K Street.
Yeah, so what about it? you might ask.
Geographically; K Street is a major thoroughfare in the United States capital of Washington, D.C.. Universally; K Street known as a center for numerous think tanks, lobbyists, and advocacy groups.
K Street lobbyists and advocacy groups.
Hmmm ... hasn't Pres. Obama said they were nasty people?
Why yes, he did. A number of times. One time was January 2006, at the Lobbying Reform Summit where he was making it a point to name Republicans for having dealings with lobbyists and special interest groups..
In his speech, Obama was extolling the virtues of Pres. Theodore Roosevelt as he "put party and politics aside in order to battle corruption and give people an open, honest government that would fight for their interests and uphold their values."
Obama continued with, "The American people are tired of a Washington that's only open to those with the most cash and the right connections. They're tired of a political process where the vote you cast isn't as important as the favors you can do. And they're tired of trusting us with their tax dollars when they see them spent on frivolous pet projects and corporate giveaways.
It's not that the games that are played in this town are new or surprising to the public. People are not naive to the existence of corruption and they know it has worn the face of both Republicans and Democrats over the years."
Later in the speech, he says, "The well-connected CEOs and hired guns on K Street who've helped write our laws have gotten what they paid for. They got all the tax breaks and loopholes and access they could ever want. But outside this city, the people who can't afford the high-priced lobbyists and don't want to break the law are wondering, "When is it our turn? When will someone in Washington stand up for me?"
http://obamaspeeches.com/047-Lobbying-Reform-Summit-National-Press-Club-Obama-Speech.htm
After he was elected, it seemed as if Obama was going to really walk the talk. But a reporter in 2009 noticing White House senior adviser David Axelrod meeting with Fox News chairman and chief executive officer Roger Ailes privately in Manhattan for 'a cup of coffee', started some to take notice of what was going on. This was about the time that the White House was beginning the rhetoric on how Fox News wasn't playing nice in the Obama sand box.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27982.html
Reports of certain visitors using side door entrances to the White House began to surface. The presence of a military guard who would then take post at that door, told the reporters that the President was nearby or in the room. In 2009, Judicial Watch, under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, filed for access to Obama White House visitor logs from January 20, 2009 forward. The Secret Service claimed that the records belong to the Obama White House and denied Judicial Watch access to them. A federal district court has ruled twice that all visitor records belong to the Secret Service and therefore should be available under the Freedom of Information Act.
An October 8 letter from the Department of Homeland Security related to Judicial Watch's request: "It is the government's position that the categories of records that you requested are not agency records subject to the FOIA. Rather, these records are governed by the Presidential Records Act…". Funny, Obama's first Executive Order was was to squelch what would be released and defined as Presidential papers.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2009/oct/obama-administration-denies-judicial-watch-foia-request-white-house-visitor-logs
Remember , "When will someone in Washington stand up for me?" Well, don't hold your breath waiting for it and don't be naive enough to think that Obama is all that invested in 'truth, openess and transparency'.
In his report, New York Times’s Eric Lichtblau blows the lid off the whole pot of coffee being shared by the White House and lobbyists. Geographically, White House administration, with Secret service agents in tow, are not meeting with lobbyists in the White House. Technically, they don't have to be listed in White House visitors’ logs and lobbying registration records.
Lichtblau report covers a lot of area as to how and where the White House administration and lobbyists are meeting. Do I hear 'plausible deniability' floating around in Obama's lawyer mind? Or maybe as a senior White House official said, “We don’t believe there’s anything untoward about these meetings, and we don’t think that represents any special access for lobbyists.” Adding that “folks are allowed to get a cup of coffee, and we’re not going to bar patronage at any of the area’s fine coffeehouses.”
I'm waiting to find out who is Obama's Abramoff.
Read Lichtblau report
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/us/politics/25caribou.html?sq=caribou coffee&st=cse&scp=2&pagewanted=print
Friday, June 25, 2010
Obama's K Street connections
K Street.
Yeah, so what about it? you might ask.
Geographically; K Street is a major thoroughfare in the United States capital of Washington, D.C.. Universally; K Street known as a center for numerous think tanks, lobbyists, and advocacy groups.
K Street lobbyists and advocacy groups.
Hmmm ... hasn't Pres. Obama said they were nasty people?
Why yes, he did. A number of times. One time was January 2006, at the Lobbying Reform Summit where he was making it a point to name Republicans for having dealings with lobbyists and special interest groups..
In his speech, Obama was extolling the virtues of Pres. Theodore Roosevelt as he "put party and politics aside in order to battle corruption and give people an open, honest government that would fight for their interests and uphold their values."
Obama continued with, "The American people are tired of a Washington that's only open to those with the most cash and the right connections. They're tired of a political process where the vote you cast isn't as important as the favors you can do. And they're tired of trusting us with their tax dollars when they see them spent on frivolous pet projects and corporate giveaways.
It's not that the games that are played in this town are new or surprising to the public. People are not naive to the existence of corruption and they know it has worn the face of both Republicans and Democrats over the years."
Later in the speech, he says, "The well-connected CEOs and hired guns on K Street who've helped write our laws have gotten what they paid for. They got all the tax breaks and loopholes and access they could ever want. But outside this city, the people who can't afford the high-priced lobbyists and don't want to break the law are wondering, "When is it our turn? When will someone in Washington stand up for me?"
http://obamaspeeches.com/047-Lobbying-Reform-Summit-National-Press-Club-Obama-Speech.htm
After he was elected, it seemed as if Obama was going to really walk the talk. But a reporter in 2009 noticing White House senior adviser David Axelrod meeting with Fox News chairman and chief executive officer Roger Ailes privately in Manhattan for 'a cup of coffee', started some to take notice of what was going on. This was about the time that the White House was beginning the rhetoric on how Fox News wasn't playing nice in the Obama sand box.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27982.html
Reports of certain visitors using side door entrances to the White House began to surface. The presence of a military guard who would then take post at that door, told the reporters that the President was nearby or in the room. In 2009, Judicial Watch, under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, filed for access to Obama White House visitor logs from January 20, 2009 forward. The Secret Service claimed that the records belong to the Obama White House and denied Judicial Watch access to them. A federal district court has ruled twice that all visitor records belong to the Secret Service and therefore should be available under the Freedom of Information Act.
An October 8 letter from the Department of Homeland Security related to Judicial Watch's request: "It is the government's position that the categories of records that you requested are not agency records subject to the FOIA. Rather, these records are governed by the Presidential Records Act…". Funny, Obama's first Executive Order was was to squelch what would be released and defined as Presidential papers.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2009/oct/obama-administration-denies-judicial-watch-foia-request-white-house-visitor-logs
Remember , "When will someone in Washington stand up for me?" Well, don't hold your breath waiting for it and don't be naive enough to think that Obama is all that invested in 'truth, openess and transparency'.
In his report, New York Times’s Eric Lichtblau blows the lid off the whole pot of coffee being shared by the White House and lobbyists. Geographically, White House administration, with Secret service agents in tow, are not meeting with lobbyists in the White House. Technically, they don't have to be listed in White House visitors’ logs and lobbying registration records.
Lichtblau report covers a lot of area as to how and where the White House administration and lobbyists are meeting. Do I hear 'plausible deniability' floating around in Obama's lawyer mind? Or maybe as a senior White House official said, “We don’t believe there’s anything untoward about these meetings, and we don’t think that represents any special access for lobbyists.” Adding that “folks are allowed to get a cup of coffee, and we’re not going to bar patronage at any of the area’s fine coffeehouses.”
I'm waiting to find out who is Obama's Abramoff.
Read Lichtblau report
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/us/politics/25caribou.html?sq=caribou coffee&st=cse&scp=2&pagewanted=print
Yeah, so what about it? you might ask.
Geographically; K Street is a major thoroughfare in the United States capital of Washington, D.C.. Universally; K Street known as a center for numerous think tanks, lobbyists, and advocacy groups.
K Street lobbyists and advocacy groups.
Hmmm ... hasn't Pres. Obama said they were nasty people?
Why yes, he did. A number of times. One time was January 2006, at the Lobbying Reform Summit where he was making it a point to name Republicans for having dealings with lobbyists and special interest groups..
In his speech, Obama was extolling the virtues of Pres. Theodore Roosevelt as he "put party and politics aside in order to battle corruption and give people an open, honest government that would fight for their interests and uphold their values."
Obama continued with, "The American people are tired of a Washington that's only open to those with the most cash and the right connections. They're tired of a political process where the vote you cast isn't as important as the favors you can do. And they're tired of trusting us with their tax dollars when they see them spent on frivolous pet projects and corporate giveaways.
It's not that the games that are played in this town are new or surprising to the public. People are not naive to the existence of corruption and they know it has worn the face of both Republicans and Democrats over the years."
Later in the speech, he says, "The well-connected CEOs and hired guns on K Street who've helped write our laws have gotten what they paid for. They got all the tax breaks and loopholes and access they could ever want. But outside this city, the people who can't afford the high-priced lobbyists and don't want to break the law are wondering, "When is it our turn? When will someone in Washington stand up for me?"
http://obamaspeeches.com/047-Lobbying-Reform-Summit-National-Press-Club-Obama-Speech.htm
After he was elected, it seemed as if Obama was going to really walk the talk. But a reporter in 2009 noticing White House senior adviser David Axelrod meeting with Fox News chairman and chief executive officer Roger Ailes privately in Manhattan for 'a cup of coffee', started some to take notice of what was going on. This was about the time that the White House was beginning the rhetoric on how Fox News wasn't playing nice in the Obama sand box.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27982.html
Reports of certain visitors using side door entrances to the White House began to surface. The presence of a military guard who would then take post at that door, told the reporters that the President was nearby or in the room. In 2009, Judicial Watch, under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, filed for access to Obama White House visitor logs from January 20, 2009 forward. The Secret Service claimed that the records belong to the Obama White House and denied Judicial Watch access to them. A federal district court has ruled twice that all visitor records belong to the Secret Service and therefore should be available under the Freedom of Information Act.
An October 8 letter from the Department of Homeland Security related to Judicial Watch's request: "It is the government's position that the categories of records that you requested are not agency records subject to the FOIA. Rather, these records are governed by the Presidential Records Act…". Funny, Obama's first Executive Order was was to squelch what would be released and defined as Presidential papers.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2009/oct/obama-administration-denies-judicial-watch-foia-request-white-house-visitor-logs
Remember , "When will someone in Washington stand up for me?" Well, don't hold your breath waiting for it and don't be naive enough to think that Obama is all that invested in 'truth, openess and transparency'.
In his report, New York Times’s Eric Lichtblau blows the lid off the whole pot of coffee being shared by the White House and lobbyists. Geographically, White House administration, with Secret service agents in tow, are not meeting with lobbyists in the White House. Technically, they don't have to be listed in White House visitors’ logs and lobbying registration records.
Lichtblau report covers a lot of area as to how and where the White House administration and lobbyists are meeting. Do I hear 'plausible deniability' floating around in Obama's lawyer mind? Or maybe as a senior White House official said, “We don’t believe there’s anything untoward about these meetings, and we don’t think that represents any special access for lobbyists.” Adding that “folks are allowed to get a cup of coffee, and we’re not going to bar patronage at any of the area’s fine coffeehouses.”
I'm waiting to find out who is Obama's Abramoff.
Read Lichtblau report
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/us/politics/25caribou.html?sq=caribou coffee&st=cse&scp=2&pagewanted=print
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Is Obama and MSM telling all about BP efforts?
If you have been following news about the oil leak in the Gulf, do you think you have been getting the real information of what occurs? I think if you want to know about a neighborhood; you ask the people who live there. So, I read the news sites from the states surrounding the Gulf.
Press-Register Mobile Real-time News http://www.al.com/news/mobile/
Baton Rouge Business Report http://www.businessreport.com/
Gambit Weekly http://bestofneworleans.com/gyrobase/
Times-Picayune http://www.nola.com/
Sun-Herald http://www.sunherald.com/
The Mississippi Press http://www.gulflive.com/mississippipress/
I've added a few other reports I have read below.
I am not being an apologist for BP when I say it doesn't seem as if the main stream media is giving out the full reports of what is happening. And Obama now wants to know who ass he is going to kick.
While we are all outraged and frustrated at BP's failed attempts to cap the well, or at least significantly slow the flow; the reality of it is BP's executives didn't cut and run. BP has been quick to admit its responsibility and has been writing checks to business owners affected by the spill and hiring out of work fishermen for cleaning up and other related oil spill work. They are paying 'Loss of Income' claims to the fishermen. They are paying for the cleanup. It estimates its costs for the cleanup at almost $1 billion so far.
They also have been open to and trying different methods to cleanup the oil. An unidentified BP worker said that a number of new and unconventional methods have been looked at but that they have to receive the go-ahead from federal officials in charge. The BP worker said they were trying to get the federal officials to look at the methods, and then get approval to at least do a testing area.
If they determined the method was successful in the test area, then they would implement it on a larger scale. Since some of the methods would require immediate stepup in production to aquire enough material or product for a large area, it was necessary for the federal officials to quickly review the methods and approve them. However, the worker said just getting the federal officials to look at the methods was proving to be a task in itself. It seems the federal officials are stuck on the 'experimental' aspects of the methods.
Go ahead - say it, because I did.
Duh!
We have never had a leak at the depth of a mile down, it's never happened before. Of course everything that is being done is experimental.
BP has an ugly track record, a history of worker deaths, previous fines and other safety violations. Plus, it's spokespeople have terminal foot in mouth disease. And after all is said and done; they will probably be the most government monitored oil company in the World. But why is the MSM not reporting the truth of what is happening? And why is Obama trying to come off like Jesse Ventura?
He keeps repeating that BP will be held responsible for the spill and its aftermath. It looks as if BP is taking, and has taken, responsibility to get the job done. I keep hearing Emanuel's adage, 'You never want a serious crisis to go to waste'. It would be an extremely sad human being who would use this oil spill to put a feather in their cap.
Well near Deepwater Horizon has leaked since at least April 30
http://blog.al.com/live/2010/06/another_gulf_oil_spill_well_ne.html
A nearby drilling rig, the Ocean Saratoga, has been leaking since at least April 30, according to a federal document
Calm no more, Obama lashes out at BP on Gulf visit
Dogged for being too calm in crisis, President Barack Obama unleashed frustration for all to see Friday, warning BP it had better do right by the people whose lives it has wrecked.
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12594279
BP to pay a second month of 'Loss of Income' claims
Updated: Jun 04, 2010 4:01 PM CDT Businesses and individuals who have lost income due to the Gulf oil leak will soon receive a second advance payment from BP. The company said in Mississippi about 1900 individuals and businesses will have received about $10 million once these latest checks are sent.
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12597464
BP gave Florida $50 million
BP last month gave Florida $25 million for advertising to get that message out to the rest of the country, as well as another $25 million for spill preparedness..
