Will a righteous person be found?

 

 

 

October 21, 2011

The Beast Comes to Bayou?

Timothy Birdnow

American Thinker

 

Reach into your pocket, extract a dollar bill. Printed on that bill is a phrase officially making it money; “this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private”.  Legal tender, for all debts. This is an unambiguous statement.

Yet the state of Louisiana has decided that, well, money can’t be used as money – at least if they decide it can’t.

The State Legislature recently passed, and it was signed into law in July by the Governor , HB 195 which says that anyone buying or selling second hand goods cannot use cash in the transaction. So America’s legal tender is not legal tender when dealing with certain debts.

Practical implications aside, this strikes at a number of fundamental American liberties and values; by state fiat it strikes down Article I, Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution. According to said Constitution the Congress shall have:

“Power To…coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.”

Yet a state legislature is declaring that very power null and void.

But that’s not the worst aspect of this; the purpose is to make it possible for government to follow all financial transactions involving anything not purchased from a licensed retailer.  It is a fundamental civil liberty to be able to use cash to pay for things that are wanted or needed. The freedom to buy or sell as one pleases (subject to fundamental restrictions on the public safety and rights) is absolutely fundamental; without it a nation is not free but a despotism. This is the equivalent of a national parole officer supervising consumers.

I understand the reasoning; I work in Real Estate and know that thieves sell copper stolen from houses, and there are usually no questions asked. Antique shops often buy rare items with little concern for where those items originated. But a free society has to accept certain risks. Take away the freedom to bargain and you have tyranny.

In the Book of Revelations the Beast – the man who exemplifies history’s greatest tyrant – derives his power from the ability to prevent people from buying and selling as they see fit. According to Revelation 13:17:

“And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”

While Louisiana may not be requiring a mark on the hand or forehead, it apparently has taken a page from the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition. How long before an I.D. card is required to make financial transactions? How long before that card is surgically implanted to prevent identity theft? This may seem unreasonable, but who would believe that a state in the Union would deny the public so fundamental a right?

“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (666)”

Hat tip to Ron De Haan.

Timothy Birdnow is a St. Louis based writer. His website is www.tbirdnow.mee.nu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 21, 2011

‘Solyndra on wheels’

Rick Moran

American Thinker

 

Another half billion in tax payer guaranteed money. Another company run by Democratic donors and supporters. And another company that has labored long and hard and produced…a lemon. Network news catches on to what AT wrote about yesterday.

ABC News:

With the approval of the Obama administration, an electric car company that received a $529 million federal government loan guarantee is assembling its first line of cars in Finland, saying it could not find a facility in the United States capable of doing the work.

Vice President Joseph Biden heralded the Energy Department’s $529 million loan to the start-up electric car company called Fisker as a bright new path to thousands of American manufacturing jobs. But two years after the loan was announced, the job of assembling the flashy electric Fisker Karma sports car has been outsourced to Finland.

“There was no contract manufacturer in the U.S. that could actually produce our vehicle,” the car company’s founder and namesake told ABC News. “They don’t exist here.”

Henrik Fisker said the U.S. money so far has been spent on engineering and design work that stayed in the U.S., not on the 500 manufacturing jobs that went to a rural Finnish firm, Valmet Automotive.

“We’re not in the business of failing; we’re in the business of winning. So we make the right decision for the business,” Fisker said. “That’s why we went to Finland.”

Now the Finns are very nice people, I’m sure-a handsome, hardy folk who make great sardines and have an excellent hockey team.

But carmakers? C’mon, Barry. What gives?

Politics, that’s what:

The loan to Fisker is part of a $1 billion bet the Energy Department has made in two politically connected California-based electric carmakers producing sporty — and pricey — cutting-edge autos. Fisker Automotive, backed by a powerhouse venture capital firm whose partners include former Vice President Al Gore, predicts it will eventually be churning out tens of thousands of electric sports sedans at the shuttered GM factory it bought in Delaware. And Tesla Motors, whose prime backers include PayPal mogul Elon Musk and Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, says it will do the same in a massive facility tooling up in Silicon Valley.

Here are some performance details of the Fisker car supplied by blogger Andrew Fox:

I recalled reading that the Federal government had become a major financial partner in Fisker Automotive. That would explain the official rollout taking place in Washington. When I got back to my computer, I looked up the specifics. We the taxpayers are on the hook for more than half a billion dollars, about the same amount that got loaned to Solyndra, another “green manufacturer,” before they went bankrupt. At least Solyndra was manufacturing their products in this country, providing American manufacturing jobs (if short-lived jobs), and making a product that average Americans could conceivably afford. Fisker is manufacturing these gorgeous Leonardo DiCaprio toys in Finland. And the kicker, for those of you who would still claim that the risk of half a billion tax dollars is justified by environmental gains… contrary to the company’s initial hype, the Karma will only run for thirty-two miles on its electric motors before its turbocharged gasoline engine needs to kick in (as opposed to the initial estimate of fifty miles). Once that occurs, the Karma gets about the same mileage as a Ford Explorer. Not the new Explorer, even. The older, gas-hog, body-on-frame model. We’re talking twenty miles per gallon, folks. So much for your “green investment.”

And Fox links and comments on this study of Fisker performance from Green Car Reports:

The analysts at Green Car Reports, “the ultimate guide to cleaner, greener driving,” worry that the Fisker Karma may discredit the entire Department of Energy loan program. Given that, in a comparison of EPA mileage ratings between the two “American made” (scare quotes present due to the Karma being manufactured in Finland, with its electric motors and batteries being sourced from China) plug-in hybrids now on the market, the Chevrolet Volt and the Fisker Karma, the Volt is “rated at 94 MPGe in electric mode, and 37 mpg on gasoline, with an electric range of 35 miles,” whereas the Karma is rated at “54 MPGe in electric mode; 20 mpg in range-extended mode,” with an electric range of just 32 miles, they may well be right to worry. Oh, and Fisker conveniently left out that little detail about “20 mpg in range-extended mode” in their press releases sent out in the last few days. Details are for the little people, don’t you know…

Also on the list of major investors is Obama advisor John Doerr.

The only “green” Obama and his Democratic cronies care about is cold hard cash, wrested from the taxpayer’s purse in service to the president’s re-election.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 21, 2011

Fast and Furious Scandal Cannot Be Contained

By M. Catharine Evans

American Thinker

 

Fast & Furious is literally a killer of a scandal, drenched in the blood of victims of a federal government operation.  Despite the best efforts of the Obama team to obfuscate, the truth is emerging, so that the media and even some Democrats are focusing on a full unearthing of the facts.

Tuesday, October 18 proved to be an important day in the slow march towards justice for the families of murdered federal agents Brian Terry and Jaimie Zapata, and the hundreds of Mexicans dead from Fast & Furious firearms.

