Fox News' graphics department added together the "very likely" and "somewhat likely" numbers to reach 59 percent, and called that new group "somewhat likely." Then, for some reason, they threw in the 35 percent "very likely" as their own group, even though they already added that number to the "somewhat likely" percentage. Then they mashed together the "not very likely" and "not likely at all" groups, and threw the 15 percent who were unsure into the waste bin. Voila -- 120 percent.

Check-out mediamatters.org for clear evidence of misrepresentations by Fox News Channel.

Fox News Channel is all about misrepresentation and falsification of the truth,, with the sole goal to support an uber-conservative war-minded agenda.

Unfortunately Fox New Channel is the most viewed news channel in the USA. This means that lies are over represented and that democratic values are loosing ground in this country.

This must change, take action to spread the word to question everything presented on Fox.

This film is a shocking, almost incredible story. A government calling itself civilised tricked and expelled its most vulnerable citizens so that it could give their homeland to a foreign power . . . Ministers and their officials then mounted a campaign of deception all the way up to the Prime Minister.

STEALING A NATION (John Pilger, 2004) is an extraordinary film about the plight of people of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean - secretly and brutally expelled from their homeland by British governments in the late 1960s and early 1970s, to make way for an American military base.

The base, on the main island of Diego Garcia, was a launch pad for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Stealing a Nation has won both the Royal Television Society's top award as Britain's best documentary in 2004-5, and a 'Chris Award' at the Columbus International Film and Video Festival. A brochure of the film is available.

On April 8, 2008, the Chagos Islanders have launched a national Campaign for Resettlement of their islands.

For more information and updates on the plight of the Chagossians, visit the website of the UK Chagos Support Association.

AVAAZ.org is calling on us to support the British government effort to end commercial fishing in the Chagos archipelago.

I had never heard of the Chagos Islands, so I went to check Wikipedia to learn something about these islands. And here is what I found.

The Chagos Archipelago is basically a US military base after the British government decided to deport (forcibly removed) its legitimate inhabitants around 1970 to Mauritius:

From Wikipedia:
"Suddenly, between 1967 and 1971, the entire population was forcibly removed from the islands and relocated to Mauritius to make way for a joint United States-United Kingdom military base on Diego Garcia.

[...] It later became clear that the Chagossians had been fraudulently reclassified as 'migrant workers' in order to facilitate the American military occupation of their home. The High Court had repeatedly found in favour of the Chagosians and it was only by means of a Royal Decree that the UK government was able to overturn the decision.

[...] The British government went so far as to commission a (widely discredited) report in which it suggested that the islands were uninhabitable despite currently being home to hundreds of American military personnel."

So we need to at least question the motive here. Does the British government really want to save the oceans, or do they want to make the entire area around these islands an exclusive military zone?

I wonder if AVAAZ would like the idea of supporting the extension of military zone which is responsible for the deportation of thousands of legitimate inhabitants.

I have decided not to sign this petition as it is because I don't really like swimming in murky waters. I would love to sign the petition if it also called for the end of the military base to really protect the zone from all pollutions.

The question of its original inhabitants must also be addressed, they want to return and self determination - they do not want to be ruled by Mauritius, which the current plan after the end of the military occupation.

Update: I just signed the petition for a solution to protect the Chagos and the allow the return of Chagossians to their homeland.

Update: The lie has now been exposed thanks to Wikileaks: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/207149. 

You need to get your children off the sugar addiction, processed or not, any kind of sugar (including potatoes and killer fries), because sugars are responsible for killing more people every day than car accidents, murders, and terrorism combined.

Excess sugar (over what our bodies need for energy) is transformed into fat by the liver, transported to fat cells by (so-called bad) cholesterol, stored there, until it will be needed for energy later. The problem is that, with the typical American lifestyle, "later" never comes and the fat stays there forever, accumulates, until it kills the host (your children) from society-inflected cardiovascular decease. As Jamie Oliver puts it, this is child abuse!

If you stop the sugar flow, and start even moderate exercise, such as walking 30 minutes a day, your system will order (so-called good) cholesterol to fetch stored fat and transport it back to the liver, where the fat will then be converted to glucose and transported through the blood stream to the cells that need the energy.

Intense brain activity also requests glucose to function and is as good as exercise if intense and prolonged enough, so while you're at it make sure your children challenges their brain by getting them off television and start thinking about how to cook healthy meals or learning anything because learning consumes more energy than any other brain process.

Learning about food and its relation to metabolism would be an excellent choice to understand why the science behind what we eat is so important to our lives and reduced healthcare costs.

While you reduce sugar consumption, make sure that your children get a good supply of essential fatty acids, in particular omega-3 fatty acids (preferably from fish), that the liver cannot build - that's why they're called "essential".

Omega-3 fatty acids protect tissues from oxygen-induced damage (oxidation), and are a key building ingredient for the nervous system - including the brain.

Low-fat diets are dangerous for that reason because these deprive the body of essential fatty acids leading to premature aging, Alzheimer and Parkinson disease, depression and other mental disorders such as anorexia.

A low carbohydrate diet, associated with proper fish and vegetable intake with get your child back on a healthy and energetic lifestyle while guarantying better school results and self-loving.

Rainwater harvesting can provide fresh water while preventing out cities pollutants to increase oceans acidity.

The health cost includes tens of thousands of death per year in America alone.

Hundreds of human rights and health organizations around the world applauded U.S. President Barack Obama's move last week to repeal the so-called Global Gag Rule, which stipulated the United States may not fund any foreign healthcare organization that provides abortion counseling, advocacy, or referrals, reports OneWorld.net.

For Bangladesh, analysts concluded that $62 spent by the government to prevent an unwanted birth saved $615 in expenditures on other social services.

Iran introduced a full panoply of contraceptive measures, including the option of male sterilization-a first among Muslim countries. All forms of birth control, including contraceptives such as the pill and sterilization, were free of charge.

Perhaps the most important year affecting Homo sapiens was 1989. That was the year marking the Inflection Point for the Global Demographic Transition. Global population change reached a maximum of 88 million in that year. It has been declining ever since.

A major key toward sustainability, economic development, is the stabilization of the world population.

The good news is that family planning efforts throughout the world are not expensive and provide a return on investment model for developing countries.

The inflection point (where the second derivative equals zero) on the graph above shows that the world population is no longer on an exponential growth but that the growth rate is decreasing every year since 1989. This probably means that our civilization will not suddenly disappear after consuming all available resources like a culture of bacterias in a petri dish.

This also means that the slower growth is a (somewhat) natural response to decreasing resources per capita.

The article also shows that even strong religious opposition against family planning can be overcome as the example of Iran clearly shows.

There are other scenarios for future population growth than the above graph shows. The most pessimistic is one of continued growth, which would inevitably lead to a crisis scenario and catastrophic decrease of the world population. The most optimistic (in some way) calls for a decrease of the world population after 2050. This scenario would imply that we would overshoot the maximum population that the earth can handle. The decrease in world population could be the result of a global war or pandemic.

I find the above graph more realistic as I believe that we will find solutions to not only stop the growth rate but also to consume less unsustainable resources by 2050. I believe that as the availability of non-sustainable resources decreases there will be additional pressure against growth.

The resource per capita which is the most at risk of decreasing in the near future is not energy but food, and in particular healthy food. Healthy food requires more land surface and is the most under pressure especially in developing countries. If this challenge is addressed by intensive and unsustainable agriculture, we could only make the problem worse and move towards a less desirable scenario (from a human perspective).

Finally I would like to point out that we should not try to "save the earth". The earth could not care less about what we are doing and would be doing just fine, a million years after our extinction. The efforts towards sustainability are only to save us from our own shortcomings.