How Privatization Rips Us All Off

Average Americans are the products, and few of us see any profits.

By Paul Buchheit

The Project on Government Oversight found that in 33 of 35 cases the federal government spent more on private contractors than on public employees for the same services. The authors of the report summarized, "Our findings were shocking."

Yet our elected leaders persist in their belief that free-market capitalism works best. Here are a few fact-based examples that say otherwise.

Health Care: Markups of 100%....1,000%....100,000%

Broadcast Journalist Edward R. Murrow in 1955: Who owns the patent on this vaccine?
Polio Researcher Jonas Salk: Well, the people, I would say. There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?

We don't hear much of that anymore. The public-minded sentiment of the 1950's, with the sense of wartime cooperation still in the minds of researchers and innovators, has yielded to the neoliberal winner-take-all business model.

In his most recent exposé of the health care industry in the U.S., Steve Brill notes that it's "the only industry in which technological advances have increased costs instead of lowering them." An investigation of fourteen private hospitals by National Nurses United found that they realized a 1,000% markup on their total costs, four times that of public hospitals. Other sources have found that private health insurance administrative costs are 5 to 6 times higher than Medicare administrative costs.

Markup reached 100,000% for the pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences, which grabbed a patent for a new hepatitis drug and set the pricing to take whatever they could get from desperate American patients.

Housing: Big Profits, Once the Minorities Are Squeezed Out

A report by a coalition of housing rights groups concluded that "public housing is a vital national resource that provides decent and affordable homes to over a million families across the country."

But, according to the report, a privatization program started during the Clinton administration resulted in "the wholesale destruction of communities" and "the displacement of very large numbers of low-income households of color."

It's gotten even worse since then, as Blackstone and Goldman Sachs have figured out how to take money from former homeowners, with three deviously effective strategies:

1. Buy houses and hold them to force prices up
2. Meanwhile, charge high rents (with little or no maintenance)
3. Package the deals as rental-backed securities with artificially high-grade ratings

Private Banks: Giving Them Half Our Retirement Money

The public bank of North Dakota had an equity return of 23.4% before the state's oil boom. The normally privatization-minded Wall Street Journal admits that "The BND's costs are extremely low: no exorbitantly-paid executives; no bonuses, fees, or commissions; only one branch office; very low borrowing costs.."

But thanks to private banks, interest claims one out of every three dollars that we spend, and by the time we retire with a 401(k), over half of our money is lost to the banks.

Internet: The Fastest Download in the U.S. (is on a Public Network)

That's in Chattanooga, a rapidly growing city, named by Nerdwallet as one of the "most improved cities since the recession," and offering its residents Internet speeds 50 times faster than the American average.

Elsewhere, 61 percent of Americans are left with a single private company, often Comcast or Time Warner, to provide cable service. Now those two companies, both high on the most hated list, are trying to merge into one.

The Post Office: Private Companies Depend on it to Handle the Unprofitable Routes

It costs less than 50 cents to send a letter to any remote location in the United States. For an envelope with a two-day guarantee, this is how the U.S. Postal Service recently matched up against competitors:

• U.S. Post Office 2-Day $5.68
• Federal Express 2-Day $19.28
• United Parcel Service 2 Day $24.09

USPS is so inexpensive, in fact, that Fedex actually uses the U.S. Post Office for about 30 percent of its ground shipments. As Ralph Nader notes, the USPS has not taken any taxpayer money since 1971, and if it weren't required by an inexplicable requirement to pre-fund employee benefits for 75 years, it would be making a profit. Instead, this national institution has been forced to cut jobs and routes and mailing centers.

Paul Buchheit teaches economic inequality at DePaul University. He is the founder and developer of the Web sites UsAgainstGreed.org, PayUpNow.org and RappingHistory.org, and the editor and main author of "American Wars: Illusions and Realities" (Clarity Press). He can be reached at paul@UsAgainstGreed.org.

Rep. Peter King slams ‘carnival barker’ Ted Cruz: I’ll jump off a bridge if he’s the GOP nominee

By Arturo Garcia

Rep. Peter King (R-NY) blasts Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) in a CNN interview on March 23, 2015. [CNN]

Rep. Peter King (R-NY) hammered longtime rival Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Monday, telling CNN host Wolf Blitzer that he did not want Cruz to become his party’s next presidential nominee.

“I hope that day never comes,” King said. “I will jump off that bridge when we come to it.”

“You’re leaving open that possibility after you said what you said?” Blitzer asked.

“It’d be very difficult,” King responded. “Maybe he can go on the road to Damascus, he can have a complete conversion. But the way it is right now, it’d be very difficult to support Ted Cruz.”

King appeared on Blitzer’s show after releasing a statement calling the Texas Tea Party favorite a “carnival barker.” Cruz announced early Monday morning that he was officially entering the 2016 presidential race.

“Ted Cruz may be an intelligent person, but he doesn’t carry out an intelligent debate,” King said. “He oversimplifies, he exaggerates.”

King also accused Cruz of leading the GOP “off the cliff” in 2013 for inciting the federal government shutdown. At the time, King blamed Cruz and his “acolytes” for the shutdown, saying it was “madness” for the party to follow his lead.

While scoffing at both Cruz and Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) credentials, King did say he was exploring his own presidential campaign, describing it as his chance to appeal to his party’s “true conservatives,” as opposed to “counterfeit conservatives” like Paul and Cruz.

“From what I understand personally, he’s a very nice guy,” King said of Paul. “But his views are so isolationist in the world we face today, I think he’d be taking us back to the 1930's.”

Watch Blitzer’s interview with King, as aired on Monday, below.

Justice Dept. rips Philadelphia cops for excessive force and ‘operational deficiencies’

By Reuters

'Police Officer In Uniform With His Citation Book' [Shutterstock]

Philadelphia police need more training to defuse significant tension with the community, according to a U.S. Justice Department report released on Monday.

The highly anticipated report on police use of deadly force identified “serious deficiencies in the department’s use of force policies and training,” the Justice Department said.

The report came in response to a 2013 request for help from Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, considered a national leader in policing, after a spike in officer-involved shootings.

“Our assessment uncovered policy, training and operational deficiencies in addition to an undercurrent of significant strife between the community and department,” the report said.

Philadelphia’s police are among a growing number of departments to come under scrutiny for use of deadly force after the deaths of unarmed individuals in U.S. cities ranging from Ferguson, Missouri, to Albuquerque, New Mexico, and New York.

Ramsey was tapped by President Barack Obama to head up a national task force to improve police and community relations following unrest touched off by the 2014 killing of Michael Brown, an unarmed black teen shot by a white officer in Ferguson.

In Philadelphia, cases of brutality and rogue behavior have eroded the community’s trust in the police department, the report said.

Among them was a Philadelphia detective charged with helping his girlfriend, a murder suspect, hide from police, and narcotics officers accused of dangling people from high-rise balconies as an interrogation technique and stealing dealers’ drug stashes.

“Incidents involving discourtesy, use of force, and allegations of bias by officers leave segments of the community feeling disenfranchised and distrustful of the police department,” the report said.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania said 81 percent of people shot by Philadelphia police are African-American, although they make up only about 44 percent of the population.