First, the U.S Senate unanimously voted in favor of an amendment prohibiting funds from going to any future gun-walking type operations. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced the amendment in direct response to the 2009 Fast and Furious debacle. The bipartisan consensus prompted Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) to join Cornyn in his demand for answers from Attorney General Eric Holder.

When I look at what happened in Operation Fast and Furious, I was fast to be furious about the bungled, botched occurrences that occurred. It was poorly planned, poorly executed, had flawed leadership, and it was definitely of questionable integrity and value.

The southwest border is America’s border. Anything that happens down at your border affects us. That’s the way we need to think about ourselves, we’re all Americans, we all need to look out for one another.

Second, ABC’S Jake Tapper became the latest mainstream media reporter to focus on what he called “a big scandal.” In a Nightline interview Tapper confronted President Obama on the controversy surrounding the “Justice Department, the ATF moving guns tied to crime scenes.” Obama once again denied any prior knowledge of Fast and Furious.

Well I heard about it from the news reports. This is not something we were aware of in the White House and the Attorney General it turns out wasn’t aware of either.

So this investigation will be complete, people who have screwed up will be held accountable but our overarching goal consistently has been to say we’ve got a responsibility not only to stop drugs from flowing north, we’ve also got a responsibility to make sure we are not helping to either arm or finance these drug cartels in Mexico.

Wow. President Obama wants the American people to believe he and his top officials were unaware that low level agents were implementing a program to curb the flow of guns from the United States to Mexico. The same officials, Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who visited Mexico in March and April of 2009 “to make sure” weapons bought in the United States were not crossing the border.

Has the President forgotten he and Secretary Clinton were in the news six months before the start of Fast and Furious contending that 90% of the guns crossing into Mexico were coming from the U.S., a figure later proved to be false?  How could Clinton and Obama have been so aghast at the now-debunked number of American guns related to crimes in Mexico and yet remain clueless about the operation going on right under their noses?

If the “consistently” “overarching goal” Obama referred to in the Tapper interview was to stop the trafficking of guns from U.S. to Mexico, then how could he, AG Holder, Secretaries Clinton and Napolitano be so out of the loop they did not hear about Fast and Furious?

Is it mere coincidence that around the same time Operation Fast and Furious commenced, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acted to launch talks on a U.N. treaty to regulate the sales of small arms?   Is it also a coincidence that in October 2009, the U.S. State Department released a statement overturning the Bush administration’s previous stance against such a treaty?

Secretary Clinton supported the talks stating, “Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly.”

Later, former United Nations ambassador John Bolton weighed in on the Small Arms Treaty, warning American gun owners that the UN “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

The convergence of so many high-level actions at the same time as Fast and Furious cries out for an in-depth investigation by Republicans and Democrats.   Sen. Mikulski’s call for action on the Senate floor proves this well-planned operation isn’t a witch hunt by conservatives, but a necessary investigation of an egregious series of events that led to the horrific deaths of many innocent people.

Read more M. Catharine Evans at Potter Williams Report

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 21, 2011

Fast and Furious: What a Tangled Web They Weave

M Catharine Evans

American Thinker

 

Tuesday October 18 proved to be an important day in the slow march towards justice for the families of murdered federal agents Brian Terry and Jaimie Zapata.

First, the U.S Senate unanimously voted in favor of an amendment prohibiting funds from going to any future gun-walking type operations. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced the amendment in direct response to the 2009 Fast and Furious debacle. The bipartisan consensus prompted Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) to join Cornyn in his demand for answers from Attorney General Eric Holder.

When I look at what happened in Operation Fast and Furious, I was fast to be furious about the bungled, botched occurrences that occurred. It was poorly planned, poorly executed, had flawed leadership, and it was definitely of questionable integrity and value.

The southwest border is America’s border. Anything that happens down at your border affects us. That’s the way we need to think about ourselves, we’re all Americans, we all need to look out for one another.

Second, ABC’S Jake Tapper became the latest mainstream media reporter to focus on what he called “a big scandal.” In a Nightline interview Tapper confronted President Obama on the controversy surrounding the “Justice Department, the ATF moving guns tied to crime scenes.” Obama once again denied any prior knowledge of Fast and Furious.

Well I heard about it from the news reports. This is not something we were aware of in the White House and the Attorney General it turns out wasn’t aware of either.

So this investigation will be complete, people who have screwed up will be held accountable but our overarching goal consistently has been to say we’ve got a responsibility not only to stop drugs from flowing north, we’ve also got a responsibility to make sure we are not helping to either arm or finance these drug cartels in Mexico.

Wow. President Obama wants the American people to believe he and his top officials were unaware that low level agents were implementing a program to curb the flow of guns from the United States to Mexico. The same officials, Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who visited Mexico in March and April of 2009 “to make sure” weapons bought in the United States were not crossing the border.

Has the President forgotten he and Secretary Clinton were in the news six months before the start of Fast and Furious contending that 90% of the guns crossing into Mexico were coming from the U.S., a figure later proved to be false? How could Clinton and Obama have been so aghast at the now-debunked number of American guns related to crimes in Mexico and yet remain clueless about the operation going on right under their noses?

If the “consistently” “overarching goal” Obama referred to in the Tapper interview was to stop the trafficking of guns from U.S. to Mexico then how could he, AG Holder, Secretaries Clinton and Napolitano be so out of the loop they did not hear about Fast and Furious?

Incredibly, around the same time Operation Fast and Furious commenced, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acted to launch talks on a U.N. treaty to regulate the sales of small arms. In October 2009, the U.S. State Department released a statement overturning the Bush administration’s previous stance against such a treaty.

Clinton supported the talks stating,”Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly.”

Later Former United Nation’s ambassador John Bolton weighed in on the Small Arms Treaty warning American gun owners the UN “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

The convergence of so many high-level actions at the same time of Fast and Furious cries out for an in-depth investigation by Democrats and Republicans. Mikulski’s call for action on the Senate floor proves this well-planned operation isn’t a witch hunt by conservatives, but an egregious series of events which have led to the horrific deaths of innocent people.

Read more M. Catharine Evans at Potter Williams Report

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 21, 2011

How Many Electricians Does It Take to Screw In a Light Bulb?

By Scott Mayer

American Thinker

 

Or rather, how much time and how many electricians should it take to screw in a light bulb?  The truth is that you really don’t need one at all, but I suppose that if you happen to have a sparky or two hanging around, then you would really need just one.  And it would take only a few moments to complete.  However, if we’re talking about a local government agency contracting to have this task performed, then the answer to the first question may come as bit of a shock to the taxpayer.

 

As a young electrical contractor, I was first introduced into the surreal world of government work back in 1999.  Let’s just say it was for a California South Bay Area county.