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1994640,00.html#ixzz0qEY4c71V
Ocean Springs prepping new product to fight oil
Updated: Jun 03, 2010 8:47 AM CDT Instead of boom, Ocean Springs is relying on a new line of defense to keep the oil out. Krystal Allan reports on how it works and how it will be used along Ocean Springs' shoreline.
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12586178
BP Announces First Payment on Barrier Islands Project for State of Louisiana
BP: $60 Million Payment To Louisiana Is First Installment Of Six
HOUSTON -- As part of the previously announced commitment to fund the entire $360 million cost of six berms in the Louisiana barrier islands project, BP today announced that it will make an immediate payment of $60 million to the State of Louisiana. In a letter to Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and as previously announced, BP detailed its plans to make payments in stages based on the project’s completion milestones
http://www.tradesignalonline.com/Markets/Story.aspx?id=637063&cat=18
Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/category.asp?C=186625
Deepwater Horizon Response
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/site/2931/
Press-Register Mobile Real-time News http://www.al.com/news/mobile/
Baton Rouge Business Report http://www.businessreport.com/
Gambit Weekly http://bestofneworleans.com/gyrobase/
Times-Picayune http://www.nola.com/
Sun-Herald http://www.sunherald.com/
The Mississippi Press http://www.gulflive.com/mississippipress/
I've added a few other reports I have read below.
I am not being an apologist for BP when I say it doesn't seem as if the main stream media is giving out the full reports of what is happening. And Obama now wants to know who ass he is going to kick.
While we are all outraged and frustrated at BP's failed attempts to cap the well, or at least significantly slow the flow; the reality of it is BP's executives didn't cut and run. BP has been quick to admit its responsibility and has been writing checks to business owners affected by the spill and hiring out of work fishermen for cleaning up and other related oil spill work. They are paying 'Loss of Income' claims to the fishermen. They are paying for the cleanup. It estimates its costs for the cleanup at almost $1 billion so far.
They also have been open to and trying different methods to cleanup the oil. An unidentified BP worker said that a number of new and unconventional methods have been looked at but that they have to receive the go-ahead from federal officials in charge. The BP worker said they were trying to get the federal officials to look at the methods, and then get approval to at least do a testing area.
If they determined the method was successful in the test area, then they would implement it on a larger scale. Since some of the methods would require immediate stepup in production to aquire enough material or product for a large area, it was necessary for the federal officials to quickly review the methods and approve them. However, the worker said just getting the federal officials to look at the methods was proving to be a task in itself. It seems the federal officials are stuck on the 'experimental' aspects of the methods.
Go ahead - say it, because I did.
Duh!
We have never had a leak at the depth of a mile down, it's never happened before. Of course everything that is being done is experimental.
BP has an ugly track record, a history of worker deaths, previous fines and other safety violations. Plus, it's spokespeople have terminal foot in mouth disease. And after all is said and done; they will probably be the most government monitored oil company in the World. But why is the MSM not reporting the truth of what is happening? And why is Obama trying to come off like Jesse Ventura?
He keeps repeating that BP will be held responsible for the spill and its aftermath. It looks as if BP is taking, and has taken, responsibility to get the job done. I keep hearing Emanuel's adage, 'You never want a serious crisis to go to waste'. It would be an extremely sad human being who would use this oil spill to put a feather in their cap.
Well near Deepwater Horizon has leaked since at least April 30
http://blog.al.com/live/2010/06/another_gulf_oil_spill_well_ne.html
A nearby drilling rig, the Ocean Saratoga, has been leaking since at least April 30, according to a federal document
Calm no more, Obama lashes out at BP on Gulf visit
Dogged for being too calm in crisis, President Barack Obama unleashed frustration for all to see Friday, warning BP it had better do right by the people whose lives it has wrecked.
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12594279
BP to pay a second month of 'Loss of Income' claims
Updated: Jun 04, 2010 4:01 PM CDT Businesses and individuals who have lost income due to the Gulf oil leak will soon receive a second advance payment from BP. The company said in Mississippi about 1900 individuals and businesses will have received about $10 million once these latest checks are sent.
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12597464
BP gave Florida $50 million
BP last month gave Florida $25 million for advertising to get that message out to the rest of the country, as well as another $25 million for spill preparedness..
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1994640,00.html#ixzz0qEY4c71V
Ocean Springs prepping new product to fight oil
Updated: Jun 03, 2010 8:47 AM CDT Instead of boom, Ocean Springs is relying on a new line of defense to keep the oil out. Krystal Allan reports on how it works and how it will be used along Ocean Springs' shoreline.
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12586178
BP Announces First Payment on Barrier Islands Project for State of Louisiana
BP: $60 Million Payment To Louisiana Is First Installment Of Six
HOUSTON -- As part of the previously announced commitment to fund the entire $360 million cost of six berms in the Louisiana barrier islands project, BP today announced that it will make an immediate payment of $60 million to the State of Louisiana. In a letter to Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and as previously announced, BP detailed its plans to make payments in stages based on the project’s completion milestones
http://www.tradesignalonline.com/Markets/Story.aspx?id=637063&cat=18
Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/category.asp?C=186625
Deepwater Horizon Response
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/site/2931/
Monday, May 17, 2010
Support H.R.5137 - Girls Protection Act of 2010'
Democrat Joseph Crowley of New York and Republican Mary Bono of California, on April 26, 2010, introduced legislation, Girls Protection Act of 2010, H.R. 5137, on 4/26/2010 that would make it illegal to transport a minor girl living in the United States out of the country for the purpose of female genital mutilation.
The Girls Protection Act of 2010 amends the federal criminal code to impose a fine or five-year prison term, or both, on any U.S. citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence who knowingly transports in foreign commerce a girl under the age of 18 for the purposes of female genital mutilation.
The bill reads:
H.R. 5137
Girls Protection Act of 2010
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide penalties for transporting minors in foreign commerce for the purposes of female genital mutilation.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Girls Protection Act of 2010'.
SEC. 2. TRANSPORT FOR FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
Section 116 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(d) Whoever, being a United States citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States, knowingly transports a person in foreign commerce for the purpose of conduct with regard to that person that would be a violation of subsection (a) if the conduct occurred within the United States, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.'.
END
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h5137ih.txt.pdf
PLEASE EMAIL, or CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND TELL THEM TO IMMEDIATELY VOTE TO PASS H.R.5137 - Girls Protection Act of 2010'
The Girls Protection Act of 2010 amends the federal criminal code to impose a fine or five-year prison term, or both, on any U.S. citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence who knowingly transports in foreign commerce a girl under the age of 18 for the purposes of female genital mutilation.
The bill reads:
H.R. 5137
Girls Protection Act of 2010
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide penalties for transporting minors in foreign commerce for the purposes of female genital mutilation.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Girls Protection Act of 2010'.
SEC. 2. TRANSPORT FOR FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
Section 116 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(d) Whoever, being a United States citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States, knowingly transports a person in foreign commerce for the purpose of conduct with regard to that person that would be a violation of subsection (a) if the conduct occurred within the United States, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.'.
END
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h5137ih.txt.pdf
PLEASE EMAIL, or CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND TELL THEM TO IMMEDIATELY VOTE TO PASS H.R.5137 - Girls Protection Act of 2010'
Sunday, May 16, 2010
American Association of Pediatricians amend opposition to Female Genital Mutilation
I was listening to the House Judiciary Committee question Attorney General Holder this past week. One of the Representatives questioning him brought up the one common thing shared by the Christmas bomber in Detroit, the Fort Hood mass murderer, and the Times Square bomber. The Rep said in all three terrorist attempts in the last year, one of which was successful, the individuals had ties to radical Islam. Did Holder think that was a factor?
AG Holder stumbled around for an answer as the Representative asked him another 4 or 5 times if that connection with Islam might have been the reason, or one of the reasons, these terrorist did what they did.
All Holder could form as an answer was to say he thought those people who espouse a ... a version of Islam... you say radical Islam... .
The representative finally ended with "You uncomfortable attributing any actions to Islam? Because it sounds like it.”
After 9/11 we, the American people of the U.S, began getting crash courses on Islam and its followers. We had a basic idea of the religion, and as we are generally tolerant of most religions in this country, we bought into thinking we could tolerate Islam. Big mistake. We were lead around by our noses to think that only the radical form of Islam would allow such horrific actions.
In 9 short years we have seen what we thought was just another religion in the World be shown to manifesting itself as something quite different. When are we going to see that the horrific acts commited in country after country that follow Islam are santioned by the teachings and practice of Islam? While the President is working to improve and promote relations with Muslim countries, the Muslim nations want that a global silence on denouncing Islam become law. If the theocracy of countries espousing Islam as their politcal, religious and mundane life hasn't shown us the true reachings of Islam; then how dumb are we?
We really, really need to wake up quick. Their reach has become so wide that the American Association of Pediatricians is suggesting a change in U.S. law to allow Female Genital Mutilation. There is no healthy or medical reason for it. Quite the reverse; it can cause death. Have we become so tolerant that we would lawfully allow girls to be severely mutilated to appease a religion?
The practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), or Clitoridectomies openly continues today in Africa, the Middle East, Indochina, and communities in Asia. Immigrants from these countries have brought the practice with them to Europe and North America. While some romanticize it as a 'rite of passage'; it is mutilation, no matter how you try to spin it. However, it is now being recommended that we extend culturally sensitivity and call it female genital cutting (FGC), This culturally sensitivity recommendation comes from the American Association of Pediatricians. On April 26, the AAP even suggested that laws be changed to allow pediatricians to mutilate girls. They’re not yet advocating full-scale clitoridectomies: just a milder form of child abuse or a less-severe ritual cutting they term as 'nicking'.
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwavdJn9rH0xrf9y3w2FH054x6Z4t71PRLvCLlqq6qpqiMCK9brI6Xu
Full text with graphics download (mature material graphics)- http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwVIgJTx9LbCC4lZjU3MJzpga7RHHUlW50iGS9kh7hpkQ==
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=fzc$ssuuf/8ndJ3iOaEo20e61oV0gx4DIrZRKbCUC0Nl2m7X0fc5ehG1Kh6nR9EV0uXliVe616I=
From the AAP:
AG Holder stumbled around for an answer as the Representative asked him another 4 or 5 times if that connection with Islam might have been the reason, or one of the reasons, these terrorist did what they did.
All Holder could form as an answer was to say he thought those people who espouse a ... a version of Islam... you say radical Islam... .
The representative finally ended with "You uncomfortable attributing any actions to Islam? Because it sounds like it.”
After 9/11 we, the American people of the U.S, began getting crash courses on Islam and its followers. We had a basic idea of the religion, and as we are generally tolerant of most religions in this country, we bought into thinking we could tolerate Islam. Big mistake. We were lead around by our noses to think that only the radical form of Islam would allow such horrific actions.
In 9 short years we have seen what we thought was just another religion in the World be shown to manifesting itself as something quite different. When are we going to see that the horrific acts commited in country after country that follow Islam are santioned by the teachings and practice of Islam? While the President is working to improve and promote relations with Muslim countries, the Muslim nations want that a global silence on denouncing Islam become law. If the theocracy of countries espousing Islam as their politcal, religious and mundane life hasn't shown us the true reachings of Islam; then how dumb are we?
We really, really need to wake up quick. Their reach has become so wide that the American Association of Pediatricians is suggesting a change in U.S. law to allow Female Genital Mutilation. There is no healthy or medical reason for it. Quite the reverse; it can cause death. Have we become so tolerant that we would lawfully allow girls to be severely mutilated to appease a religion?
The practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), or Clitoridectomies openly continues today in Africa, the Middle East, Indochina, and communities in Asia. Immigrants from these countries have brought the practice with them to Europe and North America. While some romanticize it as a 'rite of passage'; it is mutilation, no matter how you try to spin it. However, it is now being recommended that we extend culturally sensitivity and call it female genital cutting (FGC), This culturally sensitivity recommendation comes from the American Association of Pediatricians. On April 26, the AAP even suggested that laws be changed to allow pediatricians to mutilate girls. They’re not yet advocating full-scale clitoridectomies: just a milder form of child abuse or a less-severe ritual cutting they term as 'nicking'.
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwavdJn9rH0xrf9y3w2FH054x6Z4t71PRLvCLlqq6qpqiMCK9brI6Xu
Full text with graphics download (mature material graphics)- http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=pttjAt7z/hk/MLf9CVKU6pKhuS$9xqffreiSU5bqegwVIgJTx9LbCC4lZjU3MJzpga7RHHUlW50iGS9kh7hpkQ==
http://withfairnessandwithjusticeforall.aimoo.com/url.cfm?link=fzc$ssuuf/8ndJ3iOaEo20e61oV0gx4DIrZRKbCUC0Nl2m7X0fc5ehG1Kh6nR9EV0uXliVe616I=
From the AAP:
Female Genital Mutilation (FGM - let's call it what it really is) is illegal and subject to criminal prosecution in several countries, including Sweden, Norway, Australia, and the United Kingdom. In the United States, federal legislation in 1996 criminalized the performance of FGC by practitioners on female infants and children or adolescents younger than 18 years and mandated development of educational programs at the community level and for physicians about the harmful consequences of the practice. Various state laws exist as well.
Some physicians, including pediatricians who work closely with immigrant populations in which FGC is the norm, have voiced concern about the adverse effects of criminalization of the practice on educational efforts.32 These physicians emphasize the significance of a ceremonial ritual in the initiation of the girl or adolescent as a community member and advocate only pricking or incising the clitoral skin as sufficient to satisfy cultural requirements. This is no more of an alteration than ear piercing. A legitimate concern is that parents who are denied the cooperation of a physician will send their girls back to their home country for a much more severe and dangerous procedure or use the services of a non–medically trained person in North America. In some countries in which FGC is common, some progress toward eradication or amelioration has been made by substituting ritual “nicks” for more severe forms.2 In contrast, there is also evidence that medicalizing FGC can prolong the custom among middle-class families (eg, in Egypt)
The option of offering a “ritual nick” is currently precluded by US federal law, which makes criminal any nonmedical procedure performed on the genitals of a female minor.
Most forms of FGC are decidedly harmful, and pediatricians should decline to perform them, even in the absence of any legal constraints. However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful and is much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting. There is reason to believe that offering such a compromise may build trust between hospitals and immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguring and lifethreatening procedures in their native countries, and play a role in the eventual eradication of FGC. It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm.
Efforts should be made to use all available educational and counseling resources to dissuade parents from seeking a ritual genital procedure for their daughter. For circumstances in which an infant, child, or adolescent seems to be at risk of FGC, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that its members educate and counsel the family about the detrimental health effects of FGC. Parents should be reminded that performing FGC is illegal and constitutes child abuse in the United States.