“The police department must begin to repair this relationship by emphasizing de-escalation and mutual respect in their interactions rather than relying on force,” said Sara Mullen, ACLU-PA associate director.

Ramsey and Mayor Michael Nutter said they were committed to making the recommended changes.

“The only way to achieve the levels of public safety we all want is by ending the notion of ‘Us vs. Them’ and replacing it with a shared sense of the city’s future based on police and the public working together,” Nutter said in a statement.

The recommendations will be implemented over the next 18 months, the Justice Department said.

(Reporting by Barbara Goldberg in New York; Editing by Andrew Hay, Ellen Wulfhorst and Eric Beech)

The Six Most Evil Presidents In U.S. History

If evil is as evil does, then these guys wreaked some serious havoc.

By Larry Schwartz

Evil, like beauty, is sometimes in the eye of the beholder.

It is difficult to distinguish an evil act from an evil person. Few people, for example, would argue that Adolph Hitler, Pol Pot, and Josef Stalin were not evil men. But if killing lots of people is the criteria, Abraham Lincoln was a pretty evil guy, too; he just happened to be on the right side of history. As the saying goes, history is written by the winners and, it seems, the winners get to decide who is evil. For a long time, we Americans have thought of ourselves as a shining beacon of goodness. Ronald Reagan stoked that mood with his “Morning in America” administration. Meanwhile, those bad guys over there in the Soviet "Evil Empire" were wreaking their havoc. Only, the rest of the world does not quite see it that way. Distrust of America is growing and we are seen as one of the biggest perpetrators of evil and bloodshed, the“Great Satan” to some. This confuses Americans because that's not what we see when we look at ourselves in the mirror, and through the lens of American exceptionalism.

The point is, objective truths are hard to pin down, and subjective truths are many and contradictory. Adolph Hitler was evil because he killed people out of spite and a bankrupt and hate-filled ideology (although he also probably didn’t see himself as evil when he looked in the mirror.) Lincoln was not evil because he was forced into the position of killing people for the preservation of the country. But many Germans worshipped Hitler, and many in the Confederacy despised Lincoln.

No one sets out to do evil, U.S. Presidents included. Our most murderous, warmongering presidents did not intend to become killers, but they did end up committing acts that are considered evil. Here are six of the most evil Presidents in our history (followed by a healthy list of runner-ups.)

1. Andrew Jackson
Andrew Jackson, Old Hickory, our seventh president, was beloved by the common people of the United States. He was a populist who railed against the federal banking system, a man who grew up poor and climbed the ladder to ultimate power, a war hero, a romantic who pined for his wife who passed away only days after he won the presidency. He was a slave owner who believed in the morality of owning human chattel (although many of our early presidents owned slaves and felt similarly).

What set Jackson apart, and places him high in the “Evil President” ranks was his actions against Native Americans. Simply put, Andrew Jackson never met an Indian he liked or felt obliged to respect. Appointed by President Thomas Jefferson to wage war on the Creek and Cherokee tribes in order to gain their territory, Jackson was a brutal Indian killer whose nickname Sharp Knife was well earned. At his command, his troops killed not only vast numbers of male Native Americans, but also women and children. Millions of acres of land was stolen from the tribes during his campaigns.

In 1818 Jackson and his men invaded Spanish Florida and incited the First Seminole War, killing Seminoles and capturing escaped slaves who lived among them. As he illegally swept through Florida, he, “violated nearly every standard of justice,” wrote historian Bertram Wyatt-Brown. Long before ethnic cleansing became a term to describe the terrible war crime, Jackson perfected the practice.

Supporting and signing, as President, the Indian Removal Act in 1830, over 46,000 Native Americans were forcibly removed from their homes and lands east of the Mississippi River and marched to reservations in the western territories. In one such forced march, which occurred after Jackson left office, 4,000 Cherokees died during the infamous Trail of Tears. Millions of acres of Indian land was seized and handed over to the white slave aristocracy. Old Hickory carried his actions against Native Americans out despite the fact that the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional. "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" cried Jackson.

2. Harry Truman
Famous for the sign on his desk, “The Buck Stops Here”, Harry ”Give ‘Em Hell” Truman never shied away from his decision to drop the A-bomb on Japan. Debate has raged ever since. In1945, Truman ordered the U.S. military to drop atom bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Was his action, which literally incinerated many thousands of civilian men, women, and children, and crippled and mutilated many thousands more, justified in order to end World War Two and save the lives of a million American soldiers, who would have had to invade mainland Japan otherwise?

That is the argument in favor of the decision, but that turns out to be disingenuous. Japan was willing to surrender to the United States in July of 1945 with one condition, that the Japanese Emperor Hirohito not be tried as a war criminal. The truth was that Japan was virtually helpless by this time, its military in a shambles, its cities bombed, and its people starving. Truman ignored the offer, and in August ordered the bombs dropped. Since the U.S. ultimately granted that condition anyway, the dropping of the bombs was unnecessary, and the horrific death and destruction that resulted was also unnecessary.

3. William McKinley
When most people think of William McKinley, our 25th President, they are most likely to think of America’s fattest president. Weighing in at over 300 pounds, McKinley was a mountain of a man. He also was a man with blood on his hands, the blood of hundreds of thousands of Filipino people. At the conclusion of the Spanish-American War in 1898, in which the United States defeated Spain, McKinley found himself with the question of what to do about the Philippines. The Filipino people had expected to be given their independence, which they had fought with Spain over prior to the war.

Instead, McKinley decided, “that we could not leave them to themselves - they were unfit for self-government - and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain’s was; and…that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died." Thus, under McKinley’ mandate, the U.S. brutally put down the Filipino insurrection in a war that lasted until 1902.

“I want no prisoners. I wish you to kill and burn: the more you kill and burn, the better you will please me,” said one of McKinley’s generals, General Jacob H. Smith. Tens of thousands died in direct combat in the guerrilla war, and hundreds of thousands more from disease transmitted in the concentration camps where Filipino prisoners were herded.

4. Ronald Reagan
Today’s Republican Party may remember The Gipper as a saintly figure, but it is doubtful that many in the gay community share the sentiment. In the 1980s, an unidentified disease began decimating the gay community, and in 1981 it was identified as AIDS. While not specifically a gay disease, it was the homosexual community (as well as intravenous drug users) that was primarily infected with it in the United States at first. Reagan’s attitude towards homosexuals was well known. While campaigning for President in 1980, Reagan referred to gay civil rights: “My criticism is that [the gay movement] isn’t just asking for civil rights; it’s asking for recognition and acceptance of an alternative lifestyle which I do not believe society can condone, nor can I.”

His beliefs carried over into his administration, and he virtually ignored the AIDS crisis for the several years as it ravaged and killed thousands of infected people. Even his old Hollywood friend Rock Hudson’s death from the disease did not sway him from his indifference to the suffering.

Reagan’s Surgeon General, C. Edward Koop was specifically prevented from speaking out about the ways to minimize contracting AIDS. When he did speak about it, The Great Communicator actually served to inflame the crisis. Despite the Centers for Disease Control issuing a report that casual contact did not pose a threat to contract AIDS, parents in many parts of the country spoke out against allowing children with AIDS (who mostly contracted AIDS through blood transfusions) to attend school.