 

My company was asked to provide a proposal for the hourly labor rate that we would charge to perform several miscellaneous “Y2K” electrical projects at various county-owned buildings prior to the end of the year.  We ended up winning the contract, which definitely made my guys happy because they were able to cash in on the prevailing wage rates (the equivalent of union wages) that we were required to pay them.  I found the arrangement attractive as well because we had to supply only the manpower, while the county provided all of the necessary direction for the men.  Seemed like a win/win.

 

Most of the assignments were fairly straightforward troubleshooting or repair types of projects, and according to the guys, there was absolutely no pressure to work at lightning speed.  They definitely enjoyed the higher wages they were earning — for a while.

 

At the end of the workday one afternoon, I spoke with the guys and received some negative feedback about what they had been asked to do on that particular day.  I was really surprised by their moods, given the amount of money they were making.

 

It turns out that the two of them were assigned the task of replacing a single light bulb — unbelievably, they were asked by their temporary boss at the county to make the assignment last the entire day.  Granted, it was a large metal-halide, or high-pressure-sodium, lamp that was fairly high off the ground, but it still should have taken one man no more than about twenty minutes to complete the task.

 

Construction is a fast-paced environment, and my team was used to being as productive as possible (I lose my business and they lose their jobs if we’re not productive), so they were naturally extremely uncomfortable with being asked to be so unproductive.  Because they felt so uncomfortable with their assignment, they did attempt to find some additional things to do in order to keep themselves busy, like inspecting existing electrical, cleaning, sweeping, etc.  I did make sure that they were kept busy for the remainder of the contract.

 

I’m not sure how much you’d be willing to pay an electrician to change just one lamp, but I’m sure you would absolutely blow a fuse if you were asked to pay (as taxpayers did) the almost $1,100 that the county paid my company to replace just one light bulb on that day.  The county did in fact “party like it’s 1999,” but it did so on the taxpayer’s dime.

 

While not all of the tasks were as blatantly wasteful as the one given on that day, it seems as though my company was hired to help dispose of some “surplus” cash that the county was given for those “Y2K” projects.  Basically it’s the same concept as one of those “use it or lose it” year-end monetary bonfires we’ve all heard about.

 

Anyone who’s ever had the “luxury” of running a (non-crony) business understands that this kind of treatment of capital is 180 degrees out of phase from how the free market works — and the free market does work!  This is just another example of the costly consequences of people having the freedom to play around with other people’s money while being safely insulated from those pesky free-market forces.

 

If President Obama was even remotely serious about job-creation, he would quit with the childish “Occupy Wall Street” mentality and embrace the one thing that the government is capable of doing to help the creation of jobs (in the private sector), which is to just get out of the way of the job-creators and start unscrewing the inhibitory taxes, regulations, spending, and unnecessary waste that are currently impeding any real economic recovery.

 

Instead, our president keeps trying to answer another question: how many tax dollars does it take to create a job?  Unfortunately for the taxpayer, the answer will never be a static number, as the question is based upon the false pretense that government stimulus money is able to provide any meaningful job growth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 21, 2011

Jobs to Obama: ‘You’re headed for a one term presidency’

Rick Moran

American Thinker

 

The new biography of Steve Jobs is being rushed into print following the Apple founder’s death and there are some interesting tidbits that have been released prior to publication that put a little different spin on Jobs and his beliefs.

Huffpo:

Jobs, who was known for his prickly, stubborn personality, almost  missed meeting President Obama in the fall of 2010 because he insisted  that the president personally ask him for a meeting. Though his wife  told him that Obama “was really psyched to meet with you,” Jobs insisted  on the personal invitation, and the standoff lasted for five days. When  he finally relented and they met at the Westin San Francisco Airport,  Jobs was characteristically blunt. He seemed to have transformed from a  liberal into a conservative.

“You’re headed for a one-term presidency,” he told Obama at the start  of their meeting, insisting that the administration needed to be more  business-friendly. As an example, Jobs described the ease with which  companies can build factories in China compared to the United States,  where “regulations and unnecessary costs” make it difficult for them.

Jobs also criticized America’s education system, saying it was  “crippled by union work rules,” noted Isaacson. “Until the teachers’  unions were broken, there was almost no hope for education reform.” Jobs  proposed allowing principals to hire and fire teachers based on merit,  that schools stay open until 6 p.m. and that they be open 11 months a  year.

Aiding Obama’s Reelection Campaign

Jobs suggested that Obama meet six or seven other CEOs who could  express the needs of innovative businesses — but when White House aides  added more names to the list, Jobs insisted that it was growing too big  and that “he had no intention of coming.” In preparation for the  dinner, Jobs exhibited his notorious attention to detail, telling  venture capitalist John Doerr that the menu of shrimp, cod and lentil  salad was “far too fancy” and objecting to a chocolate truffle dessert.  But he was overruled by the White House, which cited the president’s  fondness for cream pie.

Though Jobs was not that impressed by Obama, later telling Isaacson  that his focus on the reasons that things can’t get done “infuriates”  him, they kept in touch and talked by phone a few more times. Jobs even  offered to help create Obama’s political ads for the 2012 campaign. “He  had made the same offer in 2008, but he’d become annoyed when Obama’s  strategist David Axelrod wasn’t totally deferential,” writes Isaacson.   Jobs later told the author that he wanted to do for Obama what the  legendary “morning in America” ads did for Ronald Reagan.

Jobs was no fool, and despite the fact that he was a liberal, he recognized what needed to be done to improve the business climate in America. He also pegged Obama correctly as someone who promoted anti-business policies and regulations.

It comes as no surprise that Obama refused to listen to a successful businessman, preferring instead the advice given by ivory tower academics who never met a payroll in their lives.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Iran’s war to win

