distance between 
the first and the least in America is indeed vast and growing — proven by shocking statistics and 
personal stories of challenge and hardship, made even harder by policies and political collusion that 
reward the wealthy at the cost of everyone else. We need to be aware about the class gap, how it 
happened, what's making it worse and what you can do about it. Because if we don't The American 
Dream as we know it will die. 
EFTA01159945

Change since 1979 
240% 
Productivity 
200% 
■ Average income of top 1% 
■ Average overall wages 
160% 
Ire% 
SO% 
1979 
1901 
ins 
ON 
Or 
WM 
Up 
7000 
20011 
2000 
Mothcrioncs 
In the past 20 years, the US economy has grown nearly 60 percent. This huge increase in productivity 
is partly due to automation, the internet, and other improvements in efficiency. But it's also the result 
of Americans working harder—often without a big boost to their bottom lines. Oh, and meanwhile, 
corporate profits are up 20 percent. 
YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR GAINS 
Productivity has surged, but income and wages have stagnated for most Americans. If the median 
household income had kept pace with the economy since 197o, it would now be nearly $92,000, not 
$50,000. 
Kiev's Independence Square was the focal point of much of the initial violence 
EFTA01159946

With pressures building on all sides, and after five months of intensifying combat that threatened to 
rip Ukraine apart and to reignite the Cold War, the Ukrainian government and separatist forces signed 
a cease-fire agreement on Friday that analysts considered highly tenuous in a country that remains a 
tinderbox. Previous attempts to stop the fighting have failed. But the prime difference this time was 
that the main thrust of the plan was not just endorsed, but laid out, by President Vladimir V. Putin of 
Russia, whom Western leaders accuse of stoking unrest to prevent Ukraine from slipping out of 
Russia's orbit. 
The cease-fire was agreed to after a two-week rebel counteroffensive backed by Russian troops, armor 
and artillery that threatened to roll back most of the gains the Ukrainian military had made. Russia has 
not acknowledged the presence of any of its military units on Ukrainian soil, and there was no mention 
of their removal as part of the agreement. From the moment the crisis erupted in November — when 
Ukraine's president at the time, Viktor F. Yanukovych, rejected a trade agreement with the European 
Union in favor of a deal with Russia — Kiev and the West have accused Moscow of destabilizing the 
country, first with a stealth invasion and annexation of Crimea and then by inspiring and covertly 
arming the rebels in southeastern Ukraine. 
The conflict ignited the most serious East-West confrontation since the end of the Cold War, with 
Europe and the United States looking largely impotent as Moscow upset the postwar order by altering 
borders by force. The West has imposed some economic sanctions, and it is threatening more, but the 
Kremlin has dismissed their impact and made it clear that it no longer feels itself beholden to Western 
nations or institutions. The agreement reached Friday laid out the first tentative steps toward both an 
immediate cessation of hostilities and the promise of greater political freedom in the future. Artillery 
exchanges tapered off after it was put in effect at 6 p.m., and quiet prevailed through the initial hours. 
Combat in the contested southeastern region that killed some 2,600 people and in In the last two 
weeks, Ukrainian forces suffered heavy setbacks, with the separatists opening a third front that 
threatened the strategic southern coast around the port of Mariupol. Meanwhile, NATO leaders at a 
summit meeting in Wales threatened Russia with tougher sanctions and committed to providing 
increased defensive help for Ukraine and the alliance's Eastern European members. Among other 
things, the cease-fire agreement called for amnesty for all those who disarm and who did not commit 
serious crimes; the release of all hostages; the disbanding of militias; and the establishment of a 10-
kilometerbuffer zone (about six miles) along the Russian-Ukrainian border, with compliance overseen 
by international monitors. 
It also points the way to a possible political solution to the conflict. Mr. Putin, insistent that Ukraine be 
tied to Russia instead of the West, has pressed for regional autonomy for the southeastern regions, 
while the Ukrainian government has so far been open only to the idea of decentralization. On the face 
of it, Mr. Putin's endorsement of the cease-fire should increase the chances that it will be maintained. 
But he has consistently operated in a deceitful manner on Ukraine, like denying that Russia had 
backed the rebel fighters and had moved its troops and artillery into the country, when clearly it had 
done so — so there is every reason for skepticism. 
In his quest for control and regional power, Mr. Putin poses a serious threat to the international order 
by disregarding borders, violating agreements and pursuing an expansionist vision without regard to 
other states or even the effect that economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation could have on Russia. 
EFTA01159947

