This girl is appealing to Obama to help her father.  They live in Egypt. 

In the ME countries it’s hard for non muslims to live and Jews may not even enter to some. 

Yes, it’s terrible.  Horrible. Inhumane!

Their laws are in complete opposition to ours.

They don’t believe in a judicial system that includes all people and allows for personal liberty.

The Judicial system and therefore, the politic and the government is based in ISLAM.  Islam (submission) is the complete opposite of the LAWS of this country and the CONSTITUTION, which is living and breathing -UNCHANGED- from the first day that it was writen.  It lives and breaths, because WE do.  It is unchanged.  If we change our laws, that include ALL, then what have we changed?  We changed to EXCLUDE all?  Is that the “change” that we need? 

Lets KEEP the Constitution alive, by referring to it and keeping it the ONE document underwhich WE STAND and without which WE FALL.

Girl Appeals to Obama to Help Ex-Muslim Father

           http://formermuslimsunited.americancommunityexchange.org/2009/11/21/girl-appeals-to-obama-to-help-ex-muslim-father/

The 15-year-old daughter of well-known Egyptian convert Maher el-Gohary has written a letter appealing to President Obama to help her father who is in danger of being murdered or imprisoned for becoming a Christian.
Related

Dina el-Gohary, who also converted from Islam to Christianity, has been on the run and living in hiding with her father, who is the second Egyptian to legally request to change his religious status.

In her handwritten letter in Arabic, posted on Coptic Web sites, she writes:

“Mr. President Obama, we are a minority in Egypt. We are treated very badly. You said that the Muslim minority in America are treated very well, so why are we not treated here likewise? We are imprisoned in our own home because Muslim clerics called for the murder of my father, and now the Government has set for us a new prison, we are imprisoned in our own country,” according to a translation posted by the Assyrian International News Agency (AINA).

The Egyptian girl asked President Obama to mediate with the Egyptian government on their behalf.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times earlier this year, Maher el-Gohary said he and his daughter live like “fugitives,” moving every few months.

As one of Egypt’s most well-known converts, the el-Gohary’s cannot walk freely on the streets for fear of being identified by Muslim extremists. Friends provide the family with food.

“I’m not so much afraid of the government anymore,” el-Gohary told the Times in August. “It’s conservative Muslims who worry me. Some of them believe whoever kills me is rewarded. When I go to court, I’m surrounded by police protection.”

El-Gohary, 57, accepted Jesus Christ as his Savior secretly 35 years ago. But in August 2008, the Muslim-born Egyptian filed a lawsuit to legally change his identification to Christian. It was the country’s second lawsuit ever related to religious status.

In June 2009, however, a Cairo judge rejected his petition even after el-Gohary provided a baptism certificate and a letter of acceptance into the Coptic Orthodox Church as the court had demanded.

Since filing the suit last year, the father and daughter have been living in hiding. Several Muslim clerics have labeled him an apostate and have issued fatwas calling for “spilling his blood,” according to AINA.

The el-Gohary family tried to leave Egypt, but was barred in September without any legal reasons.

El-Gohary has appealed the court decision regarding his religious identification. He has also said he is willing to give up his Egyptian nationality in order to leave Egypt, according to AINA.

“If the Egyptian nationality is the cause of my imprisonment within my home and being unable to move, then I do not want it,” he said. El-Gohary said he’d rather hold any other nationality than stay in Egypt where he said he and his daughter are “suffering imprisonment within the walls of my apartment and without any freedom.”

Copts United has also appealed to the U.N. Human Rights Council for help with el-Gohary’s case

  

Coptic Christian burnt alive on Egyptian streets – it was thought he may have had a liking for a Muslim girl.

 

Christians and Muslims clashed in 2005 at St. George’s Church in Alexandria, Egypt, where Muslims demanded an apology for a play they said was offensive to Islam.

Gohary speaks of how years earlier the teachings of Jesus, especially parables on forgiveness and loving your enemy, changed his life.

“In Islam, if you steal your hands are cut off, but in Christianity you can be forgiven,” he says. “This compassion is what attracted me.”

Maher El Gohary is something his Muslim compatriots can’t fathom: a convert to Christianity. He and his daughter live like fugitives, moving frequently to avoid those who’d like to see him dead.

  

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_QfVWU-2pVL4/SpLSfSHMyWI/AAAAAAAAH88/zrgRK4hjTWU/s1600/Christians%252Band%252BMuslims%252Bclashed%252Bin%252B2005%252Bat%252BSt.%252BGeorge%27s%252BChurch%252Bin%252BAlexandria,%252BEgypt,%252Bwhere%252BMuslims%252Bdemanded%252Ban%252Bapology%252Bfor%252Ba%252Bplay%252Bthey%252Bsaid%252Bwas%252Boffensive%252Bto%252BIslam.jpg&imgrefurl=http://islamizationwatch.blogspot.com/2009/08/christian-convert-on-run-in-egypt.html&usg=__79KFa12w3YqkhZPSIuVYYhWyf90=&h=350&w=500&sz=64&hl=en&start=11&sig2=diOTqCaSfnuBCmo5ESoj0g&um=1&tbnid=osq6fFWbrHzgUM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3DMaher%2Bel-Gohary%26hl%3Den%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7WZPA%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1&ei=8TUQS6rNDtX-4Abf5fXjAw

 

 

Happy Thanksgiving. What did the Constitution say about Church and State?

Read it here!
http://animal-farm.us/change/no-separation-of-church-and-state-799

Dubai is known for the area of the world that caters to the wold leaders and the mega rich.  It’s an exclusive club.  A club that many world politicians and those in the business and public eye are in.  These are the people and companies that hold the power of the world in their hands.  These companies cater to them.  Who are they?  No one really knows.  The reason is that it would not be a good idea to let it be known who scratches who back.  This is also the reason why it seems to the average individual that they are in the dark A LOT.  Plato said it well in the parable of the cave.  We, the average folk, are prisoners in a cave, and only see the shadows of reality.  The upper crust wants it that way, because if the average person becomes knowing of the realities, then the people operating the shadows would no longer have control.  They are too scared to let the control go.  We, the people, are too greedy, stupid, and consumed with our own self interests to PLAY nice with the rest of the world.  So, the elite have to operate on this level for us.  You see (sarcasm is required here) it’s for our OWN good. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE5AP1L120091127?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=69&pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

 

 

By Rania Oteify and Sujata Rao

DUBAI/LONDON (Reuters) – Banks outside the Gulf played down their exposure to Dubai debt on Friday after fears of default shook global markets, and European leaders said the world economy was now strong enough to cope with the setback.