October 19, 2011,  6:01 PM
Caroline Glick
Mullahs.jpg
The Obama administration’s response to Iran’s plan to bring its 32-year-old war against the United States to the US capital is the newest confirmation that President Barack Obama has no intention in taking action to remove or diminish the threat Iran poses to the US, its allies and interests.
Last week, the Justice Department revealed that law enforcement officials foiled an Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the US and to blow up the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington.
They arrested an Iranian-American dual national who is a relative of a senior terror mastermind serving in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards. The dual national, Mansoor Arbabsiar, contacted an American undercover agent whom he believed worked for one of Mexico’s drug cartels and asked for the cartel to assist Iran in carrying out the plot.
Iran declared war on the US in 1979. Since then, it has used its terrorist arms in Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region to murder Americans. It has used its terror arms in Latin American to target US interests and allies. And now it has been caught in the act of recruiting agents to assist it in carrying out acts of terror in Washington, DC.
Following the Justice Department’s announcement, the Obama administration proclaimed it intends to “isolate” Iran in the international community. While it sounds like a serious plan, particularly when it is stated assertively by Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the fact is that this is not a serious policy at all.
Indeed, upon reflection, it is clear that the announced aim of isolating Iran involves doing nothing to retaliate against Iran for its aggression.
There are three reasons that this is the case. First, by placing the burden for punishing Iran on the nebulous “international community,” Obama is signaling that under his leadership, America does not view operational plans to attack US interests on American soil as something that America should deal with.
In Iran’s case, the “international community” means Russia and China. The two UN Security Council-veto-wielding regimes have collaborated with Iran on its illicit activities generally and its development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles specifically. Russia and China have blocked all serious sanctions against Iran in the UN Security Council. Their active defense of Iran at the Security Council renders it a foregone conclusion that the UN will never authorize military force to be used against Iran’s nuclear installations.
Since Russia and China prefer to see Iran acquire nuclear weapons than authorize any UN measure that could prevent or slow down this development, it is hard to imagine either government suddenly agreeing to isolate Iran just because it planned to kill the Saudi ambassador and blow up a couple of foreign embassies in Washington.
THE SECOND reason it is reasonable to conclude that the administration is being disingenuous in its tough talk about Iran is because the administration tells us it is being disingenuous. Speaking to The New York Times over the weekend, several senior White House officials said they were considering options to steeply escalate the US’s sanctions against Iran.
Specifically, they said the administration is mulling the prospect of barring financial transactions with Iran’s central bank. They also said that the White House is thinking about barring contact with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards-owned company that controls the sale of Iranian oil and natural gas to foreign countries.
Then again, administration sources also told the Times that they aren’t certain that the sanctions are such a good idea. If the US blocks the only viable path toward purchasing Iranian gas and oil and otherwise makes it impossible for Iran to sell its natural resources, they warned, the US would cause the market price of both commodities to rise sharply, thus harming its own economy.So probably the US won’t ratchet up sanctions on the regime after all.
Then there is the notion of military retaliation. After the news broke of the foiled terror plot, Obama let it be known that the “military option is on the table.” But then, he didn’t specify the goal of the military option or its target. Is the US developing an option for attacking Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities? Is it preparing to attack Iranian regime targets in an effort to topple the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world? Is it planning a military strike against IRGC targets in Iran or Iraq or Afghanistan?
It is highly unlikely that the US is planning to undertake any of these missions. Over the weekend, the US announced that its troops would be fully removed from Iraq in January. Obama has insisted on withdrawing his surge troops from Afghanistan despite the Taliban resurgence in the country.
As for attacking regime targets, it is hard to imagine that after siding with the mullahs against democracy protesters in the aftermath of the stolen 2009 presidential elections, Obama would decide to call suddenly for the regime to be replaced – let alone take military action to advance that goal.
THEN THERE is the nuclear issue. Since Russia’s and China’s support for Iran at the Security Council rules out any option of a Security Council-sanctioned attack in Iran’s nuclear installations, it is fairly obvious that the administration will take no military action whatsoever against Iran’s nuclear program. This is, after all, the administration that believes the US must receive UN approval for any military operation.
Obama’s effectively pro-ayatollah policies have caused him to treat the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran as essentially identical to the threat posed to the US by the Soviet Union during the Cold War. As nuclear proliferation scholar Avner Cohen explained in an interview with The Jerusalem Post earlier this month, the administration is committed to a policy of containing a nuclear-armed Iran rather than preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Cohen explained, “The US wants itself, and also Israel, to be engaged in a thorough effort to contain Iran – like the way the Soviet Union was contained during the Cold War – meaning that for all practical purposes and short of extreme circumstances, both the US and Israel would have to put aside the military option and instead work to contain Iran.”
According to Olli Heinonen, the former deputy director of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, the US will have an opportunity to put its nuclear containment policy toward Iran into action in the near future. In an interview two weeks ago with Der Spiegel, Heinonen asserted that within two years, the Iranians will have sufficient quantities of plutonium to produce atomic bombs. Within a year, they will have enough highly enriched uranium to have what is referred to as “break-out capacity,” meaning they can produce nuclear bombs at will.
The problem with Obama’s non-response to Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its terror plot to attack Washington is that the Iranian regime is nothing like the Soviet Union. The regime whose first foray into international diplomacy involved taking a knife to the nation-state system by attacking the US embassy and holding its personnel hostage is not a strategic equivalent of the Soviet Union. A regime that sent 100,000 of its children to their deaths during the Iran-Iraq War by dispatching them to the battlefields as human mine sweepers is not a regime that can be contained through mutual assured destruction as the Soviets were.
Iran’s war against the US is a war that only Iran is fighting. And if something doesn’t change very quickly, it is clear that since Iran is the only side fighting the war, Iran is the only side that will win the war.
Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Riots bring Greece to a standstill

By Elena Becatoros October 20, 2011 6:18 am


 

ATHENS, Greece (AP) – Hundreds of youths smashed and looted stores in central Athens and clashed with riot police during a massive anti-government rally against painful new austerity measures that won initial parliamentary approval in a vote Wednesay night.

 

 

 

The rioting came on the first day of a 48-hour nationwide general strike that brought services in much of Greece to a standstill, grounding flights for hours, leaving ferries tied up in port and shutting down customs offices, stores and banks.

More than 100,000 people took to the streets of the Greek capital to demonstrate against the austerity bill, which includes new tax hikes, further pension and salary cuts, the suspension on reduced pay of 30,000 public servants and the suspension of collective labor contracts.

Creditors have demanded the meaures before they give Greece more funds from a euro110 billion ($152.11 billion) package of bailout loans from other eurozone countries and the International Monetary Fund. Greece says it will run out of money in mid-November without the euro8 billion ($11 billion) installment.

But Greek citizens said they already are reeling from more than one-and-a-half years of austerity measures.

“We just can’t take it any more. There is desperation, anger and bitterness,” said Nikos Anastasopoulos, head of a workers’ union for an Athens municipality, as he joined the demonstration early in the day.

The bill won initial approval in the 300-member Parliament late Wednesday, with 154 deputies voting in favor on principle and 141 against. A second vote, on the bill’s articles, is due Thursday. Only after that procedure will the bill have passed. A communist party-backed union has vowed to encircle Parliament Thursday in an attempt to prevent deputies from entering the building for the procedure.

The new measures have even prompted some lawmakers from the governing Socialists to threaten not vote for at least some of the articles in the bill. But Finance Minister Evangelos Venizelos insisted there was no choice but to accept the hardship.

“We have to explain to all these indignant people who see their lives changing that what the country is experiencing is not the worst stage of the crisis,” he said in Parliament. “It is an anguished and necessary effort to avoid the ultimate, deepest and harshest level of the crisis. The difference between a difficult situation and a catastrophe is immense.”