Rather than soothing these fears, Reagan stoked them. “…medicine has not come forth unequivocally and said, This we know for a fact, that it is safe. And until they do, I think we just have to do the best we can with this problem.” It was only after organizations like ACT UP, and celebrities like Elizabeth Taylor, began pressuring Reagan to acknowledge the crisis that he allowed Koop to issue a report in 1986, a full five years after the disease was identified.

Even then, his Administration was ultimately at odds with Koop, as the report went way beyond what Reagan wanted, rejecting AIDS testing and urging use of condoms and sex education.

5. Andrew Johnson
Andrew Johnson, 17th President of the United States, was just not a worthy successor to Abraham Lincoln. Maybe anyone succeeding The Great Emancipator would suffer in comparison, but Johnson energetically earned his incompetence with deeds that the African Americans in the former Confederacy could truly consider evil.

Considering the fact that Johnson was a fervent racist, and pre-Civil War slave owner, who believed in the inferiority of African Americans, it was no surprise that the Reconstruction of the South, post-Civil War, did not go as Lincoln would have liked. “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government for white men,” wrote Johnson in a letter to the governor of Missouri.

In 1867, in his message to Congress, he said, “…wherever they [black people] have been left to their own devices they have shown a constant tendency to relapse into barbarism.” In order to minimize the influence of newly freed slaves, and to prevent the redistribution of land to them, he pardoned all but the most egregious Confederates, and they quickly began grabbing the seats of government.

Soon after, they began passing “Black Codes”, laws that, while granting some rights, effectively made African Americans second-class citizens. Radical Republicans in the Congress passed a civil rights bill, which Johnson promptly vetoed, claiming the bill unfairly favored people of color over whites (the veto was overturned).

 In response, the Congress created the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, giving African Americans equal protection under the law. Johnson vehemently campaigned against the amendment.

6. James Buchanan
There’s a lot not to like about our 15th President, James Buchanan, not the least of which is that he fiddled while Rome burned, i.e., he allowed the country to slide to the brink of civil war, which it did shortly after his successor, Abraham Lincoln, took office. The issue that the American Civil War revolved around was, of course, slavery.

During Buchanan’s administration, the debate in the air was whether slavery would be legal in U.S. territories, or would only be decided once statehood was imminent. Northern interests leaned towards territorial decision, where the decision could be made before significant numbers of slave owners arrived. The South preferred that states make the decision, believing that at that point, slave owners could flood the soon-to-be state and vote it pro-slavery. Buchanan sided with the southern states on the issue, and saw an opportunity to have the courts decide the matter.

On the Supreme Court docket was a case involving a slave, Dred Scott. Scott sued for his freedom, based on the claim that he had lived for a period of time with his owner in Illinois and Wisconsin (at the time, part of Minnesota), both free under the Missouri Compromise of 1820 (which had limited slavery primarily to Southern states and had diffused the issue for several years).

There were five southern justices on the Court, but they let Buchanan know they were inclined to allow an earlier lower court ruling stand and not make new federal law. However, Buchanan was informed that if northern judge Robert Cooper Grier could be persuaded to side with the Southerners, the Court would agree to rule on the matter. Improperly infringing on judicial territory, Buchanan proceeded to write Grier and request that he side with the Southerners, which Grier agreed to do.

The resulting Dred Scott decision declared that slaves were not citizens and could not therefore sue.

Secondly, it said that slaves were property, not people, and were therefore protected by the Constitution in all territories and could not be prohibited there. The decision invalidated the Missouri Compromise. The President of the United States, James Buchanan, colluded with the Supreme Court to eliminate territorial barriers to slavery, opened the door to the expansion of the “peculiar institution”, and ultimately set the stage for the Civil War.

Some Evil Runner-ups

George W. Bush: For invading Iraq under false pretenses (“Weapons of Mass Destruction”), resulting in the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens.

James Polk: For starting a war with Mexico under the doctrine of “Manifest Destiny” (the belief that the United States was destined to expand and acquire land), resulting in the deaths of 25,000 Mexicans and the theft of most of southwest North America.

Franklin Roosevelt: For the imprisonment of over 100,000 Japanese American citizens for the crime of looking Asian.

Lyndon Johnson: For expansion of the Vietnam War while lying to the American people about both the reasons for the war and the prospects for victory.

Richard Nixon: For further expanding the Vietnam War after promising a secret plan to end it, and illegally spying on American citizens perceived as political enemies.

Dwight Eisenhower: For authorizing the overthrow of the Iranian government via the CIA, resulting in the coronation of the Shah, countless subsequent political murders, and ultimately the rise of Muslim extremism.

Glenn Beck leaves the Republican Party - 'I am done!'

By Egberto Willies



Glenn Beck was irate on his show. He let the Republican Party have it.

"The Republican Party, I've made my decision," said Glenn Beck. "I am out! I'm out! I am not a Republican. I will not give a dime to the Republican Party. I am out! I highly recommend, run from the Republican Party. They are not good and you see it now. All this stuff that they ran and they said they were doing all these great things. And they were going to stand against Obamacare and everything else and legal immigration, set us up. Enough is enough. They are torpedoing the Constitution and they are doing so knowingly. They are taking on people like Mike Lee and Ted Cruz. And they are torpedoing them, knowingly. And these guys are standing for the Constitution. So I am done with them."

Wilson at GlennBeck.com wrote:

It should come as no surprise to long time listeners that Glenn is fed up with the Republican party as it exists in Washington, DC. He’s been outspoken in his criticism of the establishment’s leadership, including John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and Lindsey Graham. Meanwhile, he’s watched those same establishment politicians try to destroy passionate conservatives like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee. So today on radio he made it crystal clear that he is done with the Republican Party.

“When we first started the 9/12 Project and everything else, we said stay in the Republican party. Change it from the inside. Then we saw now how rotted the Republican is. There’s no saving it. Don’t give another dime to the Republican party. We tried to do it from the inside. They are knifing us from the inside,” Glenn said.

In other words, the Republicans are not enough to the right for Glenn Beck and his ilk. Really? If it wouldn't hurt so many people, it would be great to give these folks the country they claim to want for a couple years. They would become card-carrying liberals quickly thereafter.

Adding Injury To Insult

This post originally appeared on RingofFireRadio.com.

As if one of the wealthiest corporations on the planet paying poverty wages wasn’t bad enough, McDonald’s (one of several franchises being represented in a lawsuit against the city of Seattle over its recent mandate to raise wages to $15 an hour) apparently believes itself to be exempt from regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Remember Ketchup As a Vegetable?

In the great tradition of the Reagan years, the management at McDonald’s “restaurants” consider mustard and mayonnaise to be first aid ointments. It’s not a joke. In a press release from the website FightFor15.org, a McDonald’s worker from Chicago described her experience:

“My managers kept pushing me to work faster, and while trying to meet their demands I slipped on a wet floor, catching my arm on a hot grill…the managers told me to put mustard on it, but I ended up having to get rushed to the hospital in an ambulance.”

This worker’s story is not unusual. At least 80% of McDonald’s employees report suffering moderate to severe burn injuries. Of that 80%, 6 out of every 10 workers suffered multiple injuries. 1 in 3 report that the first aid kit (mandated under OSHA regulations) is either not readily accessible, lacking supplies – or missing altogether.