Stocks from Tokyo to London were haunted by concerns that banks were exposed to state companies in Dubai, whose rise from a desert backwater into the business hub of the world’s top oil exporting area lured expatriate cash and executives.

The crisis began on Wednesday when Dubai, part of the United Arab Emirates federation, asked to delay payment on billions of dollars of debt issued by conglomerate Dubai World and its main property subsidiary Nakheel, developer of three palm shaped islands that once attracted celebrities and the super-rich.

“While it is a setback, I think we will find it is not on the scale of previous problems we have dealt with,” British Prime Minister Brown told reporters in Port of Spain, where he will attend a summit of leaders from Commonwealth countries.

“The world financial system is stronger now and able to deal with the problems that arise,” he said.

French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said there were enough resources in the region to make sure there would not be a second round of the financial crisis although at a joint news conference, Russian premier Vladimir Putin said the saga showed it would be tough for the world to shake off the financial crisis which has gripped it for two years.

Dubai World had $59 billion of liabilities as of August, most of Dubai’s total debt of $80 billion. International banks exposure related to Dubai World reach $12 billion in syndicated and bilateral loans, banking sources told Thomson Reuters LPC.

But the numbers pale in comparison to the $2.8 trillion in writedowns the International Monetary Fund estimates U.S. and European lenders will have made between 2007 and 2010 as a result of the global credit crisis.

“The events in Dubai in recent days are one of the hiccups if you like, one of the difficulties, which affirms that we were right to highlight the uncertainty ahead of us and that the road ahead could be a bumpy one,” European Central Bank Governing Council member Athanasios Orphanides said.

French banks said their exposure to the Dubai crisis was limited and Italy’s central bank said Italian banks should face no problems linked to the Gulf trade and tourism hub. The sentiments were echoed by Chinese banks.

Those statements helped push European stocks into the black although U.S. stock futures pointed lower after markets were shut for the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday.

“We have seen a classic risk aversion reaction in the markets over the past 24 hours. The dollar has slumped, the yen is stronger,” a Societe Generale note said. “At this stage, this setback looks to be one that is very much country specific.”

ABU DHABI EXPOSURE

While European and Asian banks scrambled to distance themselves, lenders in Abu Dhabi, a fellow member of the UAE federation and home to most of the country’s oil, appeared to have major positions.

Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank has at least 8-9 billion dirhams ($2.18-$2.45 billion) exposure to Dubai World and related entities, forcing the bank to book more provisions, a senior executive of the bank said. First Gulf Bank has at least 5 billion dirhams ($1.36 billion).

JP Morgan said it was less concerned about global banks’ direct exposure to Dubai World and was not worried about Abu Dhabi, which is sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars.

“We are more concerned about the spillover effect within the UAE with CDS spreads in Abu Dhabi increasing,” it said in a note. “It remains unclear if the Dubai government will support the liabilities of government related entities and how … neighbors will weather the storm.”

The price of insuring Gulf debt surged again on Friday.

Credit default swaps (CDS) for Dubai rose more than 100 basis points but were well below previous peaks in the global crisis late last year and earlier this.

For related graphic, see:

here

Nakheel’s Islamic bond prices extended losses, falling 30 points to a record low of 40, according to Reuters data.

The $3.52 billion bond at the center of the crisis, which was originally due to mature on Dec 14, 2009, had traded as high as 110 on Wednesday before the Dubai government said it would ask creditors to agree on a standstill of debt held by Nakheel and Dubai World until May 2010.

The debt crisis in Dubai also pushed up debt insurance costs for other sovereigns in the Gulf, a wealthy region Western firms had turned to for help at the height of the credit crunch.

TRANSPARENCY, CREDIBILITY

Analysts expect Dubai to receive financial support from Abu Dhabi, though it may have to abandon an economic model focused on developing swathes of desert with foreign money and labor.

But the prospect of a bailout did little to allay concerns among investors, already worried the global economy may not be recovering quickly enough to justify a near doubling of prices for emerging market stocks and many commodities since March.

International fund managers said they were considering rotating dedicated money out of Dubai and into Abu Dhabi, Qatar and Egypt after local markets begin to open on Monday after the Muslim Eid al-Adha holiday.

Analysts also said the timing of the announcement on the eve of the holiday, the lack of prior communication with bondholders, and the scant details given on how a debt rescheduling would work had dented Dubai’s credibility.

“The way the announcement was made, including its timing has caused damage to Dubai’s credibility,” Ghanem Nuseibah, senior analyst at Political Capital Policy Research & Consulting Institute. “This will take a very long time to repair.”

UAE media either ignored the crisis or put a positive spin on the news on Friday. Abu Dhabi-based financial daily Alrroya Aleqtissadiya carried the headline “European markets overreact to Dubai’s bond news.” 

(For graphic of a simplified breakdown of the various holdings of Dubai World, Dubai Holding and Investment Corporation of Dubai click:

here)

(Writing by Lin Noueihed, reporting by Raissa Kasolowsky, Martina Fuchs and Enji Kiwan in Dubai, Ulf Laessing in Saudi Arabia, Adrian Croft, Sujata Rao, Atul Prakash, Caroline Cohn in London andMichele Kambas, Editing by Mike Peacock)

Those are the companies and are worth noting. 

I will need find more information about them later in follow up articles

We are being driven down a dead-end road. When our president says “Only the rich will have an increase in their taxes” or “It’s time that the rich pay their fair share”, it really makes me cringe.

Bill Cosby is one of the richest men in America. He earned his own fortune and he doesn’t owe me a dime. Neither does Bill Gates or Bill, my neighbor.