Hours before Wednesday’s vote, one of Athens’ largest demonstrations in years degenerated into violence as masked and hooded youths pelted riot police outside Parliament with gasoline bombs and chunks of marble smashed from buildings, metro stops and sidewalks.

Police responded with tear gas and stun grenades. Authorities said 50 police were injured in the clashes, along with at least three demonstrators, while 33 people were detained for questioning or arrested for alleged involvement in the rioting. At least three journalists covering the riots were also slightly hurt.

Long after Wednesday’s demonstration was over, violence continued, with police fighting running street battles with youths setting up burning barricades along the back streets near Athens’ main Syntagma Square and near the tourist area of Monastiraki.

Thick black smoke billowed from burning trash and bus-stops, and debris lay strewn along the capital’s broad avenues. A hurled gasoline bomb set fire to a sentry post used by the ceremonial presidential guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier outside Parliament.

In Greece’s second city of Thessaloniki, protesters smashed the facades of about 10 shops that defied the strike and remained open, as well as five banks and cash machines. Police fired tear gas and threw stun grenades.

The general strike is set to continue Thursday, with all sectors — from dentists, hospital doctors and lawyers to tax office workers, taxi drivers, prison guards, teachers and dock workers — staying off the job.

Air traffic controllers scaled back their strike from 48 hours to 12, allowing flights to take off and land after noon on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, European countries are trying to work out a broad solution to the continent’s deepening debt crisis, before a weekend summit in Brussels. It became clear earlier this year that the initial bailout for Greece was not working as well as had been hoped, and European leaders agreed on a second, euro109 billion ($151 billion) bailout. But key details of that rescue fund, including the participation of the private sector, remain to be worked out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Long, Steep Drop for Americans’ Standard of Living

Reprinted from Prophecy News Watch

Think life is not as good as it used to be, at least in terms of your wallet? You’d be right about that.

The standard of living for Americans has fallen longer and more steeply over the past three years than at any time since the US government began recording it five decades ago.

Bottom line: The average individual now has $1,315 less in disposable income than he or she did three years ago at the onset of the Great Recession – even though the recession
ended, technically speaking, in mid-2009. That means less money to spend at the spa or the movies, less for vacations, new carpeting for the house, or dinner at a restaurant.

In short, it means a less vibrant economy, with more Americans spending primarily on necessities. The diminished standard of living, moreover, is squeezing the middle class, whose restlessness and discontent are evident in grass-roots movements such as the tea party and “Occupy Wall Street” and who may take out their frustrations on incumbent politicians in next year’s election.

What has led to the most dramatic drop in the US standard of living since at least 1960? One factor is stagnant incomes: Real median income is down 9.8 percent since the start of the recession through this June, according to Sentier Research in Annapolis, Md., citing census bureau data.

Another is falling net worth – think about the value of your home and, if you have one, your retirement portfolio. A third is rising consumer prices, with inflation eroding people’s buying power by 3.25 percent since mid-2008.

“In a dynamic economy, one would expect Americans’ disposable income to be growing, but it has flattened out at a low level,” says economist Bob Brusca of Fact & Opinion Economics in New York.

To be sure, the recession has hit unevenly, with lower-skilled and less-educated Americans feeling the pinch the most, says Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’ Economy.com based in West Chester, Pa. Many found their jobs gone for good as companies moved production offshore or bought equipment that replaced manpower.

“The pace of change has been incredibly rapid and incredibly tough on the less educated,” says Mr. Zandi, who calls this period the most difficult for American households since the 1930s. “If you don’t have the education and you don’t have the right skills, then you are getting creamed.”

Per capita disposal personal income – a key indicator of the standard of living – peaked in the spring of 2008, at $33,794 (measured as after-tax income). As of the second quarter of 2011, it was $32,479 – almost a 4 percent drop. If per capita disposable income had continued to grow at its normal pace, it would have been more than $34,000 a year by now.

The so-called misery index, another measure of economic well-being of American households, echoes the finding on the slipping standard of living. The index, a combination of the unemployment rate and inflation, is now at its highest point since 1983, when the US economy was recovering from a short recession and from the energy price spikes after the Iranian revolution.

In Royal Oak, Mich., Adam Kowal knows exactly how the squeeze feels. After losing a warehouse job in Lansing, he, his wife, and their two children have had little recourse
but to move in with his mother. Now working at a school cafeteria, Mr. Kowal earns 28 percent less than at his last job.

He and his wife now eat out once a month instead of once a week, do no socializing, and eat less expensive foods, such as ground chuck instead of ground sirloin. “My mom was hoping her kids would lead a better life than her, but so far that has not happened,” says Kowal.

“We have quite a few grandparents who are raising their grandchildren on a fixed income, feeding them and buying clothes for them when they can’t afford to do [that for] themselves”

With disposable incomes falling, perhaps it’s not surprising that 64 percent of Americans worry that they won’t be able to pay their families’ expenses at least some of the time,
according to a survey completed in mid-September by the Marist Institute for Public Opinion. Among those, one-third say their financial problems are chronic.

“What we see is that very few are escaping the crunch,” says Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute in Poughkeepsie, N.Y.

Income loss is hitting the middle class hard, especially in communities where manufacturing facilities have closed. When those jobs are gone, many workers have ended up in service-sector jobs that pay less.

“Maybe it’s the evolution of the economy, but it appears large segments of the workforce have moved permanently into lower-paying positions,” says Joel Naroff of Naroff
Economic Advisors in Holland, Pa. “The economy can’t grow at 4 percent per year when the middle class becomes the lower middle class.”

He would get no argument from Jeff Beatty of Richmond, Ky., who worked in the IT and telecommunications businesses for most of his career – until he hit a rough
patch. He and his wife are living on his unemployment insurance benefits (which will run out in months), his early Social Security payments, and her disability
payments from the Social Security Administration. Their total income comes to $30,000 a year.

“Our standard of living has probably declined threefold,” he says.

Mr. Beatty, who used to make a comfortable income, now anticipates applying for food stamps. He and his wife have sold much of their furniture, which they no longer need because they have moved into a one-bedroom apartment owned by his sister-in-law.

Even people with college degrees are feeling the squeeze. On a fall day, Hunter College graduate and Brooklyn resident Paul Battis came to lower Manhattan to check out the Occupy Wall Street protest. He tells one of the protesters that America’s problem is the various free-trade pacts it has approved.

Mr. Battis’s angst over trade is rooted in the fact that two years ago he lost his data-entry job with a Wall Street firm that decided to outsource such jobs to India.

