Subject: Brother Saeed needs YOUR HELP!!! URGENT
Date: Tuesday 18 January 2005 12:11
From: Calherbe Muhammad <email@example.com>
AS SALAAM ALAIKUM
I hope and pray that this email reaches you all in the best of health and
spirit. Below is an email I received from our dear Brother Saeed, Final Call
Staff Writer in New York. Brother and His family are in critical need of
You all know the Brother's work and sacrifices, therefore, I am asking you
and the rest of the family to reach out to Brother Saeed and His Family in
this time of need. Please share your blessings with Brother and share the
message. HELP CAN'T WAIT.
May Allah continue to bless all of us.
Brother Calherbe Muhammad
Note: Brother Saeed's cell phone 917-576-3769, his Nextel Instant Connect
111*651*80, and e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org.
saeed SHABAZZ <email@example.com> wrote:
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 02:09:17 -0800 (PST)
From: saeed SHABAZZ
To: Calherbe Muhammad
Since September 11, 2004, my family and I have been homeless. We have been
staying in Staten Island at my brother;s one-bedroom apartment. He had a
stroke, and came back home in late November. I have attempted to get NOI
officials to approve assistance so that we may get a new apartment, and to
date to no avail....... We need at least $3,000, i don't have to tell you
about the rnts in New York City. I use the figure of $3,000 because I know
we can afford $900 a month for rent, so with the security and a fee for the
real estate agency, if i cannot get an apartment otherwise, etc. Let me tell
you very quickly how we ended up in this situation: Our daughter now attends
a college in Boston (Emerson). Last year she had applied to six schools
across the nation, so we had to get her to those schools, there was $1,500
for her SAT review, and many other costs, which we could not afford, but she
was a National Honor Student, she graduated 20th in her class, etc. We made
a decision that no matter what, she would be able to go to a good svhool,
and Allah blessed us, but it also cost us our apartment. I receive $900
every two weeks from the Final Call, and my wife gets a monthly disability
check which is less than $500 a month. So, we need a jump start. We must be
out of my brother's by the end of the month. Don't panic, i am not asking
you for $3,000. What i am asking you and others i will be writing is to
advocate for me with the brotherhood of the FOI that you know. My cell phone
is the best way to get me 917-576-3769 or my Nextel Instant Connect
111*651*80, e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org.
Project Engineer Resume
3771 East 142nd Street
Cleveland, OH 44120
Highly motivated, result oriented, self starter with 1 year experience as the Executive Director of CSI, Inc. 3 years experience as a Manufacturing Engineering Associate in a Leadership Rotational program with Avery Dennison. 1 year experience as an Engineering Project Manager at North Carolina A&T State University Physical Plant.
North Carolina A&T State University Greensboro, North Carolina
BS, Electrical Engineering May 1999
April 2003 Present: Center for Self-Improvement, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio - Executive Director
ุConceptualized, defined and operationalized programs and their components
ุProgram development and evaluation
ุAcquisition and procurement of funds
ุDevelop and manage operational budget
ุProfessional training and development of staff
ุEvaluation of staff
ุEstablished relationship with various political, social and special interest organizations
ุMarket programs and services
September 1999 May 2003: Avery Dennison Manufacturing Engineering Associate in the Manufacturing Engineering Logistics Leadership Development Program (MELLDP - rotational program). Below are the 5 rotations while in the MELL Development Program.
June 2002 May 2003: Six Sigma Black Belt - Specialty Tape Division, Painesville, Ohio
Lead Six Sigma Team on Black Belt Project to improve processing of Transfer Tape products in STD - Painesville Finishing yielding $100k in savings.
Taught Six Sigma Methodology and tools usage to Green Belt Candidates in STD Wave 3 Green Belt Training
Mentored Green Belt Candidates and participants in the MELL Development Program
October 2001 June 2002: Six Sigma Black Belt - GMD-Fairport, Fairport Harbor, OH
Lead Six Sigma Team on Black Belt Project for 25% reduction in setup/changeover downtime yielding $228k ($40k Hard & $188k Soft) in savings.
March 2001 October 2001: Project Engineer - OPNA Meridian, Meridian, Mississippi
Procurement of New Technology Worked with overseas manufacturer on the acceptance of two automatic label holder sealing machines increasing productivity by 100%.
Transferred equipment out of facility to OPNA plants in Tijuana, Mexico and Juarez, Mexico.
July 2000 March 2000: Project Engineer - Crepe Materials Unit, Framingham, Massachusetts
Relocation of Tubing Business Provided engineering support for state to state relocation and integration of tubing manufacturing operation from Tonowanda, N.Y. to Framingham, Massachusetts.
