Lithium in the Water: An Idea Brought to You By Big Brother

Yes, this is the panacea for mental illnesses. Just not the illness of sheepery.



If you cannot see the entire video, here is the link to the site with the article to with the video.

TSA Tyranny

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

Bill Gates Advocates Eugenics

Atlas Shrugged and the Tea Party

The Big News You Didn’t Read This Week: The Atlas Shrugged Film Trilogy

by Frances Martel | 2:43 pm, July 24th, 2010

[who_is_john_galt] Did you know that the film that is potentially the magnum opus of the Tea Party movement is being split in three? And that, despite initial dire reports of economic woes and an inexperienced cast, production on the set of Atlas Shrugged is sailing smoothly? No, you don’t, because you were too busy staring at Andrew Breitbart’s Photoshop doodle of a literal “race card”— not that he didn’t also break that news.

Smack in the middle of the messy Shirley Sherrod race scandal, Breitbart’s Big Hollywood published an exclusive look at production on the set of Atlas Shrugged, the classic Ayn Rand novel that has skyrocketed to the top of bestseller lists on the back of support from conservative leaders like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Editor-in-Chief John Nolte reports that the state of the film is much more positive than initial reports made it seem, and broke the news that the novel is set to be split into a trilogy, rather than cramming all 1,200 pages into a two-hour feature:

“Much has been made of the film’s reported budget of $5 million, especially for a project major studios have shied away from out of budgetary concerns. Like most smart producers, [Harmon] Kaslow won’t talk specifics, but there’s more to the story than the $5 million:

‘The amount expended on the movie is far north of $5 million. The movie is based on Part 1 of the book (the book has 3 parts) … so the film is based on about 27% of the book.’ […]

Kaslow assures the Randians: ‘The movie is a direct ‘adaptation’ of the book included using much of the dialogue written by Ayn Rand.’”

The cast is completely unknown, but also fiercely loyal to Rand and her vision of the film, meaning it’s either going to be one of the more well-adapted films based on a book in history, or it will be an unmitigated disaster. It’s a battle of experience versus passion. Either way, judging from the book sales and promotion of objectivism (in some capacity) by everyone from Beck to John Stossel to, apparently, Andrew Breitbart—and many on the left using Rand to paint the caricature of their ideological opponents that best suits them— it’s more than newsworthy.

The novel strikes at the heart of the greatest schism of the American right: that between authoritarianism and libertarianism, between social conservatism and little-l “liberalism.” Let’s just say there’s a reason Sarah Palin isn’t on the list of Rand enthusiasts that isn’t the obvious book length joke (the deliberate lack of emphasis on the family and overt natural talent of the protagonists are two that come to mind).

Whatever way we define Atlas Shrugged’s place in the greater scheme of classic literature, its philosophy is at the cornerstone of the Tea Party movement, intentionally or not. Many of the ideas presented by the movement that seem a bit haphazard and arbitrary— the initial calls for the return to the gold standard, the belief that extreme socialism could actually overtake the nation in ways similar to how it has previously abroad, the abhorrence of any government aid to the underprivileged—align more coherently in the context of the book and the greater themes of Rand’s philosophy.

The small-government right may or may not be reading all 1,200 pages, but they are buying the book, promoting it, and channeling its ideas, meaning that, ultimately, it would not be irrational to expect the film to do brilliantly in the box office— at least the first one, which would not depend on the quality of any precursor. It makes sense that the producers would give Big Hollywood the exclusive, and it’s not a surprise that the film seems to be getting minimal support from the kind of crowd Big Hollywood specializes in heckling.

All of this is to say that the progress on the set of Atlas Shrugged is a much more important story to both pop culture and the political world than, say, the fact that an anonymous government employee may or may not have helped an anonymous farmer once, which makes her either a nice lady or a progressive fiend or a Russian spy and who even knows if these farmers actually exist at all? A story about a person who wields no political influence has been distorted, stretched out and spun so much that it’s been made to look like the defining issue of the midterm elections. As a nation, we have bigger fish to fry. The fact that a film with that kind of ideological baggage is set for release so close to the 2012 elections is something media spinsters should have on their radar. An Atlas Shrugged film means that all the would-be Randians too lazy to read the book or too young to care to watch The Fountainhead now have easy access to her philosophy, which, in large part, is the philosophy of the Tea Party Movement. A Shirley Sherrod YouTube video means… absolutely nothing.

Many who follow hard news were disillusioned with the fact that the media chose the Sherrod story over bigger national security and economic concerns, and while there is an argument to be made there, it is also unfair to ask the media not to cover, for lack of a better word, propaganda. Of more palpable, more specific concern here is that the media chose Breitbart’s Sherrod propaganda story—because race is a sexy thing to cover— over Breitbart’s story on the development of a sophisticated series of political films that can have a significant impact on the American right. The eager participation of the media, the White House, and the NAACP in the Sherrod case does not exonerate Breitbart for turning Sherrod’s life upside down to begin with, but it does emphasize how much the media and thus, the public, chooses to pass on interesting and potentially big stories to harp on issues that, ultimately, will do little to sway voters or change the political pulse of America.
[Photo via BeatCanvas]

Read the article here: http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-big-news-you-didnt-read-this-week-the-atlas-shrugged-film-trilogy/

Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism Terms and Concepts

The Government Can Kill Americans Citizens Anywhere in the World

Obama Can Kill American Citizens Anywhere in the World

Infowars.com
June 29, 2010



Obama and Democrats opposed this sort of behavior when Bush did it.

http://www.infowars.com/obama-can-kill-american-citizens-anywhere-in-the-world/

False Flag Operations

I don't agree with everything in this slide show, but most is an accurate example of how our government (shadow government) is willing to sacrifice a few individuals for the purpose of pursuing their plans.

False Flag Operations in U.S. History

View more presentations from Mormons4justice.

Never Waste a Crisis -- from Rahm's own mouth

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."-- Rahm Emmanuel, Chief of Staff
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-motley/2008/11/21/media-mia-emanuels-crisis-comment#ixzz0s13ZikdH


This should be burned into everybody's head. This should be the one thing that everybody remembers because this is not just the Obama administration. This is the banking community, this is giant global corporations, this is the United Nations, this is anyone who has a different point of view on the world. This is anyone, any of our enemies, from Al-Qaeda to Russia to China.

Napolitano: Internet Monitoring Needed to Fight Homegrown Terrorism

"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security." --Benjamin Franklin

Napolitano: Internet Monitoring Needed to Fight Homegrown Terrorism

Published June 18, 2010

| Associated Press



WASHINGTON -- Fighting homegrown terrorism by monitoring Internet communications is a civil liberties trade-off the U.S. government must make to beef up national security, the nation's homeland security chief said Friday.

As terrorists increasingly recruit U.S. citizens, the government needs to constantly balance Americans' civil rights and privacy with the need to keep people safe, said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.


But finding that balance has become more complex as homegrown terrorists have used the Internet to reach out to extremists abroad for inspiration and training. Those contacts have spurred a recent rash of U.S.-based terror plots and incidents.

"The First Amendment protects radical opinions, but we need the legal tools to do things like monitor the recruitment of terrorists via the Internet," Napolitano told a gathering of the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.

Napolitano's comments suggest an effort by the Obama administration to reach out to its more liberal, Democratic constituencies to assuage fears that terrorist worries will lead to the erosion of civil rights.


The administration has faced a number of civil liberties and privacy challenges in recent months as it has tried to increase airport security by adding full-body scanners, or track suspected terrorists traveling into the United States from other countries.

"Her speech is sign of the maturing of the administration on this issue," said Stewart Baker, former undersecretary for policy with the Department of Homeland Security. "They now appreciate the risks and the trade-offs much more clearly than when they first arrived, and to their credit, they've adjusted their preconceptions."

Underscoring her comments are a number of recent terror attacks over the past year where legal U.S. residents such as Times Square bombing suspect Faisal Shahzad and accused Fort Hood, Texas, shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan, are believed to have been inspired by the Internet postings of violent Islamic extremists.

And the fact that these are U.S. citizens or legal residents raises many legal and constitutional questions.