When he had the job, he made a comfortable income. Now his income is sporadic, from the occasional construction job he lands. He used to buy clothing from Macy’s or other
department stores. Now he goes to Goodwill or Salvation Army stores. He has even cut back on taking the city subways, instead riding his bicycle. Separated from
his wife and his 15-year-old daughter, he says, “Try making child support payments when you don’t have a regular income. I’m constantly catching up.”

Even recently some Americans could tap the equity in their homes or their stock market accounts to make up for any shortfalls in income. Not anymore. Since 2007, Americans’ collective net worth has fallen about $5.5 trillion, or more than 8.6 percent, according to the Federal Reserve.

The bulk of that decline is in real estate, which has lost $4.7 trillion in value, or 22 percent, since 2007. In Arizona, for example, more than half of homeowners
live in houses that are worth less than their purchase prices, according to some reports.

Stock investments aren’t any better. Since 1999, the Standard & Poor’s index, on a price basis, is off 17 percent. It’s up 3.2 percent when dividends are included, but that’s a small return for that length of time.

“This is really a lost decade of affluence,” says Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor’s in New York.

Among those who have watched their finances deteriorate are senior citizens.

“Given the stock market, they are very nervous,” says Nancy LeaMond, executive vice president at AARP, the seniors’ lobbying group. “They want to keep their savings.”

But Ms. LeaMond also notes that about 2 in every 3 seniors are dependent not on Wall Street but on Social Security. The average annual income for those over 65 is $18,500 a year – almost all of it from Social Security, she says. “This is not a part of America that is rich,” she says.

At the same time, seniors are getting pinched in their pocketbooks.

“Our members are watching all the things they have to buy, especially health-care products, go up in price,” says LeaMond.

“We have quite a few grandparents who are raising their grandchildren on a fixed income, feeding them and buying clothes for them when they can’t afford to do [that for]
themselves,” says Yvonne Womack, the team leader.

Others, she says, are forgoing food to pay for their medical prescriptions. “And then there is your ordinary senior whose Social Security [check] has not gone up in the last
several years, but food and gasoline [prices] have skyrocketed,” she says. (However, Social Security checks will go up 3.6 percent in January.) The Blessings, she notes, is now feeding 42 percent more people than last year. “We also provide food you can eat out of a can,” she says. “We do have seniors who are living on the streets.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Published 17:17 19.10.11
  • Latest update 17:17 19.10.11

Freed female Palestinian terrorist to Gaza children: I hope you will become martyrs

Wafa al-Biss, who was freed as part of the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange, was sentenced to a 12-year term for planning to blow herself up near Be’er Sheva’s Soroka hospital in 2005.

By ReutersTags:                                        PalestiniansGazaHamasprisoner exchangeFatahIsrael terrorism

A would-be Palestinian suicide bomber freed by Israel in the prisoner swap for soldier Gilad Shalit told cheering schoolchildren in the Gaza Strip the day after her release on Wednesday she hoped they would follow her example.    
“I hope you will walk the same path we took and God willing, we will see some of you as martyrs,” Wafa al-Biss told dozens of children who came to her home in the northern Gaza Strip.

Biss was travelling to Beersheba’s Soroka hospital for medical treatment in 2005 when Israeli soldiers at the Erez border crossing noticed she was walking strangely. They found 10 kgs (22 lbs) of explosives had been sewn into her underwear.    

A member of al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an offshoot of President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah party, Biss was sentenced to a 12-year term for planning to blow herself up.    

After she spoke, the children cheered and waved Palestinian flags and chanted: “We will give souls and blood to redeem the prisoners. We will give souls and blood for you, Palestine.”    

Biss said she had planned to blow herself up at the checkpoint but her detonator malfunctioned.    

“Unfortunately, the button did not work at the last minute before I was to be martyred,” Biss told Reuters.    

She said she had not yet adjusted to her freedom and arose early on Wednesday for prison roll call.    

“This morning I woke up in my room, wore my scarf and stood up awaiting the line-up time before I realised I was home and not in jail,” she said.    

Once she settles back to her routine, Biss said she plans to complete university psychology studies but added that she remained defiant in the face of Israeli warnings to act against those who return to militancy.    

“We will pursue our struggle and (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Nentanyahu) knows that. Arrests will not deter us from our strong battles and confrontation in the face of Zionist arrogance in the land of Palestine,” she said.    

Biss was one of 477 Palestinians freed by Israel on Tuesday in the first stage of an exchange with Gaza’s Hamas Islamist rulers that ended Shalit’s five years of captivity. Another 550 Palestinans will be freed in the second stage later this year.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘UNSC may vote on PA statehood bid in early November’

By REUTERS AND JPOST.COM STAFF
19/10/2011
Diplomats say that a scheduled meeting could end with a vote on the Palestinian application for full UN membership.
UNITED NATIONS – The Palestinian quest for UN membership is likely to come to a head on or around Nov. 11, when Security Council ambassadors plan a final meeting to decide their response, diplomats said on Wednesday.
The date represents a delay in dealing with the Palestinian application, submitted by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Sept. 23, amid hopes that indirect Israeli-Palestinian talks scheduled for next week could get a peace process off the ground.

RELATED:
PA won’t pull UN bid even if Israel accepts pre-conditions
Clinton says PA UN bid is stalled, calls for renewed talks

The Nov. 11 meeting could result in a vote by the divided council, diplomats said. The United States, which supports its ally Israel in strongly opposing the membership bid, is considered certain to veto it but the Palestinians may seek a vote anyway if they can show majority support in the council.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu met with Colombian Foreign Minister  Maria Angela Holguin on Wednesday, thanking her for Colombia’s  opposition to the Palestinian statehood bid.

“I’m happy that you also think that peace is brought about through  direct negotiations without preconditions,” the prime minister said.

Membership is formally approved by the 193-nation General Assembly but that requires a Security Council recommendation.

“The 11th (of November) will probably be the end of the Security Council consideration process, one way or the other,” a senior council diplomat said following a meeting of envoys on Tuesday that agreed to a  timetable. “If the Palestinians want a vote, there will be a vote.”

Such a Palestinian request would be channeled through Lebanon, the sole Arab state currently on the 15-nation council.

Under UN rules for applications, council diplomats are currently  discussing technical issues of whether Palestine is a state, is  “peace-loving,” and willing to fulfill the obligations of the UN charter — all requirements for membership. But members are expected ultimately to vote on political grounds.

Diplomats said indications so far were that the Palestinians would push  for a vote next month, but that could change if prospects improved for  peace negotiations.

International mediators will meet separately with Israeli and  Palestinian officials on Oct. 26 in Jerusalem to try to revive direct  peace talks.

“If they were to make progress, and there were to be further meetings  over the following few days, then obviously that could affect the  Security Council timetable,” said the senior diplomat, who asked not to  be identified.

Many analysts, however, think a breakthrough is unlikely, with the  Palestinians continuing to reject direct talks unless Israel halts  settlement activities and Israel refusing to do so.

