Twenty-three-year-old artist and DJ Noah Becker, who is mixed-race, had commented in a recent interview with Emotion magazine that he had been attacked in Germany because of the color of his skin, adding that Berlin is a “white city compared to London or Paris.”
Becker’s remarks then came under fire from Jens Maier, who had worked as a judge before becoming a member of the Bundestag. According to Bild, the lawmaker tweeted on Tuesday: “The little half-n****r just seems to have been paid too little attention, otherwise his behavior cannot be explained.” The tweet was later removed.
On Wednesday, the AfD politician got in touch with a Bild journalist via Twitter, claiming that “an employee” had written and posted the message, and that it was “deleted immediately once it became known.” Maier did not name the employee and what consequences the person could face.
AfD chairman Alexander Gauland has, meanwhile, slammed Maier’s comment. “That’s not my style,” he said, according to Berliner Morgenpost.
Bild also reported that the Becker family’s lawyer has been instructed to take legal action against Maier. “I am now assigned to immediately take the necessary criminal and civil action against Mr. Jens Maier over this clearly racist Twitter message,” the lawyer said.
The social media community has given Maier a tongue-lashing for the tweet, with prominent German actor Til Schweiger calling the AfD politician a “disgusting scumbag” on Facebook. Schweiger’s post generated hundreds of comments, most of them critical of Maier.
“It’s unbelievable that people like Jens Maier are allowed to voice such disgusting statements in our country. Pooh! Freedom of speech? Yes! But this is against our constitution and also incompatible with the profession of the judge,” SvenBerni Schi wrote on FB.
“Mr. Maier … a judge and member of the Bundestag who represents the constitution of this country. Imagine a citizen with a migrant background sitting in front of this ‘Judge Maier’ waiting for a verdict…,” Hakan Adigüzel remarked.
“Jens Maier should rather look at his behavior before looking at that of others,” Susi Tho noted.
“Jens Maier, this ‘little half-negro’ is in every respect bigger than you. I am ashamed for our government that such a feudish AfD member can pollute the Bundestag,” Christel Kämper wrote.
The AfD has already been in hot water after another Bundestag member, Beatrix von Storch, tweeted about “barbaric, gang-raping Muslim hordes of men” on New Year’s eve.
Von Storch’s account was suspended by Twitter for 12 hours over the “Islamophobic tweet.” Storch, the deputy leader of AfD, faces a police investigation for hate speech, German media report.
CNN’s insufferably self-important Jim Acosta made the news all about himself once again on Tuesday. This time, as reported by Randy Hall at NewsBusters, following in the footsteps of ABC’s detestable Sam Donaldson during the Reagan administration, Acosta, despite being warned not to, interrupted a bill-signing ceremony to shout out a question at President Donald Trump.
Acosta’s press cohorts clearly aren’t objecting to his conduct, which is in sharp contrast to how they treated a reporter for a center-right outlet in 2012 when Democrat Barack Obama was in the Oval Office.
As I noted in June 2012 (links are in original; bolds are mine throughout this post):
You’d think from the reaction to Daily Caller White House Correspondent Neal Munro’s shouted question during President Obama’s announcement of de facto amnesty for 30-and-under illegal aliens at the Rose Garden yesterday that it’s the first time any reporter has ever shouted a question at a U.S. president out of turn. Friday afternoon, the Daily Caller, Munro’s employer, carried his explanation of the incident, as well as sturdy defenses from Editor-in-Chief Tucker Carlson and Publisher Neil Patel.
Munro made it clear in his explanation (italics are mine) that he “timed the question believing the president was closing his remarks” (mistakenly, it turned out), based on seeing that Obama appeared to begin to walk away “while I and at least one other reporter asked questions.”
By the way, the question related to what has become known as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), and Munro’s question to Obama — “Is it the right thing to do for American workers?” — still resonates.
After the incident, the rest of the press treated Munro’s affront as the equivalent of the Crime of the Century. Many reflexively accused him of racism (because every criticism of the wonderful, marvelous Democratic president could only be based on race, not on legitimate disagreement), and wanted to see the Daily Caller’s White House press credentials taken away.
Now that there’s a Republican in the White House, especially one who is as completely despised by the establishment press as Donald Trump is, it’s once again open season for shouting out questions at the President, regardless of the nature of the event, with Jim Acosta leading the pack.