Procurement of New Technology Worked with overseas manufacturer to improve the design and performance of semi-automatic machine that significantly reduced production cost and increased productivity by 50%.
September 1999 July 2000: Process Engineer - Transformer Materials Unit, OFallon, Missouri
Quality Control System Project - Redesigned Quality Control System to address, track and report the causes of non-conforming materials that do not meet our quality specifications derived from customer expectations
Static Control Project Recommended upgrades on static control equipment to secure new business to be run on coating lines.
1997 1998: Physical Plant of NC A&T SU, Greensboro, North Carolina Project Engineering
Functioned as onsite liaison and monitor the performance, schedule attainment, materials and workmanship of the contractors and workers.
Performed management of minor construction and renovation projects.
Reviewed and standardized design specifications.
Supported the Physical Plant Director of Special Projects with designing and enhancing on-going projects.
1. 'd8 Certified Six Sigma Black Belt
2. 'd8 Lean Manufacturing Training
3. 'd8 AutoCAD (Alacad)
4. 'd8 Six Sigma Champion Training, July 2000
5. 'd8 Servo Training (Superior Electric)
CSAT Committee, Appointed by Vice Chancellor of Business & Finance
Council of Presidents, President
Council of Presidents, Vice-President
Special Advisor to SGA President
Assistant to Attorney General of SGA
University Civility Committee
Available upon requests
U.S. Officials Accuse DuPont of Concealing
Teflon Ingredient's Health Risk
By Michael Hawthorne
The Chicago Tribune
Tuesday 18 January 2005
PARKERSBURG, W. Va. - More than 50 years after DuPont started producing Teflon near this Ohio
River town, federal officials are accusing the company of hiding information suggesting that a chemical
used to make the popular stick- and stain-resistant coating might cause cancer, birth defects and
Environmental regulators are particularly alarmed because scientists are finding perfluorooctanoic
acid, or PFOA, in the blood of people worldwide and it takes years for the chemical to leave the body.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reported last week that exposure even to low levels of
PFOA could be harmful.
With virtually no government oversight, PFOA has been used since the early 1950s in the
manufacture of non-stick cookware, rain-repellent clothing and hundreds of other products. The EPA
says at this point there is no reason for consumers to stop using those items. But so many unresolved
questions remain about PFOA that the agency is asking an outside panel of experts to assess the
"The fact that a chemical with those non-stick properties nonetheless accumulates in people was not
expected," said Charles Auer, director of the EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
Critics say the lack of knowledge about PFOA and related chemicals - called perfluorinated
compounds - exposes a system where environmental regulators largely rely on companies that profit
from industrial chemicals to sound alarms about their safety. Questions about potential effects on
human health and the environment often aren't raised until years after a chemical is introduced to the
The long and mostly secret history of PFOA began to unravel down the road from DuPont's Teflon
plant in a West Virginia courtroom, where a Parkersburg family began asking questions in the late
1990s about a mysterious wasting disease killing their cattle.
Jim and Della Tennant suspected the culprit might lurk in a froth-covered creek that meandered past
a DuPont landfill near the Teflon plant before spilling into their pasture. Their lawsuit ended with a
monetary settlement that avoided assigning blame for the dead cows, but the legal battle uncovered a
trove of industry documents about PFOA.
One document detailed how DuPont scientists started warning company executives to avoid human
contact with PFOA as early as 1961. Industry tests later determined the chemical accumulates in the
body, doesn't break down in the environment and causes ailments in animals, including cancer, liver
damage and birth defects.
Recent studies have found that PFOA levels in some children are in the range of those that caused
developmental problems in rats.
"We're not very popular with some of the folks over at the plant," said Della Tennant, who lives in a
subdivision known as DuPont Manor, a sign of the firm's importance in this corner of Appalachia. "But I
don't know how you could sleep at night not telling people about this contamination."
If found guilty of illegally withholding information by an administrative law judge, DuPont could face
more than $300 million in fines - about $100 million more than the company is estimated to make each
year from products manufactured with PFOA.
DuPont already has agreed to pay up to $345 million to settle another lawsuit filed on behalf of
60,000 West Virginians and Ohioans whose drinking water is contaminated with PFOA. Much of what
the public is starting to learn about the chemical comes from industry documents submitted during
Those documents also prompted the EPA's ongoing review of health risks, which could lead to rules
that limit or phase out the use of PFOA.
