South Africa, black on black crime

South Africa police charged with dragging murder

[...] The video shows Mr Macia struggling with police after apparently parking his vehicle illegally.

Police officers then overcome the taxi driver and tie him to the back of a van by his arms before driving off.

Police Commissioner Riah Phiyega: "The behaviour displayed in the video... is to be abhorred"

Former South African President Nelson Mandela's wife, Graca Machel, joined hundreds of mourners at a Daveyton sports stadium on Wednesday.

Wednesday's emotional ceremony saw mourners, many wearing t-shirts and holding posters printed with Mido Macia's photograph, joining together to sing, clap and dance.

Graca Machel, who is herself Mozambican, told reporters: "As a society we are bleeding. We are grieving. We are in pain. We just don't know how to deal with the pain."

Sonnyboy Ndlovu, a witness to the dragging who was at the ceremony, told Reuters news agency: "The police are used to terrorising people here in the township, especially the Ethiopians and Mozambicans." [...]

During the Aparteid years, any crime by the white-controlled police against blacks made international headlines. When Apartheid was abolished, and blacks assumed majority rule and control of the police, crimes by police continued, I would read about them in SA newspapers on the internet. They were reported in South Africa, but no longer made international headlines. The international press was not interested in reporting black on black crimes by police.

So what made this case different? Someone recorded it on video with their cell phone, and it got shown on South African TV (the article has a link to that video). And Nelson Mandela's wife Graca Machel got involved.

There has been an ongoing problem in South Africa with crimes against black foreigners. When Apartheid was abolished, so were much of the border controls with neighboring countries, which allowed millions of foreign nationals to come streaming into South Africa, competing with South Africans for jobs in an already tight job market. Unfortunately, it continues to be a problem.

   

Can someone be accidentally buried alive, even after rigor mortis has set in?

The answer would seem to be "yes":


Woman wakes after heart stopped, rigor mortis set in

"Val Thomas’ doctors honestly can’t explain how she is alive today.

Thomas, who lives in West Virginia, is being called a medical miracle after she suffered two heart attacks and had no brain waves for more than 17 hours; reports NewsNet5.com.

Thomas’ heart stopped around 1:30 a.m. Saturday and doctors said she had no pulse. Rigor mortis started to set in, and she was placed on a respiratory machine.

“Her skin had already started to harden and her fingers curled,” Thomas’ son, Jim, told NewsNet5.com. “Death had set in.”

Thomas, 59, was rushed to a West Virginia hospital, where she was put on a special machine to induce hypothermia. This would allow her body to cool down for 24 hours before they would warm her up again, doctors explained.

However, Thomas’ heart stopped again after the procedure.

Her family said their goodbyes and Thomas’ tubes were removed, but she remained hooked on a ventilator as the possibility of organ donation was discussed.

However, Thomas woke up 10 minutes later and started talking.

“The nurse said, ‘I’m so sorry, Mrs. Thomas,’ and mom said, ‘That’s OK, honey, that’s OK,’” Jim Thomas said. [...]

I don't know which is worse; them thinking she's dead when she's not, or them wanting to harvest her organs while she's still alive.

I remember when an uncle of mine died in the state of Maine, state law said the body could not be buried for three days. At the time I thought, "There must be a reason for that". Well, now I know why!

There is a VERY informative article on the topic at snopes.com:

Just dying to get out

Snopes doesn't let you copy excerpts, so you'll just have to follow the link. Some very horrific, but even some very funny, stories on the subject. And did you know that even now, some people want to be buried with their cell phones, "just in case?".

Golly, how do you test your cell phone reception for six feet under ground? I'm sure that's one that the "Can you hear me now?" guy hasn't tested.

Well, I guess now you know what the conversation is like around our dinner table sometimes! Pat's been complaining that my posts about impending financial Armageddon are too depressing, and suggested that I should post about something more cheerful, like this, so here ya go. ;-)
     

Is the "Jupiter Jack" any good? I doubt it.

Pat thought we should get one, maybe two. But I looked it up on Amazon.com. The customer reviews of it are not impressive. It sounds like junk:

Amazon.com Customer Reviews of Jupiter Jack

Many of the customers go into detail about the problems. Not good.

There have been complaints too, about extra shipping charges when ordering directly from the company:

How to Not Get Scammed by Jupiter Jack

At this point I'm not tempted to try it. I think it's perhaps a good idea that needs more development, and maybe a stronger transmitter. In fact one of the Amazon reviewers said that the company is also pitching a "stronger" model than the one on sale. They also said that the $20 two-for-one offer ends up costing $54.00 because there is separate shipping charges for each item, including the dashboard holders (which you only find out about AFTER they have your credit card number). It does not sound good: Buyer Beware.

