Amplify’d from www.huffingtonpost.com

Dead Birds Fall From Sky AGAIN In Louisiana, 300 Miles From Arkansas Incident Days Earlier

Travis Walter Donovan

Around 500 dead birds have fallen from the sky in Louisiana, found scattered along a quarter-mile portion of highway in Point Coupee Parish, the AP reports. The discovery is approximately 300 miles south of Beebe, Arkansas, where just days earlier thousands of the same species of birds also fell from the sky.

Initial tests conducted by biologists on the red-winged blackbirds and starlings found in Arkansas revealed that the birds suffered internal injuries that formed deadly blood clots. Countless explanations have been speculated, from intense high-altitude weather like lightning or hail to disturbance from fireworks. Disease and poison were determined to be far less likely causes, though full test results won't rule them out until next week.

"There was probably some physical reason, but I doubt anyone will ever know what it was," Thurman Booth, Arkansas' wildlife services director, told CBS.

The latest occurrence of more dead birds turning up in Louisiana only compounds local residents' worries, as in the week prior to the Arkansas blackbird mystery, 83,000 dead drum fish washed up along a river about 100 miles west of Beebe. Wildlife officials claim the incidents are not related.

A Kentucky woman also reported finding dead birds in her yard Monday, though numbering far less in the dozens.

What do you think caused the birds to fall out of the sky? Weigh in with your prediction by CLICKING HERE. Read more at www.huffingtonpost.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bkl8q

Agenda 21: A Global Economic Disaster in the Making

Amplify’d from www.rightsidenews.com

Agenda 21: A Global Economic Disaster in the Making

James Simpson

Exclusive to Right Side News:

Listening to the local news on the radio recently, I heard a report about how newly elected Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamenetz plans to save $8 million by, among other things, merging the “Office of Sustainability” with the Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management.

Office of Sustainability? In the county?

According to the story, “The new agency will be renamed the Department of Environmental Protection and Sustainability….”

The Department of Environmental Protection and Sustainability

A county government has its own EPA? You must be kidding.

No, unfortunately not. We’re from the government and we’re here to help.

Baltimore County’s Office of Planning defines “sustainability” as “Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of current and future generations to meet their own needs.” Doesn’t that sound nice!

I checked some of the other county websites.Carroll County’s Sustainability Plan defines sustainability as: “…meeting the requirements of social, environmental, and economic circumstances without compromising the ability for future generations to meet the same need.”

Montgomery County’s says: “To live sustainably, one strives to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (my emphasis). People living sustainably recognize the fundamental and inextricable interdependence between the economy, the environment, and social equity, and work to promote each to the benefit of all.”

Oh wonderful!

Howard County’s Office of Environmental Sustainability has similar blather. I didn’t look further, but you get the idea.

A curious coincidence perhaps, but these humble county governments’ definitions of “sustainability” look amazingly similar to the UN definition:

Sustainable Development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Of course it is no coincidence.

This definition was first articulated in a 1987 report of the United Nations World Commission on Environment & Development titled “Our Common Future.” (See p. 24.)

This has come to be known as the Brundtland Commission. It was chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland, Norway’s socialist former Prime Minister, who also served as vice-chair of the Socialist International.

It is worth mentioning here that Carol Browner, President Obama’s Energy and Environment Czar, also served on the Socialist International’s Commission for a Sustainable World Society, although her name was stripped from the masthead the minute she got that appointment. Why?

The Brundtland Commission included Maurice Strong (Canada’s version of George Soros, an exceedingly corrupt oil billionaire who, like Soros, has called for the destruction of the West), William Ruckelshaus (first head of the EPA – the only American) and luminaries from such enlightened states as Zimbabwe, Communist China, the USSR, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Cote D’Ivoire. These are environmental paradises to emulate for sure, but somehow they left out the important states of Togo and Burkina Faso. How could they?

In any event, "Sustainable Development" is a distinctly and entirely socialist idea, and it varies from typical socialist rhetoric only in the metaphors used. It demands redistribution of land, resources and private property into government hands. One particularly odious quote:

Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlements, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Social justice, urban renewal and development, the provision of decent dwellings-and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole.