Company officials say they share the government's concerns about the presence of PFOA in human
blood but contend they did nothing wrong and that the chemical affects animals differently than people.
"DuPont remains confident that based on over 50 years of use and experience with PFOA there is no
evidence to indicate that it harms human health or the environment," said company spokesman R.
The company's Teflon plant - a sprawling complex of towers, smokestacks and metal buildings -
rises above the flood plain in a sharp bend of the Ohio River. The area has become something of a
makeshift laboratory as scientists scramble to learn more about the chemical behind world-famous
brand names such as Teflon, Stainmaster and Gore-Tex.
Since 1976, federal law has required companies to disclose what they know about any risks posed
by toxic chemicals. The EPA says independent efforts to figure out how people are exposed to PFOA
and what it might do to them should have started by the early 1980s, when DuPont discovered an
employee had passed the chemical to her fetus.
Among other things, the EPA accuses DuPont of failing to notify the agency when two of five babies
born to plant employees in 1981 had eye and face defects similar to those found in newborn rats
exposed to PFOA.
DuPont also has known since at least 1984 that water wells in West Virginia and Ohio were
contaminated with PFOA, according to company records. But people who rely on the wells for drinking
water didn't find out until 2002, when internal DuPont documents started pouring into court.
"Someone made a conscious decision to expose us to this without telling us," said Robert Griffin,
general manager of the Little Hocking Water Association, which supplies drinking water to 12,000 Ohio
customers from wells across the river from the Teflon plant.
"If you wanted people to be lab rats for such a long period," Griffin said, "nobody would ever allow it."
Company lawyers contend DuPont wasn't obligated to share the information because PFOA doesn't
meet the legal definition of a toxic chemical that poses a "substantial risk."
DuPont documents, though, show company officials were worried the public would learn that PFOA
had contaminated local water supplies. One benefit of settling the lawsuit over the Tennant family's
dead cattle, company attorneys advised in an internal e-mail, would be preventing the release of
information about PFOA in the water.
"Biggest potential downside: plant contamination issues surface, case becomes class action,"
DuPont attorney Bernard J. Reilly concluded in a March 2000 email outlining tradeoffs if the company
chose to fight the Tennants in court.
DuPont says it has reduced air and water emissions of PFOA by 90 percent at the Teflon plant. Yet
levels of the chemical in water wells on the Ohio side of the river are the highest recorded to date,
according to tests last fall.
"Drinking water data in possession of DuPont 'reasonably supports the conclusion' that PFOA
'presents a substantial risk of injury to health,'" the EPA wrote in an October filing.
Scientists are just now starting to learn how much of the chemical is in people's blood and how far it
has traveled from the handful of sites where PFOA is manufactured or used - information that highlights
new challenges for scientists and regulators.
Substances added to food are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and must undergo
rigorous testing before their use. But critics say that with industrial chemicals the EPA is limited by
laws that make it difficult to order testing.
The agency reported in 1998 that it had no toxicity data or "safe level" for 43 percent of the 2,800
chemicals produced in volumes of 1 million pounds a year or more.
"It borders on the ridiculous," said Tim Kropp, a senior scientist with the nonprofit Environmental
Working Group, which has helped draw the EPA's attention to PFOA and other compounds. "There is
no way consumers can be knowledgeable about all of these chemicals. That's why we need the
government to ensure they are safe."
The EPA's case against DuPont has gradually evolved over four years as industry concerns about
PFOA came to light.
Agency officials initially were worried about a related perfluorinated chemical in Scotchgard, the st
ain-resistant coating pioneered by 3M. Regulators started focusing on PFOA after the EPA pressured
3M in 2000 to stop making the compounds, prompted by research that found the chemicals in human
blood and in foods such as apples, bread, green beans and ground beef.
3M had been the chief supplier of PFOA to DuPont, which now makes the chemical at a plant in
DuPont announced last week that a new study of more than 1,000 workers at the Teflon plant found
virtually no health effects from exposure to PFOA. Some workers were found to have
higher-than-expected cholesterol levels.
Tests on lab animals have found links to illnesses including liver and testicular cancer, reduced
weight of newborns and immune-system suppression. The findings concern EPA officials because rats
flush the chemical out of their bodies within days, while PFOA stays in human blood for at least four
As a result, the EPA says, the potential for human health effects cannot be ruled out.
"Low-level exposure to people over time produces blood concentrations that may be of concern,"
Auer said. "As time goes on and the opportunity for exposure continues, those blood concentrations
could move to even higher levels."