Though Jim Acosta’s attitude and temperament during the Trump presidency have been far worse than Donaldson’s during the Reagan era (more on that shortly), he hasn’t yet reached the ABC reporter’s depths of Reagan-era inappropriateness described by Rush Limbaugh in the wake of the Munro incident five years ago:
RUSH LIMBAUGH: We went back to the archives, 1983. What was the — 30 years ago. 30 years ago!
Ronaldus Magnus is at a White House press conference. At the end, First Lady Nancy Reagan rolled in a birthday cake for the President.
During this, a birthday cake being rolled in, Sam Donaldson got up and started shouting.
(go to White House event)
SAM DONALDSON: Anything you want him to do differently?
NANCY REAGAN: I think he’s doing just fine.
DONALDSON: Well maybe this would be a good time for you to tell him whether you think he should run again.
NANCY REAGAN: Oh, no.
DONALDSON (directing his attention to President Reagan): You’re not getting too old to run again, are you sir? You’re not getting too old to run again, are you sir? (Yes, he repeated the question — Ed.)
NANCY REAGAN: How would you like a piece of cake, Sam?
(back into the studio)
LIMBAUGH: you note the class and character of Nancy Reagan turning it, making it into a joke. “Do you want a piece of cake, Sam?”
But, I remember back in these (days) — everybody (didn’t say) what disrespect! How could there be such disrespect for the President?
Oh, no. Donaldson was lauded. He was a hero.
I also noted in 2012 that reporters during the Reagan era got so belligerent that they shouted questions at Reagan at inappropriate times like a pack of wolves. It was a practice that was so off-putting to much of the public that the Associated Press’s Christopher Connell tried to address the matter in a 1987 analysis (“Why Do Grown Men And Women Shout At President Reagan?”). Naturally, the AP reporter decided that “the blame rests with Reagan and his aides, who have sharply curtailed opportunities for the press corps to engage the president under more civil circumstances.”
Donaldson, for all of his considerable faults, didn’t constantly interrupt or badger White House press secretaries or Reagan himself three, four, or five times if his question wasn’t answered to his satisfaction, so the CNN’s Acosta is in that sense unfortunately breaking new ground. That said, one has to wonder how Donaldson would have conducted himself 30-plus years ago if he would have had Twitter at the ready, and fawning colleagues at the cable news channels available to grant him laudatory interviews after every presidential challenge.
Especially given the proliferation of news outlets, it was especially appropriate that Trump Press Secretary Sarah Sanders reminded Jim Acosta that attending White House press briefings and presidential events is a privilege, and that there are plenty of other perfectly qualified reporters at other outlets who would be glad to take his place if he continues to serially refuse to meet minimal standards of decorum.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump, whose presidential campaign featured plenty of tough talk about China, took a more cordial tone with Chinese President Xi Jinping while visiting Xi’s country this week.
“I give China great credit,” Trump — who once likened the U.S. trade deficit with China to “rape” and accused China of committing “the greatest theft in the history of the world” — said during a joint appearance with Xi on Thursday.
Another subject on which Trump apparently hasn’t offered China much resistance: freedom of the press.
On Thursday in Beijing, each leader made statements but did not take questions from the press — perhaps unsurprising, given Trump’s criticisms of the media and his attempts at infringing on press freedom at home, as well as his embrace of authoritarian leaders abroad.
But it was a sharp departure from prior U.S. presidents of both parties, whose administrations pushed back on China’s demands for curtailed access.
When asked by reporters covering Trump’s trip why he and Xi did not take media questions, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said that “it was at the Chinese insistence there were no questions today.”
In 2009, President Barack Obama faced sharp criticism for not taking reporters’ questions on his first visit to the country. He did so when he returned in 2014.
“The Chinese try this every time. It’s a test of will and principle,” Obama’s first White House press secretary, Jay Carney, tweeted Thursday morning. ”Letting them dictate press access is an embarrassing capitulation.”
“They always insist, Sarah,” former United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice tweeted in response to Sanders. “The trick is to use diplomacy to extract that concession as a matter of principle, despite their resistence [sic].”
In 2014, the Obama administration fought to allow reporter questions for Obama’s joint press conference with Xi. In a famous exchange, Obama granted the only question to The New York Times’ Mark Landler, who asked Xi about press access.
