The Ohio State Medical Center (OSUMC) is performing unnecessary surgeries on women and the world-renowned doctor who blew the whistle on the practice is about to be fired. 


Well-respected gynecological pathologist Dr. Gerard Nuovo has provided public records showing that the decision to give women unnecessary surgery on their cervix or endometrium depends upon the diagnosis of an inexperienced pathologist. It has been suggested by the National Organization for Women (NOW) Education and Legal Fund that this is done to maximize profit.

Nuovo has been a tenured professor in the College of Medicine at the Department of Pathology in the OSUMC since 1999. Dr. Nuovo has written a textbook on gynecologic pathology and co-wrote a textbook entitled "Human Papillomavirus and the Relationship to Genital Tract Neoplasms." He has published over 260 peer-reviewed articles and has written 37 chapters in various medical books. 


The fall and decline of an empire can take many years, but certain "benchmarks" (as imperial courts have been known to call them) can measure the progress in one year alone. Take, for example, the year 2010.

This year opened with the United States Supreme Court claiming further power to rewrite the U.S. Constitution, specifically by further opening up elections to the highest bidder. The year closed with congressional elections that cost more than before and in which money spent by third parties to influence the elections was more decisive than before. Election advertisements, in the view of myself and many others, also became uglier, baser, and more hateful than before, while the positions advertised moved a big step rightward. These were all trends that could be measured in previous years as well, and which we will probably see advance further in years to come, barring a change of course.

Just under two weeks ago the WikiLeaksIsDemocracy statement was sent to several leading intellectuals, community organizers, activists, and people from varying political perspectives by Linda Schade. The hope was to begin building a serious, contemplative, engaged community—both nationally and internationally—who are not only concerned about preserving the U.S. Constitution, but understand the consequences of its unraveling as well as the importance of the information being published by WikiLeaks.

Nowhere is this unraveling more apparent than in the WikiLeaks case. Constitutional protections of Freedom of Speech, the Press, and the right of people to peaceably assemble are now in the cross hairs of a United States executive branch run amok with its de facto monitoring of innocent civilians, wars of aggression and other overreaches too numerous to cite here.

A dozen years ago, before 9/11, before Bush Jr. or the war on terror, Bill Clinton, then in the midst of impeachment hearings, bombed Iraq over a four-day period. Shortly before this act of national distraction, I read an article in the Chicago Tribune discussing, with the knowing, amoral inanity of the mainstream media, the international implications of the pending action.

For me, the article was immortalized by the following pull-quote from an anonymous Jordanian official, which crystallized the cynicism of geopolitics and the way nation-states function: “Look, nobody here likes Saddam, but people will not be happy when they see Iraqi babies dying on TV.”

The article was in no way critical of the quote, which seemed to be delivered up merely for our sophisticated consumption. The idea, or so it struck me, was to coyly bring readers into the know so they could pretend to weigh, as important officials do, the troublesome public relations components of an act of war before committing murder in the name of national security.

A curious turn of events is taking shape in Latin America, one that demonstrates at least two levels of international change. The leaders of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay have stated their recognition of a Palestinian state within the 'green line', the 1948 armistice line between Israel and the Palestinians.