History always repeats itself. Hitler said that the Jews should pay. Mussolini said the Masons needed to pay. Stalin said those who have something must share it with others or give it up. Now, Obama is telling America that it’s time for us to pay up.

I’m not a Jew or a Mason and I don’t even have anything the government wants, but I do have principals and I do know right from wrong.

The people who want their neighbor to pay for their mortgage, health-care or ongoing welfare are truly nescient. They blindly accept the handouts, unaware that every time they accept another dollar, they empower the government a little bit more.

I do not expect my neighbor to pay for my wife, my family or me regardless of my neighbor’s income level. For any politician to use this as “justification for confiscation” is criminally, if not morally, corrupt.

I’ll pay my own way, thank you.

Asalamu Alaikum.

Again, subhanAllah, it has been too long since I put up any Islamic posts on this blog. I want to balance the posts between Islam and Socialism, but sometimes the events in the news dictate what will be discussed more than anything else. SubhanAllah, politics and political questions have been at the forefront lately.

Anyway, this blog is called “¡Orale Allah!” One of the reasons it is called that, is because I wanted to reach out to my fellow Latino Reverts. For many Latinos, the religious experience was one of Roman Catholicism. This means that for many of us, our childhoods and family experience were heavily peppered with of images and stories of Isa (Jesus, Peace be Upon Him) and Maryam (Mary, may Allah be pleased with her).

For many Latino’s that are or were Catholics, a big barrier to changing religion is the sense of abandoning the past. Because of this, I have decided to share this video about the Islamic view of Isa (PBUH) and Maryam.

Isa (PBUH) and Maryam are both important people in Islamic history and are revered greatly in the Qur’an. Contrary to what many Islamophobes and ignorant people may try to say, Islam includes Isa and Maryam in its history and tradition and embraces both completely. The big difference is that we do not see Isa as “the son of God.” We see that as blasphemous to think that Allah (SWA), being such a supreme and incomprehensible being, would ever lower himself, or be lowered, to the sort of behaviour of human beings (i.e. having children).

Of all of the videos that I have found on this subject, I think that this is the best, though not the only one.

Insh’Allah please check out the video and learn more about Isa and Maryam in Islam!

http://www.halaltube.com/islamic-view-on-the-return-of-jesus

Jazak Allah Khair to Halal Tube and Imran Hosein!

Asalamu Alaikum.

I have not had a chance to post any about Islam in quite some time, subhanAllah.

So here I would like to place a link to Nouman Ali Khan’s audio lecture “Misconceptions by non-Muslims.”I think the title says it all, Alhamdulillah!

This lecture, tries to put misconceptions about Islam in context. And if this blog teaches you nothing else, it is to always put things in context.

http://www.halaltube.com/nouman-ali-khan-misconceptions-by-non-muslims

Mash’Allah Nouman Ali Khan is an interesting, powerful, witting, and extremely knowledgeable speaker on Islam.

Nouman is often speaking at various conferences, Masjids (mosques), etc.

I specifically find his audio and video lectures on Halal Tube. Alhamdulillah, there is so much useful information on Halal Tube, it is amazing.

It is full of lectures by prominent and lesser known Muslims that give anecdotal, theological, and academic insight into Islam. Mash’Allah, Halal Tube in general, and Nouman Ali Khan specifically, are incredible resources for the Ummah (Muslim community) and for people interested in simply learning more or understanding Islam better.

With all of that said, I do need to add that subhanAllah, all of the audio and video on Halal Tube, and even from Nouman Ali Khan, is completely in line with my own politics. Just like with Youtube, Halal Tube carries audio/video from a variety of different speakers with a variety of different backgrounds, and a variety of different political views.

Some of the folks on Halal Tube are sexist and homophobic, just like on Youtube. Some are not, just like on Youtube.

Some of the folks on Hala Tue are anti-communist, just like on Youtube. Some of them are not, just like on Youtube.

I need to mention that because Nouman Ali Khan is (at the very least) not pro-communist, and I am pretty sure he is (at the very least) not pro-gay either.

Those are by themselves huge short falls. But with that said, we as Muslims and as Socialists need to learn how to sift through things to find the nuggets of information that are useful to us, so that we can apply those nuggets of information in our lives, while discarding the “crap” that holds us back (such as sexism, racism, and homophobia). SubhanAllah.

Anyway, insh’Allah please click on the link that I placed above and insh’Allah listen to Nouman Ali Khan’s lecture and insh’Allah take away the necessary information to use, while discarding the things we don’t need.

Jazak Allah Khair to Halal Tube and Nouman Ali Khan!

I couldn’t say it any better, so I just highlighted the salient points.

God Bless

A National Nightmare, Indeed

By David Limbaugh
November 24, 2009

In a Democratic fundraising speech in Iowa over the weekend, Vice President Joe Biden told party loyalists that opponents of the Obama administration’s agenda “should be worried about us, for we are their worst nightmare.” Duh.

Finally we can agree on something, Joe. Even the liberal New York Times reports that at the current level of federal spending, the annual interest on the national debt will exceed $700 billion by 2019 — compared with $202 billion this year. Some forecasters predict it will be much higher. This additional half-trillion dollars a year in interest is more than our current combined expenditures on education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Oh, and the Times isn’t even factoring in the cap-and-trade nightmare you and Barack have in store for us, Joe — you know, that urgent legislation to catapult the nation back into Third World status based on hysteria generated by fraudulent science and corrupt zealots and politicians.

Nor is the Times including in its calculations the additional debt that would result from Obamacare.

Joe, when The New York Times is sounding the warnings over the exploding national debt, you and Barack insist not only on not reversing your disastrous course but also on making it worse. How can reasonable people assume anything other than that you are trying to run this nation into the ground financially?

Don’t dare keep telling us your hyper-ambitious spending is a necessary evil required to deliver us from a financial crisis you inherited. Whatever crisis we face is debt-related, purely and simply. Everything else is manageable. Yet you all are deliberately increasing our indebtedness as far as the eye can see, without the slightest pretense of scaling back in this millennium. In fact, you are laboring to establish further entitlements and institutional changes that would generate exponential burdens on our debt and would be enormously difficult for any responsible and financially sane successor to undo, much less reverse.