Emphases are mine. The last sentence makes clear that land must be controlled by government.

But it doesn’t stop there. “Sustainable Development” has become the buzzword for a strategy under development since at least the early 1970s to completely control every aspect of our lives, including resettling entire populations. For example, the 1976 U.N. Conference on Human Settlements called for population redistribution:

Recommendation A.1 National Settlement Policy:

All countries should establish as a matter of urgency a national policy on human settlements, embodying the distribution of population, and related economic and social activities, over the national territory.

Recommendation A.2 Human Settlements and Development:

A national policy for human settlements and the environment should be an integral part of any national economic and social development policy.

Recommendation A.4 More Equitable Distribution:

Human settlements in most countries are characterized by wide disparities in living standards from one region to another, between urban and rural areas, within individual settlements and among various social and ethnic groups. Such discrepancies exacerbate many human settlement problems, and, in some instances, reflect inadequate planning. Human settlement policies can be powerful tools for the more equitable distribution of income and opportunities.

They are not kidding. And there is much more.

In 1992, an initiative titled “Agenda 21” was proposed at the U.N. sponsored Conference on Environment and Development, (the “Earth Summit”), held in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil. It states:

Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment

The Agenda is an all-encompassing prescription for regulating every aspect of human activity in the interest of “sustainable development.” Is it not troubling that they couldn’t even get their grammar right? 178 governments signed on, including the United States.

Thank you, George H.W. Bush. However, Agenda 21 was not ratified by the U.S. Senate President Clinton then defied the Senate’s will by signing Executive Order 12852, which created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development and got the ball rolling. Thank you, Bill Clinton!

While we all would like to assure natural resources are properly preserved for current and future generations, the U.N.’s prescriptions require that nations accept their definitions of “sustainable” and their recommendations for how to accomplish their goals. And it is all simply naked communism.

Let me repeat that, "sustainability" is codeword for communism.

Marxism has only survived because of Marxists' ability to package and repackage the same odious ideas in flowery or obscure language. Consider the following phraseology. Everything in quotes comes directly from UN sustainability documents:

“Social Justice” assures the right “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment” = equal distribution of wealth = communism.

“Social Justice” assures that “every worker/person will be a direct capital owner” = dictatorship of the proletariat = communism.

“Sustainability” means that “individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective." How about that? Individual rights don’t matter, and as you shouldknow, “collective” = communism.

“Public/private partnerships” = Government subsidized competitive advantage, wipes out competing private business, allows for monopoly government control = communism. (Note: "Public/private partnerships" and grants for "sustainability" are features of the Kennedy Serve America Act, the law that created Obama'scivilian defense force, passed in honor of the deceased senator in 2009.)

Here’s another example. The Agenda’s Rio Declaration demands that:

All States and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development, in order to decrease the disparities in standards of living and better meet the needs of the majority of the people of the world.(Emphasis added.)

Under the guise of “saving the earth” the socialists have explicitly demanded redistribution of income. What a surprise.

Agenda 21's Millennium Development Project calls for “developed countries,” that’s you and me folks, to donate 0.7 percent of GDP every year. Lest 0.7 percent of GDP sound like a small number, for this year it equates to $103 billion, an amount that would fund the Departments of State, Justice and Energy, as well as the entire Legislative and Judicial branches of the U.S. government. Alternately, it could fund the Departments of Homeland Security, Interior and Housing and Urban Development! Take your pick. (Source: Office of Management and Budget).

And that is just the camel’s nose under the tent. Be sure, it will only increase. But why do it at all? How have our other efforts worked out for them?

Currently, the United States contributes the largest share of any nation to the U.N. Budget. We provide the largest contribution to the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and every other similar organization. We provide billions in loans, subsidies and grants to other nations through separate programs within multiple federal agencies and offer private loans subsidized or guaranteed by the government. Has that had a noticeable impact? Seems everyone just hates us all the more!