And what of safety equipment? Dream on, folks – you think this is a four-star French cafe?

(Incredibly, there are 1,200 McDonald’s outlets in France – but in order to survive in that country, the corporation was forced to adapt to French eating habits and preferences…and you’d better believe working conditions are better as well.)

Actually, McDonald’s and most other “fast food” franchises have far more in common with an automotive assembly line than any sort of upscale dining establishment.

A Bit of History

The concept of “fast food” in the United States goes back over a century, but arguably, the first modern “fast food” chain was A&W (of root beer fame), which began franchising in 1921. 19 years later, two brothers in San Bernardino, California, created a kitchen and food service method modeled on the same assembly lines pioneered by Henry Ford.

The brothers’ names? Richard and Maurice McDonald.

In 1954, a salesman for milkshake blending machines visited the McDonald’s operation in order to learn why the brothers had ordered a dozen machines (most eating establishments and soda fountains had one or two at most). When the dust settled from that visit, the McDonald’s had a partner in that visiting salesman, who went by the name of Ray Kroc. He opened the first McDonald’s franchises in his home state of Illinois shortly thereafter. By 1961, Kroc was in a position to buy out the McDonald brothers – and the modern McDonald’s Corporation was born.

It’s Not All Bad

For better or worse, this food service business model has become almost ubiquitous. However, some present-day fast food restaurants treat employees far better than others. Not surprisingly, these tend to be either small, independent family businesses or more localized chains, such as the Pacific Northwest’s Burgerville or the Southwest’s In-N-Out Burger. Both of these companies have always paid starting employees more than minimum wage and provide low-cost, full medical and dental benefits. Current and former employees give the companies high marks when it comes to worker satisfaction, despite the fast-paced and stressful nature of the job.

So….what is it about these issues that McDonald’s doesn’t get?

Ronald Could Learn a Thing or Two

On 16 March, 28 complaints from workers having suffered burn injuries were filed with OSHA. This issue – now attracting national attention – is quickly becoming part of the fight for higher wages among these workers from across the nation. Demonstrators in the San Francisco Bay area and elsewhere in the country are gathering outside of McDonald’s stores, not only demanding $15 an hour, but speaking out about unsafe working conditions as well.

A spokesperson for McDonald’s told USA Today that alleged safety violations would be investigated, but added that the media should to be aware that said allegations were “part of a larger strategy” on the part of “activists” who were targeting the company.

According to the allegations, as managers exert extreme pressure on employees to work faster and “more efficiently,” basic, common-sense safety precautions are ignored. One of these is to wait for cooking oil to cool down before emptying fryers for cleaning. At least one employee was instructed to line a cardboard box with plastic, fill it with ice, and dump hot cooking oil into it so the fryer could be cleaned faster and the used product disposed of sooner.

After all, profits are at stake. Franchisees are themselves under intense pressure from the corporate office, which sends out inspectors regularly to make certain they are toeing the line. (Conformity appears to be the main concern, here; safety is low on the priority list.)

It must be paying off for someone. Despite a great deal of bad press in recent years, McDonald’s – a global corporation with 36,000 locations worldwide – has been seeing a modest increase in sales. In 2012, the corporation had revenues of $27.5 billion, a little over 3% over the prior year. That averages just under $764,000 per restaurant.

In-N-Out, which has a mere 232 locations in five Western states, made an estimated $625 million that same year. But that represents an income of nearly $2.7 million per restaurant – about 350% better than McDonald’s.

One significant difference between the two restaurant change is that the global corporation must grow and expand at all costs. If that means cutting corners and gaming the system, so be it. If workers get hurt and customers get sick, well, that’s just part of the cost of doing business.

It is what the late author and social critic Edward Abbey described as “the mentality of the cancer cell.”

The regional chain, which was founded in 1948, has an entirely different business philosophy. Central to In-N-Out’s philosophy is treating employees well and sharing the corporation’s success with the workers who make it possible. According to Wall Street wisdom, anything that cuts into the profit margin and prevents constant, rapid expansion is bad business.

Yet In-N-Out is doing phenomenally well by all standards. McDonald’s, which follows Wall Street convention, is facing charges for violating labor regulations, armies of angry, dissatisfied employees demanding a greater share of the wealth they work to generate – and a rapidly tarnishing public image.

And in the meantime, McDonald’s employees continue to suffer unnecessary, painful, on-the-job injuries. One hopes that OSHA officials will take these complaints seriously and give the Golden Arches a good, hard, detailed once-over.

Republicans to America: JK

By Tom Tomorrow 

How Processed Foods Can Be A Disaster For Your Health

Used in mayonnaise and sauces, emulsifiers could raise your blood sugar and make you fat.

By Ari LeVaux

Processed foods are suspected of causing a variety of heath issues. Foods high in sugar and refined carbohydrates, for example, are known to cause high blood sugar and obesity. But recent research has uncovered an entirely new mechanism by which many metabolic disorders can be triggered. Certain additives that are commonly used in processed foods are being shown to impact health, at least in mice, by altering the body’s population of bacteria that live in the gut. Collectively referred to the microbiome, the importance of this bacterial community of millions is just beginning to be understood.

Research published last September demonstrated that artificial sweeteners can raise blood sugar levels in mice, stimulate their appetites, and possibly lead to obesity and diabetes. The artificial sweeteners appear to create these conditions by changing the micriobiome’s composition.

Last month, a different set of research was published that also suggested a disease pathway mediated by microbiome disturbance. This time, commonly used food additives called emulsifiers are the culprits.

Emulsifiers help keep sauces smooth and ice cream creamy, they hold dressings together and prevent mayonnaise from separating into oil and water. The new research gives reason to suspect that emulsifiers could raise your blood sugar, make you fat and even make your butt hurt.

The study, published in Nature, looked at two common emulsifiers, Polysorbate 80 and carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), and found a range of metabolic problems that appeared in mice who were given water dosed with these chemicals in quantities proportional to what a human might consume. The mice who drank either emulsifier tended to eat more, gain weight and develop conditions like irritable bowel syndrome, colitis and metabolic syndrome, which is a range of pre-diabetic conditions.

The effects of these additives were dependent on the dosage; the more emulsifier the mice consumed, the worse off they were. A control group drank water laced with a common preservative, sodium sulfite, and did not show any negative effects on the gut.

The team found that the bacterial diversity of the mice microbiomes were altered. They also discovered the mucous membrane of the gut was thinner in mice who were fed emulsifiers. The thinner mucous membrane allowed the microbes closer to the gut wall than they would normally get, they wrote, which could cause the observed inflammation of the gut wall, and diseases like irritable bowel syndrome.

John Coupland, a professor of food science at Penn State University, thinks this research could be a game changer, providing it can be shown that these emulsifiers can do to humans what they do to mice. “[It] really challenges a lot of the way we think about assessing toxicology and nutritional value of foods,” he said in an email.

Coupland noted that Polysorbate 80 and CMC are very different molecules. While Polysorbate 80 is small, and doesn’t carry an electrical charge, CMC is large, and charged. These molecules are not only built differently, but they behave differently, he said, pointing out that CMC is technically not even an emulsifier, but a thickener that makes emulsions more stable. That they both cause similar microbial disruptions, mucous reductions and associated health problems is a striking discovery.