While the Palestinian application looks certain to fail in the council,  Abbas has made a major effort to attract nine votes in support — which  would oblige the United States to use its veto and be seen by  Palestinians as a moral victory. To pass, council resolutions need nine  votes and no vetoes.

Diplomats currently expect eight council members to back the  Palestinians and six to vote against or abstain. There is uncertainty  over Bosnia, the three members of whose collective presidency — Muslim, Serb and Croat — disagree over which way to vote, diplomats say.

If the application fails in the council, the Palestinians could ask the  General Assembly to upgrade their status to “nonmember state” observer,  which would not require council endorsement. That would imply UN  recognition of statehood and could help the Palestinians join  international bodies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADMINISTRATOR’S NOTE: Dear Readers; aren’t you relieved to know that the over $2,000,000,000 spent in Iraq – and we’re still sending money over by the cargo plane full – and those thousands of lost American lives, and tens of thousands whose lives are forever changed due to loss of limbs, or head injuries brought DEMOCRACY to the people of Iraq!? Here’s the truth. This was the truth from the beginning, but blindness and lack of vision and errant sensabilities prevail in this dark world consumed with Humanism, Relativism, and the cunning lies of evil.

Iraq is a cesspool. Always was. Always will be. No amount of U.S. dollars or U.S. lives will alter that reality. Begin to face it finally people…

 

The Christian Post > World|Tue, Oct. 18 2011 06:03 PM EDT

Open Doors USA: Extremists Want to Eliminate Christians From Iraq

By Alex Murashko | Christian Post Reporter

SANTA ANA, Calif. – Ongoing violence against Christians in Iraq has produced an accelerated exodus of believers recently and numbering in the hundreds of thousands over the last 10 years, said Open Doors USA officials.

  • iraq
    (Photo: REUTERS / Ako Rasheed)
    A man stands among debris inside a church after a bomb attack in central Kirkuk, 250 km (155 miles) north of Baghdad August 2, 2011. A car bomb and two attempted bombs targeted three churches in northern Iraq on Tuesday in coordinated attacks that wounded at least 16 people in the ethnically and religiously mixed city of Kirkuk, a senior police official said.
Related Topics

Members of the Orange County, Calif.-based organization that provides help to persecuted believers in Jesus worldwide say that while the world’s attention has shifted to such countries as Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan and Pakistan, the mass movement of Christians in Iraq continues unabated.

Before the Gulf War in 1991, the number of Christians was about one million, stated Open Doors in a news release. “That number fell to an estimated 850,000 in 2003 at the start of the U.S.-led invasion that ended the Saddam Hussein regime. Since then the numbers have plummeted.

“At the beginning of the summer, Open Doors estimated the number of Christians remaining in Iraq at 345,000. However, the number decreases every month,” officials stated.

“It is an estimation; some even think there are less Christians left in the country than that,” another Open Doors member said.

Bassam Isho, 30, who was killed by unknown gunmen on Oct. 1 is considered a martyr by Christians in Mosul. The gunmen entered the restaurant where Isho worked and opened fire, killing him instantly, according to Open Doors.

 

During the same week, two more Christians were killed in Kirkuk. It is this type of violence, including the continuing harassment from Muslim extremists that has many Christians in Iraq seeking refuge.

“Iraqi Christians feel that the government fails to give them the security and freedom to worship in peace,” Open Doors USA spokesman Jerry Dykstra told The Christian Post. “Countless Christians have been threatened, robbed, raped, kidnapped or killed.”

“I think we need to pray that the Christians who have fled the country or live in the Kurdish area can come back home in the near future – with complete freedom of religion,” Dykstra said. “We need to keep the pressure on the U.S. government to speak out for minority faith groups in Iraq. Just because the U.S. troops are leaving, does not mean we can ignore the ongoing violence and lack of protection of Christians inside Iraq.”

The anniversary of one of the bloodiest attacks on the country’s dwindling Christian community is on Oct. 31, Dykstra said. Last year, 58 people were killed when Islamic extremists assaulted a Syrian Catholic Church in Baghdad.

“The attacks on Christians continue and the world remains totally silent. It’s as if we’ve been swallowed up by the night,” AsiaNews quotes one anonymous Christian as saying.

Dr. Carl Moeller, Open Doors USA President/CEO, has labeled the attacks against Christians in Iraq as “religicide.”

“Christians in cities like Baghdad and Mosul are gripped by terrorism. They are fleeing in droves. Their families are threatened. Extremists want to eliminate Christians from Iraq,” Moeller said.

Christians are leaving the south and center of the country and attempting to build new lives in the far north, according to Open Doors.

“But today not only are Christians fleeing from the far southern cities of Baghdad and Basra, they also are moving from the northern cities of Kirkuk and Mosul that not long ago had large Christian communities,” Open Doors officials state. “The Iraqis who leave their cities often flee to the relatively secure and most northern Kurdish part of Iraq. That’s why a vast majority of Iraqi Christians now live in this part of the country. Many of them are now Internally Displaced Persons.”

Open Doors estimates the number of IDP to be at least 186,000.

The number of Christians moving into the Kurdish areas such as Ankawa is growing, but they are also struggling with the effects of displacement. Loss of income, high unemployment, adequate housing, schooling for children, and medical care are some of the problems coming as the result of the exodus into new areas.

“Because many of the Iraqi Christians that have fled Mosul or Baghdad speak Arabic, they often have no access to a Christian community that speaks their language as in the north traditional Chaldean or Assyrian languages are spoken,” said an Open Doors worker who is a specialist on Iraq.

Open Doors helps train Iraqi church leaders, including methods of delivering Bibles and Christian literature to the Christians in the country. The ministry also facilitates the translation of the Bible into Kurdish dialects. Additionally, the group supports Christian refugees with loans and grants to start small businesses, and says it has proven to be an effective tool to encourage them to stay in Iraq.

The ministry is helping refugees with vocational training and the children of the IDP are being supported through trauma counseling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrator’s Note: The time is swiftly approaching when places such as “A Crooked Path” will not be permitted to exist under the lawlessness that will take the place of our laws. This time is not far into the future. This is not fantasy, paranoia, or fiction. The evil powers that control this world want nothing more than to eradicate all information they deem unacceptable to their agenda – which is the spread of lies and evil and to focus solely on what THEY SAY. I do not know how long, but there is a day coming when you will not find “A Crooked Path” on the Internet, or anything pertaining to faith – other than faith in the Antichrist, the false prophet, and the One World Religion – One World Government.

 

 

VeriSign Demands Power To Kill “Abusive” Websites

 

Manager of all .com internet addresses seeks authority to terminate domains on government order without legal oversight

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Tuesday, October 11, 2011

The global authority over all .com domain names, VeriSign, is demanding the power to terminate websites deemed “abusive” when ordered to by government without a court order or any kind of oversight whatsoever.