Scientists still aren't sure how PFOA is spreading around the planet. While DuPont says the
manufacturing process leaves only trace amounts of the chemical in non-stick cookware and other
goods, some researchers think that as Teflon products age they release chemicals that then break
down into PFOA.
The compound also is released into air and water during manufacturing. Studies that have found
PFOA in salmon in the Great Lakes, polar bears in the Arctic and dolphins in the Mediterranean Sea
suggest the chemical travels easily through the atmosphere.
Another theory the EPA and academic researchers are testing is that other perfluorinated chemicals,
known as telomers, break down to PFOA. Made by DuPont and other companies, telomers are used
in stain and grease-repellent coatings for carpets, clothing and fast-food packaging.
Researchers studying PFOA levels in the Great Lakes think that when carpets and clothing treated
with telomers are cleaned, some of the chemicals wash into sewage treatment plants that are not
equipped to remove them before wastewater is dumped into lakes and rivers. Landfill runoff could be
Last spring, former DuPont chemist Glenn R. Evers told a lawyer for people living near the DuPont
plant that the chemicals can be absorbed from french fry boxes, microwave popcorn bags and
hamburger wrappers, among other items, according to a partial transcript filed by the EPA. The
company responded by describing Evers as a disgruntled former employee with little direct knowledge
In Parkersburg, some are reluctant to question one of the community's leading benefactors, even
after the PFOA contamination became public. With more than 2,000 employees, the Teflon plant is the
largest manufacturer in a valley lined with plastics factories and refineries, a hub of economic strength
in a region plagued by chronic unemployment.
"We're not ignoring it, but you've got to look at all the good things they do," said George
Kellenberger, president of the Mid-Ohio Valley Chamber of Commerce.
But others drawn to the area by the promise of a good job and the rolling, pine-covered hills aren't so
By the time Matt and Melinda McDowell built their dream home a few miles north of the Teflon plant,
DuPont had known for more than a decade that the local water supply was contaminated with PFOA.
Like thousands of others in the valley, the McDowells recently received a letter informing them that
DuPont promises to install treatment equipment for six area water systems under terms of the recent
legal settlement. But they worry about their two sons, ages 8 and 12, who have drunk and breathed
PFOA for most of their lives.
"We are subjecting our children and ourselves to a giant science experiment," Matt McDowell said.
"We don't know what it's doing to us. But the bottom line is it doesn't belong in drinking water and it
definitely doesn't belong in our bodies."
Judge rejects black farmers' bid to reopen settlement
BY PETER HARDIN
TIMES-DISPATCH WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT
Jan 6, 2005
WASHINGTON -- A federal judge rejected this week a legal effort to reopen a 1999
civil-rights settlement between the U.S. Department of Agriculture and black
farmers who sued it over race discrimination in loan practices.
Judge Paul L. Friedman
of the U.S. District Court
for the District of
Columbia turned back the
bid by 11 black farmers
settlement was severely
flawed, has done little to
fix past discrimination,
and denied relief to
thousands of eligible
Friedman said Monday in
a 39-page opinion that as
a result of the settlement,
more than 13,500
farmers have received
more than $830 million in cash and other relief from the government. He affirmed
his judgment from 1999 that the settlement was "fair, reasonable and adequate,"
while also leaving room for Congress to act if it chose.
John W. Boyd Jr. of Virginia, president of the National Black Farmers Association,
said yesterday, "It appears we've exhausted our avenues in court" and will need to
push for a legislative fix.
On Capitol Hill, a House of Representatives subcommittee has been examining
concerns that the civil-rights settlement has fallen far short of weighing thousands
of black farmers' claims for payments. The Republican-led panel plans another
hearing this month.
Friedman said those who brought the legal action failed to meet numerous tests
for it to succeed, and he was sharply critical of two of them: lawyer James W. Myart
Jr. of Texas and Thomas Burrell of Tennessee, a senior official of the Black
Farmers and Agriculturalists Association Inc.
"By filing these motions and trumpeting their optimism in the press and on the
Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association, Inc., website, Mr. Myart and Mr.
Burrell have given false hope to thousands of African American farmers," Friedman
Myart replied yesterday that he thought Friedman did not like to see a number of
people trying to overturn his decision, "so naturally he's protective of it." The lawyer
said he was preparing an appeal.
"We were . . . just awestruck, that the judge would take a personal attack and
display his disdain and contempt" for people advocating on behalf of those black
farmers who did not get adequate legal notice about the settlement, Burrell said.
He contended the congressional hearings show the importance of his group's
Contact Peter Hardin at (202) 662-7669 or email@example.com