In an email interview, the study’s co-author, Benoit Chassaing, acknowledged that CMC is more of a thickener than an emulsifier, but noted that it does have emulsification properties, due to its charge. He suspects the resulting emulsifying activity is to blame.

I asked how they originally thought to look at emulsifiers. Chassaing explained:

"The incidence of IBD and metabolic syndrome has been markedly increasing since about the mid-20th century, and this dramatic increase has occurred amidst constant human genetics, suggesting a pivotal role for an environmental factor. We considered that any modern additions to the food supply might play an important role, and addition of emulsifiers to food seems to fit the time frame of increased incidence in these diseases.

"We hypothesized that emulsifiers might impact the gut microbiota to promote these inflammatory diseases and designed experiments in mice to test this possibility."

The team is currently investigating other common emulsifiers, aiming to identify any others that might cause microbial disturbances, or inflammation of the gut. Carrageenan, Chassaing noted, has already been found to cause inflammatory bowel disease in rats. Extracted from seaweed, carrageenan is widely used in processed “natural” foods. Like CMC, carrageenan is more of a thickener than an emulsifier, but is, like CMC, on the spectrum of additives that exhibit emulsifying properties.

One molecule his team is currently investigating is lecithin, which is a true emulsifier. Like carrageenan, lecithin is used in many “natural” processed products. If lecithin shows similar activity to carrageenan, CMC, and Polysorbate 80, it would cast a shadow over many, many processed food formulations. Organic processed foods are still processed foods. Organic approved additives like carrageenan can still give you ulcerative colitis.

Food additives are tested for certain toxilogical activities, like the ability to cause cancer, or to cause a mouse to instantly drop dead. But they aren’t tested for any potential effects they might have on one’s microbiome, or their ability to stimulate one’s appetite, or cause conditions like irritable bowel syndrome.

If the recent results on mice can be repeated in humans, current testing protocols for food additives will be revealed as woefully inadequate.

If you stay away from highly refined, heavily processed foods with long lists of ingredients, you can avoid most of these additives in one swoop, and not have to worry about inadequate testing procedures.

But not everyone has the luxury of being able to avoid processed foods, especially the poor, and ironically, people stuck in institutions like hospitals. That’s why we need the standards by which food additives are evaluated to be updated sooner, rather than later.

 

Ari LeVaux writes a syndicated weekly food column, Flash in the Pan.

$65,000,000 for a New Private Jet, Creflo Dollar? Negro, Please

He wants to pull millions out of the community for a Gulfstream G650, just so he can fly above it all and tell his congregation to say “praise the Lord” while he does.

By Kirsten West Savali

Creflo Dollar
Raymond Boyd/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

On the streets of any hood in the United States, Creflo Dollar, the kingpin behind World Changers Church International, would be called a hustler. Behind the pulpit, however, he’s called pastor, and if that’s not a sin, I don’t know what else to call it.

Dollar, who made headlines in 2012 for allegedly assaulting his then 15-year-old daughter, has now launched a full-fledged campaign to pressure his congregation into buying him a new, $65 million Gulfstream G650 jet.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Apparently, the right reverend was traveling on his old private jet when the aircraft experienced engine failure. Fortunately, the pilot was able to land safely without any injuries or fatalities, but the incident was so frightening, Dollar felt compelled to reach out to his flock.

His G650 plea reads, partially, as follows:

We are asking members, partners and supporters of this ministry to assist in the undertaking of an initiative called Project G650. The mission of Project G650 is to acquire a Gulfstream G650 airplane so that Pastors Creflo and Taffi and World Changers Church International can continue to blanket the globe with the Gospel of grace. We are believing for 200,000 people to give contributions of 300 US dollars or more to turn this dream into a reality—and allow us to retire the aircraft that served us well for many years.

To which, the question has to be asked: Is American Airlines closed? Did Delta go on break?

According to a recent Atlanta Blackstar report, Dollar has an estimated net worth of $27 million—900 times more than the $29,640 average annual income in College Park, Ga., where he holds court.

So, for argument’s sake, let’s say that he’s such a VIP that it’s just absolutely necessary for him to own a private jet—or, maybe, he’s just allergic to those two-pack Biscoff cookies airlines pass out in-flight. But why can’t he pay for it himself?

After all, this is a man who tells his followers that Jesus wants them to be rich, and if you pay him, he’ll show you how to do it. He unapologetically flaunts his wealth to prove to his congregation that the God of the Holy Bible will make those faithful to him richer than Empire’s Lucious Lyon. His prosperity gospel has encouraged more materialism and greed that any episode of Basketball Wives ever could. And he walks around with more gold than Trinidad James.

He’s too broke, though, to buy his own plane?

Dollar would rather press people living below the federal poverty line—people with no jobs, no insurance, no health care and, in some cases, no homes—into funding his luxurious travel?

The man should be ashamed of himself, but apparently he’s not. Anyone bold enough to tell a congregation that he had visions of executing anyone who didn’t pay tithes clearly has no conscience. Yes, he told them that the only reason they’re still alive is that he’s “covered with the blood of Jesus”:

I mean, I thought about when we first built “the Dome,” I wanted to put some of those little moving bars and give everybody a little card. They’d stick it in a little computer slot. If they were tithing, beautiful music would go off and, you know, ‘Welcome, welcome, welcome to the World Dome.’

But ... if they were non-tithers, the bar would lock up, the red and blue lights would start going, the siren would go off, and a voice would go out throughout the entire dome, “Crook, crook, crook, crook!”

Security would go and apprehend them, and once we got them all together, we’d line them up in the front and pass out Uzis by the ushers and point our Uzis right at all those non-tithing members ’cause we want God to come to church, and at the count of three Jesuses we’d shoot them all dead. And then we’d take them out the side door there, have a big hole, bury them and then go ahead and have church and have the anointing.

Aren’t you glad we’re under the blood of Jesus? Because if we were not under the blood of Jesus, I would certainly try it.

A man of God, ladies and gentlemen. A man of God.

I’m not Christian, but I know a master manipulator when I see one. Take this situation out of the tabernacle and onto the track, and he might as well put baby powder in his palm and say, “Bring me back my money.”

He’s a charlatan, and I’m not at all surprised that he’s making this outrageous request. Nor will I be surprised when he reaches his goal. It’s just pathetic that during a time of such unrest and uprising in black America—when food safety is nonexistent, public education is dismal and the bodies of our children are piling up while politicians wave for the cameras—Dollar is busy scheming. Instead of putting millions into the community, he’s pulling millions out of it just so he can fly above it all and tell his congregation to say “praise the Lord” while he does.

And there is nothing holy about that.

[Editor’s Note: We initially reported that Pastor Creflo Dollar’s estimated net worth of $27 million is 200 times more than the average annual income in College Park, Ga., where World Changers Church International is located. It is actually 900 times more than College Park's annual average income of $29,640.]

A New Plane? Fight Tickets? Have Some Pride And Stop Online Panhandling

There’s a new trend of people venturing onto crowdfunding sites to publicly beg for bottles of Hennessy, trips, even a $65 million jet, and it needs to stop.

By Michael Arceneaux

Jameelah Kareem set up a GoFundMe page to raise money so that she could fly to Las Vegas for the upcoming Mayweather-Pacquiao fight. GoFundMe

Unless he was offering direct flights to and from heaven, there was no way in hell Creflo Dollar was going to successfully raise $65 million for a new Gulfstream G650 jet via his own website.

Despite that harsh reality, the Rev. Dollar Dollar Bills, Y’all pulled his campaign only because the online commotion that his outrageous request had caused resulted in absolute ridicule. But as shameless as Dollar may have seemed, he is not an aberration in terms of how people are exploiting online charity.

I can understand fundraising to cover medical bills or even the cost of some creative endeavor, but how have we gotten to the point where people feel comfortable turning to strangers to support their every want and desire no matter how superfluous?

Take, for instance, Jameelah Kareem, who set up a GoFundMe page to raise money so that she could fly to Las Vegas for the upcoming Floyd Mayweather-Manny Pacquiao fight. Kareem’s initial goal was to raise $1,500 (which she did), only she subsequently decided to extend her campaign and shift the remaining dollars raised to a former high school classmate who apparently needs to cover some medical bills related to breast cancer.

That gesture sounds lovely or something, but they do not negate Kareem’s initial intentions, which are audaciously superficial.

Or there’s the case of Azel Prather Jr., who recently launched a GoFundMe initiative to collect airfare to fly to Miami to “save his relationship with his girlfriend.” Prather, who works in marketing and apparently “has a knack for comedy,” scored an interview by the Washington Post for his efforts. Ah, there’s the real win.

There are worse campaigns than this, though. Some are presumably created in jest, hosted by people aiming to cover the cost of a Hennessy bottle or those professing that they are tired of being broke or in need of money for breast augmentation, intending to properly tip strippers or just wanting white privilege. But if their crowd actually donated, each fund seeker would have undoubtedly gleefully taken the contributions and spent them accordingly.

For example, there’s the woman who successfully crowd-sourced her $362 Halloween cab ride from Uber. And then there’s the man who netted $55,000 to make potato salad. It’s not their fault that folks gave them money. Yet I somewhat resent them for inspiring the foolish aforementioned.

And while some of these stunts scream comedy, others are taking advantage of crowdsourcing and are completely serious in their intentions. I’ve stumbled across GoFundMe pages seeking help to cover the cost of immigration fees, baby showers and college tuition.

A month ago, I was sent a link to a Web page of a student trying to pay for the second semester of his freshman year. His story was sad and he went to my alma mater (Howard University, thank you very much). So in theory, I was supposed to feel bad and subsequently toss some money his way.

Unfortunately for him, my only reaction was that his predicament just describes so many people at Howard and every other college in America. My friend echoed this sentiment as we then proceeded to complain about the private student-loan system under which we both still suffer.

Since then I’ve seen several other campaigns like that one, and my outlook has not wavered: If you cannot afford the school of your choice and you’re not anywhere near the finish line of your degree program, go to a cheaper school.

Likewise, if you cannot afford to go to Las Vegas to watch a boxing match that will be screened at way too many sports bars (with wing-and-drink specials to match), stay at home. And if you can’t afford to tip a stripper, go look at free porn. (Sorry, porn stars. It’s rough out here.)

Sure, I’ve sometimes thought, “Well, hell, let me set up a GoFundMe page to support my love of go-go boys, making student-loan payments on time and eating catfish despite it being way more expensive up North than down South.” But I have a sense of pride—something that is beginning to feel passé with each passing day.

Although in the past I have struggled with asking for help (a character flaw that has been to my own detriment at times), whenever I have accepted help, it was not for such self-serving causes.

Beyond that, most of the people asking the folks in their own networks are essentially asking those in similar situations. Most of us are one or a few paychecks away from seriously entertaining the thought of doing something a little strange to keep a roof over our heads. Yes, I read the job reports: And wages are still stagnant and a lot of our cousins have just stopped looking for jobs, hence the lower unemployment figures.

Studies have shown that the poor can be far more charitable than the wealthy, but some of you selfish monsters using the Internet to live out your rapper and reality-star dreams need to pour gasoline over your electronic, Internet-ready devices and get the hell on with it.

Charity is beautiful, but one fine point always needs to be kept in mind: You can’t always get what you want. And to the more self-serving beggers of the virtual world, I say you don’t deserve half of what you’re asking for.

10 Things Black People Fear That White People Don't (Or Don't Nearly as Much)

Statistically and in practice, black people have more to fear than whites do.

 By Terrell Jermaine Starr 

When black people wake up and begin the day, we have a wide range of issues we have to think about before leaving our homes. Will a police officer kill us today? Or, will some George Zimmerman vigilante see us as a threat in our own neighborhoods and kill us? We brace ourselves for those white colleagues who are pissed Barack Obama won both elections and take out their racist rage on us. When we drive our cars, we have to wonder if we’ll be pulled over because our cars look too expensive for a black person to be driving. If we’re poor and sick, we wonder if we'll be able to be treated for our illness. We have a lot on our minds, and sometimes it’s overwhelming.

Here are a few examples of things we have to be afraid of that white people don’t (or not nearly as much).

1. Getting fired because we don’t fit into white cultural norms. Rhonda Lee, an African American meteorologist who worked at a Louisiana TV station wore her hair in a natural hairstyle one viewer found offensive. “The black lady that does the news is a very nice lady. The only thing is she needs to wear a wig or grow some more hair. I’m not sure if she is a cancer patient. But still it’s not something myself that I think looks good on TV,” the viewer wrote on the station’s Facebook page.

After Lee posted a respectful reply to the man’s insulting remark, she was fired for violating the station's social media policy, even though she wasn’t made aware there was one. It took her nearly two years to find a new job. She has filed a discrimination lawsuit against the station that is still pending.

Another example: In 2013, Melphine Evans, a British Petroleum executive, was fired from the company’s La Palma, Calif. location because, she says, she wore a dashiki and her hair in braids. She sued for racial discrimination. In her 24-page lawsuit, Evans claims her supervisor told her that, "You intimidate and make your colleagues uncomfortable by wearing ethnic clothing and ethnic hairstyles.”

“If you are going to wear ethnic clothing, you should alert people in advance that you will be wearing something ethnic,” Evans says she was told, according to the lawsuit.

These are just two examples of ways black people are treated if they don’t perm their hair, dress in a way white bosses deem “professional,” or conduct themselves in a way that is “non-threatening” to their white colleagues.

2. Encountering a police officer who may kill us. ProPublica reports that black males stand a 21 times greater chance of being killed by cops than their white counterparts. What’s more, a 2005 study reveals that police officers are more likely to shoot an unarmed black person than an armed white suspect. Madame Noire created a list of at least 10 armed white men who aggressively brandished weapons or even shot at police yet were taken into custody alive. Black women aren’t treated any better, as this list by Gawker demonstrates.

There is a reason black people bristle when a white person says, “#AllLivesMatter” during a #BlackLivesMatter discussion. In the eyes of many police, clearly all lives don’t matter.

3. Not being able to get a job. The black unemployment rate has been twice the rate of unemployment for whites, basically forever. According to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2013, the unemployment rate for black Americans has been about double that of whites since 1954.

The current unemployment rate is 5.7 percent overall. For white people, it’s 4.9 percent; the percentage is 10.3 for AfricanAmericans, a little more than double.

Not much has changed for us since the 1950's, has it?

4. Our daughters being expelled from school because of “zero tolerance policies.” According to a 2015 report titled “Black Girls Matter: Pushed Out, Overpoliced and Underprotected,” that analyzed Department of Education data from the New York City and Boston school districts, 12 percent of black girls were subjected to exclusionary suspensions compared to just 2 percent of white girls. In New York City, during the 2011-2012 school year, 90 percent of all girls subject to expulsion were black. No white girls were suspended that year.

Let that marinate for a minute. Before you do, data from the Department of Education reports that "black children make up just 18 percent of preschool enrollment, but 48 percent of preschool children suspended more than once."

The black kids aren’t being suspended simply because they aren’t as well-behaved as the white children.

5. We are much more likely to be harassed by police than by white residents in NYC.Though the NYPD has legally put an end to its racist stop-and-frisk policy, the department’s “Broken Windows” policy is in full effect. What the policy does is arrest people for smoking small amounts of pot, peeing on the streets, riding a bike on a sidewalk, selling cigarettes on the corner and other minor offenses. Between 2001 and 2013, roughly 81 percent of the summonses issued have been to African Americans and Latinos, according to the New York Daily News. Most of the arrests were made in black and Latino neighborhoods, as if white people never pee on the sidewalk or smoke pot on their stoops.

NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton swears by the policy, saying  it keeps the city safe. Eric Garner, who was apprehended for allegedly selling loose cigarettes, likely wouldn’t agree. He died after an officer on the scene put him in a choke hold.

Every black person walking the streets of New York City knows he or she could be the next Eric Garner. That’s not just a fear, it’s our reality.

6. Being bullied at work. Fifty-four percent of African Americans claim to be victims of workplace bullying compared to 44 percent of white respondents, according to the 2014 Workplace Bullying Survey.

A recent example of workplace bullying comes from Portland, Oregon, where two current and two former black employees of Daimler Trucks North America are suing the company for $9.4 million.

Joseph Hall, 64, says half a dozen white employees threatened him with violence, wrote graffiti showing "hangman's nooses" at his job, and placed chicken bones in his black co-worker's locker.

There’s much more ugly racism alleged in the case, if you have the stomach to read it.

Black people who just want to earn an honest buck sometimes have to put up with crap like this.

7. Being pulled over by the police. Black drivers are 31 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers, according to the Washington Post. We fear this pretty much every time we enter our vehicles. Sure, we sometimes violate traffic traffic laws. But we get stopped even when we don't.

8. Being accused of shoplifting when we’re shopping. Shopping while black can be pretty stressful. Just this week, a black NYPD officer filed a lawsuit alleging that employees at PC Richards & Son store, in Lawrence, N.J., harassed him for "shopping while black.” Sammari Malcolm, 40, of Brooklyn, says employees accused him of using a stolen credit card when he purchased $4,150.23 worth of electronics, even after showing his ID. Malcolm also claims store employees frisked him and detained him for two hours. He is seeking $5.75 million in damages. Sound familiar?

Perhaps you heard about the incident at Macy’s flagship Herald Square store, in Manhattan, where "Treme" actor Rob Brown was handcuffed and accused of using a fake credit card to buy his mother a $1,300 watch in June 2013. He filed a lawsuit against the store and the city of New York over the incident, which was settled in July 2014. In August, Macy’s paid $650,000 to settle a state probe into racial profiling allegations at the store. The store profiled and detained minorities at far higher rates than whites, according to the state’s investigation.

Money and success doesn’t shield us from racism. Even black celebrities are far from immune.

Academy Award-winner Forest Whitaker was racially profiled in February 2013, when he was falsely accused of stealing an item from a deli. An employee frisked him in front of other shoppers. The Academy Award winner didn’t sue, but he wasn’t happy about it.

9. Getting sick and not having access to health care. While African Americans have gained better access to healthcare since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, black people have less access to medical care than whites in core measures, according to data from the Agency for Healthcare and Research Quality. When we do gain access to care, it’s far worse than whites in 40 percent of core measures.

Much of this is tied to poverty, which disproportionately plagues African Americans.

10. Having white people say we’re exaggerating these issues. This isn’t so much a fear as a chronic and sometimes debilitating annoyance. It seems that no matter how much we can statistically demonstrate that racism is pervasive and damages us on many levels, there are white people who fight us tooth and nail with arguments that life is not as challenging for us as we say it is.

I’ve given up convincing white people about the harsh realities of my life as a black man. I’ll devote that energy to fighting for my black liberation in our very racist society.

An Inconvenient Billionaire

How hedge-fund mogul Tom Steyer is using his checkbook to punish climate-change deniers, persuade Obama to halt the Keystone XL pipeline, and try to save the planet.

Tom Steyer founded NextGen Climate, "a non-partisan organization focused on bringing climate change to the forefront of American politics," most notably by opposing the Keystone XL Pipeline, supporting politicians (but not becoming one). He also founded Farallon Capital Management. Farallon is one of the largest landowners in the Bay Area (related, previously). Steyer is also involved with the recent scandal that led to the resignation of Oregon Gov. Kitzhaber.

Explore The Economic Risks Of Climate Change In Your Region

Blue Bell ice cream recall linked to 3 Listeria deaths

By Danielle Haynes

 WASHINGTON, March 13 (UPI) -- Blue Bell Creameries has recalled several styles of ice cream novelties after listeria infections sickened five people who consumed the products, three of whom died.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are investigating an outbreak of listeria monocytogenes infections in five patients in Kansas.

All five people were admitted at a Kansas hospital for unrelated conditions and became ill with the infection between January 2014 and January 2015. For the four patients whose food intake was documented, all had consumed milkshakes made with a single-serving Blue Bell ice cream product called Scoops while in the hospital.

Three of the patients died.

The CDC and FDA determined Blue Bell products were likely the source of the outbreak. As part of an unrelated investigation, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control isolated listeria monocytogenes in single-serve products Chocolate Chip Country Cookie Sandwiches and Great Divide Bars. Scoops products were made on the same production line.

Additionally the Texas Department of State Health Services isolated the bacteria in products samples at Blue Bell's production facility in Brenham, Texas.

Blue Bell said it removed all products made from the same production line from stores and has shut down the production line. The other items included in the recall are Sour Pop Green Apple Bar, Cotton Candy Bar, Vanilla Stick Slices, Almond Bars, six-pack Cotton Candy Bars, six-pack Sour Pop Green Apple Bars and 12-pack No Sugar Added Mooo Bars.

A notice posted on the Blue Bell website indicates this is the first recall the company has had in its 108-year history.

NYPD caught wikiwashing Wikipedia entries on police brutality

Edits to Wikipedia pages on Bell, Garner, Diallo traced to 1 Police Plaza

Edits ranged from sensitive entries on cases of police brutality to the British band, Chumbawamba. (Photocomposite)

By Kelly Weill 

Computers operating on the New York Police Department’s computer network at its 1 Police Plaza headquarters have been used to alter Wikipedia pages containing details of alleged police brutality, a review by Capital has revealed.