“The company said today it wants to be able to enforce the “denial, cancellation or transfer of any registration” in any of a laundry list of scenarios where a domain is deemed to be “abusive,” reports the UK Register.

Not only is VeriSign seeking the power to kill websites when ordered to by governments, but also by “quasi-governmental agencies,” which could extend as far as lobbying organizations and special interests.

VeriSign has asked the domain name industry overseer ICANN to grant it the power to kill a .com or .net domain in order to comply with “applicable court orders, laws, government rules or requirements,” and believes the authority should be global to allow the company to shut down websites “without a court order” if any government agency merely requests it do so.

“The company has already helped law enforcement agencies in the US, such as the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, seize domains that were allegedly being used to sell counterfeit goods or facilitate online piracy, when the agency first obtained a court order,” states the report.

Indeed, the Department of Homeland Security has already seized website domains merely for linking to copyrighted material, despite the fact that such material isn’t even hosted on the website itself. DHS has also worked with VeriSign to terminate websites already deemed legal by courts in other countries.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation slammed the DHS website seizures as “Blunt instruments that cause unacceptable collateral damage to free speech rights.”

“ICE’s domain name seizures, including this one, are occurring without meaningful court oversight, with no chance for the targets to defend themselves before their websites are taken down and a highly cumbersome process for challenge afterwards,” said EFF Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry. “The government should stop these seizures until they comply with the law.”

Now VeriSign wants to seize even more draconian powers so it can work with governments to shut down “abusive” websites on a whim without any legal due process whatsoever.

This represents a massive threat to the last refuge of true free speech, the Internet, and follows in the footsteps of the Obama administration’s efforts to create an Internet kill switch under the guise of cybersecurity.

As we have documented, lawmakers like Senator Joe Lieberman have teamed up with DHS officials to push draconian legislation in an effort to mimic the Communist Chinese system of policing the Internet. During a CNN appearance last year, Lieberman said the goal was to empower the U.S. government with an Internet kill switch.

“Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” Lieberman told CNN’s Candy Crowley.

However, China’s “war” is not against foreign terrorists or hackers, it’s against people who dare to use the Internet to express dissent against government atrocities or corruption. China’s system of Internet policing is about crushing freedom of speech and has nothing to do with legitimate security concerns.

Lieberman has already acted to shut down websites without a court order or any form of oversight when Amazon axed Wikileaks from its servers after being pressured to do so by Lieberman’s Senate Homeland Security Committee.

If Verisign is granted these sweeping new powers, governments all over the world, from the United Kingdom, to the U.S. to oppressive regimes in the third world, will have access to a feeding frenzy of web censorship which they could easily abuse to silence free speech and oversee political cover-ups.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrator’s Note: Less than 6 months ago my best friend, and a dear sister in the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and I were discussing this very thing (see article below) and we both agreed that such a thing was not long in coming. And now here it is! When people bury their heads in the sand and become so lax and accepting, and do not care about morals, or God, or adhering and fighting for what is right in the Lord’s sight, and they are NOTHING but selfish, sequestered away, living their lives of delusion, illusion, and ignorance evil runs rampant – runs right over them.

Nothing is now off limts or deemed deviant. Soon those which have sex with the dead and animals will be marching in the streets demading their “rights” – which none of these people have to live their lives of perversion and diviance! No one has a “right” to have sex with their own sex, or with a child, or any dead thing or animal! Wake up people! Where do you come up with “they have a right”? These are all abominations and great sin. And while you may not partake in these specific sins your sin of silence and doing nothing and permitting these evils to grow will need to be answered for!

 

Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals

Posted by • October 15, 2011  • Printer-friendly

Claim unfair to be stigmatized for sexual orientation

by Jack Minor –

Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.

Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. “Gay” advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists with B4U-Act recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA.

B4U-Act  calls pedophiles “minor-attracted people.” The organization’s website states its purpose is to, “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma and fear.”

In 1998 The APA issued a report claiming “that the ‘negative potential’ of adult sex with children was ‘overstated’ and that ‘the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from  childhood sexual abuse experiences.”

Pedophilia has already been granted protected status by the Federal Government. The Matthew Shephard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act lists “sexual orientation” as a protected class; however, it does not define the term.

Republicans attempted to add an amendment specifying that “pedophilia is not covered as an orientation;” however, the amendment was defeated by Democrats. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fl) stated that all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law. “This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these ‘philias’ and fetishes and ‘isms’ that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule.”

The White House praised the bill saying, “At root, this isn’t just about our laws; this is about who we are as a people. This is about whether we value one another  — whether we embrace our differences rather than allowing them to become a source of animus.”

Earlier this year two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia is a sexual orientation just like homosexuality or heterosexuality.

Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, told members of Parliament, “Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality.”

He went on to say, “True pedophiles have an exclusive preference for children, which is the same as having a sexual orientation. You cannot change this person’s sexual orientation. He may, however, remain abstinent.”

When asked if he should be comparing pedophiles to homosexuals, Van Gijseghem replied, “If, for instance, you were living in a society where heterosexuality is proscribed or prohibited and you were told that you had to get therapy to change your sexual orientation, you would probably say that that is slightly crazy. In other words, you would not accept that at all. I use this analogy to say that, yes indeed, pedophiles do not change their sexual orientation.”

Dr. Quinsey, professor emeritus of psychology at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, agreed with Van Gijseghem. Quinsey said pedophiles’ sexual interests prefer children and, “There is no evidence that this sort of preference can be changed through treatment or through anything else.”

In July, 2010 Harvard health Publications said, “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and unlikely to change. Treatment aims to enable someone to resist acting on his sexual urges.”

Linda Harvey, of Mission America, said the push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as LGBT groups continue to assert themselves. “It’s all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages; to convince them that normal friendship is actually a sexual attraction.”

Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated that child pornography could be beneficial to society because, “Potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex against children.”

Diamond is a distinguished lecturer for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco. The IASHS openly advocated for the repeal of the Revolutionary war ban on homosexuals serving in the military.

The IASHS lists, on its website, a list of “basic sexual rights” that includes “the right to engage in sexual acts or activities of any kind whatsoever, providing they do not involve nonconsensual acts, violence, constraint, coercion or fraud.” Another right is to, “be free of persecution, condemnation, discrimination, or societal intervention in private sexual behavior” and “the freedom of any sexual thought, fantasy or desire.” The organization also says that no one should be “disadvantaged because of  age.”

Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states including California, Georgia and Iowa. Sex offenders claim the laws prohibiting them from living near schools or parks are unfair because it penalizes them for life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply, please --- thank you.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes