- You can't stop opium-producing Afghani drug lords…you can
only hope to contain them and based on an eye-opening United Nations report released this week,
the international community isn't doing a good job in either endeavor. According
to the UN report, Afghanistan produced record levels of opium in 2013 despite
nearly $7 billion spent by the U.S. to combat the problem. Throwing $7 billion
at the problem simply wasn’t enough to neutralize an insurgency that has become
more hands-on in the trade, driven by strong demand that has kept prices high.
Cultivation of opium poppies, which are processed into heroin, rose 36 percent,
amounting to 209,000 hectares and proving that junkies are as desperate as ever
for their next fix. With those numbers, Afghanistan easily remains the world's
largest opium producer – last year accounting for 75 percent of the world's
heroin supply. To the cynic, those numbers might suggest that more than a
decade worth of international efforts to persuade poppy farmers to switch to
other crops such as wheat have failed miserably. "The narcotics issue in
Afghanistan acts as a virus festering on a low immunity system of
governance," said Jean-Luc Lemahieu, the United Nations Office on Drugs
and Crime representative for Afghanistan. "The region and international
community share responsibility in this." The southern and western parts of
Afghanistan remain the poppy hotbed of the nation, but cultivation has spread
to the north and two provinces, Faryab and Balkh, are noted in the U.N. report
to have lost their poppy-free status. It’s not difficult to figure out why
farmers are choosing poppies over wheat, with the price for dry opium at $160 to $200 for one kilogram and a mere
41 cents for one kilogram of wheat. Impoverished farmers trying to support
their families aren't likely to care about the end result for the crop they
grow, not when the junkies dying from that product live half a world away in a
nation that invaded their country and continues to occupy it………
- In a scene straight out of a “Saved By the Bell” episode
that didn’t make the cut for air, Saturday’s Central
Intercollegiate Athletic Association football championship game was
canceled after multiple players from Virginia State allegedly jumped and beat
up the opposing quarterback in a restaurant bathroom. Both Division
II schools confirmed that the CIAA canceled the title game set for Saturday in
Winston-Salem after Winston-Salem State quarterback Rudy Johnson was
"viciously beaten by one or more members of the Virginia State football
team." The incident took place at an event that was supposed to be a celebration for both teams at the end
of a successful season. Instead, police ended up bringing the curtain down on
the party and Johnson had a swollen eye and a cut above his eye. The chief
culprit seems to be Virginia State player Lamont Britt, who was arrested
Friday and charged with misdemeanor assault inflicting serious injury. Winston-Salem
State chancellor Donald Reaves confirmed the details of the incident and said police
were trying to identify the other Virginia State players. "We don't know a lot of what happened
but we do know our starting quarterback, Rudy Johnson, was beaten up," Reaves said. "And he didn't
beat himself up." Conference officials confirmed that athletes from both
schools were in the fight, but Johnson appears to be the only one who sustained
any significant injuries. "We understand that some Virginia State
University and Winston-Salem State University student-athletes were involved in an incident during the time of
today's luncheon event," CIAA commissioner Jacqie Carpenter said in
a statement. "The police are
currently investigating the incident and are speaking with the individuals
involved. The bathroom brawl not only killed the conference football
championship, but led conference officials to pull the plug on its volleyball
championship as well. Nothing quite like a bunch of meatheaded jocks channeling
their inner high school sophomores and getting into a fight with the other
team’s quarterback in a bathroom the day before the big game, ruining the
weekend for everyone……..
- Who really domesticated the dog? The results of a new
DNA study by Finnish scientist Dr. Olaf Thalmann and his colleagues suggest that dogs were domesticated in
Europe. Scientists have long agreed that the dog is an evolutionary
off-shoot of the grey wolf, but there has been little agreement on the precise
timing and location for the appearance of man’s best friend. This study is based
on a genetic analysis of ancient and modern dog and wolf samples and pinpoints
the time of origin at approximately 18,000 years ago. Previous research
suggested that the modern dog’s beginnings traced back to wolves that attached
themselves to human societies in the Middle East or perhaps in East Asia as
recently as 15,000 years ago. Fossils of distinctly dog-looking animals that
are 30,000 years old or more contradict those theories, so Thalmann and his
team took another run at reconciling the conflicting DNA evidence. They compared
genetic sequences from a wide range of ancient animals with material taken from
living canines, both dogs and wolves. Their findings showed modern dogs to be
most closely related to ancient European wolves or dogs and because the dog
remains used in the research are dated to be more than 18,000 years old, it
indicates a timing for domestication that is much older than some researchers
have previously argued. If the results are accurate, they would prove that dogs
started to diverge from wolf populations when humans had yet to settle into
fixed, agricultural communities and were still hunters and gatherers. "You
can see how wolves benefitted from living near humans because they got these carcasses,
but humans too would have benefitted," Thalmann said. "It's a plausible
scenario for the origin of the domestication of dogs." More research into
the subject is likely, but it too will be problematic because dog populations
have become very mixed over time, as a result of being moved around by their
human owners. This muddies the genetic picture and makes a definitive answer
difficult………
- All is not well in the Marvel Comics feature film
universe. Sure, Iron Man movies continue to be mega-blockbusters and will
continue to gross ridiculous sums of money, but within the franchise, there is
tension. Terence
Howard, who played Air Force Lt. Colonel James "Rhodey" Rhodes in the
first movie in the series back in 2008, was axed from the next two superhero
films. Having peripheral characters nixed from sequels isn't out of the
ordinary, but Howard claimed recently that it wasn’t because of creative issues
or money, but rather because star Robert Downey Jr. wanted him out. "It turns
out in order for - this is going to get me in a lot of trouble - it turns out
that the person that I helped become Iron Man ... when it was time to re-up for
the second one, took the money that was supposed to go to me and pushed me out,”
Howard said, alluding not so subtly to Downey. He was asked about rumors that
he asked for the same money as Downey to appear in the second and third
installments of the franchise, but suggested that those rumors weren't
accurate. “We did a three picture deal, so that means that you did the deal
ahead of time," Howard added. "There was going to be a certain amount
for the first one, a certain amount for the second, and a certain amount for
the third. They came to me with the second and said, "Look, we will pay
you one eighth of what we contractually had for you, because we think the
second one will be successful with or without you.” When all of this went down,
Howard said, he called Downey to talk things over. As he tells it, Downey did
not return his call for three months and by that time, there was little left to
talk about. However, Howard insisted their relationship is fine now and that he
still loves Downey even though his famous friend hung him out to dry with a
whole lot of money on the line…….
- Dear street vendors: Go away. You’re annoying pests and
no one wants you around. Someone should have told the dozens of vendors and
supports who rallied
in Los Angeles’ Koreatown area this week to support the legalization of street
food vendors in the city. Members of the Los Angeles Street Vendor Campaign
showed up to support a proposal introduced by Councilmen Jose Huizar and Curren
Price that would establish formal regulations, and legal protection, for
sidewalk vending operations. Yes, street vendors sell all sorts of unhealthy
and usually unsanitary food in cities like New York and they are an accepted
part of the local culture. That doesn’t mean there is a reason to spread the
menace, even if supporters believe the measure would have a positive effect on
food safety. “Once legalized, these vendors would be subject to routine
inspections by the [LA County Department of Public Health]. They would also be
required to post A-B-C letter grades issued by the health department, giving
the public an easy way to recognize lawful vendors from those operating without
permits and outside food safety requirements,” Angelo Bellomo, the director of
Environmental Health for the county’s health department, said in a statement.
Vendors argued that they struggle to do their jobs while looking over their
shoulders and operating without permits. “It gives people a chance to be
entrepreneurs,” vendor Wo’se Kofi said. But you’re not….you sell hot dogs, soft
pretzels and various ethnic foods from metal carts on wheels to people who don’t
want to make the walk all the way down the street to Subway during their lunch
break. Back to the shallow end of the culinary pool………
No comments:
Post a Comment