The legitimacy on an unconstitutional ruling by the IRS, that benefits only members of the Church of Scientology, is once again feeling the heat. After a decades long battle with the IRS, which resulted in numerous charges and prison time for leading members of the Church of Scientology, further questions arise regarding the apparently commercial nature of this ethically unconventional organization. The battles may wage across the globe, but, more and more, the center of the controversy sits squarely in the lap of the American government.

Scientology v. The World

Events in Australia, this past week, rekindle the flame of concern regarding the preferential taxation status of the Church of Scientology. After a March 10 broadcast by ABC’s Four Corners(1), chronicling allegations and court cases against the Church of Scientology, Senator Xenophon has made a fresh bid to challenge the tax-free status of the church(2). The Four Corners special outlines reports of child labor malpractice, physical and psychological abuse, coerced family separation, tax evasion and forced abortion(3), all allegedly perpetrated by the Church of Scientology.

This, the latest in a continuing series of rows with the church, comes only a year after French courts tried and convicted the Church of Scientology of fraud, charging the sect $900,000 in fines(4). The sect is not recognized as a religion in France, as it is in the United States. Germany has also taken a very strong stance against the organization. German officials “consider(s) the Scientology organization a commercial enterprise with a history of taking advantage of vulnerable individuals and (has) an extreme dislike of any criticism. The German government is also concerned that the organization’s totalitarian structure and methods may pose a risk to Germany’s democratic society. Several kinds of evidence have influenced this view of Scientology, including the organization’s activities in the United States.” (5) Efforts to ban the organization from France were suggested by prosecutors but not pursued by the courts(6). This judgement follows yet another major court case in the United Kingdom that found the group culpable on several counts, requiring a fine of $235,000 and the possibility of prison time(7).

Scientology v. America

In America, the Scientologists have engaged in similar legal battles. In the late 1970’s, after the group lost its briefly enjoyed tax exempt status, it was embroiled in an ongoing battle with the IRS that the church itself referred to as a ‘war’. Several high ranking members, including founder L. Ron Hubbard’s wife, Susan Hubbard, were imprisoned on a variety of charges including breaking into government offices, illegal electronic surveillance and theft of classified government documents(8). Additional testimonies include harrowing accounts of personal harassment, illegal surveillance, stalking, malicious court filings and death threats (9). The Church is reportedly the sole client of several law firms and as early as 1991 was spending an estimated $20,000,000 annually on legal actions, according to Richard Behar in his Time Magazine article titled ‘The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power’.(10)

In the early 1990’s, with the aid of it’s own security and intelligence department, the Church of Scientology’s Office of Special Affairs (OSA), which reportedly rivals the intelligence agencies of many countries(11)(12), the scientologists were able to ‘negotiate’ a deal with the IRS which not only reinstated tax exempt status but provided unprecedented preferential status in violation of the First Amendment. According to the New York Times, “the exemption followed a series of unusual internal IRS actions that came after an extraordinary campaign orchestrated by Scientology against the agency and people who work there.”(13) The group reportedly used “bugging of government offices, theft of classified files, private detectives pursuing senior government officials, [and] thousands of lawsuits” (14) in its campaign to gain leverage against the United States Government. They were successful with this campaign, procuring the aforementioned status for themselves with the IRS. Details and specifics of the secret meeting leading up to the arrangement, between David Miscavige, current leader of the Church of Scientology, and Fred T. Goldberg Jr, past Commissioner of the IRS, have remained sealed.(15)

In 2008, the reinstated and preferential tax status of the Church of Scientology was once again challenged in U.S. courts. The case was Sklar v. Commissioner.(16) An Orthodox Jewish family wanted the same tax deductions afforded Scientologists. Their lawyer argued that it was discriminatory to give Scientologists a tax break no other religion is permitted. The exemption in question was for the part of his children’s education provided by a yeshiva school, which is an Orthodox Jewish religious school.

The court relied on Hernandez v. Commissioner to deny his tax deduction(17). The irony here is that Hernandez v. Commissioner apparently applies to everyone in the country except Scientologists. The decision involved a Scientologist and specifically states that the kind of tax deduction they get is illegal. Judge Wardlaw, in oral arguments of Sklar v. Commissioner, pronounced the preferential status of the Church unconstitutional and in clear violation of the First Amendment. It’s a constitutional question of the separation of church and state. If religious education becomes deductible, it means that taxpayers are subsidizing religion. Unfortunately the court found itself in no legal position to change a deal ‘negotiated’ by the Church of Scientology with the IRS.

The Public Face of Scientology

In addition to its schools and various ‘Orgs’, the church also operates under front organizations Narconon, Applied Scholastics, Criminon, and the Citizens commission on Human Rights. The history of the organization, both internationally as well as in the United States, is riddled with constant legal battles, many of which have been termed by American courts as malicious and abusive on the part of the church(18). The courts Have been used by Scientology’s army of lawyers to target any who the Church of Scientology deem an enemy, or in their terms, a Suppressive Person.(19) As their founder, L. Ron Hubbard wrote “The law can be used easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.” – L.Ron Hubbard (A Manual on the Dissemination of Material, 1955)

As reported by Hubbard’s son; “My father and I created a ‘religious front’ only for tax purposes and legal protection ‘from fraud Claims’. We almost always told nearly everyone that Scientology was really science, not a religion, but that the religious front was created to deal with the government.” — Ronald DeWolf a.k.a. L. Ron Hubbard, Jr. (son of L. Ron Hubbard), Affidavit in Schaick v. Church of Scientology, US District Court Mass., No. 79-2491 (20)

Last year, amid international scandal and proven culpability, as well as domestic challenge, the church continued to enjoy preferred tax status over all other religions in America. The affluent Scientology organization has recently built, or renovated, opulent Scientology churches, which it calls Ideal Orgs, in Rome; Malmo, Sweden; Dallas; Nashville; and Washington, DC. At its base, on the Gulf Coast of Florida, it continues buying hotels and office buildings (54 at last count) and constructing a 380,000-square-foot mecca that looks like a convention center.(21)

Scientology in a ‘Nut’ Shell

According to Scientology; seventy five thousand years ago, Xenu was head of the Galactic Federation, an organization of 76 planets that had existed for 20,000,000 years. The planets were over-populated. Xenu’s solution was to gather up large numbers of the people and kill them, freezing their thetans(souls). He ended up with over 1.3 trillion frozen thetans. He transported the frozen thetans to Earth, which he called Teegeeack. The thetans were left in the vicinity of volcanoes which Xenu destroyed with atomic weapons.

Now, each human has their own thetan as well as clusters of thousands of these dead thetans inside them. Scientology, which asks its followers to sign a billion year contract, seeks to free humans from these dead thetans through costly auditing and training programs, totaling as much as $500,000 USD, so that they can be truly clear, super-human, eternal beings(22). Did I mention that L. Ron Hubbard, before founding the Church of Scientology, was a very prolific Science Fiction writer?(23)

What Are Scientology’s Crimes?

Regardless of the delusional spiritual landscape created by a commercially minded and imaginative entrepreneur; the mafioso style tactics, and subversive governmental interference, should be enough to shut this scam down if not remove any legal or taxation preferences and protections it enjoys. If nothing else, an official investigation is certainly warranted. That is, unless America has willingly become the last safe harbor for charlatans and snake-oil salesmen seeking tax havens for their grotesque profits padded with tax payer’s money.

If the courts are truly unable to address a recognized breach of the First Amendment of the Constitution; a public Congressional Inquiry should be convened to determine if the IRS has been compromised through either blackmail, coercion, or collusion, to cause such a violation. Such a breach of the institution threatens the credibility of the entire system and could prove to further erode confidence in the government and democratic institutions of the United States of America.

The only apparent recourse seems to lay in the hands of the citizenry. Investigate and compile available references and links regarding this issue. Send them, and this article, to your government representatives and request that an official investigation and inquiry be launched immediately into the preferential tax exempt status of the Church of Scientology, including all relevant tax codes, agreements and settlements . Insist that an investigation, or a reason not to investigate, is produced and that communication and responses are in writing. The First Amendment and the Citizens of the United States deserve no less.

“No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.” -Thomas Jefferson

(1) – http://www.atheistmedia.com/2010/03/abc-four-corners-scientology-ex-files.html
(2) – http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/xenophon-pushes-for-scientology-inquiry-20100312-q3wh.html
(3) – http://www.scribd.com/full/14464561?access_key=key-1fsp0mqjsb4aiy9a95ss
(4) – http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/nonprofit/2009/10/french-court-convucts-church-of-scientology-of-fraud.html
(5) – http://www.rickross.com/reference/scientology/germany/germany21.html
(6) – http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1901373,00.html
(7) – http://www.solitarytrees.net/pickets/sp861.htm
(8) – http://xenutv.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/marc_headley_v_cos_lawsuit.pdf
(9) – http://xenu.net/archive/personal_story/paulette_cooper/
(10)- http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972865,00.html
(11)- http://www.xenu.net/archive/go/osahist.htm
(12)- http://www.factnet.org/?p=270
(13)- http://www.lermanet.com/scientologynews/nytimes/nyt-irs-030997.htm
(14)- http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/irs.html
(15)- http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/19/us/scientology-denies-an-account-of-an-impromptu-irs-meeting.html?fta=y
(16)- http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/Sk2lar.TC.WPD.pdf
(17)- http://laws.findlaw.com/us/490/680.html
(18)- http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/crtquot.htm
(19)- http://www.youtube.com/user/newyork420420?blend=2&ob=4
(20)- http://www.lermanet.com/cos/morejud.html
(21)- http://www.xenutv.com/blog/?p=4490
(22)- http://altreligion.about.com/od/mythologicalfigures/a/xenu.htm
(23)- http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/h/l-ron-hubbard/

Editor’s Note – Secular Sunday is part of the Progressive Unity Project on News Junkie Post. Each day of the week, look forward to a fresh article written by an expert on a variety of subjects.

Daily Postings:
Eco Monday
Union Tuesday
LGBT Wednesday
Immigration Thursday
Science Friday
Legalization Saturday
Secular Sunday

Please follow Liam Fox on Twitter, and The News Junkie Post for all of our articles.

Thousands of Americans turned out today for the launch of the Coffee Party, a political movement whose goal is to facilitate a more responsive dialogue between people on how to move the country forward. It was held in over 350 locations and has could potentially reignite the movement for change and reform that was so pivotal over the last two election cycles.

What is the Coffee Party movement? According to the mission on their website:

The Coffee Party Movement gives voice to Americans who want to see cooperation in government. We recognize that the federal government is not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges that we face as Americans. As voters and grassroots volunteers, we will support leaders who work toward positive solutions, and hold accountable those who obstruct them.

The first Coffee Party Day had folks meet up in coffee shops across the nation. The large groups then broke down into small discussion groups. Issues that they found important were discussed, such as the economy, health care, jobs, and immigration. One man was quoted, “We may disagree, but we must not be disagreeable.”

