Hiromi Uehara 上原ひろみ

Hiromi Uehara (上原ひろみ, born 26 March 1979) is a jazz composer and pianist born in Hamamatsu, Japan. She is known for her virtuosic technique, energetic live performances and blend of musical genres such as jazz, progressive rock, classical and fusion in her compositions.

Hiromi started learning classical piano at age 5. She was introduced to jazz by her piano teacher Noriko Hakita when she was 8. At age 14, she played with the Czech Philharmonic Orchestra. When she was 17, she met Chick Corea by chance in Tokyo, and was invited to play with him at his concert the very next day. After being a jingle writer for a few years for Japanese companies such as Nissan, she enrolled to study at Berklee College of Music in Boston, Massachusetts. There, she was mentored by Ahmad Jamal and had already signed with jazz label Telarc before her graduation.

Since her debut in 2003, Hiromi has toured the world and appeared in numerous jazz festivals. She will be performing live at the 2009 edition of the TD Canada Trust Toronto Jazz Festival on June 29th. She performed in London on 10th July at the Barbican, City of London.

For more information on Hiromi Uehara see

Source: Youtube & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiromi_Uehara

Screen Addiction: Does the overuse of screens alter our perceptions of reality?

Deconstructionist philosopher Avital Ronell teaches that a few generations ago European travelers in the Swiss Alps found the sight of the mountain peaks so overwhelming that they equipped their carriages with special screens to block their view. They looked through tinted glasses to mediate the experience of raw nature. Today, standing in the Alps or outside our home, we no longer rely on colored glasses. Instead, we use digital cameras, cell phones and movie players to filter our experience. And we have become so accustomed to the view that we prefer pixels to sublime reality … we are addicted to the screens we use to dampen the rawness of life.

We are a society in the grips of a widespread screen addiction. Many of us spend upwards of eight hours a day staring at a screen. We carry video capable iPods, Internet savvy BlackBerrys and graphically stunning portable game machines. We steal glances at these little screens throughout the day and then tuck them back into our pockets and return our gaze to the big screens sitting on our desks. In order to relax, we plop ourselves in front of a widescreen TV. We spend more time making eye contact with our screens than with our neighbors.

The screen is, by design, the ultimate distraction. Even when we try to avoid looking at screens, our eyes are naturally drawn to their flickering lights. The dazzling special effects of our iPhones and our video games stimulate our brains more powerfully than reality. Given the option of looking at the slow pace of nature unfold or the frenetic speed of a big budget movie playing on a tiny screen, we often choose the screen. But training our brains to expect constant visual stimulation has troubling consequences.

Neuroscientists are beginning to address the long-term consequences of visual addiction. Books such as iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind argue that the increase in screen use has rewired our brains and led to a decrease in our empathy and our ability to read facial language. The authors of iBrain ultimately propose a policy of moderating screen time, I wonder if this goes far enough. As visual technologies advance and a greater proportion of our working lives are spent online, there isn’t one, individual-based, solution.

Society is addicted to screens. What we need, therefore, is not a policy of personal moderation but a cultural revolution. Our visual addiction is masking our fear of feeling existence to its fullest. Our task is to build a movement to unwire our social relationships, to unlink our workplace communications and to accept the slow pace of life in order to directly confront the existential dilemmas that we face.

Micah White is a Contributing Editor at Adbusters and an independent activist. He is writing a book on anti-screen activism. www.micahmwhite.com or micah (at) adbusters.org

Source: http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/blackspot_blog/screen_addiction.html

See also http://www.screentime.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1

Screen addiction ‘bad for kids’ health’

Videos Reveal G20 Police Aggression And Assault On Man Who Died

Exclusive footage obtained by the Guardian shows Ian Tomlinson, who died during G20 protests in London, was attacked from behind by baton–wielding police officer

Dramatic footage obtained by the Guardian shows that the man who died at last week’s G20 protests in London was attacked from behind and thrown to the ground by a baton–wielding police officer in riot gear.

Moments after the assault on Ian Tomlinson was captured on video, he collapsed to the ground and despite attempts by fellow protestors was pronounced dead shortly after*.

This was not an isolated incident. The police operation on 1st April was a disgrace.

Watch this short film of the police operation in Bishopsgate where the police attacked peaceful protestors demonstrating against climate change measures.

The footage clearly shows the campers calling out “this is not a riot” and holding their arms in the air, while riot police surge forward wielding batons and shields in an unprovoked attack.

Bikes, tents and personal belongings were damaged and lost in the attacks. Several people were injured.  There were reports of several arrests. At one point a small group of people are trapped between riot police coming in from a side entrance on the east, and more pushing up from the south.

This footage must be seen by the justice committee on ‘policing protests’. Almost every one of their recommendations are broken.

The Guardian is preparing to hand a dossier of evidence to the police complaints watchdog on the death of Ian Tomlinson.