Napolitano said it is wrong to believe that if security is embraced, liberty is sacrificed.

She added, "We can significantly advance security without having a deleterious impact on individual rights in most instances. At the same time, there are situations where trade-offs are inevitable."

As an example, she noted the struggle to use full-body scanners at airports caused worries that they would invade people's privacy.

The scanners are useful in identifying explosives or other nonmetal weapons that ordinary metal-detectors might miss -- such as the explosives that authorities said were successfully brought on board the Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas Day by Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. He is accused of trying to detonate a bomb hidden in his underwear, but the explosives failed, and only burned Abdulmutallab.

U.S. officials, said Napolitano, have worked to institute a number of restrictions on the scanners' use in order to minimize that. The scans cannot be saved or stored on the machines by the operator, and Transportation Security Agency workers can't have phones or cameras that could capture the scan when near the machine.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/18/napolitano-internet-monitoring-needed-fight-homegrown-terrorism/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Text+-+Politics%29

This Worry you?? License to Kill? Intelligence Chief Says U.S. Can Take Out American Terrorists

License to Kill? Intelligence Chief Says U.S. Can Take Out American Terrorists
Director of National Intelligence Says Intelligence Community Can Target Citizens Presenting a Terrorist Threat

28 comments
By JASON RYAN
Feb. 3, 2010

The director of national intelligence affirmed rather bluntly today that the U.S. intelligence community has authority to target American citizens for assassination if they present a direct terrorist threat to the United States.
Information gained from the Christmas Day bomber has officials on high alert.

"We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community; if … we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that," Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair told the House Intelligence Committee.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra D-Mich., addressed the issue at today's hearing.

"The targeting of Americans -- it's a very sensitive issue, but again there's been more information in the public domain than what has been shared with this committee," he said.
Related
9/11 Chairs Criticize Underwear Bomber Case
Sting: FBI Nabs Firearms Execs in Vegas
Crime, Murder Rate Down in First Half of 2009

"There is no clarity." Hoekstra said. "What is the legal framework?"

"Whether that American is involved in a group that is trying to attack us, whether that American has -- is a threat to other Americans. Those are the factors involved." Blair explained. "We don't target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans."
Increasing Threat?

Blair said this is "a threat, which may be increasing. We're taking it more and more seriously and this is a -- this is something that is very -- is potentially very dangerous to us because of all of the -- for all of the reasons of the rights that American citizens have.

"We may be shooting behind the rabbit here and it's moving faster than we thought and we're spending a lot of additional effort on that, to try and understand it." Blair said.

Plan ... event of emergency, that would suspend the American Constitution

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin



Source: http://www.infowars.com/us-constitution-may-be-suspended-war-national-emergency-and-continuity-of-government/

US Constitution May Be Suspended: War, National Emergency and “Continuity of Government”



Peter Dale Scott
Japan Focus
May 30, 2010

[Congressman Jack] Brooks: Colonel North, in your work at the N.S.C. were you not assigned, at one time, to work on plans for the continuity of government in the event of a major disaster?

Both North’s attorney and Sen. Daniel Inouye, the Democratic Chair of the Committee, responded in a way that showed they were aware of the issue:

Brendan Sullivan [North's counsel, agitatedly]: Mr. Chairman?

[Senator Daniel] Inouye: I believe that question touches upon a highly sensitive and classified area so may I request that you not touch upon that?

Brooks: I was particularly concerned, Mr. Chairman, because I read in Miami papers, and several others, that there had been a plan developed, by that same agency, a contingency plan in the event of emergency, that would suspend the American constitution. And I was deeply concerned about it and wondered if that was an area in which he had worked. I believe that it was and I wanted to get his confirmation.

Inouye: May I most respectfully request that that matter not be touched upon at this stage. If we wish to get into this, I’m certain arrangements can be made for an executive session.[1]

But we have never heard if there was or was not an executive session, or if the rest of Congress was ever aware of the matter.

Brooks was responding to a story by Alfonzo Chardy in the Miami Herald. Chardy’s story alleged that Oliver North was involved with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in plans to take over federal, state and local functions during a national emergency. This planning for “Continuity of Government” (COG) called for “suspension of the Constitution, turning control of the government over to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, emergency appointment of military commanders to run state and local governments and declaration of martial law.”[3]

The expanded application of COG to any emergency was envisaged as early as 1984, when, according to Boston Globe reporter Ross Gelbspan,

Lt. Col. Oliver North was working with officials of the Federal Emergency Management Agency . . . to draw up a secret contingency plan to surveil political dissenters and to arrange for the detention of hundreds of thousands of undocumented aliens in case of an unspecified national emergency. The plan, part of which was codenamed Rex 84, called for the suspension of the Constitution under a number of scenarios, including a U.S. invasion of Nicaragua.[9]

Notes

[1] New York Times, July 14, 1987.

[2] James Bamford, A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies (New York: Doubleday, 2004), 74: “The existence of the secret government was so closely held that Congress was completely bypassed. Rather than through legislation, it was created by Top Secret presidential fiat. In fact, Congress would have no role in the new wartime administration. ‘One of the awkward questions we faced,’ said one of the participants, ‘was whether to reconstitute Congress after a nuclear attack. It was decided that no, it would be easier to operate without them.’” Cf. James Mann, The Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush’s War Cabinet (New York: Viking, 2004), 145.

[3] Miami Herald, July 5, 1987. In October 1984 Jack Anderson reported that FEMA’s plans would “suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, effectively eliminate private property, abolish free enterprise, and generally clamp Americans in a totalitarian vise.”

[4] Tim Weiner, New York Times, April 17, 1994.

[5] Bamford, A Pretext for War, 74; cf. James Mann, The Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush’s War Cabinet (New York: Viking, 2004), 138-45.

[6] Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007), 183-87.

[7] The provisions of Executive Order 12656 of Nov. 18, 1988, appear at 53 FR 47491, 3 CFR, 1988 Comp., p. 585, http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12656.html. The Washington Post (March 1, 2002) later claimed, falsely, that Executive Order 12656 dealt only with “a nuclear attack.” Earlier there was a similar misrepresentation in the New York Times (November 18, 1991).

[8] Andrew Cockburn, Rumsfeld: His Rise, Fall, and Catastrophic Legacy ( New York : Scribner, 2007), 88.

[9] Ross Gelbspan, Break-ins, Death Threats, and the FBI (Boston: South End Press, 1991), 184; cf. New York Times, November 18, 1991.

[10] 9/11 Commission Report, 38, 326; Scott, Road to 9/11, 228-29.

[11] Alfred Goldberg et al., Pentagon 9/11 (Washington: Department of Defense, 2007), 132.

[12] Scott, Road to 9/11, 238, 240-41.

[13] U.S. Department of Defense, “U.S. Northern Command,” http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/dod/northcom.htm. Cf. John R. Brinkerhoff, PBS, Online Newshour, 9/27/02: “The United States itself is now for the first time since the War of 1812 a theater of war. That means that we should apply, in my view, the same kind of command structure in the United States that we apply in other theaters of war.” Brinkerhoff had earlier developed the martial law provisions of REX 84 in the Reagan era.

[14] Cf. Peter Dale Scott and Dam Hamburg , “To All Readers: Help Force Congress To Observe the Law on National Emergencies!!!,” 911Truth.org, March 24, 2009,http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090324183053848).

[15] Peter Dale Scott, “To All Readers: Help Force Congress To Observe the Law on National Emergencies!!!” (with Dan Hamburg), http.//www.truth.org, March 24, 2009, http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090324183053848#r7.

[16] White House Press Release, September 10, 2009, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Notice-of-continuation-from-the-president-regarding-the-emergency-declared-with-respect-to-the-September-11-2001-terrorist-attacks/. A press briefing by Obama’s spokesman Robert Gibbs the same day did not mention the extension.

[17] Cf. Time, Nov. 26, 2001: “While Daschle, the Senate majority leader, could have been chosen as a representative of all Democrats or of the entire Senate, Leahy is a less obvious choice, most likely targeted for a specific reason. He is head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is involved in issues ranging from antitrust action to antiterror legislation” [emphasis added]. See also Anthony York, “Why Daschle and Leahy?” Salon, November 21, 2001, http://dir.salon.com/story/politics/feature/2001/11/21/anthrax/index.html.