In a sharp contrast to the Tea Party movement, members are asked to take the following civility pledge:

As a member or supporter of the Coffee Party, I pledge to conduct myself in a way that is civil, honest, and respectful toward people with whom I disagree. I value people from different cultures, I value people with different ideas, and I value and cherish the democratic process.

The Coffee Party appears to be gathering steam quickly. The website has received hundreds of thousands of page views. A page on Facebook was started last month, and has exploded to nearly 150,000 fans.

The Guardian reports about an expanded mission statement taken from the Facebook page:

Anyone who wants our government to function in the interest of ordinary Americans, not corporations, is welcome to join this movement. We believe that the majority of Americans are regular folks like us, and some of us have been misled into thinking that the federal government is the cause of our struggles, our anxiety and our fear. In short, our government has been presented to us as our enemy.

Annabel Park, the movements founder responded to a question on NPR about the historical precedent and context:  “After they dumped tea into [Boston] Harbor, the Continental Congress declared coffee to be the national drink, and that became the solution to the problem. So we associate coffee with both solutions and working very hard for representation.”

On CNN’s American Morning, Park expanded on the goals of the movement.
“Just like in the American Revolution, we are looking for real representation right now. We don’t feel represented by our government right now, and we don’t really feel represented well by the media either,. It’s kind of a simple call to action for people to wake up and take control over their future and demand representation,” she said. “And it requires people standing up and speaking up.”

Photos are streaming in today. There are a couple good hubs at Flickr and Facebook.

For those unable to attend the meet and greet in person today, there was an alternative.  A virtual coffee shop meeting was held today at 4:00 pm Central Time.  However, registration was suspended due to an overwhelming response, and even those who got in weren’t able to stay for long because the system crashed due to the huge chat load.

350 meetings were held across the country, and there are hundreds more planned on March 27th.

This grassroots movement has gathered some attention in the media as well. There have been some creative headlines:

Meet the people who are percolating in the Coffee Party  CNN

Coffee vs. Tea: A political movement is brewing CNN

Coffee Party Founder Wants Common Grounds NPR

Something Is Brewing Across America Today: The Coffee Party is Percolating Huffington Post

Coffee Party starts brewing The Guardian

Will the Coffee Party lose it’s steam or keep brewing a discussion on how we can move forward as a nation?  Only time will tell.

Editor’s Note: Please follow The News Junkie Post on Twitter to stay updated on all of our articles.

Apple investors cheered yesterday when it was announced that their company has overtaken the giant corporation, Wal-Mart.

The two companies are part of two different markets, Wal-Mart is in the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and Apple in the NASDAQ. But measured by volume and marker capitalization, Apple has now become the biggest kid on the block.

When the bell rang to close the markets on Wall Street yesterday, Apple pulled one of its most amazing days. According to FinancialAdvisor.com:

In less than an hour, close to 2 million shares of Apple changed hands, as the price of the stock shot up to $227.73, bringing the market cap of the company to $206.5 billion.

Apple’s humble beginnings created a cult-like following that carried the company through many tough years. Apple continues to amaze critics who once believed the company would not be able to survive in a world dominated by Microsoft’s Windows systems.

iPod’s, iPhones, and Apple’s stylish and powerful computers have brought in billions in profits. Their newest product, the iPad, is expected to do just as good.

Many credit the company’s success to Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO, who is said to be in better health these days according to a recent segment on NPR’s Marketplace.

Wal-Mart’s model of selling cheaper products and paying their workers low-wages, had allowed it to reign on Wall Street for years. Even at times when the economy was in a recession, Wal-Mart investor’s always profited. But with Apple’s rise to the top, perhaps some investors will want to go a little more high-end by acquiring Apple stocks.

Still, it’s too premature to count out Wal-Mart as a leader on Wall Street. But for now, Apple has one more reason to celebrate.

Editor’s Note: Please follow Dolores M. Bernal on Twitter, and The News Junkie Post to stay updated on all of our articles.

It’s always fascinating to watch corporations flail about cluelessly while society is in the throes of epochal change.  One has to go no farther than Starbucks for an example; their recent crash course in societal change involved incurring the wrath of marijuana users, as it turns out a sizeable portion of their target demographic.  Starbucks only took a couple of days to come around after pot users threatened a national boycott after spotting the coffee giant’s logo on a virulently extremist anti-marijuana website.

Huge behemoths like Starbucks and WalMart exercise their corporate policies with the implicit assumption that American society as a whole is in their corner, philosophically speaking.  Playing the middle of the road is just smart business, after all. Nobody gets rich by alienating huge groups of consumers.

But the interesting thing about social change is that sometimes the corporations get left in the dust. Starbucks was careful to make sure that didn’t happen; I’m betting WalMart may not be so smart, if its atrocious labor policies are an accurate marker.

During these periods of rapid and dizzying change – a perfect and current example being the huge shift in American attitudes toward marijuana — major corporations often reveal themselves to be big, dumb, lumbering beasts.  That was exactly what WalMart, notorious for its corporate stance of social conservatism, looked like this week when it summarily sacked a cancer patient who had been “Associate of the Year” for using medical marijuana with his doctor’s recommendation – in Michigan, a state where that is perfectly legal.  WalMart, so far at least, hasn’t budged. But the wave of revulsion and outrage over their treatment of Associate of the Year Joseph Casias hasn’t crested yet, and it’s going to get a lot bigger before it does.

For now, WalMart seems completely oblivious that what just a few years ago was solid political ground under its feet is simply no longer there.  The ritual corporate shaming of marijuana and its users – extending even to legal, medical users – is now so disconnected from science, medicine and mass perception that we can only watch in horror as companies like WalMart mistreat employees, fully confident they’ll get away with it “just like they always have.”