It sheds new light on the events surrounding the death of the 47-year-old newspaper seller, who had been on his way home from work when he was confronted by lines of riot police near the Bank of England.

The submission to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) includes a collection of testimonies from witnesses, along with the video footage, shot at around 7.20pm, which shows Tomlinson at Royal Exchange Passage.

The film reveals that as he walks, with his hands in his pockets, he does not speak to the police or offer any resistance.

A phalanx of officers, some with dogs and some in riot gear, are close behind him and try to urge him forward.

A Metropolitan police officer appears to strike him with a baton, hitting him from behind on his upper thigh.

Moments later, the same policeman rushes forward and, using both hands, pushes Tomlinson in the back and sends him flying to the ground, where he remonstrates with police who stand back, leaving bystanders to help him to his feet.

The man who shot the footage, a fund manager from New York who was in London on business, said: “The primary reason for me coming forward is that it was clear the family were not getting any answers.”

The Guardian’s dossier also includes a sequence of photographs, taken by three different people, showing the aftermath of the attack, as well as witness statements from people in the area at the time.

A number of witnesses provided time and date-stamped photographs that substantiate their accounts.

Some said they saw police officers attack Tomlinson.

Witnesses said that, prior to the moment captured on video, he had already been hit with batons and thrown to the floor by police who blocked his route home.

One witness, Anna Branthwaite, a photographer, described how, in the minutes before the video was shot, she saw Tomlinson walking towards Cornhill Street.

“A riot police officer had already grabbed him and was pushing him,” she said.

“It wasn’t just pushing him – he’d rushed him. He went to the floor and he did actually roll. That was quite noticeable.

“It was the force of the impact. He bounced on the floor. It was a very forceful knocking down from behind. The officer hit him twice with a baton when he was lying on the floor.

“So it wasn’t just that the officer had pushed him – it became an assault.

“And then the officer picked him up from the back, continued to walk or charge with him, and threw him.

“He was running and stumbling. He didn’t turn and confront the officer or anything like that.”

The witness accounts contradict the official version of events given by police.

In an official statement on the night of Tomlinson’s death, the Metropolitan police made no reference to any contact with officers and simply described attempts by police medics and an ambulance crew to save his life after he collapsed – efforts they said were marred by protesters throwing missiles as first aid was administered .

The force said officers had created a cordon around Tomlinson to give him CPR.

“The officers took the decision to move him as during this time a number of missiles – believed to be bottles – were being thrown at them,” it said.

Yesterday, the IPCC began managing an investigation by City of London police into the circumstances of Tomlinson’s death after the Guardian published photographs of him on the ground and witness statements indicated he had been assaulted by police officers.

The IPCC commissioner for London, Deborah Glass, said: “Initially, we had accounts from independent witnesses who were on Cornhill, who told us that there had been no contact between the police and Mr Tomlinson when he collapsed.”

“However, other witnesses who saw him in the Royal Exchange area have since told us that Mr Tomlinson did have contact with police officers.

“This would have been a few minutes before he collapsed. It is important that we are able to establish as far as possible whether that contact had anything to do with his death.”

The IPCC added that Tomlinson was captured on CCTV walking onto Royal Exchange Passage.

“This is the aspect of the incident that the IPCC is now investigating,” it said.

It was here the video was shot. A post mortem carried out by a Home Office pathologist last Friday revealed Tomlinson died of a heart attack.

Prior to seeing the dossier of evidence, Tomlinson’s family said in a statement: “There were so many people around where Ian died, and so many people with cameras, that somebody must have seen what happened in the Royal Exchange passageway.

“We need to know what happened there and whether it had anything to do with Ian’s death.

“We know that some people who were at the protest may not feel comfortable talking to the police.

“People are putting pictures on the internet, writing on blogs and talking to journalists. But we really need them to talk to the people who are investigating what happened.”

The attack and subsequent death of Ian Tomlinson is an attack against every man and woman in the country. It could have been any of us in that position at that time. It is an attack that must be responded to.  This is another example of how the  government will behave when the people speak up or raise their voice.  It cannot be swept under the carpet. Make no mistake, the signal from Downing Street was clearly to come down hard on protestors.

The Metropolitan police had contacted a number of protest groups in the week before warning that the main day of protest, Wednesday, 1 April would be “very violent”, and senior commanders made clear that they were “up for it, and up to it”, should there be any trouble.

Make no mistake, this was a public display of brutality and aggression aimed at getting a message across.  The majority of protestors were peaceful but were met with pent up aggression and organised violence.  A  pumped up mob of testosterone fuelled officers in riot gear that had been given the green light to go and smash some skulls. I am amazed their is only one death to report.

R.I.P IAN TOMLINSON 2009

*It is now known that the cause of death was as a result of internal bleeding caused by the blows from the police officer’s assault. The officer has now come forwards and is being charged with manslaughter.