We are all aware, from newspaper accounts and from firsthand information acquired in the courtroom, that Renato Hughes has been charged with the murder of childhood friends Christian Foster and Rashad Williams, although he was not the shooter.

However, we are equally aware that Shannon Edmonds admitted shooting to death both Foster and Williams. We are also aware that, to date, Shannon Edmonds has yet to be charged with any offense.

In that vein, we pose the below questions:

1) Is Shannon Edmonds to be charged with any offense?

2) When did it become lawful for any person to shoot in the back (multiple times) and kill, two fleeing, alleged robbers? [Record Bee, 1/29/2006]

3) Has it "yet been determined whether Edmonds shot the men [Foster and Williams] while they were inside the house, outside the house or both," since that was a factor that would help determine whether Edmonds would be prosecuted, according to an article which appeared in the Press Democrat, December 10, 2005?

4) Was the weapon (Browning automatic) used by Edmonds, legally obtained and registered?

5) What about the lighting conditions in the predawn hours of Dec. 8, 2005?

6) Is Edmonds an expert marksman?

7) What about the quantity of marijuana found and taken from the Edmonds residence?

8) What is the legal amount of medical marijuana in Lake County?

9) Did Edmonds have more than the legal limit of medical marijuana, and for what purpose? According to an investigative officer of the Clearlake Police Department, from testimony given and reported in the Record-Bee (1/19/2006), he (the officer) "call(ed) the five bags of marijuana found and a not quite-full zip bag of the substance 'an acceptable amount,' with an overall street value of less than $5,000."

He continued by stating, "It could have been for sale, but five bags of marijuana is secondary in my opinion. I was called out to a double homicide investigation. While I was investigating the double homicide, I confiscated the marijuana."

10) Why was there no investigation done with regard to the amount of marijuana found at the residence of Edmonds after the killing of these two young men?

And, (11) Why wasn't the person identified by Edmonds, to a Clearlake Police Department officer, at the scene of the shooting, detained until the investigators could sort out “who did what to whom” and definitively determine if the person Edmonds identified was complicit in this incident, as Edmonds stated in front of the officer?

Finally, Lake County's chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) expects the fair dispensation of justice, in the Hughes matter, by the judicial system.

We believe, based on the above unanswered questions, that Edmonds and the unidentified fourth person at the scene of the crime on Dec. 8, 2005, should have been arrested and have to await their day in court.

Aqeela El-Amin Bakheit is president of the Lake County branch of the NAACP.

"She pushed the light of the language a little further against the darkness,” E.M. Forster said of Virginia Stephen Woolf.

"To know the psyche of Virginia Woolf, and this is what she is in effect asking of a biographer, one

would have to be either God or Virginia, preferably God," wrote Quentin Bell, her biographer and nephew.

Woolf was born Jan. 25, 1882, at the height of the Victorian Era, and has since become an important figure in the history of women and literature. So it's fitting to remember her during March, Women's History Month, the same month in which she died 66 years ago.

Bell, the son of Clive and Vanessa Stephen (Virginia's sister), grew up amongst the Bloomsbury

Group.

"What did you feel when she walked in a room?" someone once asked him.

"I don't know," he replied. "She was my aunt. I wasn't observing for posterity's sake, I was just living."

I've only ever met two people who actually met Bell – one of them is Sandra Wade, Lake County's Poet Laureate.

Anne Olivier Bell, the editor of Virginia's diaries, saw Virginia only once.

"It was across a crowded room, in the summer of 1939," she said in an interview two years ago. "She was like a vision."

"The exteme beauty of her writing," Eudora Welty wrote, "is due greatly to one fact, that the imprisonment of life within the word was as much a matter of the senses with Virginia Woolf as it was a concern of the intellect."

Virginia wrote of "Orlando," he who became she and skated through centuries of time. She wrote of "Mrs. Dalloway," a day in the life. She wrote of "A Room Of One's Own."

"If truth is to be found on the shelves of the British Museum, where – I asked myself picking up a notebook and a pencil – is truth?" she said in the latter, an essay Quentin Bell claims is "very close to her conversational style."

Not to forget the "Letters," in six volumes edited by Nigel Nicholson and Joanne Trautmann; the other

essays, nine volumes, including "The Common Reader, First Series," and "The Second Common Reader;" the non-fiction biographies of Elizabeth Barrett Browning's dog, "Flush," and of "Roger Fry."

There are books about Virginia and books about and by Leonard Woolf, her husband. There are books about Bloomsbury and books about Bloomsbury People. There are even books about Virginia and Leonard's Hogarth Press.

And there is the other fiction, from the most famous, "To The Lighthouse," to the early, "The Voyage Out," to her masterpiece, "The Waves."

Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, her American publisher, has helped make Virginia Woolf's life one of the most examined in literary history.

From this, Edward Albee has his play, "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?"

From this, Madison, Wis. has its feminist bookstore, "A Room of One's Own."

From this, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich had its centenary editions of "A Room of One's Own," "Mrs. Dalloway," "To The Lighthouse;" and a play, "Virginia" by Edna O'Brien.

From this the composer and once member of another Bloomsbury Group (his first rock band) Sigmund Snopek III has his symphonic song, "Virginia Woolf."

"Virginia walked into the sea, because she wanted nothing to be," Sigmund sings.

He told me one midnight morning in the 1970s of Virginia coming to him in a dream ... inspiring a piece of music about singing and life, suicide and dreams and "a sea, which rhymes better than the River Ouse does with 'be'."

Does a vision of Virginia singing seem strange?

She wrote to Violet Dickinson in 1927: "Many scenes have come and gone unwritten, since it is today 4^th September. A cold gray blowy day, made memorable by the sight of a kingfisher and my sense, waking early, of being visited by 'the spirit of delight.' 'Rarely comest thou spirit of delight.' That was me singing this time last year; and sang so poignantly that I have never forgotten it."

Sigmund told me later that he had never read Virginia Woolf.

I believed him and it no longer seemed strange.

Though "A Room of One's Own" most closely approaches Virginia in the flesh, I remain partial to "The

Common Readers" particularly to her essay, "The Russian Point of View."

Here it seems, in describing Dostoevsky's writing, she describes her own:

"It is all the same to him whether you are noble or simple, a tramp or a great lady. Whoever you are, you are the vessel of this perplexed liquid, this cloudy, yeasty, precious stuff, the soul. The soul is not

restrained by barriers. It overflows, it floods, it mingles with the souls of others ... nothing is outside

Dostoevsky's province, and when he is tired, he does not stop, he goes on. He cannot restrain himself. Out it tumbles upon us, hot, scalding, mixed, marvelous, terrible, oppressive – the human soul."

"Her words are very strange," Aldous Huxley once said.

"They're very beautiful, aren't they?” he wrote. “But one gets a curious feeling from them. She sees with incredible clarity, but always as through a sheet of plate glass. Her books are not immediate. They're very puzzling to me."

Yet there remains that incredible clarity.

And there remains Vanessa writing to Madge Vaughn about Virginia in 1904:

"She is really quite well now – except that she does not sleep very well – and is inclined to do too much

in some ways ... she ought not to walk very far or for a very long time alone.

"... Now she goes out before beginning to write in the morning for one-half an hour alone ..."

And there remains that final walk into the River Ouse, 28 March 1941.

She wrote, before going out this time. "I feel certain I am going mad again. I feel we cannot go through another of those terrible times. And I shan't recover this time ..."

Then, she took a stone, placed it in her pocket, walked alone into the river and drowned like Ophelia,

leaving our sight, but never our minds.

Yes, "Virginia walked into the sea." But before she did she pushed the light of the language a little

further against the darkness."

"Rarely comest thou, spirit of delight."

E-mail Gary Peterson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:5}

At a major congressional hearing in January, a prominent NASA climatologist spoke publicly about attempts by agency officials to interfere with his ability to release his research results that described impact of global warming on Antarctica.

Sadly, the scientist is not alone. Growing evidence shows that over the past several years, political interference in federal government science has become both widespread and pervasive. To ensure that science – one of the cornerstones of American democracy – continues to serve society, public officials must act to defend taxpayer-funded science from political interference.

The Bush administration has censored scientists, suppressed reports, and altered scientific documents on issues ranging from mercury pollution to childhood lead poisoning to drug safety. And for every scientist who is able to speak out against political interference in his or her work, scores of others have been pressured into silence and don’t have the standing that would allow them to speak without retribution.

Recent surveys by the Union of Concerned Scientists found that nearly 40 percent (699) of more than 1,800 scientists working at nine federal agencies report that they fear retaliation for openly expressing concerns about their agency's work. In a survey of climate scientists alone, 150 scientists reported at least 456 instances of political interference in their research or the communication of their results. These numbers should be zero.

Just as troubling are actions that politicize science by limiting public access to information and hindering public oversight. In its second term, the administration has closed federal scientific libraries that housed unique documents. It significantly reduced the public’s right to know about the chemicals factories release into our neighborhoods. And new administrative procedures effectively keep science out of many critical decisions.