This moralistic and intolerant stance towards medical marijuana patients flies in the face of modern American sensibilities. More than 80 percent of Americans now support the medicinal use of pot.

Casias worked at the WalMart store in Battle Creek, Michigan, for five years, winning employee of the year in 2008 despite suffering from sinus cancer and an inoperable brain tumor.  At the recommendation of his doctor, Casias began using medical marijuana to ease his pain. “It helps tremendously,” Casias said. “I only use it to stop the pain. To make me feel more comfortable and active as a person.”  Then he sprained he knee at work last November.

During the routine drug screening that follows all workplace injuries, marijuana was detected in his system.  Casias showed WalMart managers his Michigan medical marijuana card, but was fired anyway.  “I was told they do not accept or honor my medical marijuana card,” Casias said.

Casias said he had never shown up at work after smoking pot. “No, I never came to work under the influence, ever,” he said. “I don’t think it’s fair. Because I have a medical condition I can’t work and provide for my family?”

WalMart was completely unapologetic. “In states such as Michigan, where prescriptions for marijuana can be obtained, an employer can still enforce a policy that requires termination of employment following a positive drug screen,” said WalMart spokesman Greg Rossiter from company headquarters.  “We believe our policy complies with the law, and we support decisions based on the policy,” Rossiter said.

Casias has been collecting unemployment compensation since getting sacked in November, but this week he got more bad news: Now WalMart is even challenging his eligibility for benefits.  So how do you teach a big, dumb beast? You hurt it in the only way it understands.

It’s time to teach WalMart that mistreating medical marijuana patients isn’t just dumb and cruel; it is also very, very bad for business.  The national WalMart boycott by medical marijuana supporters begins in 5… 4… 3…

Editor’s Note – Legalization Saturday is part of the Progressive Unity Project on News Junkie Post. Each day of the week, look forward to a fresh article written by an expert on a variety of subjects.

Daily Postings:
Eco Monday
Union Tuesday
LGBT Wednesday
Immigration Thursday
Science Friday
Legalization Saturday
Secular Sunday

Please Follow Steve Elliott on Twitter, and The News Junkie Post for all of our articles.

The conservative side of the political spectrum has attempted to use their version of morality for nearly 30 years as a way of winning elections. Although both sides and the center certainly have their sex scandals, when they are done by the so called ‘family values’ Christian Conservatives, it is especially hypocritical. From the last few years, here are the top 10 examples of conservative sex scandals.

10. State Sen. Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield)
March 03, 2010

This story just broke last week, and is the perfect way to start this list. Ashburn is a “Traditional Family Values” conservative who has made a lot of headway organizing anti-gay marriage rallies. He was recently stopped by the Sacramento Police and given a DUI after leaving…you know it…a gay bar.  A couple days later, the true extent of his homophobic hypocrisy was revealed when he admitted he was gay.

9. Sen. John Ensign (R-NV)
July 09, 2009

Ensign fought for a federal constitutional amendment to prohibit same sex marriage, is a member of the Pentecostal International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, resides at the tax exempt C-Street religious house in Washington, D.C., and is a proud member of the Promise Keepers, an evangelical group. Thus it should have been no surprise when he caught with his pants down, not only having an affair with a campaign staffer, but bribing her and her husband to keep it quiet.

8. Rep. David Vitter (R-LA)
July 2007

Vitter is a staunch conservative. Despite his vocal outrage of the recent Acorn scandal, he was identified as a client of “D.C. Madam” Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s prostitution service in Washington, D.C.

7. Former State Rep. Roland Corning (R-SC)
Oct 28, 2009

Roland was the assistant Attorney General in South Carolina, when the married man was caught with a stripper, sex toys, and viagra in a cemetery. The wife of the officer who detained him worked for the same office, and Roland was released without charge. To his credit, at least he wasn’t caught having sex with a horse (another SC tradition).

6. State Rep. Bob Allen (R-FL)
July 11, 2007

Allen was the Florida Chairman of John McCain’s Presidential Campaign and “one of 21 Florida legislators to sign Gov. Jeb Bush’s friend-of-the-court brief supporting the state’s ban on gays adopting children, and he co-sponsored an unsuccessful bill that would have enhanced penalties for “offenses involving unnatural and lascivious acts” such as indecent exposure.” What happened next? Allen was busted trying to buy oral sex from an undercover cop in the restroom of a public park.

5. Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID)
June 11, 2007

Craig was a Senate liason for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and fought against adding hate crimes against LGBT folks into law. Again demonstrating conservative hypocrisy, Craig was busted and plead guilty for soliciting sex from an undercover cop in a Minneapolis airport bathroom.

4. Glenn Murphy Jr.
July 28, 2007

Murphy was the Natl. Chair of the Young Republicans and a GOP political consultant who urged conservative candidates to use gay marriage as a wedge issue in order to tout their “traditional values”.
I guess traditional values for Murphy meant giving a passed out Republican friend “mouth-to-penis resuscitation”, and he was charged with sexual battery.

3. Ted Haggard
November 2006

Pastor Ted was the founder of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs and Association of Life-Giving Churches. He was also a leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, a conservative christian organization. A powerful force in the evangelical movement, Haggard participated in weekly meetings with President George Bush (R-Merica) and top advisors where he gave spiritual advice. He taught that homosexuality was an abomination and actively lobbied against gay rights. Quite hypocritical when it was revealed that he was having a repeated gay affair with a male prostitute while using methamphetamine.

2. Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC)
June 18, 2009

A rising star in the conservative movement and possible 2012 Republican candidate, Sanford suddenly disappeared from his post for nearly a week. Despite persistent rumors that he was actually on the annual Nudists Hike on the Appalachian Trail, turns out he was in Argentina, on the taxpayers dime to visit his girlfriend. His wife was not happy.

1. Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL)
September 28, 2006

Mark Foley was the Chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children and one of the biggest social conservatives against child pornography in the Senate. His crusade hid a dark secret however when it was revealed that he had been sending sexual emails and instant messages to teenage boys in the Congressional page program for more than 10 years.

An Aboriginal leader in Australia claims archaeologists have discovered the world’s southernmost site of early human life. The site is reported to be 40,000 years old.  Is this the earliest human site here, and what does it mean in terms of the origins of human settlement?

Michael Mansell of the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre states, “When the archaeological report came out it showed that (life there) had gone back longer than any other recorded place anywhere else in Tasmania, dating back to 40,000 years.”

The projects head archaeologist Rob Paton added, “We haven’t even done a reading on the bottom sample yet, I was expecting 17,000 (years) for the base of the trench and about 4 or 5,000 (years) for the top. That suggests to me that they’re probably correct, giving us a top reading of 28,000 (years old) and certainly seeming to go back another 10,000 (years) at least beyond that. We do have the oldest, most southern site anywhere in the world, an important site for anyone and quite exciting for us.”

The date was achieved using a process called thermoluminescence or TL in archaeological terms, which is in essence ‘heat glow’. When certain materials are last heated or exposed to sunlight, the lattice structure traps some radioactivity. Since there is a known and constant decay rate for this radioactivity, it can consequently be measured giving an accurate time frame. TL fills an important gap between the accuracy range of radiocarbon (C14) dating which generally is accurate only to around 40-60,000 years BP (Before Present) and Potassium Argon (K-Ar) dating which does not begin to be accurate until at least 100,000 BP. TL is also a valuable tool for measuring sediments and ceramics where carbon samples cannot be taken.

The site was located during a survey work that took place prior to transportation construction in Tasmania near the Derwent River, and yielded around three million artifacts.

There is some debate as to the earliest arrival of our species in Australia. The Genographic Project estimates that Aboriginal Australians branched off approximately 60,000 BP.

There is also some evidence of occupation earlier than the 40,000 BP range. The oldest rock art found in Australia dates from between 45,000 to 65,000 BP. Rock art can take 2 forms: petroglyphs (rock engravings) and pictographs (rock paintings). Rock art can be dated using traditional C14 methods, although optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) and accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) are also option.

Petroglyph in Australia

Pictograph: Lascaux Cave, France

There are also human remains called Mungo Man that were found almost 1000 km west of Sydney in New South Wales by Lake Mungo that were dated between 56,000 and 68,000 BP.

The New York Times reports:
Geneticists re-examining the first settlement of Australia and Papua-New Guinea by modern humans have concluded that the two islands were reached some 50,000 years ago by a single group of people who remained in substantial or total isolation until recent times. The finding, if upheld, would undermine assumptions that there have been subsequent waves of migration into Australia.

The oldest human remains from Australia, about 45,000 years in age, have quite thin or gracile bones, whereas fossils from 20,000 years ago are robust. The new findings suggest that the difference must stem from some internal process like adaptation to climatic change, and not to interbreeding with the archaic species Homo erectus, as some have suggested.

Regardless, the first ones took a land bridge from southern/southeastern Asia down the Sunda Shelf in modern day Indonesia. Considering the sea levels were up to 150 meters lower at the time because much of the water on the planet was locked up in ice shelves and continental glaciers, this would have meant an connected isthmus nearly reaching the Sahal Shelf (Australia and Papua New Guinea itself). There is an open water gap between the two that would have stretched at least 90 km, meaning that the Aboriginal Australians would have had to have the world’s earliest definite use of navigable rafts or canoes, although to date there is no archaeological remains of either found.

Although the actual arrival time may never be known, the earliest physical evidence of habitation by modern homo sapiens outside Africa is in Australia, and this recent archaeological site in Tasmania is one of the oldest.

Editor’s Note – Science Friday is part of the Progressive Unity Project on News Junkie Post. Each day of the week, look forward to a fresh article written by an expert on a variety of subjects.

Daily Postings:
Eco Monday
Union Tuesday
LGBT Wednesday
Immigration Thursday
Science Friday
Legalization Saturday
Secular Sunday

Maybe there’s a game on. The President had three meetings on immigration reform at the White House today.  He is increasingly under pressure to act on promises he made as a candidate to enact immigration reform in his first year in office and, now in his second year, the patience of pro-reform advocates – and Latino and immigrant voters – is wearing thin.

The power of the Latino vote is a big reason the Democrats won the White House and control of both houses of Congress in 2008.  If the Democrats fail to address the immigration issue – an issue to which Latino voters are particularly sensitive and which helped drive their increased turnout in 2008 – the Democrats face even longer odds with voters in 2010.

The President met with Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who are leading the effort to introduce an immigration bill in the Senate and their meeting was sandwiched between two others.  The first was with a group of pro-reform advocates, including labor unions, a Catholic Bishop, and local and national ethnic, civil rights, student, and immigrant advocacy groups.  They had expected to meet with White House staff and ended up meeting with the President himself – a meeting he chaired.  The President’s last meeting of the day was with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and was planned to discuss both health care and immigration.

All of this comes at a particularly busy time as Congress prepares for the Easter recess.  The President is embarking on a major international trip (Indonesia and Australia, he leaves next week), is in the throes of a major public relations push for his health care proposal, and is trying to keep the focus on jobs and the economy.  Yet, he took almost an entire day to dig into immigration reform, an agenda item many thought – and some hoped – was dead.