“With respect to press attitudes towards America or me in particular, I am always working on the assumption that the press giving me a hard time is true wherever I go, whether in the United States or China,” Obama said. “That’s part of being a public official.”
Obama’s calling on Landler was intended to make a point. China had barred several of the Times’ foreign correspondents, as well as reporters from some other foreign outlets, from obtaining visas, in retaliation for the paper’s investigative reporting into Communist Party leaders. Since that reporting in 2012, the Chinese government has largely banned access to the Times’ website.
Xi appeared to ignore Landler’s question, before saying that “media outlets need to obey China’s laws and regulations.”
At a news conference during his first visit to China in 2002, Bush urged the country’s government to respect human rights and religious freedom.
“China’s future is for the Chinese people to decide. Yet no nation is exempt from the demands of human dignity,” he said. “All the world’s people, including the people of China, should be free to choose how they live, how they worship, and how they work.”
Trump, by contrast, has made little mention of these issues, mostly lavishing praise on his Chinese counterpart. And he agreed to work with “Beijing’s sweeping efforts to control the message of his heavily choreographed visit,” according to The Associated Press.
White House social media director Dan Scavino on Thursday used Chinese state media coverage to promote Trump’s visit.
- This article originally appeared on HuffPost.
Source Article from https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-follows-china-apos-lead-193930879.html
Has someone at the Wall Street Journal been following Natural News? It sure seems like it, as the paper recently published a piece on a topic that the mainstream media usually ignores: The power of nature and the difficulties often encountered by those who want to bring products with natural ingredients to the masses. Rife with articles about the latest chemical solutions lining the pockets of Big Pharma, it’s actually newsworthy when they admit that something natural can be beneficial, as they did in this case with the natural molecule found in licorice root extract known as glycyrrhizin.
Natural News has been talking about the “miracle molecule” glycyrrhizin for at least five years. In February 2016, Mike Adams called it “one of the most astonishing herbal cures story of the decade.” And yet it remained largely unreported in other outlets, despite several scientific studies illustrating its remarkable liver-protecting capabilities.
For example, it has been found to block the cellular damage in the liver caused by alcohol and drugs like Tylenol. As if that weren’t enough, it also has strong anti-tumor, anti-inflammation and antiviral effects, making it a powerful tool for fighting liver cancer, liver disease and cirrhosis.
This ability was not lost on businessman Harsha Chigurupati, who sought a way to make drinking alcohol safer while still a student at Boston University. The focus of the Wall Street Journal piece, he said he had the idea to infuse alcohol with the compound to help protect the liver from its health effects as people drink it.
Chigurupati spent a dozen years and $35 million to develop a compound that can protect the liver from damage by drinking, coming up with a formula containing glycyrrhizin as well as mannitol and potassium sorbate. He named the compound NTX (as in “no tox”), and human trials by a research team in California found that the biomarkers of liver damage were a remarkable 93 percent lower in those who got drunk on the vodka containing NTX compared to regular vodka. Further studies found that the vodka with NTX also decreased the amount of damage to the human participants’ DNA caused by drinking.
Discussing the product’s health benefits not allowed
Chigurupati then joined forces with the New Jersey spirit brand Bellion to infuse vodka with his NTX compound right after it is distilled. Unfortunately, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau won’t let the product explain its benefits on the bottle as their policies do not allow any type of health claims to be placed on alcoholic beverages – whether there are mountains of scientific support or not.
Among the weak excuses proffered by the TTB for this stance is that Americans could confuse “NTX” with a medication used in the management of opioid and alcohol addiction known as Naltrexone. They’ve also said that claiming on the bottle that it can reduce the risk of developing alcohol-related liver disease would distract people from those health risks it doesn’t protect against, like birth defects and addiction. They also said that it does still raise a person’s risk of liver disease compared to not drinking, albeit by far less than traditional vodka.
He has presented hundreds of studies and petitioned the TTB repeatedly, but his efforts have largely been met with opposition. A small victory with the TTB saw Chigurupati getting the green light to place the statement “Made with NTX” on each bottle, but he can’t say what it is or what it is supposed to do, so many consumers don’t realize the potential benefits of the very ingredient that is the vodka’s main selling point.