So, not only is this very anti-American body of foreign, unelected bureaucrats attempting to dictate practically every aspect of our lives, we are footing the bill.

At the Copenhagen Global Warming summit last year, Gordon Brown, British Labor Party leader and Prime Minister from 2007-2010 said:

For 60 years we have measured our progress by economic gains and social justice. Now we know that the progress and even the survival of the only world we have depends on decisive action to protect that world. In the end, without environmental stewardship, there can be no sustainable prosperity and no sustainable social justice. (Emphasis added.)

The citation comes from a self-consciously pompous website titled “Make Wealth History,” run by two college-age brothers, who claim that:

The lifestyle of the western world is unsustainable – environmentally, economically, and socially. We are living beyond our means, and sharing the earth’s resources unequally. To restore some balance, we need to learn to use less, want less, and be more generous.

I chose the quote above because it captures the simple-minded, emotion-drenched, conceited attitude that animates these people. And just as socialism mindlessly reduces life to a tug-of-war between the haves and have-nots, this shallow, vapid monument to political correctness reveals the utter ignorance of its practitioners.

Socialists everywhere and always see life as a zero sum game: if someone is wealthy, he must have taken it from the poor; if we are rich today, it must follow that future generations will be weaker. Current generations greedily sap our resources, leaving less for the future. The sustainable development crowd has transformed this complaint into public policy, using the alarming specter of "Anthropogenic Climate Change" to force the issue.

We have exposed the greenhouse gas myth for the fraud it is, but their entire argument is fatally flawed. The most salient feature of a market economy is its ability to grow and adapt as market conditions change. When any resource becomes scarce, its price increases. This creates a multitude of responses: producers seek new sources of supply, engage in research to find alternatives, or invent methods of using the resource more efficiently. The market accomplishes this smoothly, quietly and without large disruptions, unless government gets involved to manage it.

A salient theme of college courses in environmental conservation is the "greediness" of American consumer society. They constantly repeat the mantra that "America consumes 25 percent of the world's resources but is only 5 percent of the world's population." Barack Obama even reiterated this statement on the campaign trail.

The  clear implication is that this is wasteful and unfair. We should only be consuming 5 percent. Going from 25 percent to 5 percent is an 80 percent reduction. What happens to the countries supplying those goods when we reduce our consumption by 80 percent? Do they magically get a wealth transfer? No. Their economic decline will be cataclysmic.

Another way to look at it is that we consume 25 percent of the world's resources to produce 25 percent of the world's GNP. Our economy buoys all the economies of the world through its consumption and production activities. Reducing our GDP to 5 percent would create an economic catastrophe that would make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park.

During the Great Depression, U.S. GDP declined by 27 percent. World industrial production fell 31 percent as a result. Worldwide calamity ensued, culminating in World War II. What would happen if we reduced GDP by 80 percent?

As it stands, the sustainability crowd want to see carbon-based energy usage reduced by 80 percent. That goal was incorporated in the Cap and Trade bill that thankfully has not yet been enacted. Not quite the same as reducing GDP by that amount, but certain to cause a catastrophic decline in living standards nonetheless. Some analysts have even said that "planned recession" is the only way to reduce "greenhouse gasses" enough to make a difference.

These people are nuts.

If any true environmentalists understood this plan, they would be fleeing for their lives. It will ruin economies and cause widespread hardship. And we have plenty of evidence: every country that adopts the socialist/communist model so far has become an environmental disaster area.

But that is the intention, because socialism's true objective is power - to the exclusion of everything else. And while the sustainability agenda will certainly destroy world economies, in the process of doing so it will hand absolute power to the people promoting it.

Using the Marxists' deceptive language, the sustainability agenda has insinuated its way into government right down to the local level and is now firmly entrenched.

The good news is that this is something local tea party activists can focus on and may well be able to stop before it is too late. But make no mistake, that hour draws near.

Tomorrow: Agenda 21: Globalist Totalitarian Dictatorship Taking Over a Town near You.