Adding insult to injury, you are spending this money not to improve (“stimulate”) the economy — which even the most politically and economically illiterate should now realize — but to restructure American society, dismantle our free enterprise system and impose in its place a command-control economy and political system — in which life’s decisions, including over our private health care, are dictated from Washington.

But while you and Barack are hoisting your wrecking ball, could you please spare us the pseudo-sanctimony and transparent populism in telling us that it will take “grit and determination” to outlast the “special interests” on Wall Street and the insurance industry to pass your destructive agenda?

You both know better. When you have to bribe Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., with a larcenous $300 million addition to your Senate bill (I know, you’re pretending it’s just Harry Reid’s bill) that’s specifically earmarked just for her state — at the expense of the rest of the states and the national interest — something smells to high heaven. You could at least have the decency to admit this provision to raise the bill’s cost by increasing Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster” is not even motivated to help Louisiana, but to buy Landrieu’s vote. And you want to talk to us, Joe, about the corruption of special interests?

Special interests, Joe? Is that how you describe 56 percent of the American people, who now oppose Obama’s plan? And that’s without even knowing the half of it. Or maybe you would describe them as dangerous protesters or domestic terrorists?

But, Joe, I do applaud you for your candor in telling your fawning supporters, “I can tell you with absolute certainty: (Barack’s) resolve has never waivered for one instant.”

Bull’s-eye, Joe. You and Barack believe you know better than the American people what is good for them, and you only care what they think to the extent that it makes your job more difficult when they oppose you.

But if you told the truth about your plan — that it would cost dramatically more than you pretend (especially considering that the benefits wouldn’t begin to be paid until 2014 and that taxes would increase almost immediately); that the public option would subsume private care; that the federal government would ration care; that medical choice would be drastically reduced; that you are still trying to secure federal funding for abortion; that you intend to cover currently illegal immigrants; that after all your hype about promoting this bill to achieve universal coverage, millions would remain uninsured and penalized, to boot; that medical quality would be seriously reduced; and that overall costs would increase — your support for the bill would be in the single digits.

So keep chanting it, Joe; you are indeed a national nightmare.

—

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His book “Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today’s Democratic Party” was released recently in paperback. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his Web site at www.DavidLimbaugh.com.

o November 13, 2009 at 1:09 pm
On local Houston radio 2 days ago a private from Ft. Hood called into the AM talk show on 950AM. Since then the host has verified just to be sure that the man was indeed an injured soldier so as not to be fooled.
Anyway, the private was with some others that were not critically hurt in a ward. He called in to offer the “difference” between the visit from President Bush vs the visit from President Obama.
As you stated, no one knew President Bush was coming, he just showed up. WITH NO PRESS OR CAMERAS AT ALL! The private says that he spent a lot of time visiting with EACH soldier. He said he sat on the stool at his bedside for about 5 minutes and HELD HIS HAND and spoke with him. Then he did the same with the others. He said his words were heartfelt and they had a conversation.
Compared with the visit of President Obama. First off the private said was the advance team that he said made sure there was nothing on the bedside tables Obama did not want in the pictures. (like what a bible maybe?) Then he said a man whose name he forgot came and gave them all a lecture about what they were ALLOWED TO SAY AND DO while the President was there. He said they could not speak unless HE spoke to them, and could not TOUCH him unless he touched them.
This guy you could tell was not left bashing. He said that Obama gave a prepared speech to the whole group, NO PERSONAL BEDSIDE VISITS. Then he went around and shook their hands, but still no words to them other than his prepared remarks. Then he left.
And that my friends is the difference. Just like the Dover visit. President Bush used to go a lot, but he never took the press with him. We did not know that, did we, until a couple of weeks ago.
The difference between an American and a foreign pretender is VERY obvious isn’t it!

I don’t know if it is true or not BUT it certainly seems so from what we have seen from President Bush and thus far from Barack Hussein Obama. Obama has never met a camera he didn’t like or a primetime news cast he didn’t want to be on. The man has an ego as big as Alaska and is a confirmed narcissist!

RWD

I actually don’t know where I’ve been. When did I last update? It was about work, so Thursday/Friday of last week. That makes it exactly a week since my last post. What have I been up to?

Friday, I travelled back to University. I headed onto campus, went to my lessons, hung around for a bit and went home. Once home, Sheree picked me up and we went to her shoot, which we couldn’t actually find. It was funny looking for it though. We headed back to Sheree’s and, after getting stuck in traffic, she changed and headed to Tesco while I headed to mine to shower and get ready to go out. So, out I went, after getting drunk at mine with Sheree and playing music far too loudly. We walked down to Sheree’s to get the safety bus onto campus. Once there, we continued to get drunk and events unfolded that, whilst not being overly troubling, I’d still rather not express.

Saturday I went to Cambridge. My friend had a seizure on the bus so we had to stop so the paramedics could check her over on the way there, but she was fine for the rest of the day. It was really nice. I took some good photos, spent too much money, bought a beautiful bracelet and too many books, and we also sat outside a lovely little coffee shop, next to a little church. It was beautiful, like something you’d see in a French film.

Sunday, I actually did very little. So little, in fact, I can’t actually remember the day at all.

Monday, full day of classes. I had a meeting too I think. It was all very, organised. I saw Natalie too. I miss her when she isn’t around.

Tuesday was good. It started off relatively bad as I got up late and so was late to start my radio show. It was ok though because, after a few technical difficulties, it all went to plan and I was very happy with it. Nathan B was there to talk about Climate Change, among other things, and then we had some lunch with Emily and Vicky. I went to my seminar, had a test, then went to the library to meet Nathan B again. He went home for a bit and I stayed in the library and booked my ticket for Copenhagen. Then we all met up in the middle of campus and had a drink at the SU Bar before heading to the emergency general meeting. It was really good. I’ll do a whole post for it tomorrow. Then off to the bar for a few more drinks, then home.