An undeterred Chigurupati is still pressing forward. Next, he’d like to infuse gin, bourbon and tequila with NTX as he continues working toward his goal of making alcohol safer. We wish we could say that it’s surprising that someone would meet so many roadblocks in trying to market a product that aims to protect people’s health, but it’s a pattern that is all too familiar as government agencies continue to protect drug companies, hospitals and doctors, who make lots of money on liver disease and liver transplants. Natural News has been discussing NTX’s quest for years, and it’s nice to see the Wall Street Journal following in our footsteps.
Akron, OH — An elderly Ohio couple, who’ve never been in trouble with the law before got a hefty dose of the police state this week because they honked their horn at the wrong cop.
Carl and Margaret Wilson were on their way home this week when they came up behind a Summit Metro Parks ranger.
“I tooted the horn and went around; he swung out behind me and followed me up,” Carl Wilson told FOX 8.
But that is when the ranger’s road rage kicked in and he began following the couple home.
“So I come up here and pulled in the driveway and that’s when he pulled in behind me,” Carl explained.
Carl then told FOX 8 that he never expected what was going to happen next.
“He was screaming, said, ‘get out of the truck,’ and ‘get on the ground.’ I said, ‘what`s wrong with you?’ I said, ‘I’m no criminal; why did you follow me?’”
Wilson explained that the ranger pulled him from his truck and threw him on the ground.
“He was absolutely crazy like he was on drugs and he wouldn’t answer any questions.”
Margaret explained that the crazed officer scared her and she thought he may hurt Carl who has to wear a protective vest due to an operation on his heart.
“I just thought he was going to hurt him because, you know, he has no protection here,” she said.
When Margaret got out of her car to confront the apparent road raging officer, he then threatened to hurt her.
“I said, ‘you’re not going to hurt Carl,’ and he said, ‘woman, stand back; I’ll spray you with this mace.’”
Suddenly, however, instead of simply threatening to hurt the elderly woman, the officer took to actually hurting her.
“We were standing here at the door of the truck and he ran all the way back and took his foot and kicked her, messed up her elbow, messed up her back,” Carl explained.
A family friend took to Facebook to explain what happened.
These are Mary’s parents, Carl and Margaret Wilson. Both in their seventies, and Carl is an Army Veteran. They were brutalized by park ranger, Jeffrey Axner, in Akron Ohio. (Summit County) This can not be happening!?! Elderly, disabled and citizens of Akron for more than 50 years they have lived in the same home in Akron for all their married lives. Mary’s father wears a brace to protect his heart since an infection after open heart surgery caused him to have his breast bones removed. He was knocked to his knees and handcuffed behind his back for an hour and a half for the crime of honking his horn at a park ranger. This fraud also kicked Mary’s mother in the stomach, knocking her to the ground and handcuffed her as well. She laid on the ground, handcuffed and crying, shaking in fear while this monster threatened to mace her. Margaret is in frail health, having had two brain surgeries and a recent shoulder surgery. This could be your parents! If our country allows this kind of brutality to the old and frail, how are any of us safe?
Naturally, Carl and Margaret, who’ve never had a run-in with police before were terrified after this happened. They explained to FOX 8 that it was especially terrifying considering the fact that it happened in their own front yard.
Carl then had some choice words about this tyrant who he says should’ve never been given a badge.
“I wasn’t even in the park. The guy, he shouldn’t even be a dogcatcher, let alone in the park as a ranger,” Carl said.
For honking at the power tripping officer, the elderly couple was attacked and arrested. However, the charges were so glaringly false that the Summit Metro Parks released a statement noting they are going to be dropping them immediately.
Summit Metro Parks has placed a park ranger on paid administrative leave following an incident yesterday involving a senior couple in their vehicle. We have also requested that all charges brought against the couple after the incident be dropped immediately.
The incident began yesterday morning at the Newton Street entrance of Goodyear Heights Metro Park. The ranger pursued the couple’s vehicle to a residence on Darrow Road and handcuffed both individuals after an altercation. A backup ranger was summoned to the scene, and an Akron Police officer driving past the residence also stopped to offer assistance. The couple was charged with resisting arrest, obstruction of official business, aggravated menacing and failure to comply.
We are conducting an internal investigation of the incident and have also reached out to the couple to learn more about the matter from their perspective. We are asking the Akron Police Department to conduct a third-party review as well. We will cooperate fully with APD’s review.