[18] Brian Michael Jenkins and Frances Edwards-Winslow, “Saving City Lifelines: Lessons Learned in the 9-11 Terrorist Attacks” (San Jose, CA: Mineta Transportation Institute, San José State University, 2003).

[19] 9/11 Report, 17; cf. fn. 101, 458.

[20] Houston Chronicle, May 9, 2001; Road to 9/11, 209.

[21] James Mann, The Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush’s War Cabinet (New York: Viking, 2004), 139; James Bamford, A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse ofAmerica’s Intelligence Agencies (New York: Doublesday, 2004).

[22] Mann, Rise of the Vulcans, 144.

[23] Scott, The Road to 9/11, 186-87.

[24] 9/11 Commission Report, 555.

Andy Stern Describes Free Market and Says it "Should Never Be Revived"

Andy Stern, A Member of Obama’s Fiscal Responsibility Commission, Says ‘Worshipping the Market’ Has Failed America
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer


Andy Stern, former head of Services Employees International Union (SEIU) and a President Barack Obama appointee to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, said on Monday that the free market has failed the country and American workers. He made his remarks at a conference of the Campaign for America's Future in Washington, D.C., on Monday. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
(CNSNews.com) – Andy Stern, the former head of the Service Employees International Union who now sits on President Obama's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, said the United States needs an economic plan that does not include “worshipping” the free market.

“America needs a 21st century economic plan because we now know the market-worshipping, privatizing, de-regulating, dehumanizing American financial plan has failed and should never be revived, worshipping the market again,” Stern said in remarks at the annual conference of the liberal activist group Campaign for America’s Future in Washington on Monday.

“It has failed America and everyone that works here,” Stern said.

Stern said the changes that Obama and Democrats in Congress have made are nothing short of a “revolution” that will move the American economy from national to international.

"This not our father’s or our grandfather’s economy," Stern said. "We’re as far today from the New Deal as the New Deal was from the Civil War. And we cannot drive into the future looking in the rear view mirror."

He said the progressive movement must build on the past and look to the future as the economy is transformed "from a manufacturing base, to a service, finance, knowledge, green, Internet, and bio-science economy."

“This revolution’s going to only take 30 years,” Stern said. “No single generation of people have ever witnessed this much change in a single lifetime.

“American people sense the change,” Stern said. “They know something is different.

“And they, like us, I think, are in search of a new pathway forward,” Stern said. “And as we’ve witnessed now in the absence of a simple and realistic way forward, people – even us – sometimes resist the future or try to turn back the clock to days that are now long gone."

Quotes on our own Political Machinations

"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." - Thomas Jefferson
Ok, so I know this sounds really sensationalistic-- but these quotes are legitimate. If these don't worry you, nothing will.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. - Hosea 4:6

"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually runs the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties." - New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922

Here's a scary one:
"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation." - David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -- Thomas Jefferson -- The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion], whether real or promulgated [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government." - Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries." David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address before that organization in June of 1991

"The Roman Republic fell, not because of the ambition of Caesar or Augustus, but because it had already long ceased to be in any real sense a republic at all. When the sturdy Roman plebeian, who lived by his own labor, who voted without reward according to his own convictions, and who with his fellows formed in war the terrible Roman legion, had been changed into an idle creature who craved nothing in life save the gratification of a thirst for vapid excitement, who was fed by the state, and who directly or indirectly sold his vote to the highest bidder, then the end of the republic was at hand, and nothing could save it. The laws were the same as they had been, but the people behind the laws had changed, and so the laws counted for nothing." - Teddy Roosevelt

"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." - (President) Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom (1913)

“…somebody has to take governments’ place, and business seems to me to be a logical entity to do it.” – David Rockefeller – Newsweek International, Feb 1 1999.

Bilderberg 2010

"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually runs the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties." - New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion], whether real or promulgated [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government." - Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

Bilderberg 2010: Between the sword and the wall

The Catalan police are refreshingly friendly. But if the time for action comes, whose side will they be on?



Catalan police Policing Bilderberg: beneath the uniforms beat human hearts Photograph: Charlie Skelton for the Guardian

The enormous bald detective in beach shorts took the camera from my wife. "Let me see." He scrolled through the photographs, just taken, of me being detained at the campsite gates. He scrolled past, to see a photo of a limousine convoy, whooshing up the hill to Bilderberg. "I don't like this," he said, and waved a huge, disgruntled hand towards the conference hotel.

"Do you know how much this is costing?" asked Hannah. "Do you think the Spanish economy can afford all this?" Grimly, the enormous bald detective started deleting images of his comrades with his giant thumb. "Your opinion," he growled, "is right."

He handed the camera back to Hannah. "But you've deleted my best shots!" The detective whistled to his comrades, who were busy sniffing a jar of salted olives they had found in my car boot. He had them turn around, facing away from the camera. "Go head," he rumbled. "Take photographs."

What a difference a year makes. Last year in Vouliagmeni when I tried covering the 2009 Bilderberg meeting, I had Greek policemen yelling "No fotografia!" at me at every turn. I was arrested, tailed, harassed, rearrested, yelled at, bundled into squad cars, lied to, intimidated, wrestled with and hounded round Athens like I was John Dillinger.

This year, the police have been deployed in the same extraordinary numbers, but they are smiling, rolling their eyes at the rigmarole; the riot police are giving the thumbs-up to protesters and honking their horns as they come round the "awareness roundabout" at the foot of the hotel.

"The police have been laughing and chatting," says Daniel Turon, a Spanish psycho-sociologist, here in Sitges to psycho-sociologise Bilderberg. "One of them said he had read a book about Bilderberg; another said, 'Yes, we understand.'" The Catalan police, he says, "have a different sensibility" from what you may expect. "They are Catalan. Their minds are independent."

Their minds, perhaps, have been focused by recent pay disputes. Two days ago, the police were on strike in Barcelona: they are facing a pay cut next month, as part of Spain's "austerity measures" (what the IMF calls "fiscal consolidation") – and disgruntlement abounds.

Yesterday, the Spanish newspaper El Público quoted the Catalan police union's estimate, that "the mere deployment of the Mossos d'Esquadra entails costs of €150,000 for each of the four days of the Bilderberg meeting". This union has lodged a formal complaint about the misuse of resources in guarding Bilderberg.

El Público shares the union's concern: "The members of the Bilderberg club have not been elected by the citizens [of this country] in a democratic process, but the costs of the meeting is being met by them."

Ageing Bilderberg sleuth, Jim Tucker, says the Bilderberg group always reimburses the host nation for costs incurred. But if that's the case, the police are simply an army for hire.

Turon is keen to humanise the officers facing him: "Look at the eyes of the police," he says. "Look at the person who is there. They want to be with us."

"Your position is hyper-naive," laughs his friend, one of the organisers of the Spanish protests, Dídac S.-Costa. "They are puppets. They are nothing. They are a distraction. They are the cashiers at the supermarket; we need to confront the supermarket itself. This is a systemic problem." Dídac is a sociologist.

"We need to use the tools of the system against it. We need a brave judge, a brave lawyer. We need another Garzón" (Baltasar Garzón is the Spanish judge who issued the extradition request for General Pinochet). "We need to use the legal weapons at our disposal; to find a way, as the Spanish say, between the sword and the wall."

Ivan Torres, from Maresme (whom we met yesterday, near his roundabout bed), found himself caught last night between the sword and the wall, up in the hills above the Hotel Dolce Sitges. He was out with Rafa Palacios, the founder of the Stop Secrets Movement, trying to stop some secrets. A spotter on the hotel roof saw them crawling along; minutes later a police helicopter arrived, and officers swarmed the hills to arrest them. The policemen looked at the cameras, looked at the footage, then handed it back undeleted.