Although NATO has also been focused on the ISIS threat this week, the alliance pushed back hard 
against him. It reaffirmed its core purpose of defending every ally against an attack, including those in 
Eastern Europe who feel most threatened by Mr. Putin's aggression, and created a 4,000-person rapid 
reaction force capable of deploying in 48 hours. 
And although Ukraine is not an alliance member, President Obama said at a news conference on 
Friday that NATO would uphold the country's "sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and 
right to defend itself." The 28 NATO members have promised to provide Ukraine with logistics 
assistance, training and help in organizing the military command structure and related forces. The 
United States and its allies are also debating going even further and supplying defensive weapons, 
including radar and anti-tank weapons. 
But let's get real. It was the Europeans and the US whose advances to the moderates in Ukraine 
offering the possibility of joining the European Union and whispers of the possibility of joining NATO 
that fan the flames of discontent in the country. And although he have been wooed by the West, 
unable to get the deal that he desired democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovich announces 
abandonment of a trade agreement with the EU, seeking closer ties with Moscow. This ignited protest 
by for pro-EU anti-government protesters as images of them bloodied by police crackdown spread 
online and in the media leading to huge protests in Kiev's Independence Square. The City Hall is seized 
by activists. 
By November public support grew when images of pro-EU anti-government protesters bloodied by 
police crackdown spread online and in the media. Demonstrations escalated when Mykola Azarov 
resigned as Ukraine's prime minister and the parliament repealed anti-protest laws imposed by 
Yanukovich. Protest leaders, the political opposition and Yanukovich agree to form a new government 
and hold early elections. Yanukovich's powers are slashed. The parliament votes to free Yulia 
Tymoshenko, the former prime minister, from prison. Yanukovich flees Kiev after protesters take 
control of the capital. And in FebruaryUkraine politicians vote to remove Yanukovich. Ukraine's 
parliament then assigned presidential powers to its new speaker, Oleksandr Thrchinov, an ally of to 
from President Tymoshenko who was released from prioson. Pro-Russian protesters rally in Crimea 
against the new Kiev administration. Ukraine's interim government drew up a warrant for 
Yanukovich's arrest. 
In February Pro-Russian Aleksey Chaly was then appointed Sevastopol's de facto mayor as rallies in 
Crimea continue. Crimean Tartars supporting the new Kiev administration clash with pro-Russia 
protesters in the region. Pro-Kremlin armed men seize government buildings in Crimea. Ukraine 
government vows to prevent a country break-up as Crimean parliament set May 25 as the date for 
referendum on region's status. Yanukovich is granted refuge in Russia. Armed men in unmarked 
combat fatigues seize Simferopol international airport and a military airfield in Sevestopol. UN 
Security Council holds an emergency closed-door session to discuss the situation in Crimea. Moscow 
responded by claiming that military movements in Crimea were in line with previous agreements to 
protect its fleet position in the Black Sea. And in March Russian upper house of the parliament 
approves a request by Putin to use military power in Ukraine. On March 2, 2014 a convoy of hundreds 
of Russian troops headed toward the regional capital of Crimea resulting in Arseny Yatsenyuk, 
Ukraine's new prime minister accusing Russia of declaring war on his country. 
Since the removal of President Viktor Yanukovich through deadly anti-government protests, Ukraine 
has called for fresh presidential elections on May 25. The move was countered by the Crimea 
EFTA01159948

administration that voted overwhelmingly to join Russia in a referendum deemed illegitimate by the 
US and EU, but welcomed by Russia. As the government in Kiev continued to emphasize the need for 
a united Ukraine, and world leaders strive to avoid military conflict all side claimed the moral high 
ground when in fact what happened in Kiev and Ukraine as a whole was an anti-constitutional 
takeover and armed seizure of power ignited by the West. 
The Americans who themselves are war weary have no illusion that Ukraine could ever prevail in a war 
with Russia. But the intent of the NATO summit decisions is to encourage a political solution by 
raising the cost of further military actions by the rebels and Mr. Putin. The Europeans, who too often 
hesitated during this crisis, on Friday showed more resolve by agreeing to stronger sanctions that 
affect Russia's access to capital markets, defense, dual-use goods and sensitive technology. And 
although only one-day in the cease-fire, it has already been breached and if a permanent cease 
fire isn't reach the Ukraine crisis could get a lot worse. And just blaming Putin, who was actually 
protecting his southern flank isn't the solution. 
THIS WEEK's QUOTES 
Most of our generation was HOME SCHOOLED in 
many ways. 
1. My mother taught me TO APPRECIATE A JOB WELL DONE. 
"If you're going to kill each other, do it outside. I just finished cleaning." 
2. My mother taught me RELIGION. 
"You better pray that will come out of the carpet." 
3. My father taught me about TIME TRAVEL. 
"If you don't straighten up, I'm going to knock you into the middle of next week!" 
4. My father taught me LOGIC. 
" Because I said so, that's why." 
5. My mother taught me MORE LOGIC. 
"If you fall out of that swing and break your neck, you're not going to the store with me." 
EFTA01159949

6. My mother taught me FORESIGHT. 
"Make sure you wear clean underwear, in case you're in an accident." 
7. My father taught me IRONY. 
"Keep crying and I'll give you something to cry about." 
8. My mother taught me about the science of OSMOSIS. 
"Shut your mouth and eat your supper." 
9. My mother taught me about CONTORTIONISM. 
"Just you look at that dirt on the back of your neck?" 
10. My mother taught me about STAMINA. 
"You'll sit there until all that spinach is gone." 
11 My mother taught me about WEATHER. 
"This room of yours looks as if a tornado went through it." 
12. My mother taught me about HYPOCRISY. 
"If I told you once, I've told you a million times. Don't exaggerate!" 
13. My father taught me the CIRCLE OF LIFE. 
"I brought you into this world, and I can take you out..." 
14. My mother taught me about BEHAVIOUR MODIFICATION. 
"Stop acting like your father!" 
15. My mother taught me about ENVY. 
"There are millions of less fortunate children in 
this world who don't have wonderful parents like you do." 
EFTA01159950