We take this matter very seriously. Our rangers are commissioned peace officers who enforce the park district’s rules, regulations and other applicable laws to protect resources, keep visitors safe and maintain good order. We hold our rangers, and all of our employees, to a high standard of conduct. Even though this incident unfolded outside park boundaries, we expect them to live up to that standard. The public deserves no less.
As soon as we learned of this incident, we immediately placed the ranger on paid administrative leave and began our investigation, in keeping with Summit Metro Parks policies and procedures, and in keeping with our contract with the Ohio Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association (OPBA).
We will provide updated information as new developments occur.
The Wilsons told FOX 8 they are hiring an attorney so we can rest assured the taxpayers of Akron will pay for this insane cop’s behavior
“I don’t wish anything bad on him, but I think they should prosecute him so that he don’t act like that anymore and hurt someone else.”
It’s been three years since Brown, a recent high school graduate, was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson from the Ferguson Police Department. Wilson was placed on paid administrative leave as hundreds of residents of the predominantly black suburb of St. Louis, Missouri, took to the streets. The following day, protests and vigils turned violent overnight with reports of riots and looting.
Within days, the FBI opened a civil rights investigation into the Brown shooting. On November 24, 2014, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch waited until 8pm local time to announce that a grand jury declined to indict Wilson on any charges relating to the shooting death of Brown. Then-Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the US Department of Justice would continue its investigation into Brown’s death, despite the lack of an indictment on the local level.
Ferguson again erupted into a night of fierce riots.
By the end of the month, Wilson resigned from the Ferguson PD. In early March, the DOJ announced it would not prosecute Wilson for civil rights violations in the Brown shooting case. In mid-April, Brown’s family filed a lawsuit against Wilson, the city of Ferguson, and chief of the Ferguson PD at the time of the shooting.
It’s not unusual for officers involved in shooting civilians to avoid charges. A 2016 study found that law enforcement avoided federal civil rights charges in 96 percent of cases in which they were accused of violating someone’s civil rights over the course of 20 years. Many police killings are ruled as justified without public knowledge.
Instead, victims’ families find justice through the civil side of the judicial branch, by accepting payouts in settlements with local jurisdictions. In June, Brown’s parents settled their wrongful death suit against the city, though the terms were not made public because it could jeopardize the safety of those involved in the matter “whether as witnesses, parties or investigators,” US District Judge E. Richard Webber wrote.
While the amount that Brown’s parents received has been sealed, Ferguson is one of many jurisdictions around the country forced to shell out millions in taxpayer money to atone for police brutality. In the last year, big cities and small towns have settled lawsuits for officer-involved shootings. In most cases, those payments are the only closure the victims and their families have received.
In June, the family of Philando Castile, a school cafeteria worker fatally shot by Minnesota police officer Jeronimo Yanez, reached a $3 million settlement with the city of St. Anthony.
Castile was shot and killed during a traffic stop last July while his girlfriend Diamond Reynolds and her four-year-old daughter were in the car. Yanez was acquitted of manslaughter and intentional discharge of a firearm that endangers safety earlier in the month.
In mid-July, Yanez was awarded a $48,500 payout to leave the St. Anthony Police Department, in addition to “up to 600 hours” of accrued personal leave.
Although a settlement was already reached last April in the fatal Tamir Rice shooting ‒ to the tune of $6 million dollars for the 12-year-old’s family ‒ one of the two officers responsible for the preteen’s death was fired at the end of May, but not because of Rice’s death on a Cleveland, Ohio, playground.
Instead, Timothy Loehmann was dismissed from the department because he omitted from his employment application that he was allowed to resign from the nearby Independence Police Department, where officials found him to be emotionally unstable and unfit to be an officer. He also concealed that he had failed a written exam for another Ohio law enforcement agency. A grand jury declined to indict Loehmann in December 2015.
Earlier in May, only one officer-involved shooting that made national headlines found justice through the judicial system ‒ but only after a mistrial. In December, jurors in Charleston, South Carolina, could not reach a unanimous verdict as to whether former officer Michael Slager, who is white, should be convicted of murder or voluntary manslaughter for fatally shooting African-American Walter Scott in the back.