It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
What happened to the Bunning Amendment
I watched as Senator Bunning spoke on the Senate floor on Tuesday. He repeatedly presented a way to pay for the Temporary Extension Act. He also had in the amendment a longer extension time. As it is, the Senate will be back in the same place in about a month - having to authorize, and borrow more money for the same extensions again.
Bunning's amendment was not voted on. It was shoved under the rug when Mrs. Boxer said, "I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act."
It was Bunning's motion to to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act that was voted on. Motion to waive the Budget Act with respect to amendment SA 3355
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2010_record&page=S955&position=all
rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 53.; that put Bunning's amendment out of order and off the floor.
Temporary Extension Act: By 78 yeas to 19 nays (Vote No. 32), Senate agreed to H.R. 4691, to provide a temporary extension of certain programs, after taking action on the following amendment proposed thereto, clearing the measure for the President:
H.R. 4691
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.+4691:
Pages S926-34
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S926&dbname=2010_record
During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action:
By 43 yeas to 53 nays (Vote No. 31), three-fifths of those Senators duly chosen and sworn, not having voted in the affirmative, Senate rejected the motion to waive pursuant to section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, with respect to Bunning Amendment No. 3355, in the nature of a substitute. Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment was in violation of section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, was sustained, and the amendment was ruled out of order.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 43, nays 53
Pages S933
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S933&dbname=2010_record
The record states:
SIGNATURE AUTHORIZATION
Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills and joint resolutions during today’s session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from California.
Mrs. BOXER. How much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 55 seconds remaining.
Mrs. BOXER. I want to say, on behalf of many of us on this side of the aisle, how glad we are that Senator BUNNING has changed his mind and taken the option he was presented with on Thursday; that is, to offer an amendment and then for us to get this done. Too much pain is out there with the unemployed.
A lot of workers in my State and in States all across this Nation who are unemployed suffered a great deal of anxiety over this long weekend.
Mr. President, 2,000 Department of Transportation inspectors were furloughed. That led to stoppage of work on bridge and highway construction in 17 States, because Senator BUNNING didn’t take the deal he is taking now.
I am glad he is taking it.
I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I am sorry. I wasn’t on the floor. Could the Senator make her point of order.
Mrs. BOXER. I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I move to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. LAUTENBERG) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Texas (Mrs. HUTCHISON) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. INHOFE).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted—yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 31 Leg.]
YEAS—43
Alexander
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brown (MA)
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Isakson
Johanns
Kyl
LeMieux
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Risch
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Wicker
NAYS—53
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown (OH)
Burris
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Hagan
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kaufman
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Specter
Stabenow
Tester
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING—4
Byrd
Hutchison
Inhofe
Lautenberg
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 43, the nays are 53. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.
Bunning's amendment was not voted on. It was shoved under the rug when Mrs. Boxer said, "I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act."
It was Bunning's motion to to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act that was voted on. Motion to waive the Budget Act with respect to amendment SA 3355
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2010_record&page=S955&position=all
rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 53.; that put Bunning's amendment out of order and off the floor.
Temporary Extension Act: By 78 yeas to 19 nays (Vote No. 32), Senate agreed to H.R. 4691, to provide a temporary extension of certain programs, after taking action on the following amendment proposed thereto, clearing the measure for the President:
H.R. 4691
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.+4691:
Pages S926-34
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S926&dbname=2010_record
During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action:
By 43 yeas to 53 nays (Vote No. 31), three-fifths of those Senators duly chosen and sworn, not having voted in the affirmative, Senate rejected the motion to waive pursuant to section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, with respect to Bunning Amendment No. 3355, in the nature of a substitute. Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment was in violation of section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, was sustained, and the amendment was ruled out of order.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 43, nays 53
Pages S933
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgiposition=all&page=S933&dbname=2010_record
The record states:
SIGNATURE AUTHORIZATION
Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills and joint resolutions during today’s session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from California.
Mrs. BOXER. How much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 55 seconds remaining.
Mrs. BOXER. I want to say, on behalf of many of us on this side of the aisle, how glad we are that Senator BUNNING has changed his mind and taken the option he was presented with on Thursday; that is, to offer an amendment and then for us to get this done. Too much pain is out there with the unemployed.
A lot of workers in my State and in States all across this Nation who are unemployed suffered a great deal of anxiety over this long weekend.
Mr. President, 2,000 Department of Transportation inspectors were furloughed. That led to stoppage of work on bridge and highway construction in 17 States, because Senator BUNNING didn’t take the deal he is taking now.
I am glad he is taking it.
I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I am sorry. I wasn’t on the floor. Could the Senator make her point of order.
Mrs. BOXER. I raise a point of order that the pending Bunning amendment violates section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I move to waive the applicable section of the Budget Act, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. LAUTENBERG) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Texas (Mrs. HUTCHISON) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. INHOFE).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted—yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 31 Leg.]
YEAS—43
Alexander
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brown (MA)
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Isakson
Johanns
Kyl
LeMieux
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Risch
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Wicker
NAYS—53
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown (OH)
Burris
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Hagan
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kaufman
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Specter
Stabenow
Tester
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING—4
Byrd
Hutchison
Inhofe
Lautenberg
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 43, the nays are 53. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
The "Bloom Box"
No..it's not a gardening fixture.
It's a new power source technology that will blow you away. An inexpensive,clean and with no emissions power source. The Sunnyvale, Calif. based company has heavyweight customers such as eBay, Wal-Mart Stores, FedEx and others in California which already have been testing and using it to power their company headquarters. And the companies are reporting major savings over what they were paying the standard utility power companies. It was made by Shachar Bar-on. It's a little power plant-in-a-box they want to put literally in your backyard.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6228923n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVZAT3U_Jls&feature=player_embedded#
Now, what are the problems with it?
Well, one thing is the billions and billions of dollars in subsidies we, as U.S. taxpayers, have given, and set to give, to energy companies for Research and Development. What are G.E., BP and Siemens suppose to do without the U.S. taxpayers funding R&D money to them?
Naysayers state there's nothing that they can see that is that unique about it. The Bloom Energy fuel cell is designed to be stacked into small blocks. It's estimated that 4 or 5 blocks will power a U.S. home. Larger units, such as those with 100kW units, are housed in a unit about the size of a large side-by-side refrigerator. The "Bloom boxes" already in use by companies are costing between $700,000 and $800,000 each. Bloom Energy's CEO K.R Sridhar says it can be made inexpensive enough for everyone to afford.The $3,000 home version is estimated to be ten years away. If adopted by local power companies, this product could result in a huge decrease in homeowners energy bills
Inexpensive, clean and developed technology.
Already produced, being tested and in use.
No huge amounts of taxpayer money appropriated to R&D.
New factories or refitting current factories would be a boon for the jobs market.
Could it be fitted to an auto to totally run it on natural gas?
Oh my Goddess! What will Gore do with no carbon footprints?
What will the politicians do with no energy lobbyists for oil funding them?
Remember Bloom Energy and the "Bloom Box"; lest it be covered over and hidden by the Powers-That-Be.
It's a new power source technology that will blow you away. An inexpensive,clean and with no emissions power source. The Sunnyvale, Calif. based company has heavyweight customers such as eBay, Wal-Mart Stores, FedEx and others in California which already have been testing and using it to power their company headquarters. And the companies are reporting major savings over what they were paying the standard utility power companies. It was made by Shachar Bar-on. It's a little power plant-in-a-box they want to put literally in your backyard.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6228923n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVZAT3U_Jls&feature=player_embedded#
Now, what are the problems with it?
Well, one thing is the billions and billions of dollars in subsidies we, as U.S. taxpayers, have given, and set to give, to energy companies for Research and Development. What are G.E., BP and Siemens suppose to do without the U.S. taxpayers funding R&D money to them?
Naysayers state there's nothing that they can see that is that unique about it. The Bloom Energy fuel cell is designed to be stacked into small blocks. It's estimated that 4 or 5 blocks will power a U.S. home. Larger units, such as those with 100kW units, are housed in a unit about the size of a large side-by-side refrigerator. The "Bloom boxes" already in use by companies are costing between $700,000 and $800,000 each. Bloom Energy's CEO K.R Sridhar says it can be made inexpensive enough for everyone to afford.The $3,000 home version is estimated to be ten years away. If adopted by local power companies, this product could result in a huge decrease in homeowners energy bills
Inexpensive, clean and developed technology.
Already produced, being tested and in use.
No huge amounts of taxpayer money appropriated to R&D.
New factories or refitting current factories would be a boon for the jobs market.
Could it be fitted to an auto to totally run it on natural gas?
Oh my Goddess! What will Gore do with no carbon footprints?
What will the politicians do with no energy lobbyists for oil funding them?
Remember Bloom Energy and the "Bloom Box"; lest it be covered over and hidden by the Powers-That-Be.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
'..in China, with China, for China'
in June of 2009, General Motors in the U.S. filed for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy was America's fourth largest, but the largest for a U.S. manufacturer as G.M. was 172 billion dollars in debt. The U.S. government initially invested twenty billion dollars and, later, another 30 billion dollars. In return, taxpayers became the owners of 60% of a smaller G.M. Canada and the United Auto Workers union also own part of the restructured company.
To reduce costs, G.M. plans to close more factories and cut more jobs in the United States by the end of 2011. In addition to G.M. plans to sell or discontinue its Saturn, Saab and Pontiac lines; it plans to cut more than 1000 dealerships in the United States by the end of 2010. GM has sold its Hummer brand to a heavy equipment company in China.
Now, if the unemployment rate in the U.S. isn't depressing enough for you, then you might be interested in adding betrayal to that depression. But you will have to discern who betrayed us: companies like GM; or our own U.S. government and its representatives; or both? And, in fairness, we have to claim responsibility for allowing it happen and for being duped.
You won't find this information being reported by your daily cable channel news anchors and reporters. Only a few cable channels report on the real economy, and political plays and deals behind them. Most of them bought, and then sold to us, the 'they are too big to fail' party line.They were too busy with being used to redirect our attention and angst to the big bonuses and company jets issues.
Bush's T.A.R.P. and Obama's Stimulus have done nothing but to hasten U.S. economic decline. While some are hailing the recent report of a 2.7% rise in U.S. GDP, they are ignoring that it is being artificially propped up.
GDP growth was said to be due to higher consumer spending; however, a jump in exports was offset by an even larger rise in imports. There was also the Cash-for-Clunkers that is now over.
The GDP growth was claimed as there was a slowdown in the reduction of inventories; but, no new inventories nor U.S. manufactured goods are being added. There has been no follow through in sustaining a renewed market for the autos in the U.S. Plus, business investment declined as another large drop in investments in structures.
An increase in residential investments, as in home building and new mortgages, is said to have contributed to GDP growth. This is an artificial shoring up as the home-buyer tax credit is still in effect. There are a number of mortgages that are being renegotiated, or refinanced, as new loans.There is also a jump in housing vacancies as in the homes that were started were not completed, or, if completed, are vacant.
Finally, GDP growth was definitely pushed upwards by robust government spending. The Cash-for-Clunkers, T.A.R.P., the home-buyer tax credit, the Stimulus, and more is government spending. Yet, there is still a high rate of banks which have failed. There are 6 so far this month, And it's only December 5th. And bankruptcies are still rising.
Bailing out General Motors was part of the robust government spending. And remember that the Stimulus was also suppose to go for alternative energy research and developement. It was suppose to help create more jobs in businesses like GM for U.S. workers. That's what the President said in his speeches as to why we have to spend all this money to bail out all these big businesses. That's what people in Congress said when they voted for spending all the taxpayers money. That's what the Fed said as it doled out all the taxpayers money.
What we weren't being told by them was that in April 2009, General Motors Corp., in China, and Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp. Group (SAIC) launched SAIC's Shanghai Brand Fuel Cell Vehicle, which is powered by GM's latest fourth-generation fuel cell propulsion technology. What they didn't tell us was that GM has already developed and produced a 700 bar high-pressure hydrogen fuel cell system adapted in the Chevrolet Equinox Fuel Cell cars.
What they didn't tell us was that:
"The two automakers, which operate eight joint ventures in China, earlier signed a pair of agreements to promote advanced vehicle technology. Their Shanghai GM joint venture began selling the Buick LaCrosse Eco-Hybrid last year as part of its Drive to Green strategy. China is slated to become one of the first markets for the Chevrolet Volt extended-range electric vehicle in 2011"
And General Motors Co on Thurs, Dec. 4 2009, said it has;
"...set up a $100 million joint venture in Hong Kong along with Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp Group (SAIC) to focus on the Asian markets. The new venture would bring under its umbrella all the Indian operations of GM including the two vehicle manufacturing facilities, a power train unit and the nationwide distribution network.
GM would also produce and sell small cars and mini-commercial vehicles developed by Shanghai GM and SAIC-GM-Wuling Automobile Co in India under the new joint venture."
What they also didn't tell us was that:
"The Shanghai and Chevrolet Equinox Fuel Cell vehicles will be featured in the most extensive fuel cell demonstration program ever conducted in China. This follows the government's call for the creation of a sustainable transportation system," said GM Group Vice President and GM Asia Pacific President Nick Reilly.
"GM supports China's move toward sustainability, and we are providing our latest fuel cell technology in line with our overall strategy of in China, with China, for China."
General Motors.
Founded in 1908; in the U.S.A; built up by U.S. workers; sustained by U.S.A. consumers;
now - "..in China, with China, for China".
Remember that the next time Congress or the President tell us they have to spend money for anything; while we taxpayers are going to be betrayed, left holding the bag and beaten with the short end of the stick.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-12/05/content_9123704.htm
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=GM%3AUS&sid=ary05b2P2J6g
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Health Insurers endanger your personal information
Health insurer, Health Net, lost 1.5 million patient records in May but never informed patients, law enforcement or government entities, despite data breach laws in some states that require data spillers to notify victims and state officials when residents are affected by a breach. The insurer finally sent a letter to Connecticut’s attorney general and the state’s Department of Insurance this week.
Health Net claimed it took six months to determine what data was on the missing disk. The information was on a hard drive that disappeared from Health Net's Shelton office. The hard drive included all data on patients, including health information, as well as financial and personal data such as social security and bank account numbers. There were also some physicians' personal information on the disk as well. It said that data on the disk was compressed and stored in an image format that required special software to view, which was available only to HealthNet.
Health Net will provide credit monitoring for over two years - free of charge - to all impacted members who elect the service, and will provide assistance to any member who has experienced any suspicious activity, identity theft or health care fraud between May 2009 and their date of enrollment.
So, anyone having Health Net needs to start getting in line. I smell a class action suit for damages in the making.
http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/news11027.html
------------------------------------
Universal American Action Network exposes clients Medicare SS numbers
Thousands could become victims of identity theft just because a piece of mail has been sent to their homes.
Right on the front of the piece of mail, in plain view, is the Medicare recipient's Social Security number.
The postcards were from the Universal American Action Network, a subsidiary of Universal American Insurance. The data leak affected patients enrolled in the Medicare Advantage plan, which uses a patient’s Social Security number as his Medicare account number.
The company revealed that 80,000 postcards with Social Security numbers on them were sent out last Friday to Universal clients throughout the country. Universal American said that the Social Security numbers were on the postcards because of a printing error. And Universal claims it immediately terminated its contract with the printing service.
The big question is -- how did this company get the Social Security numbers? Well, in many cases, Medicare account numbers are your Social Security number. Universal American said it will send a letter to those who received the postcards notifying them of this problem and offer to provide free credit monitoring for a year. In the meantime, anyone with any questions can contact Universal American at 1 (877) 697-6228.
http://www.wgal.com/news/21655737/detail.html
Health Net claimed it took six months to determine what data was on the missing disk. The information was on a hard drive that disappeared from Health Net's Shelton office. The hard drive included all data on patients, including health information, as well as financial and personal data such as social security and bank account numbers. There were also some physicians' personal information on the disk as well. It said that data on the disk was compressed and stored in an image format that required special software to view, which was available only to HealthNet.
Health Net will provide credit monitoring for over two years - free of charge - to all impacted members who elect the service, and will provide assistance to any member who has experienced any suspicious activity, identity theft or health care fraud between May 2009 and their date of enrollment.
So, anyone having Health Net needs to start getting in line. I smell a class action suit for damages in the making.
http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/news11027.html
------------------------------------
Universal American Action Network exposes clients Medicare SS numbers
Thousands could become victims of identity theft just because a piece of mail has been sent to their homes.
Right on the front of the piece of mail, in plain view, is the Medicare recipient's Social Security number.
The postcards were from the Universal American Action Network, a subsidiary of Universal American Insurance. The data leak affected patients enrolled in the Medicare Advantage plan, which uses a patient’s Social Security number as his Medicare account number.
The company revealed that 80,000 postcards with Social Security numbers on them were sent out last Friday to Universal clients throughout the country. Universal American said that the Social Security numbers were on the postcards because of a printing error. And Universal claims it immediately terminated its contract with the printing service.
The big question is -- how did this company get the Social Security numbers? Well, in many cases, Medicare account numbers are your Social Security number. Universal American said it will send a letter to those who received the postcards notifying them of this problem and offer to provide free credit monitoring for a year. In the meantime, anyone with any questions can contact Universal American at 1 (877) 697-6228.
http://www.wgal.com/news/21655737/detail.html
Looks as if WH Administration is padding the job numbers?
The Government Accountability Office report on stimulus fund tracking was released in Congress on November 19, 2009. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10223.pdf . The report states;
"As of September 30, 2009, approximately $173 billion of the $787 billion—or about 22 percent—of the total funds provided by the Recovery Act had been paid out by the federal government .....Nonfederal recipients of Recovery Act-funded grants, contracts, and loans are required to submit reports .....Of the $173 billion in funds paid out, about $47 billion—a little more than 25 percent—is covered by this recipient report requirement. Neither individuals nor recipients receiving funds through entitlement programs, such as Medicaid, or through tax programs are required to report ....the required reports cover direct jobs created or retained as a result of Recovery Act funding .....On October 30, www.recovery.gov (the federal Web site on Recovery Act spending) reported that more than 100,000 recipients reported hundreds of thousands of jobs created or retained ....."
I periodically have studied the tracker on Recovery. gov to see if the what the White House Administration was publically stating was as transparent, and as true, as had been promised all those months ago on the campaign trail. If you studied very much of it, you would come across entries that had jobs created or retained, but there was no money given to them. There was also money given to agents but no jobs listed as created or retained.
My son is the math wiz in the family, but it seemed to me that if you get at least a hundred million dollars, there should be at least a few jobs showing up somewhere. I think the people that put together the GAO report saw the same things I did. They included in the report:
"Erroneous or questionable data entries that merit further review:
• 3,978 reports that showed no dollar amount received or expended but included more than 50,000 jobs created or retained;
• 9,247 reports that showed no jobs but included expended amounts approaching $1 billion, and
• Instances of other reporting anomalies such as discrepancies between award amounts and the amounts reported as received which, although relatively small in number, indicate problematic issues in the reporting."
On the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity, (http://www.publicintegrity.org/ ), a watchdog site, there were a number of instances shown to go a bit beyond being tagged as a "discrepancy". In virtually all 50 states, claims were made on behalf of congressional districts that don't exist. The 'errors' counted up as nearly $6.4 billion for nearly 30,000 jobs in 440 non-existing districts (http://www.wgal.com/news/21670147/detail.html). I wonder how many in the Government Accountability Office stayed up late for the last few nights reworking the report after this info started to hit the news media?
If you want to study a more accurate accounting of where the money has gone to, then study the stimulus tracker on MSNBC page.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33498869/#/all/all/us/all/
On the MSNBC tracker site is a statement:
"Data for the tracker, provided by Onvia, a company that tracks government contracting activity, differs from federal government data". Onvia has a site for tracking the money on http://www.recovery.org/ . That's Recovery dot ORG; not Recovery dot GOV .
Maybe this is the agency the government should use to get a true read on where the money went? ..... Wait a minute - that would mean there would be someone really making them honestly account for al those dollars the taxpayers have to shell out.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-19-stimulus-jobs_N.htm
------------------------------------
"As of September 30, 2009, approximately $173 billion of the $787 billion—or about 22 percent—of the total funds provided by the Recovery Act had been paid out by the federal government .....Nonfederal recipients of Recovery Act-funded grants, contracts, and loans are required to submit reports .....Of the $173 billion in funds paid out, about $47 billion—a little more than 25 percent—is covered by this recipient report requirement. Neither individuals nor recipients receiving funds through entitlement programs, such as Medicaid, or through tax programs are required to report ....the required reports cover direct jobs created or retained as a result of Recovery Act funding .....On October 30, www.recovery.gov (the federal Web site on Recovery Act spending) reported that more than 100,000 recipients reported hundreds of thousands of jobs created or retained ....."
I periodically have studied the tracker on Recovery. gov to see if the what the White House Administration was publically stating was as transparent, and as true, as had been promised all those months ago on the campaign trail. If you studied very much of it, you would come across entries that had jobs created or retained, but there was no money given to them. There was also money given to agents but no jobs listed as created or retained.
My son is the math wiz in the family, but it seemed to me that if you get at least a hundred million dollars, there should be at least a few jobs showing up somewhere. I think the people that put together the GAO report saw the same things I did. They included in the report:
"Erroneous or questionable data entries that merit further review:
• 3,978 reports that showed no dollar amount received or expended but included more than 50,000 jobs created or retained;
• 9,247 reports that showed no jobs but included expended amounts approaching $1 billion, and
• Instances of other reporting anomalies such as discrepancies between award amounts and the amounts reported as received which, although relatively small in number, indicate problematic issues in the reporting."
On the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity, (http://www.publicintegrity.org/ ), a watchdog site, there were a number of instances shown to go a bit beyond being tagged as a "discrepancy". In virtually all 50 states, claims were made on behalf of congressional districts that don't exist. The 'errors' counted up as nearly $6.4 billion for nearly 30,000 jobs in 440 non-existing districts (http://www.wgal.com/news/21670147/detail.html). I wonder how many in the Government Accountability Office stayed up late for the last few nights reworking the report after this info started to hit the news media?
If you want to study a more accurate accounting of where the money has gone to, then study the stimulus tracker on MSNBC page.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33498869/#/all/all/us/all/
On the MSNBC tracker site is a statement:
"Data for the tracker, provided by Onvia, a company that tracks government contracting activity, differs from federal government data". Onvia has a site for tracking the money on http://www.recovery.org/ . That's Recovery dot ORG; not Recovery dot GOV .
Maybe this is the agency the government should use to get a true read on where the money went? ..... Wait a minute - that would mean there would be someone really making them honestly account for al those dollars the taxpayers have to shell out.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-19-stimulus-jobs_N.htm
------------------------------------
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Wonder why CNN doesn't have Lou Dobbs?
I followed Lou Dobbs from the first time I turned on the CNN channel in the 1980's. He was founding member of the CNN group in the 1980s. We had cable then; satellite was a little out of our pocket book's range. Dobbs anchored a business news program, “The Moneyline News Hour with Lou Dobbs,” on CNN. In June 2003, he anchored a daily program, “Lou Dobbs Tonight”, which expanded business journalism into the political news and issues which influenced and affected average life in America. In a time of 'trickle-down economics', he was one journalist who was honestly telling the truth about what was going to be trickling-down onto our heads.
His nightly program, 'Lou Dobbs Tonight' had special ongoing reports as a cornerstone of the programs. “Broken Borders" focused on border security and illegal immigration. “War on the Middle Class,” and “Exporting America,” related news on the outsourcing of American jobs and how inequitable trade was killing the manufacturing base of the U.S. economy. “Failing Grades” stressed the ongoing the problems in public education. His latest addition of special reports was "Heroes" which featured reports of individual acts of heroism, on and off the battlefield, by U.S military personnel.
Dobbs also has a highly successful national radio program. He has won almost every major award for his work in television news from the George Foster Peabody Award to the Luminary Award by the Business Journalism Review. Yes, he even won the “Father of the Year” by the National Father’s Day Committee in 1993. He has written three best-selling books. “Independents Day: Awakening the American Spirit” in 2007, “War on the Middle Class” in 2006, and “Exporting America” in 2004. He has also been a columnist for Money Magazine, U.S. News and World Report and the New York Daily News.
He would often be the first to have important and complex reports on what the three branches of U.S government and Big Business were doing. In all these years, I can only recall a few times he was ever in error on what he reported. A large portion of his indepth reporting included topics that other journalists would shy away from or skim over as it would not be P.C. to lay out the the truth of the matter. Through his advocacy of the middle class and the working class of America, Dobbs has called for more of our elected officials and leaders of businesses built by American hands to be accountable for their actions.
You would think that in light of such public recognition that CNN would strive to, not only to keep him, but promote his, and a few others, honest journalism into the depth of issues and the ensuing provocative discussions. But CNN corporate changed over the years and began standing under a banner which emphasizes that it was taking a "non-biased approach". Translation - we're going to make everyone happy with joy-joy news that is honest; but running as lean on substance. It's like eating a rice cake as the main course of your meal.
In my opinion, CNN still has a few anchors and journalists who venture over the line to bring that substance to the surface. You have to wonder how long they will be seen if there are certain groups who go after them as there were groups going after Lou Dobbs.
You didn't know that there was a coalition of malcontents campaigning to get CNN to be rid of Dobbs? Well, you won't hear about on CNN. But you don't have to check too many web sites or other news channels to see that he was targeted by illegal immigrant advocacy organizations, outsourcing business corporations, and Washington D.C. regulars.
Dobb's indepth reporting on the Mexican drug cartel's war spilling over the border into the U.S. as far as New Jersey, his reporting of the illegal immigrant status and condition in the U.S, and of the organizations and powerheads who fully aware of what is happening, had a number of organizations after CNN for his head.
Check out the op-ed and blogs of these sites:
Latinos to CNN: Dump Dobbs Now by Roberto Lovato, founder of Presente.org
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roberto-lovato/latinos-to-cnn-dump-dobbs_b_287078.html
Media Matters - Eric Burns, president of Media Matters.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911120019
A “Day of Happiness”: Immigration Activists, Hispanic Press Relish Dobbs’ Exit From CNN
http://feetin2worlds.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/a-day-of-happiness-immigration-activists-hispanic-press-relish-dobbs-exit-from-cnn/
CA Senator Gil Cedillo Issues Statement of CNN's Removal of Lou Dobbs
http://www.obsnews.com/news/article100661_ca-senator-gil-cedillo-issues-statement-cnns-removal-lou-dobbs
Presente.org and our partners in the BastaDobbs.com campaign
BastaDobbs.com Announces Victory:Lou Dobbs to Leave CNN.
http://bastadobbs.com/blog/2009/nov/11/bastadobbscom-announces-victory-lou-dobbs-leave-cn/
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
http://maldef.org/truthinimmigration/
These are only a few of the sites online and there are many more. What they called Dobbs' 'incendiary hate speech and falsehoods' was his stating that illegal immigrants were breaking the law. These groups and others worked behind the scenes to persuade major corporations to stop advertising on Lou Dobbs Tonight. In addition to Media Matters in partnership with NDN, the coalition, representing over 2 million people, includes the National Council of La Raza, LULAC, the National Hispanic Media Coalition, America's Voice Education Fund, The Hispanic Institute, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Netroots Nation, Voto Latino, Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, the Center for New Community, Reform Immigration for America, the Dolores Huerta Foundation, the National Puerto Rican Coalition and the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials.
Now add to those groups, the one on Capitol Hill in D.C. who he offended by accurately telling us what the politicians were trying to hide in their bills, and what the Administration was doing behind closed doors....
Gee... no wonder CNN caved.
His nightly program, 'Lou Dobbs Tonight' had special ongoing reports as a cornerstone of the programs. “Broken Borders" focused on border security and illegal immigration. “War on the Middle Class,” and “Exporting America,” related news on the outsourcing of American jobs and how inequitable trade was killing the manufacturing base of the U.S. economy. “Failing Grades” stressed the ongoing the problems in public education. His latest addition of special reports was "Heroes" which featured reports of individual acts of heroism, on and off the battlefield, by U.S military personnel.
Dobbs also has a highly successful national radio program. He has won almost every major award for his work in television news from the George Foster Peabody Award to the Luminary Award by the Business Journalism Review. Yes, he even won the “Father of the Year” by the National Father’s Day Committee in 1993. He has written three best-selling books. “Independents Day: Awakening the American Spirit” in 2007, “War on the Middle Class” in 2006, and “Exporting America” in 2004. He has also been a columnist for Money Magazine, U.S. News and World Report and the New York Daily News.
He would often be the first to have important and complex reports on what the three branches of U.S government and Big Business were doing. In all these years, I can only recall a few times he was ever in error on what he reported. A large portion of his indepth reporting included topics that other journalists would shy away from or skim over as it would not be P.C. to lay out the the truth of the matter. Through his advocacy of the middle class and the working class of America, Dobbs has called for more of our elected officials and leaders of businesses built by American hands to be accountable for their actions.
You would think that in light of such public recognition that CNN would strive to, not only to keep him, but promote his, and a few others, honest journalism into the depth of issues and the ensuing provocative discussions. But CNN corporate changed over the years and began standing under a banner which emphasizes that it was taking a "non-biased approach". Translation - we're going to make everyone happy with joy-joy news that is honest; but running as lean on substance. It's like eating a rice cake as the main course of your meal.
In my opinion, CNN still has a few anchors and journalists who venture over the line to bring that substance to the surface. You have to wonder how long they will be seen if there are certain groups who go after them as there were groups going after Lou Dobbs.