RESOURCES and RELATED:

Understanding_Sustainable_Development.pdf  Bytes

Sustainable Communities - A Transformation of Virginia by Donna Holt

The History of Sustainable Development - Connecting the Dots by Donna Hold

© 2007 - 2011 Right Side News : This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

James Simpson is a freelance journalist, businessman and former White House budget analyst..  His writings have also been published on Big Government, Big Peace, Emerging Corruption, American Thinker, Washington Times, WorldNetDaily, FrontPage Magazine and Right Side News, Soldier of Fortune and others. His blog is Truth & Consequences. Read more at www.rightsidenews.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bkl7k

Belgian activist priest admits to child sexual abuse

Amplify’d from theundergroundsite.com

Belgian activist priest admits to child sexual abuse

An 85-year-old Belgian activist priest, who was being pushed for the Nobel Peace Prize, admitted recently that he sexually abused a child 40 years ago.

Francois Houtart, founder of the nonprofit organization Cetri, wrote in a letter to the Belgian newspaper Le Soir that he touched “the intimate parts” of his then eight-year-old cousin, and called the incident “inconsiderate and irresponsible,” the AP said.

The case came to light amid moves by the World Social Forum to nominate Houtart for the Nobel Peace Prize for his work against the impact of globalization on developing countries, the AP reported.

This prompted the victim’s sister to approach Cetri in October, its director Bernard Duterme told the AP. Houtart resigned from Centri’s board last month, The Daily Mail said.

The sister of the victim also spoke to the Adriaenssens commission, the Belgian church group that investigates child abuse cases. She said the abuse took place in 1970 when Houtart stayed at their home in Liege, The Daily Mail said.

Pope of anti-globalization

Houtart founded Cetri, an organization that publishes critical reports about the actions of developed nations in the Third World, in 1976. He was called the ‘pope of anti-globalization’ at the Catholic University of Brussels, where he taught from 1958 to 1990, The Daily Mail said.

In his letter to Le Soir, Houtart said that in 1970 he spent the night with relatives near Liege after attending a conference. “While walking through the bedroom of one of the boys in the family, I effectively touched his private parts twice. This woke him up and frightened him,” The Australian reported.

However, the sister of the victim called it “rape,” and in an email to Cetri, referred them to the church’s report of the incident which includes her testimony, Duterme told the AP.

The AP said that in the church report she testified that an unnamed priest went to her brother’s room twice “to rape him,” after which “my brother went to tell his parents, who kept him in their room.”

The church report said the victim’s father spoke to the priest about the episode after a few days. The priest refused their request for an apology and “told my father that there wasn’t anything more normal,” the AP reported.

Houtart, who is living in Quito, Ecuador, wrote in his letter that he was “personally perturbed, since I was conscious of the contradiction it represented with my Christian faith and my function as a priest,” according to the AP.

Rocked by scandal

The Catholic Church in Belgium has been rocked with sex abuse scandals this past year. In April, the Bishop of Bruges Roger Vangheluwe resigned after admitting that he sexually abused a nephew for years as a priest and as a bishop, the AP said.

In June, the police raided and confiscated hundreds of files from a church, and forced open a crypt in St. Rumbold Cathedral in search of evidence of clergy sexual abuse. The Vatican condemned the act, and a Belgian court ruled that the move was excessive, the AP reported.

Last week Cardinal Godfried Danneels, former head of the Church in Belgium, said that in over 30 years he learned of seven incidents of clergy sexual abuse. This prompted some 475 complaints by victims of clergy sexual abuse, The Australian said.

For three years, Houtart attended the second Vatican from 1962. He was a pioneer of the first World Social Forum in 2001, a convention designed to study different strategies of running democracies, The Daily Mail said.

The Daily Mail said Houtart is the eldest of 14 children. His grandfather, Henry Carton de Wiart, was a pioneer of the Catholic Party and served as prime minister of Belgium from 1920 to 1921, The Daily Mail reported. Read more at theundergroundsite.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bkl46

Amplify’d from chronicle.augusta.com

Rant was a shameful religious slap

By Vern J. Simon

I refer to the following comment in the Jan. 2 Rants & Raves: "Is it irony that Jesus required only a stable to be born in, but the pope requires a Vatican to live in?"