Wednesday was spent mainly at home, as was today, Thursday. I did go out, but not for long. I went to campus today and then to Reece’s with Vicky for a few hours before coming home to go to bed, which I didn’t do as, 4 hours later, I’m still up.

I’m going to leaflet the posties at 5am, and it is now 2.26am.

Goodnight, Comrades.

Titch.

Although most famous for his Alaskan wilderness fiction, Jack London also wrote a fair collection of science fiction short stories and four scifi novels. I grew up on Call of the Wild and White Fang, and obsessed over his short stories (it’s a good thing I didn’t end up naming my first dog Bâtard!), but it wasn’t until much later that I started paying attention to his non-wolfdog-based fiction.

And so I never realized as a kid that Jack London was very much a socialist. And not the fluffy kind, either. In his resignation from the socialist party, he wrote:

I am resigning from the Socialist Party, because of its lack of fire and fight, and its loss of emphasis upon the class struggle. I was originally a member of the old revolutionary up-on-its-hind legs, a fighting, Socialist Labor Party. Trained in the class struggle, as taught and practised by the Socialist Labor Party, my own highest judgment concurring, I believed that the working class, by fighting, by fusing, by never making terms with the enemy, could emancipate itself.

Since the whole trend of Socialism in the United States during recent years has been one of peaceableness and compromise, I find that my mind refuses further sanction of my remaining a party member. Hence, my resignation.

These views very much influenced his fiction. And although London is beyond a doubt one of my favorite authors of all time, my love for his stories is often tempered with uneasiness with the themes they are promoting.

Far less forgivable than his socialist views is his embracing of Social Darwinism and Rudyard Kipling-style racial paternalism. (I’m being charitable here; at times, his racism was much more severe than that, and he was not opposed to eugenics.) His opinion of women was little better, and in London’s fiction, females are often very much fungible goods. If you lose one, just find another — or better yet, steal it. The number of instances of wife-stealing in his stories is staggering. His tepid support for women’s rights was not based upon any belief in their equivalency to men, but rather as a way to bring about an end to alcohol. In John Barleycorn, the memoir opens with London announcing that he voted for women’s suffrage — not because he agrees particularly with the idea that women should vote, but rather because “[w]hen the women get the ballot, they will vote for prohibition[.]“

But because discussing economics is more fun than detailing the moral failings of a historical figure I still have respect for, I’m going to ignore his social views and instead focus instead on two of his speculative fiction short stories with communist themes: Goliah and Strength of the Strong.

Goliah is one of the creepiest pieces of scifi communist propaganda I have ever read. The Strength of the Strong is much milder in comparison, a Marxist fairytale that explains the injustices of capitalism and great strength that lies in the collective class of the proletariat, if only they could see past the capitalist deceptions and band together.

Jack London had an extremely pessimistic view of human nature, and ultimately this contributed to his disillusionment with the socialist party. London lost faith in the ability of the working class to ever unite, and to use their collective strength to overthrow the capitalist society that fed off of their lives and labor-the proletariat were simply too petty, selfish, and easily deceived by the elite classes. Socialist revolution could never be achieved by the collective action of the masses, because, on their own, they would never achieve working class solidarity.

Both Goliah and The Strength of the Strong show London’s pessimism about the ability of the proletariat revolution to come to pass. In The Strength of the Strong, he shows why a socialist revolution is necessary – and why it will never come to pass on its own. In Goliah, London tells of a socialist revolution accomplished not by a working class revolution but on the order of a single but powerful man. Once the revolution is accomplished, London delves into descriptions of the untold bounty that will be achieved once global socialism has been mandated from above.

The Strength of the Strong

The Strength of the Strong was one of the most popular pieces of London’s short fiction during his lifetime. In it, London uses cavemen to retell the Marxist accounting of history. The cavemen begin in a state of nature, but are forced to create society when they are attacked from outside. After creating a Law, they then establish a sort of primitive perfect democracy. However, after finding they were never able to search for food as they were always too busy arguing in the councils.

To resolve this, they then elect a chief. Life is good for a while, but when all the other cavemen move to join the tribe, scarcity sets in, and the strongest men lay claim to all the land — and hire others to farm it for them. Thus, feudalism is born.

Things only get worse once money is invented, however, and the strong men are able to enjoy receiving a greater percentage of the tribe’s GDP. Before, when everything was traded in fish, the strong men were limited in what they could seize — after all, if they receive 40 fish, they are only able to eat a few before the rest go bad. But once they invent money, there is no longer a natural barrier to how much wealth they can accumulate, and begin to invent more and more ways to live off the labor of the working cavemen:

“So, also, did Little-Belly and Three-Legs and Pig-Jaw have other men to lie in the sun about their grass houses and carry messages for them and give commands. And more and more were men taken away from work, so that those that were left worked harder than ever before. It seemed that men desired to do no work and strove to seek out other ways whereby men should work for them. “

Although the industries and technologies created by the strong men do result in the tribe gathering much more food than before, and in having the leisure to invent music , alcohol, and religion (all of which are used to further pacify the working classes), only the elite few benefit from the newfound wealth:

“But this was the strange thing: as the days went by we who were left worked harder and harder, and yet did we get less and less to eat.”

“But what of the goats and the corn and the fat roots and the fish-trap,” spoke up Afraid-of-the-Dark, “what of all this? Was there not more food to be gained by man’s work?”

“It is so,” Long-Beard agreed. “Three men on the fish-trap got more fish than the whole tribe before there was a fish-trap. But have not said we were fools? The more food we were able to get, the less food did we have to eat.”

“But was it not plain that the many men who did not work ate it all up?” Yellow-Head demanded.

Long-Beard nodded his head sadly. “Dog-Tooth’s dogs were stuffed with meat, and the men who lay in the sun and did no work were rolling in fat, and, at the same time, there were little children crying themselves to sleep with hunger biting them with every wail.”

Ultimately, thanks to monopolist producers who artificially decrease supply, the social order in the society is upended, as women — who are willing to work for cheap — replace the men.

“It was very strange. When Little-Belly caught too many fish, so that it took a great many to sell for a little money, he threw many of the fish back into the sea, so that more money would be paid for what was left. And Three-Legs often let many large fields lie idle so as to get more money for his corn. And the women, making so much money out of shell that much money was needed to buy with, Dog-Tooth stopped the making of money. And the women had no work, so they took the places of the men. I worked on the fish-trap, getting a string of money every five days. But my sister now did my work, getting a string of money for every ten days. The women worked cheaper, and there was less food, and Tiger-Face said for us to become guards. Only I could not become a guard because I was lame of one leg and Tiger-Face would not have me. And there were many like me. We were broken men and only fit to beg for work or to take care of the babies while the women worked.”

Alas, the socialist revolution never succeeds among the cavemen. Each time one of the tribe attempts to unite the workers to rise up against the capitalist parasites, the other workers — who have not yet obtained class consciousness — fall upon him, and destroy him. They mistakenly believe the call to overthrow the capitalist overclass is a call to return to a primitive live:

“[T]here was but one other man that dared rise up and speak his mind, and that man was Hair-Face. `Where is the strength of the strong?’ he asked. `We are the strong, all of us, and we are stronger than Dog-Tooth and Tiger-Face and Three-Legs and Pig-Jaw and all the rest who do nothing and eat much and weaken us by the hurt of their strength which is bad strength. … Let us add our strength and [the strength of the working class of the neighboring tribes] together. Then will we be indeed strong. And then we will go out together… In that day we will be so strong that all the wild animals will flee before us and perish. And nothing will withstand us, for the strength of each man will be the strength of all men in the world.”

“So said Hair-Face, and they killed him, because, they said, he was a wild man and wanted to go back and live in a tree. It was very strange. Whenever a man arose and wanted to go forward all those that stood still said he went backward and should be killed. And the poor people helped stone him, and were fools. We were all fools, except those who were fat and did no work. The fools were called wise, and the wise were stoned. Men who worked did not get enough to eat, and the men who did not work ate too much.”

Goliah

Although a Marxist revolution remains elusive and forever out of reach in The Strength of the Strong, in Goliah, a communist utopia is successfully and near painlessly achieved, thanks to the help of science fiction technology and the abandonment of the working class-lead revolution.

If it were parody, Goliah would be clever satire– but it’s not. Instead, its bland acceptance of murder and slavery in pursuit of the new world order is chilling, and the actual plot full of delusional wishful thinking.

The premise of Goliah is that a ship, the Energon, has appeared in San Francisco Bay. A man calling himself Goliah, on board the ship, announces the names of ten “captains of industry,” and insists if they do no board the ship by a certain date, they will die. They laugh it off as a joke — and are all found disintegrated in their sleep. Next, Goliah makes the same announcement, this time to ten politicians. Same result. After that, people begin to pay attention, and because everyone is terrified of Goliah’s ability to kill anyone at any time, Goliah’s will is obeyed.

Goliah decides not to wait for the ultimate uprising of the Proletarian Revolution, but instead takes charge himself and begins to command the dismantling of the capitalist superstructure. The working class may never rise up – but that will no longer be necessary, as Goliah can patiently and ruthlessly demonstrate to proletariat and capitalist alike why they must all enter into a global communist order.

“The incentive of material gain developed man from the savage to the semi-barbarian he is to-day. This incentive has been a useful device for the development of the human; but it has now fulfilled its function and is ready to be cast aside into the scrap-heap of rudimentary vestiges such as gills in the throat and belief in the divine right of kings. Of course you do not think so; but I do not see that that will prevent you from aiding me to fling the anachronism into the scrap-heap. For I tell you now that the time has come when mere food and shelter and similar sordid things shall be automatic, as free and easy and involuntary of access as the air. I shall make them automatic, what of my discovery and the power that discovery gives me. And with food and shelter automatic, the incentive of material gain passes away from the world forever. With food and shelter automatic, the higher incentives will universally obtain – the spiritual, aesthetic, and intellectual incentives that will tend to develop and make beautiful and noble body, mind, and spirit. Then all the world will be dominated by happiness and laughter. It will be the reign of universal laughter.”

After ending child and female labor, Goliah orders the nationalization of industry:

“But we cannot make profits!” wailed the petty capitalists. “Fools!” was the retort of Goliah. “As if the meaning of life were profits. Give up your businesses and your profit-mongering.” “But there is nobody to buy our businesses!” they wailed. “Buy and sell – is that all the meaning life has for you?” replied Goliah. “You have nothing to sell. Turn over your little cut-throating, anarchistic businesses to the Government so that they may be rationally organised and operated.” And the next day, by decree, the Government began taking possession of all factories, shops, mines, ships, railroads, and producing lands.

In Goliah’s world, “going Galt” is apparently not an available option:

The captains of industry became heads of departments. It was found that civil engineers, for instance, worked just as well in government employ as, before, they had worked in private employ. It was found that men of high executive ability could not violate their nature. They couldn’t escape exercising their executive ability, any more than a crab could escape crawling or a bird could escape flying. And so it was that all the splendid force of the men who had previously worked for themselves was not put to work for the good of society. The half-dozen great railway chiefs co-operated in the organising of a national system of railways that was amazingly efficacious. Never again was there such as thing as a car shortage. These chiefs were not the Wall Street railway magnates, but they were the men who formerly had done the real work while in the employ of the Wall Street magnates.

The horrifying part of the story is the means by which Goliah’s communist utopia is achieved. To set up his base of opertions, he first must enslave thousand of workers to toil on his island. Then, to accomplish his global social agenda, he uses extortion and casual murder.

And yet Goliah becomes beloved by all the world, for ushering them into a golden age. He becomes a dottering grandfather figure. Never once does anyone display any sort of revulsion at the means by which his aims were achieved.