Take, for example, the air we breathe. Environmental Protection Agency staff scientists have worked for decades with an independent scientific advisory committee to review the best available science on air pollutants and recommend appropriate pollution control standards. Last year, when the committee scientists objected to an EPA decision to set soot pollution standards that twisted the science and failed to protect public health, the agency responded with a new policy that significantly limits scientific input into the process.

In a more recent example, President Bush’s January amendments to an existing executive order could further centralize regulatory decision-making power in the White House. The new rules place political appointees deeper inside federal scientific agencies where they can more easily prevent scientific data from ever seeing the light of day.

In response, nearly 12,000 scientists, including 52 Nobel laureates and science advisers to both Republican and Democratic presidents dating back 50 years, signed a statement condemning this abuse and calling for reform. "The distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends must cease," they said, "if the public is to be properly informed about issues central to its well being, and the nation is to benefit fully from its heavy investment in scientific research and education."

Indeed, our nation’s prosperity is based on a foundation of independent, unfettered scientific discovery. Decision-makers must have access to the best available scientific information to make fully informed decisions that affect public health and the environment.

It’s time for action. There are no laws that protect federal scientists from retaliation for truthfully and publicly reporting their scientific results. Congress should act quickly to pass strong whistleblower protections for federal scientists who report scientific abuse.

Restoring scientific integrity to federal policy making will also take the persistent and energetic engagement of the next president. Presidential candidates should promise a zero tolerance policy for the manipulation and suppression of taxpayer-funded science. Candidates must commit to a philosophy of open government that allows scientists to speak freely about their scientific research and enables science to effectively inform public policy.

This is not an abstract debate. In the coming year, the administration will be faced with a number of critical science-based decisions. The EPA will set standards for pollution from lead and ozone. The Food and Drug Administration will continue to determine the safety of new prescription drugs and medical devices. And the Occupational Safety and Health Administration will debate regulations that protect the health and safety of workers.

Scientific freedom – the ability of scientists to conduct research and share their results free from government interference or censorship – is vital to a democracy. The thousands of scientists employed by the federal government represent a tremendous resource. Without a culture of scientific independence, public understanding of scientific issues will suffer, and our public officials will be unable to meet America’s most pressing challenges.

Francesca Grifo is a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists and director of the UCS Scientific Integrity Program in Washington.

{mos_sb_discuss:2}

The Clearlake City Council has enthusiastically and proudly appointed Mr. Dale Neiman as our permanent city administrator. Mr. Neiman possesses all of the attributes that our community has been looking for in our future leader. We believe that Clearlake has finally found the diamond it has been in search of for so many years.

All of us as citizens can do our part so that Mr. Neiman and our city can succeed. This all begins with a dream that our city has had for a long time. It is the dream of our city for our community to come together and work together. We can build this dream if we all have a willingness to want to try to succeed.

Our community is a profile of many people from different walks of life. Some are business owners and professionals in their prospective fields, some are hardworking citizens, some are retired and others are interested in the welfare of our city. We all share various cultures and customs.

The one thing that we all share and have in common is that we all live within the community. It is the affection of our city that we each possess in one degree or another and the respect for each other that will determine our city’s future. The opportunities within our city are at our doorstep, but we must open the door together.

The future of our city will always be surrounded by hopes and dreams which can become realities if we keep in the forefront all of us working together for the betterment of our community. By doing this, we can achieve anything. We all want a city that we can be proud of. No longer do we have to settle for less than we can do. Our successes are only limited if we allow them to be.

Our city now has a fresh beginning. It is a beginning that we can all be a part of. We have learned that there are no shortcuts to anywhere worth going. It is important that we come together, sharing in the thrill of our victories and the agony of our defeats. Defeats will not weaken us, but rather they will strengthen us if we join together and remain united. The strength we find in each other will help us meet the challenges that we face.

Our historical predecessors built our great nation with generations of people working together in order that our nation would have a legacy to bestow on future generations. They stood together regardless of successes or failures, setting the stage for our future. They gave us the tools to work with. It is now up to us to put these tools to use.

A community that works and builds together will always stand together. City officials cannot build this city alone. We can only build our city with the help of our citizens, as the heart of the city is the people within. There is no elevator to success. We must all climb the stairs together if we are to succeed. Embrace your city, as the city belongs to all of us. When you help your city, you help your fellow neighbor. We are all equal, so we should all share in the equality of our city.

America is the land of opportunity. Clearlake is the land of hope. It is time for all of us to exercise the will to make changes in order that we begin to work together. Let us all join together so that no artificial barriers of any kind will ever be able to cast a shadow over our city. Together, we can create the image that will become our city’s legacy.

Let us all honor the splendor of the characteristics of our community, the richness of our various cultures and the courage and fortitude to embark together on unchartered areas which will enrich the diversity of our wonderful community. We can all be confident and proud that whatever we do, protection and preservation of public health, safety and welfare will always surround our city.

Judy Thein is mayor of the City of Clearlake.

Laurelee Roark and her two dogs on the march. Courtesy photo.

On Sunday, March 18, my two dogs and I along with tens of thousands of our peacenik friends marched from the San Francisco ferry building to the civic center. In a rainbow of colors, ages and organizations we chanted slogans, sung songs of peace, beat drums and growled at the war in Iraq, as well as the politicians who put us there. The sheer number of people stretching for three plus miles and spanning the entire length of Market Street brought tears in my eyes and a fire in my belly.

I have been marching against wars for over 30 years. Later in the day, I was asked by a Republican friend of mine, "Well, how's it working so far?" The only answer I have is, "It is for the experience of being with like-minded people that makes me show up to every peace rally, each and every single time I can."

Being a very progressive liberal who is outspoken against the war and the policies of a failed war-mongering administration, sometimes I feel very lonely. Especially with the right-wing media yelling that it is the anti-war people who are the ones not supporting the troops. All that is needed to see

how crazy that might be is to be reminded about the Walter Reed Hospital scandal.

As the fourth anniversary of the start of the Iraq war arrives it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that we, the people of the United States, are systematically and constantly told the exact opposite of the truth.

However, being at a place where peace is affirmed by thousands of Americans simply brings me back to reality. As I saw this weekend, there is a huge ground swell of just plain everyday people who want and demand that the war machine stop now.

No more killing. No more bombing. No more. Not in our name, not for our country and not for our children or grandchildren. The people who lied us into this war must be brought to trial, impeached and then put in prison for the rest of their natural lives.

We have had enough. Three thousand of our bravest young men and women and thousands of innocent Iraqis is more than enough. Vote. Get on your feet and march. Find your voice and call your elected official. Like Vietnam, the war will not stop until we make it stop.

As the old anti-war song goes, "What do we want? Peace! When do we want it? Now!"

Laurelee Roark lives Clearlake Oaks with her husband and two dogs.

When I asked one of my classmates how he felt about the classification of government information, his response was as terse as it was disappointing. "I don't," he said.

Ask a student you see walking to a class at any college campus in America. The responses rarely vary.

The iPod Generation, with its sleek camera phones and on-demand online news, has all too often simply forgotten about the dirty little secrets that those we empower to run our lives and spend our money hide from us on a daily basis.

We skate across the surface of today's 24-hour news cycle, across the icy layer of the superficial and the celebrity that dominates today’s programming.

So how can anyone blame us?

We are, as the cliché goes, what we eat. As the news becomes increasingly soft and profit-oriented, healthy choices become more and more scarce.

Can I or any other transparency advocate blame a generation choosing from the journalistic equivalent of McDonalds for their unhealthy diet? Logic tells me I must answer no.

Had I never broken through that ice and into the debate room during high school, I, too, might never have discovered the cold waters that lie beneath the surface.

Once I did, the truth was as shocking as any plunge into a wintry lake.

Hundreds of detainees held without charge or due process in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; torture in secret prisons from North Africa to the Middle East to Eastern Europe; illegal wiretapping of American citizens. Every story read like the topic of a high-adrenaline bestseller ready to fall off bookshelves at a Borders or Barnes & Noble near me.

But the stories were true. And the deeper I dove, as I arrived at college and began volunteering at the Freedom of Information Center, the more unbelievable, shocking truths I discovered.

A U.S. government report saying the Iraq War has significantly increased the threat of terrorism, not quelled it; Iraqi insurgents who not only were financially self-sufficient, but even earned enough money to fund other terrorists around the world: These kinds of truths made me stare dumbly at my flat new laptop’s screen.

They underscore the necessity of a national dialogue about open government and transparency like Sunshine Week.

Now that I have seen the shadowy world beneath that layer of ice, I wonder how anyone could simply ignore the injustices our votes enable and tax dollars bankroll.

But I don’t wonder long.

I remember the words of the late President Reagan, who famously classified his grades after taking the oath of office: "all you knew is what I told you."

I remembered what I learned in history class: how he had neglected to mention his decision to sell arms to Iran and send the profits to anti-communist guerrillas in Nicaragua.

I remembered my generation, entirely too young to remember the lesson of the famous Iran-Contra Affair and like every generation, probably could have paid closer attention during American History.

When I think about how little my generation knows about the indignities of our times, I have to forgive them.

Instead of learning from a young age not to trust our politicians' power to create secrets, we went ice-skating.

Matt Velker is a student at the University of Missouri-Columbia, studying Journalism and Political Science. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:4}