“The matter is under internal review,” an NYPD spokeswoman, Det. Cheryl Crispin, wrote in an email to Capital after examples of the changes were presented to the NYPD.

The edits and changes were linked to the NYPD through a series of Internet Protocol addresses, or IP addresses, which can be publicly tracked by various websites. (Here, for example, is one website that shows a number of IP addresses registered to the NYPD.) IP addresses can locate where a computer is when it connects to the Internet.

Computer users identified by Capital as working on the NYPD headquarters' network have edited and attempted to delete Wikipedia entries for several well-known victims of police altercations, including entries for Eric Garner, Sean Bell, and Amadou Diallo. Capital identified 85 NYPD addresses that have edited Wikipedia, although it is unclear how many users were involved, as computers on the NYPD network can operate on the department’s range of IP addresses.

NYPD IP addresses have also been used to edit entries on stop-and-frisk, NYPD scandals, and prominent figures in the city’s political and police leadership.

There are more than 15,000 IP addresses registered to the NYPD, which employs 50,000 people, including uniformed officers and civilians. Notable Wikipedia activity was linked to about a dozen of those NYPD IP addresses.

On the evening of Dec. 3, hours after a Staten Island grand jury ruled not to indict NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of Eric Garner, a user on the 1 Police Plaza network made multiple edits, visible here and here, to the “Death of Eric Garner” Wikipedia entry. The edits, all concerning the actions of Eric Garner and the police officers involved in the confrontation, are as follows:

● “Garner raised both his arms in the air” was changed to “Garner flailed his arms about as he spoke.”
● “[P]ush Garner's face into the sidewalk” was changed to “push Garner's head down into the sidewalk.”
● “Use of the chokehold has been prohibited” was changed to “Use of the chokehold is legal, but has been prohibited.”
● The sentence, “Garner, who was considerably larger than any of the officers, continued to struggle with them,” was added to the description of the incident.
● Instances of the word “chokehold” were replaced twice, once to “chokehold or headlock,” and once to “respiratory distress.”

As of March 12, three of these edits (“chokehold or headlock,” “respiratory distress,” and “head down”) remained in “Death of Eric Garner” article, while the rest had been removed in later Wikipedia users’ revisions.

This process of revision and counterrevision is typical of Wikipedia’s self-policing user community.

The website allows anyone to edit entries, either logged in with a Wikipedia account, or anonymously, in which case the website logs the user’s IP address and creates a publicly available record of the user’s edits. Edits from 1 Police Plaza were made anonymously, therefore creating a permanent Wikipedia log of edits made on NYPD IP addresses. Using this information, Capital was able to write a computer program that would search Wikipedia for all anonymous edits made on the range of IP addresses registered to 1 Police Plaza.

Over the past decade, NYPD IP addresses have logged hundreds of anonymous Wikipedia edits, many of which had nothing to do with police issues. A long series of edits contributes to entries on the Catholic Church. There is an edit to the entry on British band Chumbawamba, seven edits to the entry on ages of consent in Europe, and an edit vandalizing the entry for “stye” with graphic comments on gay sex. However, a significant number of edits by NYPD IP addresses have been to entries that challenge NYPD conduct.

On Nov. 25, 2006, undercover NYPD officers fired 50 times at three unarmed men, killing Sean Bell, and sparking citywide protests against police brutality. On April 12, 2007, a user on 1 Police Plaza’s network attempted to delete the Wikipedia entry “Sean Bell shooting incident”.

“He [Bell] was in the news for about two months, and now no one except Al Sharpton cares anymore.

The police shoot people every day, and times with a lot more than 50 bullets. This incident is more news than notable,” the user wrote on Wikipedia’s internal “Articles for deletion” page.

A user on the NYPD network made a second edit to the Sean Bell entry on Dec. 23, 2009, this time changing “one Latino and two African-American men were shot a total of fifty times” to “one Latino and two African-American men were shot at a total of fifty times” (emphasis Capital’s).

On Nov. 23, 2013, a user on the 1 Police Plaza network edited the Wikipedia entry for Amadou Diallo, an unarmed who was killed when police mistook his wallet for a gun in 1999.

The person using this IP address made two edits to a sentence about NYPD Officer Kenneth Boss, one of the officers involved in the shooting: “Officer Kenneth Boss had been previously involved in an incident where an unarmed man was shot, but remained working as a police officer” was changed to “Officer Kenneth Boss had been previously involved in an incident where an armed man was shot.”

“Unarmed” was changed to “armed,” and “but remained working as a police officer” was omitted entirely.

On Oct. 15, 2013, a user at 1 Police Plaza edited the entry for the “Alexien Lien beating,” an event in which bikers and an undercover NYPD officer chased and assaulted a driver on the West Side Highway. The user deleted paragraphs of potentially anti-NYPD vandalism from the entry. Among the deleted text were claims like “After this incident police were pressuring on bikers because Alexian Lien uncle is their boss. Looks like Alexian has influential friends in the govt and got away with the incident.”

On three separate occasions between October 2012 and March 2013, a user on the 1 Police Plaza network edited the “Stop-and-frisk” entry. The changes are as follows; bolded words indicate edits:

“The stop-and-frisk program of New York City is a practice of the New York City Police Department to stop, question, and search people.” was changed to “The stop-and-frisk program of New York City is a practice of the New York City Police Department to stop, question and, if the circumstances of the stop warrant it, conduct a frisk of the person stopped.”

● “The stop-and-frisk program of New York City is a practice of the New York City Police Department to stop, question and, if the circumstances of the stop warrant it, conduct a frisk of the person stopped.” was changed to “The stop-and-frisk program of New York City is a practice of the New York City Police Department by which a police officer who reasonably suspects a person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a felony or a Penal Law misdemeanor, stops and questions that person, and, if the circumstances of the stop warrant it, conducts a frisk of the person stopped.”
● “The rules for stop and frisk are found in New York State Criminal Procedure Law section 140.50, and are based on the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Terry v. Ohio” was added to the entry.
● “if the circumstances of the stop warrant it, conducts a frisk of the person stopped” was changed to “if the officer reasonably suspects he or she is in danger of physical injury, frisks the person stopped for weapons.”
● An extraneous “and” was removed from a sentence.

On two separate occasions, a user on the 1 Police Plaza network edited sections of Wikipedia’s “New York City Police Department” entry that described police misconduct. On June 30, 2006, the user deleted 1,502 characters from the “scandals and corruption” section, including a sentence that claimed “at the end of March, 2006, NYPD started to make changes to this very article in an attempt to censor scandals and corruption information.” The full deleted text can be read here.

On June 19, 2008, a user on the 1 Police Plaza network deleted the entire “Allegations of police misconduct and the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB)” and “Other incidents” sections from the entry, for a combined total of 25,611 deleted characters. The full deleted text can be read here and here.

Wikipedia discourages users from making edits that might constitute a conflict of interest. “COI [conflict of interest] editing involves contributing to Wikipedia to promote your own interests, including your business or financial interests, or those of your external relationships, such as with family, friends or employers,” Wikipedia states in its behavioral guidelines. “COI editing is strongly discouraged.”

A list of all anonymous Wikipedia edits made by NYPD IP addresses is available here.
—additional reporting by Azi Paybarah