Ivan and Rafa were brought before the comisario of the Sitges police. The comisario told them frankly what he thought of them. "We admire you," he said. "We are really sad because we don't want to have a confrontation here." And, like his giant bald underling from earlier, he gestured to the hotel. "I don't like these people. All I want is a smooth operation in Sitges. The people up there," said the comisario, "I really don't like."

Rafa says that on Thursday, as police and activists squared off for the first time and as Rafa took the megaphone, it was this same comisario who stood in front of the cordon. "You have a heart under your badge", cried Rafa, "you have a brain under your hat. You are the ones we will be drinking with after the football, not the ones up the hill!"

Rafa reached out his hands towards the cordon. People who witnessed his speech say this moment defined the subsequent dynamic between the protesters and the police. "You should be protecting us, not them!" Rafa implored. "We are the people. You are the people. You are one of us!"

Rafa says he spoke directly to the comisario when he said: "A time is coming when you may be asked to use violence against us. A time is coming when you will have to choose sides. You will have to decide." And Rafa says he saw tears in the eyes of the comisario.

"I think, my friend, that I touched his heart."

My Own Essay On the American Dream

The American Dream

By Camylle Wood


Perhaps the answer to the American Dream lies in a few simple lines written at the time of our nation's founding. Thomas Jefferson drafted most of the Declaration of Independence and wrote the following, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men... are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."1 When a typical American imagines the American Dream, what ideas form in their mind? Likely a large home, abundance, and perceived happiness. But this may be a shallow interpretation of the true bounties this country offers.

Liberty is perhaps the most basic of all the rights of mankind. Pure liberty consists of a man doing what he pleases so long it does not impinge upon the rights of others. Liberty gives us the foundation on which to chase our dreams without a fear of authoritative tyranny, a freedom guaranteed by limited government. Often, we Americans look to government as a solution to our problems. Some expect it to replace what we can't or aren't willing to do to reach our dreams of material abundance. The political observer and philosopher Alexander de Tocqueville said this about our government's assumed role in the American Dream," The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."2 A Congressman from Texas once said, "To expect government to take care of us from cradle to grave undermines the basic principles of liberty."3 That goes hand in hand with what Benjamin Franklin said about our freedom, "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”4

Happiness is not guaranteed in America- but the pursuit of it is. Those that feel they are entitled to results, lack the right vision into America's destiny. If Thomas Jefferson wanted to write "Life, Liberty, and Happiness" he could have, and many Americans likely wouldn't notice the difference. Imagine if every man acquired every desire of his heart. Is every desire of every man's heart good? This principle is mediated by the principle of pure liberty. This pursuit is guaranteed by liberty that in turn provides opportunity. Through this tremendous opportunity that we enjoy here in this beloved country, comes a route through which we can achieve our dreams.

Anything that restrains our lives, liberty, and inhibits our personal pursuit of happiness in America needs to be eliminated if we are to pass on the American Dream to our children. Entitlement programs, unfair taxes, and unconstitutional laws sap our liberties every day and make the American Dream out to be about security and possessions, when, truly, liberty is at the core. Samuel Adams put our situation this way, "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”5





Citations
1. "U.S. History Project." The Declaration of Independence. 2010. Independence Hall Association. 16 May 2010
2. "iWise Wisdom On Demand." iWise Quotations. 2010. iWise Inc.. 16 May 2010
3. Ron Paul Quote-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cESC0RaVnM
4. "The Quotations Page." The Quotations Page. 2007. QuotationsPage.com. 16 May 2010
5. "Thinkexist.com." Samuel Adams Quotes. 2010. ThinkExist.com Quotations. 16 May 2010

Bias In Public Schools: One More Reason For a Voucher Program

May 14, 2010
Warner Todd Huston 2005 Kid’s Bush/Hitler Art Gets Award, 2010 Kid’s Obama/Commie Art Gets Censored
(Read WP posts from Warner Todd Huston) | (Read MT posts from Warner Todd Huston) | rss

It is, as we all know, the year 2010 and the era of Obama has fairly begun. Accordingly the commissars of good art taste in our schools have spoken: no kid's artwork that makes The Obammessiah out to be a commie will be allowed. Interestingly there was another time, another year when things were different. In 2005, as it happened, another kid's Bush-is-Hitler artwork received a wonderful award for it's inventiveness. How times have changed, eh?

Back in those hoary years of 2005 when the evil, evil Bush was destroying the world, our schools were happy to host kid's art that made Bush out to be one of the worst human beings in history. Bush-is-Hitler was so acceptable to our schools that Jeffery Eden, a 17-year-old student, was celebrated when he created his award-winning Bush diorama that, juxtaposed "Hitler quotes with statements by Mr. Bush, Nazi swastikas with American flags, desert-colored toy soldiers with olive plastic figures."

Young Mr. Eden's "work" was so wonderful he was awarded a "silver key at the Rhode Island Scholastic Art Awards." His Charelstown, New Jersey teacher, Lynn Norton, was so proud of him she gave the budding Leonardo an "A."

Eden's "work" was less than worthy as art being exclusively a political statement. All it consisted of was some photos cut out of a magazine and a couple of kid's toy soldiers pasted on a hunk of cardboard. Junk as art, really. Yet these Bush hating school thugs were overjoyed at this hack-work.

But, that was 2005 when dissing a president was all the rage in our schools. Today is another era, apparently, for today a child in Hallsville, Missouri has had his piece of art pulled because it depicts Obama surrounded by symbols of communism certainly associating Obama with that evil, failed ideology.


Art teacher Brittany Williamson said that her student simply wanted to "get a reaction" with his CommieObammie painting. She thought the painting was quite well done, too. Art wise, she is quite right, too. Compared to the 2005 garbage, this CommieObammie piece is technically good. But school administrators were not so sanguine.


Although Williamson thought the Hallsville High School sophomore’s painting was “an amazing piece,” it received not-so-amazing critiques from some school staff and visitors who complained to Williamson and Superintendent John Robertson. The painting was taken down Monday after being displayed for nearly two weeks.

The school would not identify the name of the student.

So, here we have a wonderful juxtaposition of how our schools treat presidents. Unsurprisingly it looks like what we have here is the idea that Bush/Hitler is goood, but Obama/Commie is very, very baaaad. Should we be surprised that our left intoxicated schools excoriated Bush and were consequently happy to allow students to wallow in Bush Derangement Syndrome while they are now so sycophantic for Obama that they will allow no criticism at all?

I guess there is no reason to be surprised as it seems pretty much par for the course for our fetid elementary school systems, but it is worth noting nonetheless.

I'm NOT a Socialist

George Washington's Vision

Various accounts of George Washington's vision and prophecy all agree in content. There have been only minor variations in some details as the story was repeated over the years by those to whom it was related by General Washington.



The place was Valley Forge, in the cold and bitter winter of 1777. Washington's army had suffered several reverses and the situation was desperate. Food was scarce. The Continental Congress was not sending supplies or money. Some of the troops did not even have shoes to wear in the snow. Many soldiers were sick and dying from disease and exposure. Morale was at an all-time low and there was great agitation in the Colonies against continued effort to secure our freedom from England. Nevertheless, General Washington was determined to see the struggle through.

"This afternoon, as I was sitting at this table engaged in preparing a dispatch, something seemed to disturb me. Looking up, I beheld standing opposite me a singularly beautiful female. So astonished was I, for I had given strict orders not to be disturbed, that it was some moments before I found language to inquire the cause of her presence. A second, a third and even a fourth time did I repeat my question, but received no answer from my mysterious visitor except a slight raising of her eyes.

"By this time I felt strange sensations spreading through me. I would have risen but the riveted gaze of the being before me rendered volition impossible. I assayed once more to address her, but my tongue had become useless, as though it had become paralyzed.

"A new influence, mysterious, potent, irresistible, took possession of me. All I could do was to gaze steadily, vacantly at my unknown visitor. Gradually the surrounding atmosphere seemed as if it had become filled with sensations, and luminous. Everything about me seemed to rarify, the mysterious visitor herself becoming more airy and yet more distinct to my sight than before. I now began to feel as one dying, or rather to experience the sensations which I have sometimes imagined accompany dissolution. I did not think, I did not reason, I did not move; all were alike impossible. I was only conscious of gazing fixedly, vacantly at my Companion.