On May 2, Slager pleaded guilty to violating Scott’s federal civil rights in the incident, which was caught on video. As part of the agreement, South Carolina prosecutors agreed not to retry the former cop. He faces up to life in prison and a $250,000 fine at sentencing.
David Joseph was a black teen shot and killed by a police officer in early February 2016, albeit a African-American one. Officer Geoffrey Freeman fired twice at a nude, unarmed Joseph, 17, in response to calls that a man was harassing residents in a North Austin, Texas neighborhood.
The Austin Police Department found Freeman’s use of force unjustified and fired him. This February, the city council approved a $3.25 million settlement with Joseph’s family ‒ the largest such payout in Austin’s history.
A month before the Joseph settlement, the city of Los Angeles, California, agreed to pay $1.5 million to the family of Ezell Ford, an unarmed black man who was gunned down by police in August 2014, just days before Brown’s death made national headlines.
Ford’s family filed a wrongful death and civil rights lawsuit in March 2015, claiming that Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) Officers Sharlton Wampler and Antonio Villegas “intentionally and/or negligently fatally shot unarmed decedent Ezell Ford multiple times with their firearm” after he had followed their directions to lie on the ground during an encounter in South Los Angeles. Prosecutors concluded the officers “acted lawfully in self-defense and in defense of others,” and declined to indict them.
In January, the city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, reached a $4.4 million settlement with Philippe Holland, a black delivery man whom two police officers mistakenly shot 14 times in 2014, leaving him with permanent injuries and a seizure disorder.
It was the city’s second largest payment for an officer-involved shooting. Philadelphia prosecutors never filed charges against the two officers, who were placed on desk duty after the shooting.
A week after the second anniversary of Brown’s death, New York City agreed to pay $4.1 million to settle a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of Akai Gurley, an unarmed African-American fatally shot in 2014 by a police officer in a Brooklyn housing complex.
Former officer Peter Liang was convicted by a jury of second-degree manslaughter in February 2016, but the judge reduced his conviction to criminally negligent homicide, sentencing him to five years of probation and 800 hours of community service.
The settlement also includes an additional $400,000 from the New York City Housing Authority, and $25,000 from Liang. The money will be placed in a trust fund for Gurley’s young daughter, which cannot be accessed without court approval until she turns 18.
The global movement to ban hydraulic fracturing (fracking), a method of extracting petrochemicals from shale rock deposits underneath the ground, is gaining steam as Ireland has just announced a ban on onshore fracking.
After passing the ban within the Irish parliament, The Petroleum and Other Minerals Development (Prohibition of Onshore Hydraulic Fracturing) Bill 2016 is now expected to be signed into law by Irish President Michael D. Higgins, meaning Ireland will join several other European nations in the movement.
The bill was presented by Sligo-Leitrim Dáil member Tony McLoughlin, who issued the following remarks
This law will mean communities in the West and North West of Ireland will be safeguarded from the negative effects of hydraulic fracking. Counties such as Sligo, Leitrim, Roscommon, Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan and Clare will no longer face negative effects like those seen in cities and towns in the United States, where many areas have now decided to implement similar bans to the one before us.
If fracking was allowed to take place in Ireland and Northern Ireland, it would pose significant threats to the air, water, and the health and safety of individuals and communities here.
Fracking must be seen as a serious public health and environmental concern for Ireland.
Lawmakers consider this effort to be the start of a broader initiative to phase out the use of fossil fuels in Ireland, in the hopes of creating a renewable energy independent nation for future generations. It follows similar efforts in France, Bulgaria and Germany.
While the goal of pivoting away from fossil fuels use has merit, a more immediate issue is the concern over environmental damage fracking, which is poisoning and destroying communities and rural areas in nations where fracking is in practice.
America, for example, has seen a dramatic increase in fracking related earthquakes in states who’ve historically never experienced earthquakes. Rural Americans are especially affected by fracking as in many areas, frack-wells have totally dominated the countryside, and vast swaths of wildlife habitat have been destroyed to capitalize them.
Fracking also is now believed to cause serious air pollution, and it is proven to contaminate drinking water supplies, even contributing to the startling phenomenon of flammable drinking water from your kitchen tap. Most importantly, perhaps, is the fact that fracking uses an incredible amount of fresh water, diverting supplies from much-needed farms and municipalities, turning water into a disposable resource for the oil and gas industry.