France has been subjected to horrific terrorist attacks, apparently by ISIS, on the eve of international meetings to increase cooperation against ISIS in Syria. [1] Some people seem to think that ISIS terrorism is really terrible only when it hurts people they consider their “friends.” When ISIS killed civilians in Beirut, some people minimized it because the civilians were killed in a predominantly Shia neighborhood. [2] When ISIS apparently brought down a Russian civilian plane in Egypt, some people minimized it because the passengers were predominantly Russian tourists. [3] Urge President Obama and Congress to support cooperation with all countries that are the victim of ISIS terrorism by signing our petition. References: 1. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/world/europe/attacks-in-paris-add-urgency-to-talks-on-ending-syria-war.html 2. http://fair.org/home/media-turn-civilian-isis-victims-in-beirut-into-hezbollah-human-shields/ 3. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/10/syria-world-putin-bombing-russian-jet; http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/egypt-plane-crash-this-attack-shows-that-russia-is-hurting-isis-a6725566.html

Tommie Thames made a big mistake as a young kid in trying to hide the body of his friend. The gun went off accidentally and he should have reported it immediately but he was a kid and knew no better. Research shows now that adolescents do not have the brain capacity to think about consequences- they are all in the now and make foolish decisions. But why was this kid given70 years? We need him released now. He has rehabilitated himself and there is no just reason for keeping him.

Alabama, Utah, Indiana, Tennessee, and Georgia all had the highest filing bankruptcy rates in 2013 by state. Another thing they had in common was the "Right to Work" policy. "Right to Work" is unfair and unequal to unionized workers. It takes away benefits and opportunities from our family, pension, retirement, etc. The goal of making the United States "Right to Work" effective is to lower our wages and to destroy our economy even more. Without unionized labor, there is not any guarantee of work and no growth for the middle class.

South-East Human Rights Coalition Warns Military Chiefs In Nigeria We, the Coalition of Southeast Human Rights Organizations, comprising the Anambra State Branch of Civil Liberties Organization (CLO), International Society for Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law (Intersociety), Center for Human Rights & Peace Advocacy, Human Rights Club (a project of LRRDC), Southeast Good Governance Forum, Forum for Equity, Justice & Defense of Human Rights, Society Advocacy Watch Project, Anambra Human Rights Forum and PADDI Foundation; wish to align ourselves with the earlier statement issued by our leading Coalition Partner (International Society for Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law) over the above subject. The statement is reproduced below as follows: “Our immediate and prompt attention has been drawn to a statement made by the Nigerian Army yesterday in Abuja, in which it issued a stern warning with vivid reference to millions of Nigerian citizens who are peacefully and non violently asserting through non violence and peaceful assembly and association, their regional and international rights to self determination. Such rights are also constitutionally guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution in the form of rights to personal liberty and peaceful assembly, as well as rights to freedom of association and movement, and they are contained and enshrined in Sections 35, 40 and 41 of the Fundamental Human Rights Charter of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The Nigerian Army had in its statement, titled: “Reminder on Nigerian Army Rule of Engagement for Internal Security Operations”: “the Nigerian Army would like to send an unequivocal warning to all and sundry, more specifically to all those threatening and agitating for the dismemberment of the country”. The statement is in vivid reference to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), which has in the past one week grabbed global attention with sweeping marches in major cities of Nigeria and foreign countries. The army statement further said: “The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN), 1999 (as amended) vide Sect 217 (2) (c) provides that the Armed Forces of Nigeria (AFN) shall suppress insurrection and act in aid of civil authority to restore order when called upon to do so by the President, Commander-in-Chief. This provision is reinforced by Sect (8) (1) and (3) of the Armed Forces Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, (LFN) 2004. This presupposes that troops have to use necessary force to quell crisis resulting in deaths, injury and damages to properties”. We wish to state firmly that the Army statement is totally incoherent with and unknown to the 1999 Constitution, particularly its Fundamental Human Rights Charter. It is also a clear misinterpretation of the 1999 Constitution, particularly its Section 217, which clearly states that “there shall be an armed forces for the Federation” and not “the army for the Federation”. The “armed forces” include other recognized armed forces segments like navy, air force, DSS, etc. That is to say that the view of “the Nigerian Army” cannot represent the collective view of “the Nigerian Armed Forces” and the Nigerian Army is not “the Nigerian Armed Forces”. The statement also failed woefully to understand the common meaning of “suppressing insurrection”. The word “insurrection” is a military act of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government or a range of violent behaviors aimed at destroying or taking over the position of an established authority such as a government, president, governor, or political leader. When compared with the activities of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a self-determination pressure group, the stern warning or riot act so issued is totally misguided, vexatious, shallow, dubiously intended and constitutionally incoherent. The stern warning or riot act was also grossly misdirected, as it ought to have been directed to the Boko Haram terror insurgents who have severally disclosed their intention to violently destroy the country’s existing socio-legal system and put in place radical Islamic theocracy. To date, the IPOB pressure group and millions of its supporters have not used or advocated violence. We see the stern warning or riot act as a clear declaration by the Nigerian Army of an intention to commit crimes against humanity by indicating its readiness to deploy and use brute force to “suppress” ongoing peaceful and non violent processions involving the IPOB pressure group and its teeming supporters. From the body language of the Nigerian Army, it may most likely stage-manage or create group violence, arson, vandalism and damages to property so as to find grounds to deploy and use brute force as well as justification of same. We wish to warn and remind the leadership of the Nigerian Army not to forget that there still exists International Criminal Court and other formidable local and international mechanisms through which its commanding officers found engaged in “brutal suppression or quelling” of ongoing peaceful and non violent protests shall be held accountable for crimes against humanity. Let the Nigerian Army also be reminded that during the recent economic meltdown in USA, some States agitated to secede from the United States, yet they were not tagged “insurrectionists” warranting “military suppression”. Even in the present United Kingdom, Scotland, which agitates for secession, has not been militarily crushed. It is unarguably a case of “crimes against humanity” when brute force is deployed to crush a people asserting non-violently for fair belongingness and fortification of their ethnic identity”. Beyond our alignment and total agreement with the referenced statement above, we wish to further demand for the immediate removal and replacement of the Service Chiefs, particularly the Chief of Air Staff and the Chief of Army Staff. Their open threats and comments are attestation of th...

Today, we are facing the prospect of the destruction of life as we know it and irreversible damage to our planet due to climate change. But the world’s largest polluters have prevented progress on bold climate action for far too long. The corporations that got us into this impending climate disaster don’t get to set the agenda for how to fix it. We call on the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) -- including the U.S. government -- to protect the U.N. climate talks and climate policymaking around the world from the influence of big polluters. The world is looking to the next round of negotiations, in Paris next month, for decisive action on climate. This is a pivotal moment to create real solutions. And the momentum of a growing global movement can secure a strong outcome from the Paris talks and ensure leaders take bolder action to address the climate crisis. But the fossil fuel industry and other transnational corporations that have a vested interest in stopping progress continue to delay, weaken, and block climate policy at every level. We can't let that happen. Take action today to send a clear message to world leaders: it's time to kick big polluters out of climate policy!

Carolina students and Chapel Hill community members need to feel safe in all public spaces. Transgender individuals experience discrimination on a daily bases in our stores and offices that conform to the gender binary and marginalize gender non-conforming folks. Help us change that. Demand that Chapel Hill businesses become inclusive by creating gender-neutral bathrooms.

His incarceration has affected not only his goals in life but the family as well. To whomever it concerns, have a heart and compassion for everyone makes mistakes. Give him the chance to learn and prove himself to himself and society that he is a productive human being .

That’s not a typo. It’s actual text from a misogynistic promotion that someone at Bloomingdale’s thought was appropriate for its holiday catalog. The text accompanies a man ogling a woman in a short dress, while both are at what appeared to be the company office party. You can read more about this appalling ad here: http://tinyurl.com/nl642lc While the department store chain has since issued an apology in response to backlash over this ad, no one has been held to account for what is a subtle invitation to sexual harassment on the low end and potentially championing date rape in a worst-case scenario. Noted Sarah Murnen, a psychology professor at Kenyon College in Ohio: “It’s sending the message that it is it okay to have sex with people who are incapable of consent. These are decisions that should be made consciously and willingly.” Will you join us in boycotting Bloomingdale’s for the holidays unless they fire those responsible for the ad, undergo mandated sensitivity training and work to support efforts to end sexual assault? Since logic didn’t prevail in this industry giant’s boardroom, it is critical that we let Bloomingdale’s know that such content and their weak response are unacceptable. Please sign our petition now and tell Bloomingdale’s you are boycotting them until they change their culture and their approach about sexual assault.  No one should have to think about being assaulted during the holidays simply because a retail giant recklessly thought it was cute to suggest it in an ad.

As a sexual assault advocate, I believe we all have to work together to prevent sexual violence.

The revolution cannot, must not, and will not be televised, because it begins in the mind and the heart.

The board of the League of Conservation Voters has taken the unprecedented step of endorsing Hillary Clinton for president, after only one debate between the Democratic candidates and months before the first vote in the Democratic primaries will be cast. It’s far too early in this primary to endorse. In 2004, LCV’s endorsement of John Kerry before the New Hampshire primary was unprecedented, but at least came after Kerry’s strong victory in the Iowa caucuses. There is no such defense today. By LCV’s own metrics, Clinton has the weakest environmental record of the Democratic candidates. Bernie Sanders is the highest rated candidate in the League of Conservation Voters scorecard. Martin O’Malley was the first, and so far the only candidate to release a comprehensive presidential climate agenda. Sanders led the fight against the Keystone XL pipeline while Clinton's State Department was recommending its construction. In these opening days of the Democratic primary, it's been exciting to see Clinton take stronger stands on behalf of the climate, coming closer to where Sanders and O’Malley already are. Her call for a solar revolution, exceeding previous Sanders legislation, is inspiring and greatly needed. The agreement of the candidates on the need for a federal investigation of ExxonMobil’s climate deception—an issue on which O’Malley led—is electrifying. This primary is teaching millions of Americans the urgency of the climate crisis and the grand possibilities of a true clean-energy revolution. Competitive primaries work! LCV is a very good political organization—one the best in the country working on any issue. The millions of dollars they raise and spend each year, the millions of voters they reach with a pro-climate message are a crucial bulwark against the radical Republican agenda. We know that their board, their staff and their volunteers care deeply about environmental issues and solutions. Nine times out of ten, they do great work, but this time they grossly miscalculated. Obviously, any of the Democratic candidates will be far better than the Koch-soaked Republican climate conspiracy theories, and I'm committed to electing the eventual Democratic nominee on a strong climate platform and crushing the GOP in November. But first, that Democrat - be it Clinton, Sanders, or O'Malley - needs to deserve my vote.

Western Environmental Law Center (WELC) is a nonprofit, public interest environmental law firm. For the past six years, WELC has been leading a 100-member coalition seeking to eliminate leaked methane from fossil fuel development on lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management. This can be achieved by requiring companies leasing our public lands to implement highly cost-effective, available technologies that have already been successfully deployed in oil and gas producing states like Colorado and Wyoming.