"Presently I heard a voice saying, 'Son of the Republic, look and learn,' while at the same time my visitor extended her arm eastwardly. I now beheld a heavy white vapor at some distance rising fold upon fold. This gradually dissipated, and I looked upon a strange scene. Before me lay spread out in one vast plain all the countries of the world-Europe, Asia, Africa and America. I saw rolling and tossing between Europe and America the billows of the Atlantic, and between Asia and America lay the Pacific.


'Son of the Republic,' said the same mysterious voice as before,'look and learn.' At that moment I beheld a dark, shadowy being, like an angel, standing, or rather floating in midair; between Europe and America. Dipping water out of the ocean in the hollow of each hand, he sprinkled some upon America with his right hand, while with his left hand he cast some on Europe. Immediately a cloud raised from these countries, and joined in mid-ocean. For a while it remained stationary, and then moved slowly westward, until it enveloped America in its murky folds. Sharp flashes of lightning gleamed through it at intervals, and I heard the smothered groans and cries of the American people.

"A second time the angel dipped water from the ocean, and sprinkled it out as before. The dark cloud was then drawn back to the ocean, in whose heaving billows it sank from view. A third time I heard the mysterious voice saying, 'Son of the Republic, look and learn,' I cast my eyes upon America and beheld villages and towns and cities springing up one after another until the whole land from the Atlantic to the Pacific was dotted with them.

"Again, I heard the mysterious voice say, 'Son of the Republic, the end of the century cometh, look and learn.' At this the dark shadowy angel turned his face southward, and from Africa I saw an ill-omened spectre approach our land. It flitted slowly over every town and city of the latter. The inhabitants presently set themselves in battle array against each other. As I continued looking I saw a bright angel, on whose brow rested a crown of light, on which was traced the word 'Union,' bearing the American flag which he placed between the divided nation, and said, 'Remember ye are brethren.' Instantly, the inhabitants, casting from them their weapons became friends once more, and united around the National Standard.

"And again I heard the mysterious voice saying, 'Son of the Republic, look and learn.' At this the dark, shadowy angel placed a trumpet to his mouth, and blew three distinct blasts; and taking water from the ocean, he sprinkled it upon Europe, Asia and Africa. Then my eyes beheld a fearful scene: from each of these countries arose thick, black clouds that were soon joined into one. Throughout this mass there gleamed a dark red light by which I saw hordes of armed men, who, moving with the cloud, marched by land and sailed by sea to America. Our country was enveloped in this volume of cloud, and 1 saw these vast armies devastate the whole country and burn the villages, towns and cities that I beheld springing up. As my ears listened to the thundering of the cannon, clashing of swords, and the shouts and cries of millions in mortal combat, I heard again the mysterious voice saying, 'Son of the Republic, look and learn.' When the voice had ceased, the dark shadowy angel placed his trumpet once more to his mouth, and blew a long and fearful blast.

"Instantly a light as of a thousand suns shone down from above me, and pierced and broke into fragments the dark cloud which enveloped America. At the same moment the angel upon whose head still shone the word 'Union,' end who bore our national flag in one hand and a sword in the other, descended from the heavens attended by legions of white spirits. These immediately joined the inhabitants of America, who I perceived were well nigh overcome, but who immediately taking courage again, closed up their broken ranks and renewed the battle.

"Again, amid the fearful noise. of the conflict, I heard the mysterious voice saying, 'Son of the Republic, look and learn.' As the voice ceased, the shadowy angel for the last time dipped water from the ocean and sprinkled it upon America. Instantly the dark cloud rolled back, together with the armies it had brought, leaving the inhabitants of the land victorious!

"Then once more I beheld the villages, towns and cities springing up where I had seen them before, while the bright angel, planting the azure standard he had brought in the midst of them, cried with a loud voice:'While the stars remain, and the heavens send down dew upon the earth, so long shall the Union last.' And taking from his brow the crown on which blazoned the word 'Union,' he placed it upon the National Standard while the people, kneeling down, said, 'Amen.'

"The scene instantly began to fade and dissolve, and I at last saw nothing but the rising, curling vapor I at first beheld. This also disappearing, I found myself once more gazing upon the mysterious visitor, who, in the same voice I had heard before, said, 'Son of the Republic, what you have seen is thus interpreted: Three great perils will come upon the Republic. The most fearful is the third, but in this greatest conflict the whole world united shall not prevail against her. Let every child of the Republic learn to live for his God, his land and the Union.' With these words the vision vanished, and I started from my seat and felt that I had seen a vision wherein had been shown to me the birth, progress, and destiny of the United States."

The Ten Planks of the Communist Mannifesto- We've Adopted Part or even a whole of each Plank

ARE Americans practicing Communism?

Read the 10 Planks of The Communist Manifesto to discover the truth and learn how to know your enemy...

Karl Marx describes in his communist manifesto, the ten steps necessary to destroy a free enterprise system and replace it with a system of omnipotent government power, so as to effect a communist socialist state. Those ten steps are known as the Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto… The following brief presents the original ten planks within the Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx in 1848, along with the American adopted counterpart for each of the planks. From comparison it's clear MOST Americans have by myths, fraud and deception under the color of law by their own politicians in both the Republican and Democratic and parties, been transformed into Communists.


Another thing to remember, Karl Marx in creating the Communist Manifesto designed these planks AS A TEST to determine whether a society has become communist or not. If they are all in effect and in force, then the people ARE practicing communists.

Communism, by any other name is still communism, and is VERY VERY destructive to the individual and to the society!!

The 10 PLANKS stated in the Communist Manifesto and some of their American counterparts are...

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.
Americans do these with actions such as the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management (Zoning laws are the first step to government property ownership)


2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Americans know this as misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Americans call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
Americans call it government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process. Asset forfeiture laws are used by DEA, IRS, ATF etc...).

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Americans call it the Federal Reserve which is a privately-owned credit/debt system allowed by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) another privately-owned corporation. The Federal Reserve Banks issue Fiat Paper Money and practice economically destructive fractional reserve banking.


6. Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.
Americans call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) mandated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
Americans call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture… Thus read "controlled or subsidized" rather than "owned"… This is easily seen in these as well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.


8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Americans call it Minimum Wage and slave labor like dealing with our Most Favored Nation trade partner; i.e. Communist China. We see it in practice via the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920's, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive order 11000.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country.
Americans call it the Planning Reorganization act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public "law" 89-136. These provide for forced relocations and forced sterilization programs, like in China.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
Americans are being taxed to support what we call 'public' schools, but are actually "government force-tax-funded schools " Even private schools are government regulated. The purpose is to train the young to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based "Education" . These are used so that all children can be indoctrinated and inculcated with the government propaganda, like "majority rules", and "pay your fair share". WHERE are the words "fair share" in the Constitution, Bill of Rights or the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26)?? NO WHERE is "fair share" even suggested !! The philosophical concept of "fair share" comes from the Communist maxim, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need! This concept is pure socialism. ... America was made the greatest society by its private initiative WORK ETHIC ... Teaching ourselves and others how to "fish" to be self sufficient and produce plenty of EXTRA commodities to if so desired could be shared with others who might be "needy"... Americans have always voluntarily been the MOST generous and charitable society on the planet.

Pelosi: ‘Once we kick through this door,’ more reform will follow

Just the beginning. They've been saying we'll never end up with a single payer system, and that this is a necessary and rare measure, because the market will collapse if we don't pass this. Really? That's all, or is it a massive power grab.

Pelosi: ‘Once we kick through this door,’ more reform will follow

Byron York
Washington Examiner
March 16, 2010

If you have any doubt that the Democratic leadership of the House views passing the current health care reform bill as the beginning, not the end, of the process of creating a national government health care system, just note what Speaker Nancy Pelosi told a group of bloggers on Monday. “My biggest fight has been between those who wanted to do something incremental and those who wanted to do something comprehensive,” Pelosi said, according to an account by Washington Post reform advocate Ezra Klein. “We won that fight, and once we kick through this door, there’ll be more legislation to follow.”