     

Cell Phone use and Good Manners

I saw this link to WikiHow on my iGoogle page this morning:

How to Practice Cell Phone Etiquette

To most of us, cell phones are a life saver, but rude cell phone users are the thorns in our sides. They're pretty much anywhere that there's a cell phone signal. The thing is, we could all probably use a little primer on cell phone etiquette. After all, most people who are being annoying don't realize they're being annoying. Could that be you? [...]

The guidelines offered would seem to be common sense; most people probably follow them, or at least used to? But as cell phones have become more pervasive, I think people may have become more lax about following these suggestions.

Text messaging has also added a new dimension to the guidelines. As with any rules, there can be exceptions. I guess I find this interesting, because we had owned a restaurant for several years. I had observed that most people instinctively followed these guidelines, but once in a while you would come across someone who was clueless, and had to be asked to step out of the dining room because they were bothering other patrons.

The guidelines are really just about preserving privacy, not being intrusive into other people's personal space, and not ignoring or neglecting people you are actually with. Thankfully most people get it. I hope.
     

No Pot of Gold at the End of the Rainbow

It was taken with a cell phone. And they say experts say it isn't photo shopped:

Rare photo of the “end” of the rainbow

[...] Several readers have said in the Comments section that they think this image was PhotoShopped. Nick: But it appears that this image is genuine. I have now had it reviewed by 7 people — 3 veteran photographers, a top-notch graphic designer who specializes in PhotoShop,m and 3 meteorologists at the National Weather Service. We also uploaded the image to Flickr and checked the lat/long of the image, which was taken with an iPhone. The info box says the photo was taken where the reader said it was taken. And the info text says the photo was not manipulated. [...]

This is big news. It's proof that leprechauns lie! I guess they will have to get new jobs, perhaps promoting Global Warming for Al Gore.
     

Cell Phone Dangers: how true are they?

Perhaps you've heard stories about cell phones causing kernels of corn to pop when they all work at once? How true is this stuff? Not very, apparently. An article by Gregory Lapin, Chairman of the ARRL RF Safety Committee, explains a few things:

Anything for a Buck

After writing my last column I was amazed by the number of people who wrote to tell me that cell phones are dangerous, and they have proof! I was directed to one of a number of videos that were available on YouTube, showing kernels of popcorn on a table that popped when one to four cell phones around them were transmitting. "It's obvious," reasoned these correspondents, "that if a cell phone can generate enough heat to pop corn, then it can also fry your brain cells!"

If you haven't witnessed one of those videos, you should. Pretty scary stuff, isn't it? When I first saw one of these videos it gave me pause. It didn't seem possible but there it was on the screen. These videos are copies or remakes of a professionally produced version from Cardo Systems, a manufacturer of Bluetooth remote headsets.

Popping corn with a cell phone is clearly a hoax. Similar hoaxes include hard boiling an egg with a cell phone. Take a look to see how it is done (needless to say, every ham should immediately realize how dangerous this trick could be to perform).

Just as radio amateurs must prevent their stations from exposing people to unsafe levels of RF, cell phones are extensively tested to confirm that exposure to users will be under the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE). These thresholds are far below the levels of energy absorption that can raise the temperature of tissue noticeably -- really far below what it would take to pop a kernel of corn. If you're interested in experimenting, place a small container of water between the antennas of two or more operating cell phones and try to measure a change in temperature. [...]

The article also addresses supposed "cell-phone protector pouches" that are supposed to protect you from ... who knows what. It's just a scam.

A cell phone is essentially a small radio device. The police, the military, emergency services and many businesses use radio devices for communication all the time. Many people use two way radios their whole lives, without harmful effects.

Some people claim cell phones cause brain cancer. But the data I've seen is conflicting, and doesn't seem conclusive either way. Cell phones may be unique from other radio communications, in that the transmitter device is pressed right up against the head, for hours at a time. Hours and hours and hours, for some people. It could be argued the people who use radios professionally aren't chit chatting for hours on end, every day, with the transceiver pressed up against their heads. Some folks seem to have their cell phones permanently attached there.

I don't spend a lot of time on the phone like that, but anyone who does ought to get a headset anyway. They are inexpensive, and it's much more comfortable than holding a phone.

I would guess that it's not healthy to have a cell phone glued to the side of your head 90% of the time. But then it's probably not good to be on ANY telephone that much. Many people could benefit from hanging the phone up, and going outside more for fresh air and exercise.
     

The iPhone; a rising tide that floats all boats?

A lot of folks are talking about the new Apple iPhone [has link to video]. Tammy Bruce got hers from AT&T. I'll let those who got'em talk about'em.

But wether you get one or not, the iPhone is inspiring a lot of similar devices; it marks a big change in the high tech gadget industry. Will the iPhone be a rising tide that lifts all boats? Or cellphone/internet devices, in this case? I think so.

Here is an article that lists a number of iPhone alternative devices:

Nine iPhone Alternatives

It's at Forbes.com. The link may take you to a welcome screen with a commercial, but there is a link at the top to skip it and go right to the article. It's interesting to see what the competition is coming up with.