What has happened to our paper I have received since my arrival in Augusta in 1983?

This comment totally lacks sensitivity and respect for your Catholic readers. Would you have printed this if it reflected on the Baptists or another highly respected faith, to include the Muslims, who demand respect?

Christianity in general is taking an unprecedented beating in our nation and throughout the world. We must respect all religions, and all religions must show the same respect for one another.

Vern J. Simon

Evans Read more at chronicle.augusta.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bkl3s

Abusive priest suits force archdiocese to file for bankruptcy

Amplify’d from religion.blogs.cnn.com

Abusive priest suits force archdiocese to file for bankruptcy

By Richard Allen Greene, CNN

The Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee is filing for bankruptcy protection, it announced Tuesday, citing the cost of lawsuits filed against priests by victims of sexual abuse.

"This action is occurring because priest-perpetrators sexually abused minors," the archdiocese said in a statement announcing it was filing for Chapter 11 protection.

Milwaukee was home to Father Lawrence Murphy, who was accused of molesting as many as 200 deaf boys at St. John's School for the Deaf over the course of decades. He resigned from the post in 1974 and died in 1998.

One of his alleged victims attempted to sue the Vatican to force it to release the names of thousands of Catholic priests against whom credible accusations have been filed. The Vatican said the suit had no merit.

Arthur Budzinski, a deaf man who said he was sexually assaulted and raped by Murphy, talked about the abuse in a news conference about the lawsuit last year.

He said the priest "may have stolen our bodies," but higher clerics such as cardinals, archbishops and the pope "stole our voices."

He made his comments in sign language and his daughter, Gigi, interpreted his words.

The archdiocese has failed to reach an out-of-court settlement with victims, and a court ruled in November that insurance companies were not required to help it pay off abuse claims, it said.

That forced it to file for bankruptcy protection, it said.

It said it had two goals: "fairly" compensating victims and carrying on its "essential ministries."

But a lawyer representing victims rejected the explanation.

"The reality is that this is being done for one reason - to hide the names of those who have offended kids and those that have covered it up in the archdiocese for years," said Jeff Anderson, who represents 23 victims.

But bankruptcy will only delay the process, not stop it, he argued, saying other diocese had also filed for protection.

"In all instances it has caused delays but ... never succeeded in avoiding the public disclosure of some of their crimes," he told CNN.

The head of a victims' group blasted the decision to file for bankruptcy.

"It's always distressing when supposed 'shepherds' act like callous CEOs," said David Clohessy of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

"This is about protecting church secrets, not church assets. The goal here is to prevent top church managers from being questioned under oath about their complicity, not 'compensating victims fairly,'" he told CNN.

Milwaukee becomes at least the ninth American diocese to file for bankruptcy protection since 2004, according to BishopAccountability.org, a database of publicly reported information about abuse allegations.

CNN's Alan Duke and Hada Messia contributed to this report.

Appeals court says cross on federal land is unconstitutional Abusive priest suits force archdiocese to file for bankruptcy More atheists to come out in 2011, leader predicts Copts return to scene of deadly bombing in Egypt Anger at God common, even among atheists From skinheads to Orthodox Jews Opinion: How Christians, Muslims can find peace Security tightened after deadly church blast in Egypt Pope rallies Christians not to despair in face of recent attacks 11 faith-based predictions for 2011 Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bkl2z

Donald Duck's Wandering Hand Lands Disney in Court

URL:  http://gawker.com/5724125/donald-ducks-wandering-hand-l...

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/kim8

Amplify’d from gawker.com

Scalia Says Women, Gays Not Protected by Constitution

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is a constitutional originalist who interprets the constitution based on what he believes its authors meant—you know, without pesky things like "protection against discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation."