He's the Great Reneger (and Politicians in General)

Just about died laughing watching this!!!
"You the public will have five days before I sign this."

How Our President Usurps Power by Unconstiitutional Means

There isn't much left to add to the post since the chart covers it pretty well.


Chart created by Phil Kerpen at Americans for Prosperity

More on THE COMING INSURRECTION

@ 2:12 It says, "Take up arms. Do everything possible to make their use unnecessary.There is no such thing as a peaceful insurrection. Weapons are necessary."

@ 4:31 it says, "It's a question of knowing how to fight, pick locks, to set broken bones, to treat sicknesses...how to build a pirate radio transmitter, how to set up street kitchens, how to aim straight"

@ 4:42 the synopsis of the book describes it as "an eloquent call to arms arising from the recent waves of social contestation in France and Europe... takes as its starting point theft, sabotage, refusal to work, and the elaboration of collective, self-organized forms of life."
@ 4:42 "

The Coming Insurrection

This is a scary book. It's written by the Invisible Committee, and nine of the authors are sitting in jail on account of terrorism charges in France. This is their call to action, to violently revolt against capitalism and "the system".

Here is what the description on the back reads:
It's useless to wait-- for a breakthrough, for the revolution, the nuclear apocalypse or a social movement. To go on waiting is madness. The catastrophe is not coming, it is here. We are already situated within the collapse of a civilization. It is within this reality that we must choose sides.

I'm currently reading this, and shuddering each time I read a passage like the one above. I pray God will preserve the personal liberty these domestic communists are trying to destroy. God bless the Republic.

Kane Gorny, a neglected patient at St George's Hospital in London dies of thirst - What's On Xiamen

Kane Gorny, a neglected patient at St George's Hospital in London dies of thirst - What's On Xiamen

Liberals rap Kremlin as Stalin is worshipped

Liberals rap Kremlin as Stalin is worshipped
Dmitry Solovyov
MOSCOW
Fri Mar 5, 2010 5:33am EST
A woman, holding portraits of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, walks along the Red Square to attend a wreath laying ceremony at the tomb of Stalin marking the anniversary of his death at the Kremlin wall in Moscow March 5, 2010. REUTERS/Sergei Karpukhin

A woman, holding portraits of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, walks along the Red Square to attend a wreath laying ceremony at the tomb of Stalin marking the anniversary of his death at the Kremlin wall in Moscow March 5, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Sergei Karpukhin

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian communists paid homage on Friday to Soviet leader Josef Stalin, while liberals accused the Kremlin of conniving to whitewash the dictator.

World | Russia

Communist Party chiefs led a procession of largely elderly people across Red Square on the 57th anniversary of Stalin's death, laying flowers at his grave by the Kremlin wall.

The solemn visit is an annual tradition for communists steeped in nostalgia for the Soviet era. But this year, it comes as Russia's bitter debate over Stalin's legacy sharpens ahead of May 9 celebrations marking 65 years since the Nazi defeat.

For the first time in decades, Stalin's image may appear among the banners and posters that Moscow authorities put up for Victory Day, which will draw foreign leaders to Moscow as guests of the government.

City plans to set up 10 information stands describing Stalin's role in the war have deepened animus between Russians who loathe him and their compatriots who love him.

"Today ... the greatness of Stalin's era is self-evident even to his most furious haters," Russian Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov said after laying flowers at Stalin's grave.

"We liberated the whole world, ... we built a nuclear shield, we were the first to fly into space, and we created this (nuclear) parity that ensured stable peace for nearly 50 years."

Critics call Stalin a murderer for the millions of deaths in his forced collectivization and Gulag prison camps. They say victory in the war came despite mistakes that contributed to the devastating death toll of some 27 million Soviet citizens.

Memorial, a rights group that has documented Stalin's abuses, says it will put up its own stands.

"These V-Day posters will not only insult me but also soil the memory of my father, who died with the Second Strike Army due to Stalin's senseless and cruel orders," said Lyudmila Alexeyeva, a leading rights activist and Soviet-era dissident.

After his death in 1953, the Kremlin launched a campaign to discredit Stalin, and evidence of his abuses came pouring out during the era of openness under Mikhail Gorbachev before the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.

But Stalin's backers have become bolder in recent years, and praise of the iron-fisted leader more prominent.

Opinion polls show many Russians view Stalin as a talented manager and a tough wartime leader who defeated a strong enemy. Stalin was voted Russia's third most important historical figure of all time in a nationwide television show.

Since former KBG officer Vladimir Putin came to power a decade ago, Russia's beleaguered liberals have accused the Kremlin of helping to burnish Stalin's image in order to justify its own increasingly tight political control.

Alexeyeva, 82, a recipient of the European Parliament's top human rights award, called the sincerity of official statements into question. "I suspect they have sympathy for Stalin," she said of Russia's leaders.

Roy Medvedev, a prominent historian and author of many books on Stalin, said he saw Stalin as a negative figure who would never be absolved but could not be ignored.

"For some, Stalin is a criminal. For others, he led the state for 30 years. The state had achievements and faults -- it had it all," he told Reuters. "Can Churchill be deleted from Britain's history? Likewise, we cannot erase Stalin from ours."

(Writing by Dmitry Solovyov and Steve Gutterman; editing by Jon Boyle)

Why the End of America is Closer than You Think

I sound all doom and gloom on this post, so I would like to edit the title of this post slightly.
Why the End of America is Closer than You Think-- If We Don't Act NOW!!!
We still have a choice in what direction our country is headed. We need to act NOW, while we still can.
Here is the link to where this man posted a letter of why he is moving to Ecuador.

I recently moved to Ecuador. Not for a vacation. Not for a month or two. I moved to Ecuador for good, as a permanent resident. Upon hearing my plans for living in South America, many people who knew me in the States asked things like, "Well what about the stability of Ecuador as a nation?" To which I would respond, "Oh, you mean the stability of banks that don't make loans and don't invest in derivatives? You mean the stability of a nation where the population still has the courage to march in the streets and throw corrupt officials out of its capitol?"


(CounterThink)

These questions make Americans pause. Most tend to think of public demonstrations as signs of a political instability. But in fact, public demonstrations are a sign of a healthy Democratic process. And Democracy is alive and well in Ecuador (with the usual level of corruption you find in any democracy).

It is in America, where the sheeple have been terrorized into staying inside the boundaries of their little "protest zones," that you find a fragile, unstable nation.

Through complacency and fear-mongering, most Americans have become cowards when it comes to political activism. They think emailing their Senator a few times a year is all that's required to defend freedom and preserve a nation. Marching in the streets is seen as uncivilized... or even unpatriotic! The government agrees with this, too, now labeling anyone who protests in public a "potential terrorist" and targeting them for FBI investigations. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C29...)

To be continued on next post...

No Hope in the Republican Party

GOP's Brown branded turncoat for jobs bill vote

By GLEN JOHNSON
The Associated Press
Tuesday, February 23, 2010; 8:21 PM

BOSTON -- A month after being crowned the darling of national conservatives, Republican Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts is being branded "Benedict Brown" for siding with Democrats in favor of a jobs bill endorsed by the Obama administration.

Like the four other GOP senators who joined him, the man who won the late Democrat Edward Kennedy's seat says it's about jobs, not party politics. And that may be good politics, too.

The four other GOP senators who broke ranks - Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, George Voinovich of Ohio and Christopher "Kit" Bond of Missouri - also were criticized on Tuesday. But Brown was the big target on conservative Web sites, talk shows and even the Facebook page his campaign has promoted as an example of his new-media savvy.

"We campaigned for you. We donated to your campaign. And you turned on us like every other RINO," said one writer, using the initials for "Republican-In-Name-Only."
The conservative-tilting Drudge Report colored a photo of Brown on its home page in scarlet.

The new senator responded by calling into a Boston radio station.

"I've taken three votes," Brown said with exasperation. "And to say I've sold out any particular party or interest group, I think, is certainly unfair."

The senator said that by the time he seeks re-election in two years, he will have taken thousands of votes.

"So, I think it's a little premature to say that," he said.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky wasn't particularly perturbed about Brown's vote, saying his election last month has "made a huge, positive difference for us and for the whole legislative agenda."

"We don't expect our members to be in lockstep on every single issue," McConnell added.

Political observers said each of the five Republican senators had solid reasons locally for voting as they did, to cut off a potential Republican filibuster on the bill.

The measure featured four provisions that enjoyed sweeping bipartisan support, including a measure exempting businesses hiring the unemployed from Social Security payroll taxes through December, and giving them a $1,000 credit if new workers stay on the job a full year. It would also renew highway programs through December and deposit $20 billion in the highway trust fund.

It faces a final Senate vote Wednesday.

Snowe and Collins hail from economically ailing Maine, and they can't stray too far from the Democrats who populate much of New England. And Voinovich and Bond also are from states hard hit by the recession.

The latter two also have the ultimate protection from retribution: They're not seeking re-election this fall.

"When you have decided to retire and you are a free agent, you can pretty much do what you want," said Peverill Squire, a political scientist at the University of Missouri-Columbia. And Squire doubted that Bond, retiring after 24 years in the Senate, would have paid much of a political price even if the famous appropriator were seeking re-election.

"He's had no shyness in trying to send money," he said.

While conservative columnist Michelle Malkin used her blog to accuse Voinovich of being a traitor, even suggesting he got some unspecified goody for his vote in favor of the "porkulus" bill, Ohio's governor defended him.

Gov. Ted Strickland, a Democrat, praised the senator for "standing with the people of Ohio over the majority of his party."

For Voinovich, a Republican from a Democratic stronghold, the party defection was nothing new. The two-time Ohio governor and former Cleveland mayor has sprinkled his political career with independent votes that can agitate the GOP. Former President George W. Bush famously visited Ohio in 2003 in an attempt to secure Voinovich's support for a tax cut package.

Voinovich still voted no.

Snowe and Collins, meanwhile, "survive in New England by a unique set of rules," said Dante Scala, political science professor at the University of New Hampshire.

He said: "The way they survive with voters in their homes states is by making it clear that, first and foremost, they're the servants of their constituencies, not the party label. So, they'll make a point of defying their party and going their own way."

Brown got little such leeway, despite campaigning as an "independent Republican" and publicly eschewing national supporters.

National Republican groups, as well as "tea party" members and an array of conservative special interests, all claimed a share of the credit for his upset win in the battle to succeed the legendary Kennedy.

They felt especially justified after funneling millions to Brown's campaign, including $348,000 on late television ads paid by the California-based Tea Party Express.

"You've already turned out to be as big an idiot as Obama," said one Facebook poster. "Enjoy your one term as senator."

Socialistic Hypocrites: The Premier of Labrador's Heart Surgery

Here is another example of how Socialism only hurts the middle class.
The poor quality Socialistic Healthcare provides causes the upper-class to leave the country for High-quality medical care, with the middle class left with no escape option.

'My heart, my choice,' Williams says, defending decision for U.S. heart surgery

By Tara Brautigam (CP) – 1 day ago

An unapologetic Danny Williams says he was aware his trip to the United States for heart surgery earlier this month would spark outcry, but he concluded his personal health trumped any public fallout over the controversial decision.

In an interview with The Canadian Press, Williams said he went to Miami to have a "minimally invasive" surgery for an ailment first detected nearly a year ago, based on the advice of his doctors.

"This was my heart, my choice and my health," Williams said late Monday from his condominium in Sarasota, Fla.

"I did not sign away my right to get the best possible health care for myself when I entered politics."

The 60-year-old Williams said doctors detected a heart murmur last spring and told him that one of his heart valves wasn't closing properly, creating a leakage.

He said he was told at the time that the problem was "moderate" and that he should come back for a checkup in six months.

Eight months later, in December, his doctors told him the problem had become severe and urged him to get his valve repaired immediately or risk heart failure, he said.

His doctors in Canada presented him with two options - a full or partial sternotomy, both of which would've required breaking bones, he said.

He said he spoke with and provided his medical information to a leading cardiac surgeon in New Jersey who is also from Newfoundland and Labrador. He advised him to seek treatment at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami.

That's where he was treated by Dr. Joseph Lamelas, a cardiac surgeon who has performed more than 8,000 open-heart surgeries.

Williams said Lamelas made an incision under his arm that didn't require any bone breakage.

"I wanted to get in, get out fast, get back to work in a short period of time," the premier said.

Williams said he didn't announce his departure south of the border because he didn't want to create "a media gong show," but added that criticism would've followed him had he chose to have surgery in Canada.

"I would've been criticized if I had stayed in Canada and had been perceived as jumping a line or a wait list. ... I accept that. That's public life," he said.



"(But) this is not a unique phenomenon to me. This is something that happens with lots of families throughout this country, so I make no apologies for that."

Williams said his decision to go to the U.S. did not reflect any lack of faith in his own province's health care system.

"I have the utmost confidence in our own health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador, but we are just over half a million people," he said.

"We do whatever we can to provide the best possible health care that we can in Newfoundland and Labrador. The Canadian health care system has a great reputation, but this is a very specialized piece of surgery that had to be done and I went to somebody who's doing this three or four times a day, five, six days a week."

He quipped that he had "a heart of a 40-year-old, so that gives me 20 years new life," and said he intends to run in the next provincial election in 2011.

"I'm probably going to be around for a long time, hopefully, if God willing," he said.

"God forbid for the Canadian public I won't be around longer than ever."

Williams also said he paid for the treatment, but added he would seek any refunds he would be eligible for in Canada.

"If I'm entitled to any reimbursement from any Canadian health care system or any provincial health care system, then obviously I will apply for that as anybody else would," he said.

"But I wrote out the cheque myself and paid for it myself and to this point, I haven't even looked into the possibility of any reimbursement. I don't know what I'm entitled to, if anything, and if it's nothing, then so be it."

He is expected back at work in early March.

Copyright © 2010 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Kruschev: We Won't Have To Fight You

The secretary of Agriculture of the Eisenhower administration met with Nikita Kruschev, He Quotes Nikita Khrushchev.
In 1959 Eisenhower asked Ezra Taft Benson to teach Nikita Khrushchev about Agriculture.
Ezra relayed a conversation......

"Your children will live under communism." Khrushchev said.
"On the contrary," Secretary Benson replied, "My grandchildren will live in freedom as I hope that all people will."
Khrushchev then retorted: "You Americans are so gullible. No, you won't accept Communism outright; but we'll keep feeding you small doses of Socialism until you will finally wake up and find that you already have Communism. We won't have to fight you; we'll so weaken your economy, until you fall like overripe fruit into our hands."



I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations --James Madison

Why Politicized Science is Dangerous

Why Politicized Science is Dangerous
(Excerpted from Michael Crichton's book State of Fear)

Imagine that there is a new scientific theory that warns of an impending crisis, and points to a way out.

This theory quickly draws support from leading scientists, politicians and celebrities around the world. Research is funded by distinguished philanthropies, and carried out at prestigious universities. The crisis is reported frequently in the media. The science is taught in college and high school classrooms.

I don't mean global warming. I'm talking about another theory, which rose to prominence a century ago.

Its supporters included Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Winston Churchill. It was approved by Supreme Court justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis, who ruled in its favor. The famous names who supported it included Alexander Graham Bell, inventor of the telephone; activist Margaret Sanger; botanist Luther Burbank; Leland Stanford, founder of Stanford University; the novelist H. G. Wells; the playwright George Bernard Shaw; and hundreds of others. Nobel Prize winners gave support. Research was backed by the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations. The Cold Springs Harbor Institute was built to carry out this research, but important work was also done at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford and Johns Hopkins. Legislation to address the crisis was passed in states from New York to California.

These efforts had the support of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association, and the National Research Council. It was said that if Jesus were alive, he would have supported this effort.

All in all, the research, legislation and molding of public opinion surrounding the theory went on for almost half a century. Those who opposed the theory were shouted down and called reactionary, blind to reality, or just plain ignorant. But in hindsight, what is surprising is that so few people objected.