Each of these meetings revealed something about the bind the President is in over immigration: he is already spread thin on other issues, but there are significant pressures on him to act, there are significant political benefits to acting, there are real costs to inaction, and meanwhile, Latinos in general and immigrants are not just feeling ignored, they are feeling betrayed as deportations escalate and communities continue to suffer.

Schumer & Graham

The meeting the press was prepared to cover was the one between the President and the best incarnation of the Odd Couple since Walter Matthau and Jack Lemon.  Senators Schumer and Graham were supposed to meet with President Obama on Monday afternoon, but it was delayed when Senator Graham’s flight from South Carolina was cancelled.  But at this point, delays are par for the course.  Over the summer, Senator Schumer assured the press and supporters of reform that he would introduce a bipartisan bill after Labor Day.  Now, almost six months later, he looks poised – again – to do so.  Senator Graham played a key role in getting an immigration bill passed in the Senate in 2006 and was one of the few helpful Republicans when a bill failed in the Senate in 2007.  However, he appears to be the only Republican to be stepping up to the plate this year.

Not much detail has been released about the Schumer/Graham proposal, but it is likely to track fairly closely to previous bipartisan efforts at compromise: 1) Stepped up border and interior enforcement targeting smugglers, criminals, and employers; 2) A worker verification system to allow employers to easily determine who can and can’t work legally in the U.S.; 3) A process for getting people who have been waiting for permission to come to the U.S. legally through the processing backlog that can stretch to 20 years currently; 4) Legal immigration channels for workers and family members as an alternative to illegal immigration; and 5) A requirement that people who are in the country illegally register with the government, pay fines, pass a criminal background check, and fulfill other criteria to get legal status that would eventually allow them to apply for U.S. citizenship like other immigrants.

The details will matter, both in terms of its political viability and – more importantly – whether it will work to solve our immigration issues.  Items like a mandatory trip out of the country for legalizing immigrants to “touch back” in their country of origin – a silly part of previous bills meant to somehow “reboot” the person’s legal status by making them leave and come back – is reportedly not part of the Schumer/Graham proposal.  The Wall Street Journal “broke” the story this week that the employer verification system in the bill would resemble a “national ID” of some sort, but it is unclear what that will entail.  In every bipartisan immigration bill that has gotten traction in recent years, a system similar to the E-Verify verification system has been slated for mandatory use by all employers for all employees, but Senator Schumer, a fan of a national ID, may have more in mind.

But it seems the President is prepared to back what the two Senators come up with.  In a statement after the meeting, the President said:

I told both the senators and the community leaders that my commitment to comprehensive immigration reform is unwavering, and that I will continue to be their partner in this important effort.

Nice words, but the community leaders he met with want more.  This week, they began ratcheting up the rhetoric.  The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) put out a video last week in English and Spanish with the President, as a candidate in July 2008, promising to address immigration, saying:

I think it’s time for a President who won’t walk away from something as important as comprehensive reform when it becomes politically unpopular.

And advocates have also been organizing the March for America, which promises to bring tens of thousands of immigration reform supporters to the National Mall on March 21.  Mr. Obama, who marched with the immigration reform movement in Chicago against the 2005/2006 House Republican anti-immigrant bill, knows the power of an immigration reform rally.

The advocates who have united under the banner of the Reform Immigration for America (RI4A) campaign – a coalition of labor unions, faith groups, progressive, student, ethnic, civil rights, business, and immigrant groups – want the President to make a firm commitment to support the Schumer/Graham bill and help push it through the Congress this year.

The Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, and a key leader of the RI4A campaign, said after the meeting between the advocates and the President:

We had a lively and straightforward meeting with the President and his staff. We made clear that we expect him to keep his promise to overhaul our broken immigration system…The President indicated that his administration is committed to driving a bill forward in the spring of 2010. Based on our conversation, we are optimistic and expecting aggressive and urgent action from the White House on comprehensive immigration reform before March 21.

While the President and his aides are feeling the pressure the community leaders are putting on him – which will be escalated in volume and visibility at the March for America, it is the reality of what is going on immigrant communities in the absence of reform that really got the President’s attention this week.

Deportation Nation

A press conference Monday, organized by the Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM), a subset of community-based pro-immigrant advocacy coalitions, put the cost of inaction on immigration in sharp relief.

They documented how the number of deportations have escalated to an astounding 387,000 per year under President Obama.  That’s more than 1,000 per day and a population the size of Minneapolis or Tulsa every year.  Deportations are ripping apart families, destabilizing communities and forcing businesses to close.  Add to this the deplorable conditions in which we hold immigration detainees, the brutality with which we apprehend people, and the complete inflexibility of our legal system, and you have a deportation crisis.

Since we will never deport our way out of our current mess, many people would like to see a cessation of deportations until reform is passed.  Some of the advocates – who were invited to the White House after their presentation at the Monday press conference – made this plea directly to the President.

It would be nearly impossible for him to order the federal government not to be enforce federal laws.  His administration has argued that is targeting enforcement resources specifically at serious criminals and other high-risk immigrants – and not just average workers and family members who are in the country illegally.  The reality is that while there have been some changes, enforcement is happening at a furious pace.  He is not likely to call off the dogs, but, again, the important question is how much of himself and his political capital he is will to expend to change the laws and relieve the needless suffering of immigrant communities.

The CHC’s Hardball

Which brings us back to politics. The President’s last meeting of the day was with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. They have been playing hardball, floating the possibility this week that they would withhold their support for the President’s health care proposal if the treatment of immigrants and Latinos was not addressed in the bill and if they did not get assurance that immigration reform would be a top priority for the President.

Some may say this is an idle threat, but for the past couple of years, the Hispanic Caucus has been able to play a bigger and bigger role in the immigration debate.  Essentially, the Caucus has withheld support for any immigration-related measure unless it was comprehensive.  They have not allowed agriculture, high-tech, hospitality, and other business sectors to advance their agenda on immigration without including broader reforms to address the immigrants here illegally, family immigration, and broader worker visa issues.  The notoriously fractious Caucus has remained extraordinarily cohesive in this effort.

More importantly, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus represents the power of the Latino voter in the American electorate.  Between 2004 and 2008, the Hispanic electorate grew by 30%, adding more than two million voters. Latinos make up 25% or more of the electorate in 79 Congressional districts (54 currently held by Dems, 25 by Rs) and over 40 close House and Senate races could be won or lost on the strength of the Latino vote this year.  Not only that, but the potential size of the Latino vote is growing quickly, partly through immigration, but mostly because about 400,000 Latino citizens reach age 18 each year.

But while Democrats enjoy an advantage with immigrant voters – mostly because of the harsh GOP rhetoric on immigration – they are by no means solid a Democratic constituency. Latino Decisions, a polling firm, released a report late last year that indicated Obama and the Democrats are losing the broad support they once had among Latino voters.

In 2008, the Latino vote increased more than any other segment of the population and was a crucial part of Obama’s coalition, especially in Nevada, Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, and even Indiana. However if Congress does not act on immigration reform and pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill that includes a pathway to citizenship, many Latino voters may think twice about voting Democrat in 2010 or 2012.

Many Latino voters in 2008 were new voters – those who registered and voted for the first time, many of whom were new citizens spurred to get citizenship and become voters, again, by the harsh rhetoric of the Republicans.  It is not clear that the level of enthusiasm displayed by these voters will be sustained through 2010 when there is already a natural drop in voter participation because there is no Presidential race.

One statistic from New York is troubling.  New voters – those who had cast their first ballot in 2008 – were among those least likely to vote in the New York City Mayor’s race, according to a research study conducted by City University of New York’s John Mollenkopf, reported on this weekend by the New York Daily News,

Just one in five of 2008’s first-time voters cast ballots in November – 71,335 of 338,128. While 39% of New Yorkers who voted in 2008 also voted in 2009, turnout was just 21% for people who had cast their first ballots a year earlier.

This could be the strength of the candidate or the race, but first time voters are notoriously unlikely second time voters, especially if they don’t feel their vote made a difference.

In the case of Latino voters, many who watch voter turnout and mobilization closely are concerned that the growing electorate from 2008 could deflate significantly in 2010.  Clarissa Martinez de Castro of the National Council of La Raza observed:

The millions of Latinos who voted for the first time in 2008, and those who went through the arduous citizenship process to get that privilege, need to see that participating in the democratic process means something. Many had the expectation that their vote would help speed up the day when we got serious immigration reform enacted and now their patience is wearing thin. We must not lose momentum or let the Latino community’s unprecedented civic engagement wither. As we look toward November, we don’t care what party people vote for, but we do care that people vote and see that their vote has meaning and leads to action.

Both parties have an interest in engaging the electorate in the democratic process and both parties could make a play for the Latino vote or parts of the Latino vote (though the Republicans have a lot of damage to undo).  In the short-run, this President stands to gain a great deal from energizing the Latino electorate by working with Congress to move immigration reform legislation and get a bill introduced, debated, and hopefully passed by the time voters go to the polls.  It is only out of reach if the GOP flatly refuses to work on a bipartisan basis on any legislation, because there are Republican Senators and Representatives who would support reform.  One more thing would keep it out of reach: if the President and his fellow Democrats don’t choose to push for it.

Editor’s Note – Immigration Thursday is part of the Progressive Unity Project on News Junkie Post. Each day of the week, look forward to a fresh article written by an expert on a variety of subjects.

Daily Postings:
Eco Monday
Union Tuesday
LGBT Wednesday
Immigration Thursday
Science Friday
Legalization Saturday
Secular Sunday

Please follow Douglas Rivlin on Twitter and The News Junkie Post for all of our updates.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) wife of over 40 years Landra and their daughter Lana Barringer were in a major car accident this evening.  According to reports, Landra suffered a broken back, neck, and nose.  Lana has an undisclosed neck injury and serious facial lacerations.

Their minivan was heading northbound on I-15 in Virginia in dense traffic.  They were rear ended by a tractor-trailer driven by Alan W. Snader, and sandwiched between this and the stopped traffic ahead.  Both were rushed by ambulance to Inova Fairfax Hospital in Falls Church, Va.  Mr. Snader was uninjured and charged with reckless driving.

The Huffington Post reports, “Reid, D-Nev., went to the hospital after being notified of the accident and returned to Capitol Hill for a meeting with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on efforts to pass health care legislation. He went back to the hospital Thursday evening.”

Last November it was in Switzerland with an extreme right wing Nationalist party running a campaign on an anti-Islam message, now it is the turn of the French far right party the Front National to play the same cards of racism and xenophobia. The Front National, which gained ground in recent elections due to its strong anti-immigration agenda, is now targeting what European’s far right parties at large are framing as:”The threat of Islam taking over Europe”.

The poster for the Front National electoral campaign, which is already approved by the French electoral commission, is creating some diplomatic problem with one of France former colonies: Algeria. The North-African country has now filled an official protest arguing that the campaign poster represent an “abuse of the Algerian flag”.