You didn't know that there was a coalition of malcontents campaigning to get CNN to be rid of Dobbs? Well, you won't hear about on CNN. But you don't have to check too many web sites or other news channels to see that he was targeted by illegal immigrant advocacy organizations, outsourcing business corporations, and Washington D.C. regulars.
Dobb's indepth reporting on the Mexican drug cartel's war spilling over the border into the U.S. as far as New Jersey, his reporting of the illegal immigrant status and condition in the U.S, and of the organizations and powerheads who fully aware of what is happening, had a number of organizations after CNN for his head.
Check out the op-ed and blogs of these sites:
Latinos to CNN: Dump Dobbs Now by Roberto Lovato, founder of Presente.org
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roberto-lovato/latinos-to-cnn-dump-dobbs_b_287078.html
Media Matters - Eric Burns, president of Media Matters.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911120019
A “Day of Happiness”: Immigration Activists, Hispanic Press Relish Dobbs’ Exit From CNN
http://feetin2worlds.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/a-day-of-happiness-immigration-activists-hispanic-press-relish-dobbs-exit-from-cnn/
CA Senator Gil Cedillo Issues Statement of CNN's Removal of Lou Dobbs
http://www.obsnews.com/news/article100661_ca-senator-gil-cedillo-issues-statement-cnns-removal-lou-dobbs
Presente.org and our partners in the BastaDobbs.com campaign
BastaDobbs.com Announces Victory:Lou Dobbs to Leave CNN.
http://bastadobbs.com/blog/2009/nov/11/bastadobbscom-announces-victory-lou-dobbs-leave-cn/
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
http://maldef.org/truthinimmigration/
These are only a few of the sites online and there are many more. What they called Dobbs' 'incendiary hate speech and falsehoods' was his stating that illegal immigrants were breaking the law. These groups and others worked behind the scenes to persuade major corporations to stop advertising on Lou Dobbs Tonight. In addition to Media Matters in partnership with NDN, the coalition, representing over 2 million people, includes the National Council of La Raza, LULAC, the National Hispanic Media Coalition, America's Voice Education Fund, The Hispanic Institute, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Netroots Nation, Voto Latino, Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, the Center for New Community, Reform Immigration for America, the Dolores Huerta Foundation, the National Puerto Rican Coalition and the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials.
Now add to those groups, the one on Capitol Hill in D.C. who he offended by accurately telling us what the politicians were trying to hide in their bills, and what the Administration was doing behind closed doors....
Gee... no wonder CNN caved.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Fort Hood deserves more than "political correctness" attitude
It's time to get passed the "political correctness" attitude and deal with the reality of radical religious fundamentalism. There has to be a line drawn that states the U.S, has seperation of religion and state that is to be obligatory of every religion and its practitioners - no exceptions. It must be clear that using a religion to hide behind, to preach, encourage, and/or support causing harm to Americans; that it will not be tolerated.
Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City Mo., confessed to the fatal shooting of abortion doctor George Tiller in Kansas, in May 2009. Roeder was an occasional contributor to a Des Moines-based newsletter that believes that killing abortion providers is justifiable homicide. Des Moines resident and anti-abortion activist Dave Leach publishes the newsletter, called “Prayer & Action News,” which declares it is “a trumpet call for the Armies of God to assemble.”
In August 1993 Dr. George Tiller was shot by Shelley Shannon. Leach told The Washington Post he visited Rachelle “Shelley” Shannon in prison several years ago. In the mid-90s, Leach’s association with the accused killer of a Florida abortion doctor helped persuade U.S. marshals to guard the Planned Parenthood clinic in Des Moines. Michael F. Griffin was found guilty of the murder of Dr. David Gunn of Pensacola, Florida. after Gunn had been the subject of wanted-style posters distributed by Operation Rescue in the summer of 1992.
Many of the incidents of arsons, attempted murders, death threats, assaults or batteries, kidnappings and murders against abortionist clinics, related personnel and the surrounding areas were connected to radical Christian organizations espousing violent action. Randall Terry, a leading conservative Christian, is the founder of anti-abortion group Operation Rescue. Paul Hill, a former Presbyterian minister and leader in Defensive Action assassinated a physician and bodyguard outside another abortion clinic. Anti-abortion groups Army of God and Christian Gallery advocate and celebrate violent clashes against clinics. These are only a few of the known radical organizations who espouse and stand on biblical and/or Christian religion.
The most recent incident that again calls religious fanaticism to the forefront is the horrendous shooting and killing of military personnel at Fort Hood in Texas. The tragic Ft. Hood shootings and murders are not an isolated incident as others have happened; a plot to kill soldiers at Ft. Dix; a case where one Islamic radical violently attacked a fellow soldier.
Major Nidal Malik Hassan opened fire on a brigade of engineers preparing for deployment to Afghanistan. Witnesses report that Major Hassan - a Muslim - was repeating "Allahu Akbar [God is great]" as he fired on his fellow military people. Major Hasan had contact late last year and this year with a radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi,formerly connected with Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center, a U.S. citizen now believed to be in Yemen. Hasan, from 2001, had worshiped at the suburban Virginia mosque, Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center, in Falls Church, that two of the Sept. 11 hijackers attended in 2001. al-Aulaqi applauds Hasan's murderous actions on his website.
Fellow workers report hearing Hassan compared suicide bombers '..to the noble soldiers in combat who fall on hand grenades to save fellow soldiers in the name of Allah'. He also has said that '..suicide bombers are helping Muslims kill enemy soldiers'. His web site validates their reports. Convenience store film shows Major Hassan on the day before the shooting. He was dressed head to toe in Muslim garb and complaining he did not want to go to Afghanistan and be involved in killing "fellow Muslims."
Major Hassan had received a "poor performance" rating from his superiors at Walter Reed Medical Center. As their psychiatrist, while he counseled wounded troops, he was proselytizing to patients to convert to Islam. As the military bends over backward to be tolerant of the diverse religions and spiritual ideologies; Hassan's behavior, in his capacity as a psychiatrist, of attempted religious recruitment is forbidden and highly unprofessional. Investigators are starting from the premise the suspected gunman in the Fort Hood massacre acted alone. But the FBI is keeping in mind that his communications were flagged by intelligence agencies in 2008.
To their credit, mainstream Christian religious heirarchy, while steadfastly maintaining an anti-abortion stance, have condemned the violent acts commited by the anti-abortion groups. They have done some work to actively ferret out these groups, detour them and disassociate mainstream Christianity from them. A spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations was trying to relay to his audience not to associate the killings on America's soil to Islam or its tenets. The Washington-based group noted that it had launched an anti-terrorism petition drive and a TV ad campaign against religious extremism, and coordinated an anti-terrorism fatwa, or religious ruling, condemning extremism and terrorism.
Many reporters, political officials and investigators are cautious to not cross the boundaries of "political correctness." In the case of Ft. Hood, we need to stop this political correctness. We have to ask our fellow Islamic Americans, Muslim Americans to step up and to recognize our division in this country between church and state, or mosque and state. We have to step up and expect them to not only condemn this in no uncertain terms; but to also take measures within their mosques to stop those of their following from believing that such actions are allowable or commendable.
It is insulting to us to have reporters and others in mainstream media admonish us as to how we are to perceive what happenned at Fort Hood. It is not a perception fueled by prejudice and fear; it is fueled by looking at the facts and proceeding accordingly. It is not a position based on fear and hatred to know that the Ft. Hood massacre wiil be exploited by groups like Al Qaeda. And that other fanatic groups will use it as a card to justify more religious extremism and violence.
Yes, the investigators can proceed cautiously and carefully with a thorough investigation. Once all the information is confirmed, it needs to be presented openly and honestly; and not through the filter of "political correctness." It's a slap in the face to think Americans can not distinguish for themselves between what they saw happening, and what they are told they saw through the filter of "political correctness". It is condescending to have investigators and political officials not to admit it is possible that this was a terrorist act. Information is coming forth that shows connections to al Qaeda and to radical elements of the Islamic religion. Don't tell us to connect the dots to come up with a picture of a poor victim instead of the one that reveals a murderer for the monster he is.
There are 13 dead people, and a number of wounded whose families, loved ones, friends and fellow soldiers live with the horrible reality that the pictures of the rest of their lives are forever changed.
Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City Mo., confessed to the fatal shooting of abortion doctor George Tiller in Kansas, in May 2009. Roeder was an occasional contributor to a Des Moines-based newsletter that believes that killing abortion providers is justifiable homicide. Des Moines resident and anti-abortion activist Dave Leach publishes the newsletter, called “Prayer & Action News,” which declares it is “a trumpet call for the Armies of God to assemble.”
In August 1993 Dr. George Tiller was shot by Shelley Shannon. Leach told The Washington Post he visited Rachelle “Shelley” Shannon in prison several years ago. In the mid-90s, Leach’s association with the accused killer of a Florida abortion doctor helped persuade U.S. marshals to guard the Planned Parenthood clinic in Des Moines. Michael F. Griffin was found guilty of the murder of Dr. David Gunn of Pensacola, Florida. after Gunn had been the subject of wanted-style posters distributed by Operation Rescue in the summer of 1992.
Many of the incidents of arsons, attempted murders, death threats, assaults or batteries, kidnappings and murders against abortionist clinics, related personnel and the surrounding areas were connected to radical Christian organizations espousing violent action. Randall Terry, a leading conservative Christian, is the founder of anti-abortion group Operation Rescue. Paul Hill, a former Presbyterian minister and leader in Defensive Action assassinated a physician and bodyguard outside another abortion clinic. Anti-abortion groups Army of God and Christian Gallery advocate and celebrate violent clashes against clinics. These are only a few of the known radical organizations who espouse and stand on biblical and/or Christian religion.
The most recent incident that again calls religious fanaticism to the forefront is the horrendous shooting and killing of military personnel at Fort Hood in Texas. The tragic Ft. Hood shootings and murders are not an isolated incident as others have happened; a plot to kill soldiers at Ft. Dix; a case where one Islamic radical violently attacked a fellow soldier.
Major Nidal Malik Hassan opened fire on a brigade of engineers preparing for deployment to Afghanistan. Witnesses report that Major Hassan - a Muslim - was repeating "Allahu Akbar [God is great]" as he fired on his fellow military people. Major Hasan had contact late last year and this year with a radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi,formerly connected with Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center, a U.S. citizen now believed to be in Yemen. Hasan, from 2001, had worshiped at the suburban Virginia mosque, Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center, in Falls Church, that two of the Sept. 11 hijackers attended in 2001. al-Aulaqi applauds Hasan's murderous actions on his website.
Fellow workers report hearing Hassan compared suicide bombers '..to the noble soldiers in combat who fall on hand grenades to save fellow soldiers in the name of Allah'. He also has said that '..suicide bombers are helping Muslims kill enemy soldiers'. His web site validates their reports. Convenience store film shows Major Hassan on the day before the shooting. He was dressed head to toe in Muslim garb and complaining he did not want to go to Afghanistan and be involved in killing "fellow Muslims."
Major Hassan had received a "poor performance" rating from his superiors at Walter Reed Medical Center. As their psychiatrist, while he counseled wounded troops, he was proselytizing to patients to convert to Islam. As the military bends over backward to be tolerant of the diverse religions and spiritual ideologies; Hassan's behavior, in his capacity as a psychiatrist, of attempted religious recruitment is forbidden and highly unprofessional. Investigators are starting from the premise the suspected gunman in the Fort Hood massacre acted alone. But the FBI is keeping in mind that his communications were flagged by intelligence agencies in 2008.
To their credit, mainstream Christian religious heirarchy, while steadfastly maintaining an anti-abortion stance, have condemned the violent acts commited by the anti-abortion groups. They have done some work to actively ferret out these groups, detour them and disassociate mainstream Christianity from them. A spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations was trying to relay to his audience not to associate the killings on America's soil to Islam or its tenets. The Washington-based group noted that it had launched an anti-terrorism petition drive and a TV ad campaign against religious extremism, and coordinated an anti-terrorism fatwa, or religious ruling, condemning extremism and terrorism.
Many reporters, political officials and investigators are cautious to not cross the boundaries of "political correctness." In the case of Ft. Hood, we need to stop this political correctness. We have to ask our fellow Islamic Americans, Muslim Americans to step up and to recognize our division in this country between church and state, or mosque and state. We have to step up and expect them to not only condemn this in no uncertain terms; but to also take measures within their mosques to stop those of their following from believing that such actions are allowable or commendable.
It is insulting to us to have reporters and others in mainstream media admonish us as to how we are to perceive what happenned at Fort Hood. It is not a perception fueled by prejudice and fear; it is fueled by looking at the facts and proceeding accordingly. It is not a position based on fear and hatred to know that the Ft. Hood massacre wiil be exploited by groups like Al Qaeda. And that other fanatic groups will use it as a card to justify more religious extremism and violence.
Yes, the investigators can proceed cautiously and carefully with a thorough investigation. Once all the information is confirmed, it needs to be presented openly and honestly; and not through the filter of "political correctness." It's a slap in the face to think Americans can not distinguish for themselves between what they saw happening, and what they are told they saw through the filter of "political correctness". It is condescending to have investigators and political officials not to admit it is possible that this was a terrorist act. Information is coming forth that shows connections to al Qaeda and to radical elements of the Islamic religion. Don't tell us to connect the dots to come up with a picture of a poor victim instead of the one that reveals a murderer for the monster he is.
There are 13 dead people, and a number of wounded whose families, loved ones, friends and fellow soldiers live with the horrible reality that the pictures of the rest of their lives are forever changed.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Credit Cards raising rates as high as 30%
If you have any accounts at any financial institution or any credit cards, you have probably received a mailing recently that has informed you that the fees and interest rates the institutions and companies will charge you in the future will change. It will be going UP!
Banks are raising fees for using an out of network ATM machine. Some overdraft fees are jumping to $45.00. Free checking accounts are going to be charged user fees. No one as yet has defined what that is, or what the fees will be.
Credit-card lenders, have been increasing fees and interest rates, raising minimum payments and cutting credit limits. Some have hiked interest rates as high as 29.99% or canceled cards altogether. Many card companies are going to impose a variable rate, based on the prime rate as reported quarterly in the Wall Street Journal, plus an additional amount for annual fees based on some formula the financial institutions have for raising your fees because they feel like it. And there is also a section in the malings stating that the new law allows you to "opt out" of a higher rate or an annual fee. However, if you do not agree with the fees and interest rate hikes; the company will cancel your card but you will still have to pay it off based on the new fees.
Supposedly, these institutions have to increase what they charge you, the person who pays their bills on time, because they have people who do not pay their bills on time or at all. HELLO...that's what T.A.R.P. dispersements were for - to cover the bad debts of companies from people who did not pay them. A number of these companies, such as Bank of America, Citigroup and so on, have benefited from T.A.R.P. dispersements. No one but the financial institutions know just how much money they received. To date, no federal or government agency can give a total accounting in dollars and cents of the money that was given to the institutions.
In an attempt to let you think that Congress was feeling your pain, they passed the Truth in Lending Act of 2009 which goes into force in February of 2010. It is suppose to curtail financial instituitons and credit card companies practices in the future from doing the same thing they are doing now - gouging the average person by nickle and diming you everytime you turn around.
It is because the Truth in Lending Act of 2009 will be going into effect that the instituitons are charging the costs to you now. Who would have thought that financial institutions would try to gouge you before the February deadline? Evidently Congress is just first waking up to that fact and has at least started to get moving on doing something about it.
Sen Dodd and other sponsors have two bills that need to get through Congress quickly.
S.1799 : A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act, to establish fair and transparent practices related to the marketing and provision of overdraft coverage programs at depository institutions, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] (introduced 10/19/2009)
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s1799is.txt.pdf
S.1927 : A bill to establish a moratorium on credit card interest rate increases, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] (introduced 10/26/2009)
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s1927pcs.txt.pdf
The important part of Senat bill 1927 is in Section 2:
SEC. 2. MORATORIUM ON RATE INCREASES
During the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and ending 9 months after the date of enactment of the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009, in the case of any credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan—
(1) no creditor may increase any annual percentage rate, fee, or finance charge applicable to any
outstanding balance, except as permitted under subsection 171(b) of the Truth in Lending Act (as
added by Public Law 111-24); and
(2) no creditor may change the terms governing the repayment of any outstanding balance, except as set forth in section 171(c) of the Truth in Lending Act (as added by Public Law 111-24).
Send them an email and tell your reps in Congress to move their butts on this - like yesterday! Or you might just not have any money left to contribute to their 2010 campaign.
Banks are raising fees for using an out of network ATM machine. Some overdraft fees are jumping to $45.00. Free checking accounts are going to be charged user fees. No one as yet has defined what that is, or what the fees will be.
Credit-card lenders, have been increasing fees and interest rates, raising minimum payments and cutting credit limits. Some have hiked interest rates as high as 29.99% or canceled cards altogether. Many card companies are going to impose a variable rate, based on the prime rate as reported quarterly in the Wall Street Journal, plus an additional amount for annual fees based on some formula the financial institutions have for raising your fees because they feel like it. And there is also a section in the malings stating that the new law allows you to "opt out" of a higher rate or an annual fee. However, if you do not agree with the fees and interest rate hikes; the company will cancel your card but you will still have to pay it off based on the new fees.
Supposedly, these institutions have to increase what they charge you, the person who pays their bills on time, because they have people who do not pay their bills on time or at all. HELLO...that's what T.A.R.P. dispersements were for - to cover the bad debts of companies from people who did not pay them. A number of these companies, such as Bank of America, Citigroup and so on, have benefited from T.A.R.P. dispersements. No one but the financial institutions know just how much money they received. To date, no federal or government agency can give a total accounting in dollars and cents of the money that was given to the institutions.
In an attempt to let you think that Congress was feeling your pain, they passed the Truth in Lending Act of 2009 which goes into force in February of 2010. It is suppose to curtail financial instituitons and credit card companies practices in the future from doing the same thing they are doing now - gouging the average person by nickle and diming you everytime you turn around.
It is because the Truth in Lending Act of 2009 will be going into effect that the instituitons are charging the costs to you now. Who would have thought that financial institutions would try to gouge you before the February deadline? Evidently Congress is just first waking up to that fact and has at least started to get moving on doing something about it.
Sen Dodd and other sponsors have two bills that need to get through Congress quickly.
S.1799 : A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act, to establish fair and transparent practices related to the marketing and provision of overdraft coverage programs at depository institutions, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] (introduced 10/19/2009)
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s1799is.txt.pdf
S.1927 : A bill to establish a moratorium on credit card interest rate increases, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] (introduced 10/26/2009)
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s1927pcs.txt.pdf
The important part of Senat bill 1927 is in Section 2:
SEC. 2. MORATORIUM ON RATE INCREASES
During the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and ending 9 months after the date of enactment of the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009, in the case of any credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan—
(1) no creditor may increase any annual percentage rate, fee, or finance charge applicable to any
outstanding balance, except as permitted under subsection 171(b) of the Truth in Lending Act (as
added by Public Law 111-24); and
(2) no creditor may change the terms governing the repayment of any outstanding balance, except as set forth in section 171(c) of the Truth in Lending Act (as added by Public Law 111-24).
Send them an email and tell your reps in Congress to move their butts on this - like yesterday! Or you might just not have any money left to contribute to their 2010 campaign.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Obama administration prompts reporters at press conference
On Tuesday, June 23, 2009, at 12:30 P.M. EDT, President Obama held a press conference in the Brady Press Briefing room.
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Press-Conference-by-the-President-6-23-09/)
His first question from a reporter was on Iran and where Obama draws the line on his offer for talking with Iran. When queried as to whether there should be consequences for what's happened so far in Iran, Obama says, "Since we're on Iran, I know Nico Pitney is here from Huffington Post."
Today, on Meet The Press (June 28 2009), David Gregory interviewed David Axelrod.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31584983/ns/meet_the_press/page/2/displaymode/1098/
The topic was a possible change in foreign policy regarding Iran. Near the end of the interview, Gregory played a vidoetaped portion of Tuesday's press conference:
Gregory then asked "Did the White House coordinate with a reporter about a question to be asked at a press conference?"
At first, Axelrod said the White House didn't coordinate with the reporter about a question, that they looking for a way to get questions from within Iran. Gregory pressed further with saying that they talked to a reporter beforehand and asked the reporter to ask a question from Iran at the press conference.
Axelrod tried to sidestep the question with a nonaffirmative-affirmative, saying, "We didn't coordinate with, with him about what was asked. ...We had no idea what he was going to ask."
If you have paid attention to anything coming from the Administration, then you know that this format of dancing around the wording of an answer is standard for them. Gregory pursued the topic with,
But you coordinated with him about, about that subject of a question beforehand".
to which Axelrod responded,
"He was a, he was a, he was a, he was a vehicle to get questions from Iran asked at this press conference, and that we thought was not only appropriate but, but necessary.".
When Gregory asked him if he would do it again, Axelrod said he has no problem with what was done.
As I see it: the Administration sees no problem in prompting reporters to ask questions they want to answer. Most of us who have watched the decline in true journalism the last 10 years really shouldn't be surprised that it is considered appropriate to tell reporters what sort of questions you want to be asked. Maybe for the next 'press conference', the Administration will have the whole question and answer session typed up and thrown up on the teleprompters for the reporters to just read on cue.
I won't be surprised when what happened begins to get noticed. And there will probably be the customary '..he mis-spoke when he said...what he meant to say was...' statement released sometime next week. It won't change the fact that the Administration prompts reporters - regardless of how they word it.
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Press-Conference-by-the-President-6-23-09/)
His first question from a reporter was on Iran and where Obama draws the line on his offer for talking with Iran. When queried as to whether there should be consequences for what's happened so far in Iran, Obama says, "Since we're on Iran, I know Nico Pitney is here from Huffington Post."
THE PRESIDENT: So let me open it up for questions, and I'll start with you,
Jennifer.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Your administration has said that
the offer to talk to Iran's leaders remains open. Can you say if that's still
so, even with all the violence that has been committed by the government against
the peaceful protesters? And if it is, is there any red line that your
administration won't cross where that offer will be shut off?
THE
PRESIDENT: Well, obviously what's happened in Iran is profound. And we're still
waiting to see how it plays itself out. My position coming into this office has
been that the United States has core national security interests in making sure
that Iran doesn't possess a nuclear weapon and it stops exporting terrorism
outside of its borders.
We have provided a path whereby Iran can reach
out to the international community, engage, and become a part of international
norms. It is up to them to make a decision as to whether they choose that path.
What we've been seeing over the last several days, the last couple of weeks,
obviously is not encouraging, in terms of the path that this regime may choose
to take. And the fact that they are now in the midst of an extraordinary debate
taking place in Iran may end up coloring how they respond to the international
community as a whole.
We are going to monitor and see how this plays
itself out before we make any judgments about how we proceed. But just to
reiterate, there is a path available to Iran in which their sovereignty is
respected, their traditions, their culture, their faith is respected, but one in
which they are part of a larger community that has responsibilities and operates
according to norms and international rules that are universal. We don't know how
they're going to respond yet, and that's what we're waiting to see.
Q So
should there be consequences for what's happened so far?
THE PRESIDENT:
I think that the international community is, as I said before, bearing witness
to what's taking place. And the Iranian government should understand that how
they handle the dissent within their own country, generated indigenously,
internally, from the Iranian people, will help shape the tone not only for
Iran's future but also its relationship to other countries.
Since we're
on Iran, I know Nico Pitney is here from Huffington Post.
Q Thank you,
Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Nico, I know that you, and all across the
Internet, we've been seeing a lot of reports coming directly out of Iran. I know
that there may actually be questions from people in Iran who are communicating
through the Internet. Do you have a question?
Q Yes, I did, I wanted to
use this opportunity to ask you a question directly from an Iranian. We
solicited questions last night from people who are still courageous enough to be
communicating online, and one of them wanted to ask you this: Under which
conditions would you accept the election of Ahmadinejad? And if you do accept it
without any significant changes in the conditions there, isn't that a betrayal
of what the demonstrators there are working towards?
THE PRESIDENT:
Well, look, we didn't have international observers on the ground. We can't say
definitively what exactly happened at polling places throughout the country.
What we know is that a sizeable percentage of the Iranian people themselves,
spanning Iranian society, consider this election illegitimate. It's not an
isolated instance -- a little grumbling here or there. There is significant
questions about the legitimacy of the election.
And so ultimately the
most important thing for the Iranian government to consider is legitimacy in the
eyes of its own people, not in the eyes of the United States. And that's why
I've been very clear: Ultimately, this is up to the Iranian people to decide who
their leadership is going to be and the structure of their government.
What we can do is to say unequivocally that there are sets of
international norms and principles about violence, about dealing with peaceful
dissent, that spans cultures, spans borders. And what we've been seeing over the
Internet and what we've been seeing in news reports violates those norms and
violates those principles.
I think it is not too late for the Iranian
government to recognize that there is a peaceful path that will lead to
stability and legitimacy and prosperity for the Iranian people. We hope they
take it."
Today, on Meet The Press (June 28 2009), David Gregory interviewed David Axelrod.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31584983/ns/meet_the_press/page/2/displaymode/1098/
The topic was a possible change in foreign policy regarding Iran. Near the end of the interview, Gregory played a vidoetaped portion of Tuesday's press conference:
(Videotape, Tuesday)
PRES. OBAMA: Since we're on Iran, I know Nico
Pitney is here from Huffington Post.
MR. NICO PITNEY: Thank you, Mr.
President.
PRES. OBAMA: Nico, I know that you and all across the
Internet we've been seeing a lot of reports coming directly out of Iran. I know
that there may actually be questions from people in Iran who are communicating
through the Internet. What--do you have a question?
(End videotape)
Gregory then asked "Did the White House coordinate with a reporter about a question to be asked at a press conference?"
At first, Axelrod said the White House didn't coordinate with the reporter about a question, that they looking for a way to get questions from within Iran. Gregory pressed further with saying that they talked to a reporter beforehand and asked the reporter to ask a question from Iran at the press conference.
Axelrod tried to sidestep the question with a nonaffirmative-affirmative, saying, "We didn't coordinate with, with him about what was asked. ...We had no idea what he was going to ask."
If you have paid attention to anything coming from the Administration, then you know that this format of dancing around the wording of an answer is standard for them. Gregory pursued the topic with,
But you coordinated with him about, about that subject of a question beforehand".
to which Axelrod responded,
"He was a, he was a, he was a, he was a vehicle to get questions from Iran asked at this press conference, and that we thought was not only appropriate but, but necessary.".
When Gregory asked him if he would do it again, Axelrod said he has no problem with what was done.
As I see it: the Administration sees no problem in prompting reporters to ask questions they want to answer. Most of us who have watched the decline in true journalism the last 10 years really shouldn't be surprised that it is considered appropriate to tell reporters what sort of questions you want to be asked. Maybe for the next 'press conference', the Administration will have the whole question and answer session typed up and thrown up on the teleprompters for the reporters to just read on cue.
I won't be surprised when what happened begins to get noticed. And there will probably be the customary '..he mis-spoke when he said...what he meant to say was...' statement released sometime next week. It won't change the fact that the Administration prompts reporters - regardless of how they word it.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Iran's "Angel of Freedom", Neda
Neda Agha Soltan
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/200962484755543950.html
On July the 4th, many U.S. citizens will celebrate Independence Day. It is a day in which we honor and celebrate our freedom. We have the right to agree, disagree, argue, and even protest openly against our elected officials, leaders and their policies.
Iran's "Angel of Freedom", Neda Agha Soltan, has had those rights taken away from her. In Iran's supposedly democratic theocracy, the mirage of democratic freedom has finally been stripped away. Iran's leaders are now showing the World their true faces.
It took one bullet from a member of the Basij militia on a motorcycle to kill Neda Agha Soltan. Images of Neda as she was dying have been seen by all the World. The video is graphic and uncensored; it needs to be remembered as it is the raw truth. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/?bcpid=4464161001&bctid=27077553001)
She will be remembered as Iran's "Angel of Freedom". The truth of what happened can not be silenced, even though Iran's leaders have tried to block the Iranian citizens' access to the Internet and the rest of the World.
In a BBC interview, Dr. Arash Hejazi, the doctor seen in the vidoes trying to save Neda, tells what happened:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5644492/Doctor-blames-death-of-Irans-Angel-of-Freedom-Neda-Agha-Soltan-on-militia.html
Iran's leaders have tried to quickly get out propaganda to disparage Neda. They released report she was the sister of a terrorist; someone with a smuggled gun had opened fire in the street and killed her; she was faking her death, another protestor shot her..etc.
None of their lies can silence the impact of her martyrdom, her death for the cause of freedom.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/200962484755543950.html
On July the 4th, many U.S. citizens will celebrate Independence Day. It is a day in which we honor and celebrate our freedom. We have the right to agree, disagree, argue, and even protest openly against our elected officials, leaders and their policies.
Iran's "Angel of Freedom", Neda Agha Soltan, has had those rights taken away from her. In Iran's supposedly democratic theocracy, the mirage of democratic freedom has finally been stripped away. Iran's leaders are now showing the World their true faces.
It took one bullet from a member of the Basij militia on a motorcycle to kill Neda Agha Soltan. Images of Neda as she was dying have been seen by all the World. The video is graphic and uncensored; it needs to be remembered as it is the raw truth. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/?bcpid=4464161001&bctid=27077553001)
She will be remembered as Iran's "Angel of Freedom". The truth of what happened can not be silenced, even though Iran's leaders have tried to block the Iranian citizens' access to the Internet and the rest of the World.
In a BBC interview, Dr. Arash Hejazi, the doctor seen in the vidoes trying to save Neda, tells what happened:
"...he was visiting friends in Tehran when he heard there were protests nearby, and
decided to take a look. When they reached the main street, they saw anti-riot
police coming on motorcycles towards the crowd.
"All of a sudden
everything turned crazy," he said. "The anti-riot police threw teargas among
people and the motorcycles started rushing towards people."
He
continued: "We heard a gunshot. And Neda was standing one metre away from me...
We were just standing and all of a sudden I turned back and I saw blood gushing
out of Neda's chest.
"She was in a shocked situation, just looking at
her chest, which blood was gushing out... We ran towards her and lay her on the
ground.
"I bent over her and I saw the bullet wound right in the chest
below the neck with blood gushing out. My experience says that it was the aorta
that was hit and the lung as well."
He added: "Her blood was draining
out of her body and I was just putting pressure on the wounds to try to stop the
bleeding, which wasn't successful unfortunately, and she died in less than one
minute."
The people around her took her body away in a car, Dr Hejazi
said.
The protesters thought the gunshot had come from a rooftop nearby,
but later saw a member of the Basij militia on a motorcycle. They stopped him
and disarmed him, the doctor said.
"He was shouting, 'I didn't want to
kill her'. I heard him," Hejazi said."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5644492/Doctor-blames-death-of-Irans-Angel-of-Freedom-Neda-Agha-Soltan-on-militia.html
Iran's leaders have tried to quickly get out propaganda to disparage Neda. They released report she was the sister of a terrorist; someone with a smuggled gun had opened fire in the street and killed her; she was faking her death, another protestor shot her..etc.
None of their lies can silence the impact of her martyrdom, her death for the cause of freedom.
Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson
Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson passed on June 25th. Both shared with the World their hearts - her through her acting, and him through his music.
Thank you both and blessed be.
Thank you both and blessed be.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Drew sentencing set for July 2 in MySpace case
Lori Drew's sentencing is slated for July 2 2009. U.S. District Judge George Wu delayed the May 18, 2009 sentencing date to review the case as the defense has stated that prosecution failed to prove its case and requested that the jury verdict be dismissed. (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/drew_sentenced/)
Drew was initially charged under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, with one count of felony conspiracy and three counts of felony unauthorized computer access for allegedly violating MySpace’s terms of service by participating in the creation of a fake profile for a non-existent 16-year-old boy named “Josh Evans.”
Using the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to prosecute Drew, the indictment charged that in September 2006 Drew conspired to create the Josh Evans account with her then 13-year-old daughter, Sarah, and a then-18-year-old employee and family friend named Ashley Grills, for the purpose of inflicting psychological harm on a 13-year-old neighbor named Megan Meier.
A month after “Josh” initiated the online relationship with Megan, he turned on her and told her he wanted to sever their relationship, writing that the world would be a better place without her in it. Shortly thereafter, Megan hanged herself in her bedroom.
Drew was convicted of three misdemeanor charges for unauthorized computer access and faces a maximum sentence of three years and a $300,000 fine.
Thomas O’Brien, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, aided by Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Krause, personally oversaw the prosecution and handled some of the witness testimony himself. Using the federal anti-hacking statute known as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act prosecutors in Los Angeles brought the case against Drew based on the government’s novel argument that violating MySpace’s terms of service for the purpose of harming another was the legal equivalent of computer hacking. Prosecutors stated MySpace’s user agreement requires registrants, among other things, to provide factual information about themselves and to refrain from soliciting personal information from minors or using information obtained from MySpace services to harass or harm other people. By allegedly violating that click-to-agree contract, Drew committed the same crime as any hacker.
During prosecution witness Ashley Grills' Grill’s 80-minutes of testimony, she stated that nobody involved in the hoax actually read the terms of service. Grills also said that the hoax was her idea, not Drew’s, and that it was Grills who opened the account, clicked through the MySpace terms of service, created the Josh Evans profile, and later sent the cruel message that tipped the emotionally vulnerable 13-year-old girl into her final, tragic act. Ashley Grills testified for the prosecution under a grant of immunity. (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/11/lori-drew-pla-3/)
While most of the prosecutors case was built on terms violation of a MySpace account; it was on AOL Instant Messenger that Grills’ sent the last message to Megan: "The world would be a better place without you."
Grills testified that Megan responded: "You are the kind of boy a girl would kill herself over" .
Very little was allowed into testimony about thirteen years old Megan Meiers or her medical history; that she was suicidal by 3rd grade; diagnosed with depression; diagnosed as ADHD and taking a cocktail of prescribed Schedule 2drugs. (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/01/21/080121fa_fact_collins?currentPage=all)
Megan was prescribed Celexa (an antidepression drug), Concerta (for A.D.D.), and Geodon (a mood stabilizer).
In the 7th grade, Megan and the Drews’ daughter had secretly set up a MySpace account. They were found out when a cousin of Megan's mother discovered the profile, which featured a flashing Playboy bunny icon. The Meiers did not mention the incident to the Drews. Supposedly, Lori Drew, going through her cell-phone bills, found that someone had placed a series of calls to New York. Lori’s daughter told her that Megan had made the calls, to talk to a boy they had met online. The Drews and the Meiers never discussed that incident, either.
In September 2006, Megan's parents allowed her open a MySpace with conditions and some restrictions:
1. Both parents were the only ones to know the password.
2. It had to be set to ‘private.’
3. Her parents had to approve the content.
4. Her parents had to be in the room at all times when Megan was on MySpace.
On the day she committed suicide, Megan's mother had left with her Megan's sister for a dental appointment. She knew Megan was online and told her to shut down. Megan's father was asleep upstairs and her mother found her still online when she returned home. Little was said in court of an insult war had broken out among Megan, Josh, and some of their friends . Megan had called another girl a slut, and the insult were returned in kind. In one interview, Megan's mother stated she was shocked and angry at the foul language replies her daughter had sent.
And as yet, there hasn't been any charges filed against people who pursued the Drews online on message boards, who posted the Drews’ home address and Curt’s business address, who organized a telephone and e-mail campaign against them and the businesses advertised in The Drew Advantage, who hacked into Lori Drew’s voice mail, or any other number of retalitory acts including a creepy video on On YouTube. Nor were any charges filed against Tina Meier, Megan's mother, for following Drew to places she went and asking any businesses “Do you advertise with The Drew Advantage? If so, I advise you to take a look at the Journals. The girl involved was my daughter.” No one has been charged for the acts of damage and vandalism against the Drew's home and property. And who will be charged in the future violence that may happen if the judge sets aside the verdict?
It's all a tragic set of circumstances that lead to a 13 year old commiting suicide. The case has already changed the law on cyber crime issues and possibly also changed the way some people behave online.
Has anybody ever bothered to read the full TOS of any social networking site? On the other side of the coin haven't judges found them to be not enforceable because it is assumed that people arent reading them because they are too long and can change without notification and/or warning. People who have been online for a number of years will tell you to never use your real name on any social networking site. No social networking site is going to 100% guarantee your protection or privacy.
My interest in the case was that Megan was on the usual stimulant drugs given to millions of kids daily for their 'diagnosed' mental problems and disorders. My question has always been; would a normal 13 year old have commited suicide over what was said? Since Drew was found guilty, shouldn't Megan's parents also be charged as they allowed Megan to open a MySpace account at 13? Why aren't the drugs and the medical personel who prescribe them, ever questioned or held accountable?
Drew was initially charged under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, with one count of felony conspiracy and three counts of felony unauthorized computer access for allegedly violating MySpace’s terms of service by participating in the creation of a fake profile for a non-existent 16-year-old boy named “Josh Evans.”
Using the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to prosecute Drew, the indictment charged that in September 2006 Drew conspired to create the Josh Evans account with her then 13-year-old daughter, Sarah, and a then-18-year-old employee and family friend named Ashley Grills, for the purpose of inflicting psychological harm on a 13-year-old neighbor named Megan Meier.
A month after “Josh” initiated the online relationship with Megan, he turned on her and told her he wanted to sever their relationship, writing that the world would be a better place without her in it. Shortly thereafter, Megan hanged herself in her bedroom.
Drew was convicted of three misdemeanor charges for unauthorized computer access and faces a maximum sentence of three years and a $300,000 fine.
Thomas O’Brien, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, aided by Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Krause, personally oversaw the prosecution and handled some of the witness testimony himself. Using the federal anti-hacking statute known as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act prosecutors in Los Angeles brought the case against Drew based on the government’s novel argument that violating MySpace’s terms of service for the purpose of harming another was the legal equivalent of computer hacking. Prosecutors stated MySpace’s user agreement requires registrants, among other things, to provide factual information about themselves and to refrain from soliciting personal information from minors or using information obtained from MySpace services to harass or harm other people. By allegedly violating that click-to-agree contract, Drew committed the same crime as any hacker.
During prosecution witness Ashley Grills' Grill’s 80-minutes of testimony, she stated that nobody involved in the hoax actually read the terms of service. Grills also said that the hoax was her idea, not Drew’s, and that it was Grills who opened the account, clicked through the MySpace terms of service, created the Josh Evans profile, and later sent the cruel message that tipped the emotionally vulnerable 13-year-old girl into her final, tragic act. Ashley Grills testified for the prosecution under a grant of immunity. (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/11/lori-drew-pla-3/)
While most of the prosecutors case was built on terms violation of a MySpace account; it was on AOL Instant Messenger that Grills’ sent the last message to Megan: "The world would be a better place without you."
Grills testified that Megan responded: "You are the kind of boy a girl would kill herself over" .
Very little was allowed into testimony about thirteen years old Megan Meiers or her medical history; that she was suicidal by 3rd grade; diagnosed with depression; diagnosed as ADHD and taking a cocktail of prescribed Schedule 2drugs. (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/01/21/080121fa_fact_collins?currentPage=all)
Megan was prescribed Celexa (an antidepression drug), Concerta (for A.D.D.), and Geodon (a mood stabilizer).
In the 7th grade, Megan and the Drews’ daughter had secretly set up a MySpace account. They were found out when a cousin of Megan's mother discovered the profile, which featured a flashing Playboy bunny icon. The Meiers did not mention the incident to the Drews. Supposedly, Lori Drew, going through her cell-phone bills, found that someone had placed a series of calls to New York. Lori’s daughter told her that Megan had made the calls, to talk to a boy they had met online. The Drews and the Meiers never discussed that incident, either.
In September 2006, Megan's parents allowed her open a MySpace with conditions and some restrictions:
1. Both parents were the only ones to know the password.
2. It had to be set to ‘private.’
3. Her parents had to approve the content.
4. Her parents had to be in the room at all times when Megan was on MySpace.
On the day she committed suicide, Megan's mother had left with her Megan's sister for a dental appointment. She knew Megan was online and told her to shut down. Megan's father was asleep upstairs and her mother found her still online when she returned home. Little was said in court of an insult war had broken out among Megan, Josh, and some of their friends . Megan had called another girl a slut, and the insult were returned in kind. In one interview, Megan's mother stated she was shocked and angry at the foul language replies her daughter had sent.
And as yet, there hasn't been any charges filed against people who pursued the Drews online on message boards, who posted the Drews’ home address and Curt’s business address, who organized a telephone and e-mail campaign against them and the businesses advertised in The Drew Advantage, who hacked into Lori Drew’s voice mail, or any other number of retalitory acts including a creepy video on On YouTube. Nor were any charges filed against Tina Meier, Megan's mother, for following Drew to places she went and asking any businesses “Do you advertise with The Drew Advantage? If so, I advise you to take a look at the Journals. The girl involved was my daughter.” No one has been charged for the acts of damage and vandalism against the Drew's home and property. And who will be charged in the future violence that may happen if the judge sets aside the verdict?
It's all a tragic set of circumstances that lead to a 13 year old commiting suicide. The case has already changed the law on cyber crime issues and possibly also changed the way some people behave online.
Has anybody ever bothered to read the full TOS of any social networking site? On the other side of the coin haven't judges found them to be not enforceable because it is assumed that people arent reading them because they are too long and can change without notification and/or warning. People who have been online for a number of years will tell you to never use your real name on any social networking site. No social networking site is going to 100% guarantee your protection or privacy.
My interest in the case was that Megan was on the usual stimulant drugs given to millions of kids daily for their 'diagnosed' mental problems and disorders. My question has always been; would a normal 13 year old have commited suicide over what was said? Since Drew was found guilty, shouldn't Megan's parents also be charged as they allowed Megan to open a MySpace account at 13? Why aren't the drugs and the medical personel who prescribe them, ever questioned or held accountable?
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
TARP and China
Where does the T.A.R.P. money banks are repaying go to?http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/09/AR2009060900891.html?nav=rss_businesshttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB124450458046896047.html
Government officials initially had planned for banks to keep their Treasury's investments for at least three years, but were forced by Congress earlier this year to allow banks an early exit. With signs of the financial sector stabilizing and bank stress tests complete, administration officials decided it was time to allow the strongest banks to return government funds. A handful of community banks are also expected to soon repay their TARP funds. Already, about 22 banks have taken steps to repay TARP, returning about $1.8 billion to the government. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has said he plans to reuse returned TARP funds to assist other firms, including smaller banks, including those that have already received an initial TARP infusion.
The timing of repayments will be up to each bank. While banks can easily return the preferred shares the Treasury purchased in October, they must also deal with warrants the government received in the investments.
Those warrants, which gave the government the right to purchase common stock at a set price for 10 years, have value, and the Treasury must determine what price it will accept. A low price could open the Treasury to criticism that it is leaving money on the table. But some banks are unwilling to pay a high price.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
China's screening software on all computers on July 1 2009http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8091044.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8091411.stm
As a U.S. All-American girl, I can say that your government isn't always working for your best interests. Imagine that the U.S. government said it was mandating that all computers in the U.S. - even those that are imported - had to install the software that would filter out pornographic or violent material. And the software has to be pre-installed on U.S.made computers before they leave the factory.
Even if Pres. Obama himself gave a speech encouraging it; I'd be willing to bet that most of the population would laugh out loud.... and then voice a resounding 'NO' that would literally shake the very foundation of the Capital building.
Well, in China, as of July 1st, computers have to have installed the "Green Dam Youth Escort" software. Foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said, "The purpose of this is to effectively manage harmful material for the public and prevent it from being spread. The Chinese government pushes forward the healthy development of the internet. But it lawfully manages the internet."
China does manage it's Internet; and we all agree they do it lawfully - - - not. On the eve of the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen killings, social networking sites such as Twitter and the photo-sharing site Flickr were blocked in China in an attempt by the government to prevent online discussion on the subject. But people just moved onto other social networking sites.
Even the Chinese officials must realize they can not control the whole of the Internet in China. I don't know exactly how it is done; but a few friends have said that rewriting a few lines in the software on a computer could make it look as if were working correctly when it really wasn't.
One of the foreseeable main problems will be in businesses. And since China is the World's leading manufacturing nation; imagine having an idea that would make billions but can't get past the filter to flesh the idea out or market it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Government officials initially had planned for banks to keep their Treasury's investments for at least three years, but were forced by Congress earlier this year to allow banks an early exit. With signs of the financial sector stabilizing and bank stress tests complete, administration officials decided it was time to allow the strongest banks to return government funds. A handful of community banks are also expected to soon repay their TARP funds. Already, about 22 banks have taken steps to repay TARP, returning about $1.8 billion to the government. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has said he plans to reuse returned TARP funds to assist other firms, including smaller banks, including those that have already received an initial TARP infusion.
The timing of repayments will be up to each bank. While banks can easily return the preferred shares the Treasury purchased in October, they must also deal with warrants the government received in the investments.
Those warrants, which gave the government the right to purchase common stock at a set price for 10 years, have value, and the Treasury must determine what price it will accept. A low price could open the Treasury to criticism that it is leaving money on the table. But some banks are unwilling to pay a high price.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
China's screening software on all computers on July 1 2009http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8091044.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8091411.stm
As a U.S. All-American girl, I can say that your government isn't always working for your best interests. Imagine that the U.S. government said it was mandating that all computers in the U.S. - even those that are imported - had to install the software that would filter out pornographic or violent material. And the software has to be pre-installed on U.S.made computers before they leave the factory.
Even if Pres. Obama himself gave a speech encouraging it; I'd be willing to bet that most of the population would laugh out loud.... and then voice a resounding 'NO' that would literally shake the very foundation of the Capital building.
Well, in China, as of July 1st, computers have to have installed the "Green Dam Youth Escort" software. Foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said, "The purpose of this is to effectively manage harmful material for the public and prevent it from being spread. The Chinese government pushes forward the healthy development of the internet. But it lawfully manages the internet."
China does manage it's Internet; and we all agree they do it lawfully - - - not. On the eve of the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen killings, social networking sites such as Twitter and the photo-sharing site Flickr were blocked in China in an attempt by the government to prevent online discussion on the subject. But people just moved onto other social networking sites.
Even the Chinese officials must realize they can not control the whole of the Internet in China. I don't know exactly how it is done; but a few friends have said that rewriting a few lines in the software on a computer could make it look as if were working correctly when it really wasn't.
One of the foreseeable main problems will be in businesses. And since China is the World's leading manufacturing nation; imagine having an idea that would make billions but can't get past the filter to flesh the idea out or market it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Violence against womyn under Islamic rule
I didn't watch THE SPEECH...I read THE SPEECH.
Maybe I expect too much... ... I don't know.Everytime I hear that Pres. Obama is going to make some pronounced major change, or give a historical major speech: I keep thinking, 'ok...maybe this will show me why a lot of people think he is great.'
Text - http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/06/04/obamas-speech-in-cairo/
As I read through the text, I thought 'is this Obama's 'Ich bin ein Berliner' speech?' It was his avoidance of the core of the sixth issue that was problematic for me. In one breath, he speaks of womyn's equality. In the next minute, he is making it sound as if giving Muslim girls an education will gloss over the daily brutality that Muslim girls and womyn face.
Obama came so close to the point - so close; but became lost in his campaigning persona. He really botched it when he said, "...I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal".
Pres. Obama is supposed to an educated man. Yet, he minimizes the problem more than a few of us in the West have with Islam as if it is a question of fashion preference.
The right of womyn and girls to wear the hijab is not the real issue. It is the brutality and oppression that is forced on them if they decide to make it their CHOICE whether to wear the hijab or not.
The acceptance of violence against womyn as permitted in the Islam religion and under Islamic law is a big part of the problem. It is that the brutality and oppression is viewed as a right of the Muslim man to meter it out as he sees fit to do so. In every country with a government set up under Islamic law, womyn and children are raped, torured, beaten, sold off into marriage, sexually mutilated, and killed with no consequence to the man responsible for it.
Only recently in the U.S. a Muslim husband beheaded his estranged wife because she was filing for divorce. It was deemed under Islamic law as an 'honor killing'. Every day there can be found a number of these 'honor killings' among Muslims.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Iraqi Women Can Now Say No to Hijab or Head Scarf
http://www.abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=7168860&page=1
Militants routinely threatened to kill each and every woman who did not dress according to the precepts of sharia law that were put in force in 2007..
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Child of 13 stoned to death in Somalia
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/child-of+-13-stoned-to-death-in-somalia-20081031
A girl stoned to death in Somalia this week was 13 years old. She had been accused of adultery in breach of Islamic law. Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was killed on Monday 27
October, by a group of 50 men in a stadium in the southern port of Kismayu, in front of around 1,000 spectators. Inside the stadium, militia members opened fire when
some of the witnesses to the killing attempted to save her life, and shot dead a boy who was a bystander.At one point during the stoning, Amnesty International has been
told by numerous eyewitnesses that nurses were instructed to check whether Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was still alive when buried in the ground. They removed her from the
ground, declared that she was, and she was replaced in the hole where she had been buried for the stoning to continue.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Trapped by Violence – Women in Iraq
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/feature-stories/trapped-violence-women-iraq-20090420
17-year-old Rand ‘Abd al-Qader was killed in the city of Basra on 16 March 2008. She was murdered by her father, apparently assisted by two of her brothers, because
she had developed a friendship with a British soldier based in the city. ‘Abdel Qader ‘Ali, who admits killing his daughter, was questioned at a local police station. He told a British newspaper that police officers sympathized with his motive and released him after two hours of questioning. He has still not been charged or tried. Leila Hussein, Rand ‘Abd al-Qader’s mother, denounced her husband’s crime and left him, even though this meant she had to go into hiding. She did so with the support of a local women’s organization. She too was killed on 17 May 2008, shot dead in the street in Basra. Two women accompanying her were shot and wounded. The authorities have failed to identify the perpetrators.
Six years after the overthrow of former President Saddam Hussein, Iraqi legislators have yet to amend legislation that effectively condones, even facilitates, violence against women and girls. The Penal Code, for example, provides that a convicted murderer who pleads in mitigation that he killed with “honourable motives” may face just six months in prison. It also effectively allows husbands to use violence against their wives. The “exercise of a legal right” to exemption from criminal liability is permitted for:
“Disciplining a wife by her husband, the disciplining by parents and teachers of children under their authority within certain limits prescribed by Islamic law (Shari’a), by
law or by custom.”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Afghanistan: 4 years after the US-led invasion
http://rwor.org/a/020/afghanistan-after-us-invasion-pt2.htm
The situation for women has remained unchanged in many aspects or has even become worse under the occupation. A few months ago a woman accused of adultery was stoned to death by a local court in Badakhshan, while the man was sentenced to a beating. Women are still persecuted and imprisoned for adultery on the say-so of their husband or other men. There are more and more cases of young women burning themselves alive. In the fourth year of the occupation there has been a fifty percent increase compared to the previous year. Women are at much greater risk of rape and kidnap now than before the invasion. Wearing a burqa is no longer legally compulsory, and women might not get beaten by the Taleban morality police anymore, but instead they might get raped or kidnapped or both. Forced marriage is as standard as ever. Girl children are sold for a couple of hundred of dollars. Since the invasion, prostitution has increased tremendously. Violence against women by family members is still as widespread as before, if not worse. The situation of women in Afghanistan cannot be judged by the few women in certain limited areas of the capital who
might now wear a scarf and drive a car. It should be judged by the hell that more that 90 percent of the women are going through.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Bengali mother caned for talking to Hindu man
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/06/06/75023.html
A Muslim mother has been caned for talking to a Hindu man in Bangladesh, police said Saturday, prompting fresh concerns about a rise in cases of harsh treatment of women under strict interpretation of Islamic law.The punishment was carried out in a remote village in Muslim-majority Bangladesh on the orders of village elders, local police chief Enamul Monowar told AFP. There is major concern among women's groups in Muslim-majority but officially secular Bangladesh about what they say is a rise in brutal treatment of women under locally applied Islamic laws."In the last few months, we have seen villagers invoking Shariah to mete out barbaric punishments to women," said Salma Ali, the head of rights group Bangladesh National Woman Lawyers Association.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
There are thousands more reports of violence against womyn that result from, and are sanctioned by Islamic law. It's not the "West that views a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal", Pres. Obama; it's Islamic law.
Maybe I expect too much... ... I don't know.Everytime I hear that Pres. Obama is going to make some pronounced major change, or give a historical major speech: I keep thinking, 'ok...maybe this will show me why a lot of people think he is great.'
Text - http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/06/04/obamas-speech-in-cairo/
"And I’m also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: Assalaamu alaykum."
"Now part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I’m a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and at the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith."
"Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state in our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That’s why the United States government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab and to punish those who would deny it."
"In Ankara, I made clear that America is not — and never will be — at war with Islam. ""Freedom of religion is central to the ability of
peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That’s why I’m committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat. Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit — for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We can’t disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism. "
As I read through the text, I thought 'is this Obama's 'Ich bin ein Berliner' speech?' It was his avoidance of the core of the sixth issue that was problematic for me. In one breath, he speaks of womyn's equality. In the next minute, he is making it sound as if giving Muslim girls an education will gloss over the daily brutality that Muslim girls and womyn face.
"That’s why the United States government has gone to court to protect the right
of women and girls to wear the hijab and to punish those who would deny it."
"The sixth issue — the sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights.
(Applause.) I know –- I know — and you can tell from this audience, that there
is a healthy debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that
a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. (Applause.) And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well educated are far more likely to be prosperous.
Now, let me be clear: Issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, we’ve seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead.
Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of
American life, and in countries around the world.
I am convinced that our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons. (Applause.) Our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity — men and women— to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. And that is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams."
Obama came so close to the point - so close; but became lost in his campaigning persona. He really botched it when he said, "...I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal".
Pres. Obama is supposed to an educated man. Yet, he minimizes the problem more than a few of us in the West have with Islam as if it is a question of fashion preference.
The right of womyn and girls to wear the hijab is not the real issue. It is the brutality and oppression that is forced on them if they decide to make it their CHOICE whether to wear the hijab or not.
The acceptance of violence against womyn as permitted in the Islam religion and under Islamic law is a big part of the problem. It is that the brutality and oppression is viewed as a right of the Muslim man to meter it out as he sees fit to do so. In every country with a government set up under Islamic law, womyn and children are raped, torured, beaten, sold off into marriage, sexually mutilated, and killed with no consequence to the man responsible for it.
Only recently in the U.S. a Muslim husband beheaded his estranged wife because she was filing for divorce. It was deemed under Islamic law as an 'honor killing'. Every day there can be found a number of these 'honor killings' among Muslims.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Iraqi Women Can Now Say No to Hijab or Head Scarf
http://www.abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=7168860&page=1
Militants routinely threatened to kill each and every woman who did not dress according to the precepts of sharia law that were put in force in 2007..
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Child of 13 stoned to death in Somalia
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/child-of+-13-stoned-to-death-in-somalia-20081031
A girl stoned to death in Somalia this week was 13 years old. She had been accused of adultery in breach of Islamic law. Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was killed on Monday 27
October, by a group of 50 men in a stadium in the southern port of Kismayu, in front of around 1,000 spectators. Inside the stadium, militia members opened fire when
some of the witnesses to the killing attempted to save her life, and shot dead a boy who was a bystander.At one point during the stoning, Amnesty International has been
told by numerous eyewitnesses that nurses were instructed to check whether Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was still alive when buried in the ground. They removed her from the
ground, declared that she was, and she was replaced in the hole where she had been buried for the stoning to continue.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Trapped by Violence – Women in Iraq
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/feature-stories/trapped-violence-women-iraq-20090420
17-year-old Rand ‘Abd al-Qader was killed in the city of Basra on 16 March 2008. She was murdered by her father, apparently assisted by two of her brothers, because
she had developed a friendship with a British soldier based in the city. ‘Abdel Qader ‘Ali, who admits killing his daughter, was questioned at a local police station. He told a British newspaper that police officers sympathized with his motive and released him after two hours of questioning. He has still not been charged or tried. Leila Hussein, Rand ‘Abd al-Qader’s mother, denounced her husband’s crime and left him, even though this meant she had to go into hiding. She did so with the support of a local women’s organization. She too was killed on 17 May 2008, shot dead in the street in Basra. Two women accompanying her were shot and wounded. The authorities have failed to identify the perpetrators.
Six years after the overthrow of former President Saddam Hussein, Iraqi legislators have yet to amend legislation that effectively condones, even facilitates, violence against women and girls. The Penal Code, for example, provides that a convicted murderer who pleads in mitigation that he killed with “honourable motives” may face just six months in prison. It also effectively allows husbands to use violence against their wives. The “exercise of a legal right” to exemption from criminal liability is permitted for:
“Disciplining a wife by her husband, the disciplining by parents and teachers of children under their authority within certain limits prescribed by Islamic law (Shari’a), by
law or by custom.”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Afghanistan: 4 years after the US-led invasion
http://rwor.org/a/020/afghanistan-after-us-invasion-pt2.htm
The situation for women has remained unchanged in many aspects or has even become worse under the occupation. A few months ago a woman accused of adultery was stoned to death by a local court in Badakhshan, while the man was sentenced to a beating. Women are still persecuted and imprisoned for adultery on the say-so of their husband or other men. There are more and more cases of young women burning themselves alive. In the fourth year of the occupation there has been a fifty percent increase compared to the previous year. Women are at much greater risk of rape and kidnap now than before the invasion. Wearing a burqa is no longer legally compulsory, and women might not get beaten by the Taleban morality police anymore, but instead they might get raped or kidnapped or both. Forced marriage is as standard as ever. Girl children are sold for a couple of hundred of dollars. Since the invasion, prostitution has increased tremendously. Violence against women by family members is still as widespread as before, if not worse. The situation of women in Afghanistan cannot be judged by the few women in certain limited areas of the capital who
might now wear a scarf and drive a car. It should be judged by the hell that more that 90 percent of the women are going through.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Bengali mother caned for talking to Hindu man
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/06/06/75023.html
A Muslim mother has been caned for talking to a Hindu man in Bangladesh, police said Saturday, prompting fresh concerns about a rise in cases of harsh treatment of women under strict interpretation of Islamic law.The punishment was carried out in a remote village in Muslim-majority Bangladesh on the orders of village elders, local police chief Enamul Monowar told AFP. There is major concern among women's groups in Muslim-majority but officially secular Bangladesh about what they say is a rise in brutal treatment of women under locally applied Islamic laws."In the last few months, we have seen villagers invoking Shariah to mete out barbaric punishments to women," said Salma Ali, the head of rights group Bangladesh National Woman Lawyers Association.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
There are thousands more reports of violence against womyn that result from, and are sanctioned by Islamic law. It's not the "West that views a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal", Pres. Obama; it's Islamic law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)