Today, we know that this famous theory that gained so much support was actually pseudoscience. The crisis it claimed was nonexistent. And the actions taken in the name of theory were morally and criminally wrong. Ultimately, they led to the deaths of millions of people.

The theory was eugenics, and its history is so dreadful --- and, to those who were caught up in it, so embarrassing --- that it is now rarely discussed. But it is a story that should be well know to every citizen, so that its horrors are not repeated.

The theory of eugenics postulated a crisis of the gene pool leading to the deterioration of the human race. The best human beings were not breeding as rapidly as the inferior ones --- the foreigners, immigrants, Jews, degenerates, the unfit, and the "feeble minded." Francis Galton, a respected British scientist, first speculated about this area, but his ideas were taken far beyond anything he intended. They were adopted by science-minded Americans, as well as those who had no interest in science but who were worried about the immigration of inferior races early in the twentieth century --- "dangerous human pests" who represented "the rising tide of imbeciles" and who were polluting the best of the human race.

The eugenicists and the immigrationists joined forces to put a stop to this. The plan was to identify individuals who were feeble-minded --- Jews were agreed to be largely feeble-minded, but so were many foreigners, as well as blacks --- and stop them from breeding by isolation in institutions or by sterilization.

As Margaret Sanger said, "Fostering the good-for-nothing at the expense of the good is an extreme cruelty ... there is not greater curse to posterity than that of bequeathing them an increasing population of imbeciles." She spoke of the burden of caring for "this dead weight of human waste."

Such views were widely shared. H.G. Wells spoke against "ill-trained swarms of inferior citizens." Theodore Roosevelt said that "Society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind." Luther Burbank" "Stop permitting criminals and weaklings to reproduce." George Bernard Shaw said that only eugenics could save mankind.

There was overt racism in this movement, exemplified by texts such as "The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy" by American author Lothrop Stoddard. But, at the time, racism was considered an unremarkable aspect of the effort to attain a marvelous goal --- the improvement of humankind in the future. It was this avant-garde notion that attracted the most liberal and progressive minds of a generation. California was one of twenty-nine American states to pass laws allowing sterilization, but it proved the most-forward-looking and enthusiastic --- more sterilizations were carried out in California than anywhere else in America.

Eugenics research was funded by the Carnegie Foundation, and later by the Rockefeller Foundation. The latter was so enthusiastic that even after the center of the eugenics effort moved to Germany, and involved the gassing of individuals from mental institutions, the Rockefeller Foundation continued to finance German researchers at a very high level. (The foundation was quiet about it, but they were still funding research in 1939, only months before the onset of World War II.)

Since the 1920s, American eugenicists had been jealous because the Germans had taken leadership of the movement away from them. The Germans were admirably progressive. They set up ordinary-looking houses where "mental defectives" were brought and interviewed one at a time, before being led into a back room, which was, in fact, a gas chamber. There, they were gassed with carbon monoxide, and their bodies disposed of in a crematorium located on the property.

Eventually, this program was expanded into a vast network of concentration camps located near railroad lines, enabling the efficient transport and of killing ten million undesirables.

After World War II, nobody was a eugenicist, and nobody had ever been a eugenicist. Biographers of the celebrated and the powerful did not dwell on the attractions of this philosophy to their subjects, and sometimes did not mention it at all. Eugenics ceased to be a subject for college classrooms, although some argue that its ideas continue to have currency in disguised form.

But in retrospect, three points stand out. First, despite the construction of Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory, despite the efforts of universities and the pleadings of lawyers, there was no scientific basis for eugenics. In fact, nobody at that time knew what a gene really was. The movement was able to proceed because it employed vague terms never rigorously defined. "Feeble-mindedness" could mean anything from poverty to illiteracy to epilepsy. Similarly, there was no clear definition of "degenerate" or "unfit."

Second, the eugenics movement was really a social program masquerading as a scientific one. What drove it was concern about immigration and racism and undesirable people moving into one's neighborhood or country. Once again, vague terminology helped conceal what was really going on.

Third, and most distressing, the scientific establishment in both the United States and Germany did not mount any sustained protest. Quite the contrary. In Germany scientists quickly fell into line with the program. Modern German researchers have gone back to review Nazi documents from the 1930s. They expected to find directives telling scientists what research should be done. But none were necessary. In the words of Ute Deichman, "Scientists, including those who were not members of the [Nazi] party, helped to get funding for their work through their modified behavior and direct cooperation with the state." Deichman speaks of the "active role of scientists themselves in regard to Nazi race policy ... where [research] was aimed at confirming the racial doctrine ... no external pressure can be documented." German scientists adjusted their research interests to the new policies. And those few who did not adjust disappeared.

A second example of politicized science is quite different in character, but it exemplifies the hazard of government ideology controlling the work of science, and of uncritical media promoting false concepts. Trofim Denisovich Lysenko was a self-promoting peasant who, it was said, "solved the problem of fertilizing the fields without fertilizers and minerals." In 1928 he claimed to have invented a procedure called vernalization, by which seeds were moistened and chilled to enhance the later growth of crops.

Lysenko's methods never faced a rigorous test, but his claim that his treated seeds passed on their characteristics to the next generation represented a revival of Lamarckian ideas at a time when the rest of the world was embracing Mendelian genetics. Josef Stalin was drawn to Lamarckian ideas, which implied a future unbounded by hereditary constraints; he also wanted improved agricultural production. Lysenko promised both, and became the darling of a Soviet media that was on the lookout for stories about clever peasants who had developed revolutionary procedures.

Lysenko was portrayed as a genius, and he milked his celebrity for all it was worth. He was especially skillful at denouncing this opponents. He used questionnaires from farmers to prove that vernalization increased crop yields, and thus avoided any direct tests. Carried on a wave of state-sponsored enthusiasm, his rise was rapid. By 1937, he was a member of the Supreme Soviet.

By then, Lysenko and his theories dominated Russian biology. The result was famines that killed millions, and purges that sent hundreds of dissenting Soviet scientists to the gulags or the firing squads. Lysenko was aggressive in attacking genetics, which was finally banned as "bourgeois pseudoscience" in 1948. There was never any basis for Lysenko's ideas, yet he controlled Soviet research for thirty years. Lysenkoism ended in the 1960s, but Russian biology still has not entirely recovered from that era.

Now we are engaged in a great new theory that once again has drawn the support of politicians, scientists, and celebrities around the world. Once again, the theory is promoted by major foundations. Once again, the research is carried out at prestigious universities. Once again, legislation is passed and social programs are urged in its name. Once again, critics are few and harshly dealt with.

Once again, the measures being urged have little basis in fact or science. Once again, groups with other agendas are hiding behind a movement that appears high-minded. Once again, claims of moral superiority are used to justify extreme actions. Once again, the fact that some people are hurt is shrugged off because an abstract cause is said to be greater than any human consequences. Once again, vague terms like sustainability and generational justice --- terms that have no agreed definition --- are employed in the service of a new crisis.

I am not arguing that global warming is the same as eugenics. But the similarities are not superficial. And I do claim that open and frank discussion of the data, and of the issues, is being suppressed. Leading scientific journals have taken strong editorial positions of the side of global warming, which, I argue, they have no business doing. Under the circumstances, any scientist who has doubts understands clearly that they will be wise to mute their expression.

One proof of this suppression is the fact that so many of the outspoken critics of global warming are retired professors. These individuals are not longer seeking grants, and no longer have to face colleagues whose grant applications and career advancement may be jeopardized by their criticisms.

In science, the old men are usually wrong. But in politics, the old men are wise, counsel caution, and in the end are often right.

The past history of human belief is a cautionary tale. We have killed thousands of our fellow human beings because we believed they had signed a contract with the devil, and had become witches. We still kill more than a thousand people each year for witchcraft. In my view, there is only one hope for humankind to emerge from what Carl Sagan called "the demon-haunted world" of our past. That hope is science.

But as Alston Chase put it, "when the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power."

That is the danger we now face. And this is why the intermixing of science and politics is a bad combination, with a bad history. We must remember the history, and be certain that what we present to the world as knowledge is disinterested and honest.