The poster at the center of the controversy represents a woman wearing a Burka next to a map of France that is covered with an Algerian flag. Minarets are shown as missiles over France’s map, above a caption read ” Non A L’Islamism” ( No To Islamism). The Front National’s poster resembles very closely to a poster that a Swiss far right Nationalist party (see photo) used in last November referendum to freeze Minaret construction in Switzerland. The Swiss advertisement agency that designed the poster says that it will sue the Front National party for plagiarism.

The Algerian government was quick to react to the provocative poster.

“We need to respect the symbols of one another. This is the position of our country, and we will ensure that it will be respected,” said Mourad Medelci, Algeria’s Foreign Affairs Minister on Monday.

On Tuesday, the French Foreign Ministry stated that Algeria’s official complaint was “legitimate”. Meanwhile, a Marseille court has dismissed an attempt by the anti-racist group Licra, to have the poster banned. Two more anti-racism organizations, MRAP and SOS Racism have also launched legal actions to get the controversial poster banned. The Front National reacted on Tuesday by stating:”Paris is on its knees before Algiers”.

The Front National core political traction and appeal is its stand against immigration, and even in favor of expelling foreigners out of France. The Front National needs to be called for what it is: A neo-fascist movement.

It was founded in 1972 by Francois Duprat and Francois Brigneau, and led beginning later that year by Jean-Marie Le Pen. After 10 years on the margins of French politics, the FN began a period of spectacular growth in 1981, campaigning on the slogan “France For French”, as had French fascists done in the 1930s, and linking high unemployment and crimes to the presence of immigrants. By using such arguments against immigrants, the Front National and its founder Jean-Marie Le Pen have been stirring up racism and xenophobia for years. In the 1930s the party aligned with the fascist ideology of the current FN was the Action Francaise. The Action Francaise was then blaming France’s problem on  Jews just like Adolf Hitler was in Germany. The FN attention is focused against Muslims and North-African immigrants.

Touareg/Algeria Photo By Miguel Valle de Figueiredo

Algeria won its independence from France in 1962 after a nasty war spanning on 8 years. France had almost 500,000 troops in Algeria at the darkest days of the conflict. Some of the torture exacted by the French forces in Algeria on the insurgents of the FNL were so brutal that they still defy imagination.

An important turning point for Algeria’s war of independence, which started in 1954, was the massacre of civilians by the FNl insurgency near the town of Philippeville in August 1955. Before this operation, the FLN policy was to only attack military and government targets. The killing by the FLN of 123 people, including elderly women and babies, shocked Jacques Soustelle, the French Governor General, and made him called for massive retaliation against the rebels. At the time Soustelle claimed it killed 1,273 guerrillas fighters in retaliation, but according to the FLN more than 12,000 Muslims were slaughtered by the armed forces, the police and colon gangs. After the grave incident in Philippeville an all-out war broke out in Algeria.

Editor’s Note: Please follow The News Junkie Post on Twitter.

Every time he puts his racist foot in his fat mouth, Rush Limbaugh’s fans insist it’s all in good fun. They use words like satirist and provocateur. If stick-in-the- mud progressives or anyone with a modicum of common decency eschews such descriptions, they start waving the First Amendment and the blowhard’s undeniably large audience. He stirred the Reverend Wright pot with the heavy hand of the Imperial Grand Wizard of the KKK,calling Obama a “Halfrican American” during the 2008 Presidential campaign. Limbaugh discards the racist label, of course, blaming it on a culture of political correctness he refuses to participate in. “I’m color blind,” he said during a “Today Show” interview last fall.

But on his radio show he routinely skewers President Obama, often using racist language or subtexts. “We are being told we have to hope Obama succeeds, that we have to bend over and grab the ankles because his father was black, ” he said shortly after Obama’s election. He’s called Obama “an angry black man,” and a “reverse racist, ” a charge he gleefully attached to Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor during her confirmation hearings, too.

On the Wednesday edition of his radio show, Limbaugh–with racism oozing out of his pores–had fun at the expense of New York’s beleaguered Governor David Paterson, who may be charged with filling Eric Massa’s newly vacated seat in Congress. Listen to this interchange with a caller:

All in good fun, right? And there’s no hint of racism in making an ( unfunny) throwback joke about slavery and New York’s first African American governor, right? “So the first time in his life Paterson’s going to be a massa? Interesting,” Rush said. Hilarious. Really, Rush, that was almost as funny as when you attacked the debate over the “R” word by saying, “Everyone’s all upset because someone called a bunch of retards retards.” We know that was satire because Sarah Palin certified it as such.

Limbaugh’s racist rants cost him his coveted gig as a football analyst and his shot at NFL ownership. So the GOP’s de facto Grand Pooh Bah has paid a personal price for his toxic tongue. Still, he’s behind the microphone, delivering daily diatribes, inciting anger with half truths and brazen lies. And no one ever threatens to pull the plug. I mean what will it take for radio executives and station owners to consult their consciences over their bottom lines? Really how far does this guy have to go before radio honchos will say “Enough?”

Even Imus got tossed off the air briefly. And his temporary exile came as a result of one racially insensitive remark. Yeah, okay, the guy has a history, too, but his is not nearly as malevolent as Limbaugh’s. And, for an old guy,with an inherent racism he has yet to fully cop to, Imus seems to have learned something from his infamous incident. Maybe if they gave Rush a “time out” he, too, would become more reflective about his role and responsibility in the cultural cacophony that has–for whatever inexplicable reason–given him a very powerful and wealthy voice.

Please follow Amy Beth Arkawy on Twitter and read her other News Junkie Post articles.