Goliah (and London) very much accept the moral rightness of murder in the name of establishing global communism. Responding to criticism of his methods, Goliah says,

“Do not misunderstand me, when I tell you that I am one with a theory. I want to see that theory work, and therefore I call upon your cooperation. In this theory of mine, lives are but pawns; I deal with quantities of lives. I am after laughter, and those that stand in the way of laughter must perish. The game is big. There are fifteen hundred million human lives to-day on the planet. What is your single life against them ? It is as naught, in my theory. ” …

“What are a few paltry lives ? In your insane wars you destroy millions of lives and think nothing of it. In your fratricidal commercial struggle you kill countless babes, women, and men, and you triumphantly call the shambles ‘individualism.’ I call it anarchy. I am going to put a stop to your wholesale destruction of human beings. I want laughter, not slaughter. Those of you who stand in the way of laughter will get slaughter.

The world wide communist utopia that ultimately emerges is described as being as close to perfection as human society can get. Among the benefits enjoyed by mankind as a result of Goliah’s benevolent dictatorship, there is: a three hour work day, the end of warfare, a global brotherhood of mankind, a retirement age of 48, and the disappearance of human dissatisfaction. In the new world order, Wall Street stock traders and trust fund babies are taught the virtues of honest labor (well, for at least three hours a day), and all household chores are performed by machines.

Even better, it turns out once you do away with private property, you also do away with all the criminals and lawyers:

“Ninety per cent. of the crimes against society had been crimes against private property. With the passing of private property, at least in the means of production, and with the organisation of industry that gave every man a chance, the crimes against private property practically ceased. The police forces everywhere were reduced repeatedly and again and again. Nearly all occasional and habitual criminals ceased voluntarily from their depredations. There was no longer any need for them to commit crime. … And the courts in all the countries were likewise decreased in number again and again. Ninety-five per cent. of all civil cases had been squabbles over property, conflicts of property-rights, lawsuits, contests of wills, breaches of contract, bankruptcies, etc. With the passing of private property, this ninety-five per cent. of the cases that cluttered the courts also passed. The courts became shadows, attenuated ghosts, rudimentary vestiges of the anarchistic times that had preceded the coming of Goliah.

In all, Jack London’s socialism, at least in Goliah, seems too fantastically naïve to be taken seriously. London’s just too enamored with the idea that humans do not need incentives to act, and that once basic material needs are provided for as a matter of right, mankind will no longer compete over any other sort of resources. In London’s world, government agencies are as efficient as the most streamlined corporation, racial strife is only an artifact of private property, and humans only compare about absolute worth, not relative standing.

And ultimately that’s why Goliah is unsatisfying as a work of science fiction. Scifi just doesn’t operate like that – in scifi, you only get to completely make up the external world your characters encounter, you don’t get to make up the internal nature of humanity, too. Scifi explores how society-as-we-know-it might react and adapt in the face with radical technological innovations. Goliah’s invention of energon – a never ending source of energy derived from cosmic rays – is as equally implausible as Goliah’s conception of human nature, but you can make up completely impossible technology and still have a good story. But by also making the humans in Goliah totally unrecognizable, London’s story moves beyond the realm of scifi to something akin to a religious screed.

http://viewfromll2.wordpress.com/2009/09/26/the-economic-agendas-of-sci-fi-and-fantasy-authors-vol-1-jack-london/
http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/StrengthStrong/strong.html

Local man Jeff Tinsdale seemingly had done his part this past election. He was busy raising interest in the Obama Presidential campaign by handing out fliers, going door to door canvassing, and even setting up an info booth in the West Side Mall with educational pamphlets about the Obama’s election bid. However, even after countless hours spent devoting his otherwise work-free life to promoting Barack Obama, Mr. Tinsdale has become rather disenchanted with the Obama administration for not living up to what he believed him to be before he took office.

“I saw those Joker posters, and heard from guys like Hannity and Glenn Beck that Obama was socialist. I was pretty optimistic.” Said Tinsdale, “I thought that if Obama was elected, the United States would transform into a socialist utopia where everything would be free and rich people would be forced to wear special patches on their clothing so we could identify them. I’m still waiting Mr. Obama!”

Other socialist websites are in agreement with Mr. Tinsdale. “It’s a natural and understandable place to find ourselves.  But when we get discouraged by our President’s failure to meet our expectations, and we’ve decided we can’t really alter our expectations, we must do something to shift the focus so that we can maintain our activist energy.” Says “Leftcandid” of Dailykos.com, “And the best thing to do is refocus on the problem, which is not Obama, but those who have more or less deliberately done their best to wreck this nation. Go fucking get them.  Beat the drums of war and do not let up on the Republicorporate class.”

This trend seems to be continuing among the far-left websites and individuals who are under the impression that Barack Obama would cater to their extreme demands and way-out-there philosophies. “Obama has been facing a backlash among some of the more extreme elements of the left wing, because he isn’t doing the batshit crazy stuff they think he should be doing,” said political analyst Brian Vera. “He’s running a pretty moderate ship, and the hardcore left are reacting like a teen whose girlfriend decided not to go through with the suicide pact. They’re not taking it very well at all.”

The New Barack Channel (NBC) has jumped into the fray between Kennedy and the Catholic Church.  As usual, they are doing so with a leftist bias.

The second paragraph of the article which I have highlighted in bold below sums up the crux of the matter.  When a church or other conservative  organization compromises what it believes in order to support some liberal/progressive policy, no one says anything about separation of church and state (which is a misinterpreted load of liberal crap anyway).  But let the same organization take the same conservative stand they have taken since the beginning of time, and the left comes out screaming.  Hypocrites.

Now you have the Catholic Church, which to my knowledge has been around even longer than the United States, and has always said that abortion is wrong, is saying what it has always said:  “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.”  They are telling this Kennedy idiot that Catholics (and Christians) can not support or condone abortion, and if you do support or condone abortion you can’t be a Catholic, or at least not one in good standing.  They are illustrating what God has always tried to teach us, that the world is black and white, not the shades of gray that liberals portray it to be.  There IS right, and there IS wrong.  Right and wrong don’t change with the times.  The religion of moral relativism propagated by liberals has taken over our society like a cancer.

So, why are liberals trying so hard to remove God from the public square?  Two reasons.