Surprise, surprise! There is no line in the Constitution that reads, "ATTN: ANTONIN SCALIA JUST SO YOU KNOW WOMEN ARE AFFORDED THE SAME CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AS EVERYONE ELSE FYI," so Justice Scalia is pretty confident that no such protections exist. And, hey! Don't complain to him—you want to protect women, pass a goddamn law. He's busy! From an interview in California Lawyer:

In 1868, when the 39th Congress was debating and ultimately proposing the 14th Amendment, I don't think anybody would have thought that equal protection applied to sex discrimination, or certainly not to sexual orientation. So does that mean that we've gone off in error by applying the 14th Amendment to both? Yes, yes. Sorry, to tell you that. ... But, you know, if indeed the current society has come to different views, that's fine. You do not need the Constitution to reflect the wishes of the current society. Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't. Nobody ever thought that that's what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws. You don't need a constitution to keep things up-to-date. All you need is a legislature and a ballot box. You don't like the death penalty anymore, that's fine. You want a right to abortion? There's nothing in the Constitution about that. But that doesn't mean you cannot prohibit it. Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea and pass a law. That's what democracy is all about. It's not about nine superannuated judges who have been there too long, imposing these demands on society.

So good to know that Chief Justice Warren Burger and the other eight justices on his court were wrong when they ruled the other way in 1971! This is not, of course, a surprising take on the Fourteenth Amendment from Scalia, but it's always nice to see him talk about what an asshole he is. (And, hey, why aren't we interpreting the Second Amendment the same way? "Arms" didn't mean semi-automatics to Thomas Jefferson!)

Oh, well. In case you want to write a little bit of Supreme Court ruling fanfic, here's the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause:

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

It's not like anyone was talking or thinking about women's rights when the amendment was ratified in 1868, so obviously no one thought women would be included in the categories "citizens of the United States" or "any person." Oh, wait, the Seneca Falls Convention was held 20 years earlier? Whatever.

[California Lawyer via HuffPo]

Send an email to Max Read, the author of this post, at max@gawker.com. Read more at gawker.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/kim3

Las Vegas: A Snowman's Chance in Hell

Amplify’d from gawker.com

A Snowman's Chance in Hell

[Las Vegas is better known for Cirque du Soleil than Frosty the Snowman, but residents had a chance to play with the latter after a rare winter storm covered parts of the city with inches of powder. Image via Getty]

Send an email to Brian Moylan, the author of this post, at brian@gawker.com. Read more at gawker.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/kilm

Amplify’d from gawker.com

Eat Capitalism's Dirt, Public Sector Suckers

The Way We Live Now: launching headfirst into whatever might be in front of us. Brick wall? Glass window? Wheel of fortune? All of the above! The point is that we're exhibiting economic optimism. If that's bad, well, kill us.

On one side you have Andrew Cuomo coming out and telling state workers that he's going to freeze their pay for a year. On the other side you have governors in the majority of American states glooming and dooming about how tough times are ahead. On the third side you have public libraries "shelving" (HA) a ton of services. On which side do you have the successful dynamic entrepreneurialism, then?

It ain't in the public sector, obviously!

Private investment is the key to American exceptionalistic successes, therefore, obviously, obviously. Government is for losers. The winners are those out there, on Wall Street, "bearing" the risks and reaping the rewards, while mediocre teacher types whine about a pay freeze that, let's be honest, robs them of what, a couple thousand bucks? Get over it! Big US companies are spending again, and if you're not there to grab a piece of that pie rapaciously with your talon-like money pincers, then I just don't know what to tell you. Investors are absolutely overheating! Burning up! Becoming nothingness! The opportunities are that hot!

Public service? More like public nervous!

[Photo: Flickr]

Send an email to the author of this post at Hamilton@gawker.com. Read more at gawker.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/kilg

Amplify’d from gawker.com

Woman Stabs Boyfriend Because He Won't Show Her His Facebook Page

An Indianapolis woman, Shemicka McVey, stabbed her boyfriend, Maurice Davenport, during an argument after he wouldn't let her see his Facebook page. That takes Superpoking a step too far. Doesn't he know he can just erase things from his wall?

Send an email to Brian Moylan, the author of this post, at brian@gawker.com. Read more at gawker.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/kikv