1. Acknowledging the existence of God reminds liberals of their own sin, and they do not want to be reminded of that.
2. Liberals/communists know that people who have a strong moral foundation can’t be controlled easily.  Someone without a moral foundation will believe whatever they are told by the powers that be.  This also speaks to the dumbing down of our educational system.

Whether you are a Christian or not, you need to stand up against this coordinated, intentional assault on Christianity and organized religion in America.  Right now it may not appear that liberals are attacking islam, but that is only temporary.  Political correctness is the only thing preventing that at the moment.  If the muslims win before the liberals do, the liberals will wonder where the Christians are to protect them from beheading.  If the liberals get their way before islam takes over, the liberals will persecute the muslims just like they persecute us.  As I was saying, this is more than just an assault on religion.  It is an assault on freedom.  Let’s review the 1st Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Any educated, reasonably clear thinking individual can see the wisdom behind the wording of the 1st Amendment, and that the liberals have taken great liberty with it to arrive at the current interpretation regarding “separation of church and state.”  It means that the government will not establish a STATE religion that you must be a part of.  It DOES NOT prohibit those in government who are of various religions from displaying or participating in their religion while on the job.

Wake up, people!  An attack on one of our freedoms is an attack on all of them.  Jealously guard your freedom, for tomorrow it may be taken from you.

NBC Takes Up Kennedy vs. Catholic Church ‘Crossing the Line’ Into ‘Political Blackmail’

By: Tim Graham
November 24, 2009 10:55 ET

Monday’s NBC Nightly News took up the story of liberal Congressman Patrick Kennedy’s public feud with the Catholic Church, and NBC’s Ron Allen implied something improper in how “the Catholic Church is flexing its religious and political muscle.”

When Catholic officials endorse liberal initiatives like immigration reform or oppose an execution, the networks don’t worry about the separation of church and state. But with traditional stands against abortion and gay marriage in the crossfire, NBC’s screen graphic asked if the church was “Crossing the Line?” A secular-left lobbyist accused the church of being “not above spiritual and political blackmail.”

(Read rest of article HERE)

President OBAMA sends his greetings to the MUSLIMS???!!!!  Does anyone else find this as disgusting as I do?  This administration is sending greetings to the PEOPLE and the countries that support MURDER of other people.  Imagine that President Franklin D. Roosevelt would have made a similar speech to the people that were trying to kill our military “over there.”

Yet, here we are.  I found a speech by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1943.  By contrast to President Obama’s speech, there is something familiar to it.  There is something comforting to it.  This is a President that was fighting WITH the people against a common enemy.  This speech is not questionable.  One is clear as to where President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s loyalties lie.  Here is a small excerpt from the long speech.

http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/8868564/July-28-1943-Address-of-President-Franklin-D-Roosevelt

In every country conquered by the Nazis and the Fascists, or the Japanese militarists, the people have been reduced to the status of slaves or chattels. It is our determination to restore these conquered peoples to the dignity of human beings, masters of their own fate, entitled to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

We have started to make good on that promise.

I am sorry if I step on the toes of those Americans who, playing party politics at home, call that kind of foreign policy “crazy altruism “and “starry-eyed dreaming.”

Meanwhile, the war in Sicily and Italy goes on. It must go on, and will go on, until the Italian people realize the futility of continuing to fight in a lost cause — a cause to which the people of Italy never gave their wholehearted approval and support. It’s a little over a year since we planned the North African campaign. It is six months since we planned the Sicilian campaign. I confess that I am of an impatient disposition, but I think that I understand and that most people understand the amount of time necessary to prepare for any major military or naval operation. We cannot just pick up the telephone and order a new campaign to start the next week.

By contrast we have this :

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/statement-president-hajj-and-eid-ul-adha

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

…but Best Buy?

Check it:

“Okay, so Best Buy doesn’t advertise Christmas. So what? They don’t advertise Hanukkah either. Or Kwanzaa either. How else would they avoid offending people who don’t celebrate Christmas?”

Ah, good point, loyal blog readers. First, I must state that everyone I’ve ever met that DOESN’T celebrate Christmas is NOT offended when people tell them “Merry Christmas”. I celebrate Christmas; and when (and it happens) someone says “Happy Hanukkah!” to ME, I’m not offended. Why would I be? The only ones who would be offended by any Christ loving individuals are those who are hellbent on destroying the INFIDELS. Who is that? Oh, why the Muslim Islamic Extremists!

“So what does this have to do with Best Buy?”

Good question. Have a look at THIS:

“What the fuck is Eid-al-Adha?!” Well, I’ll tell ya.

Eid-al-Adha is “Festival of Sacrifice”; a holiday celebrated by Muslims. Eid al-Adha occurs the day after the pilgrims conducting Hajj, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia by Muslims worldwide, descend from Mount Arafat. It happens to be approximately 70 days after the end of the month of Ramadan. Best Buy won’t mention any OTHER “holiday” in order to avoid being offensive… Oh, except for the Muslim holiday. Now that a Muslim lives in the White House; I guess it’s okay. But wait! They didn’t advertise Christmas when we’ve had Christian presidents, did they? NEIN.

Okay. So now that you know what THAT bullshit is all about; have a look at our P Resident of the United States of America:

BHussein on Ramadan (another Muslim Holiday):

Watch as he wishes a blessed Ramadan to Muslims in and outside of the United States. He also mentions “swine flu” and how it’s a concern for those making the hajj pilgrimage this year.

It’s no secret that he was born a Muslim, raised a Muslim, and still stands strong in his Muslim beliefs. He bends over backwards trying to appease his Muslim brothers; even those who have carried out massive acts of terrorism. (See also KSM, GITMO prisoners, and the way he licks the asscrack of the Islamic terrorists who are attacking OUR BROTHERS and our ALLI, Israel.) Sure, he “says” he’s a Christian; but he’s not fooling anyone with a triple digit I.Q.

BHussein doesn’t celebrate Christmas. Well, he does when the media is looking. When he thinks America is looking, but if you read between the lines; it’s crystal clear.

Obama leaves the gifting to Santa
Article: Politico

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) tells People magazine in the issue out Friday that he and his wife, Michelle, do not give Christmas or birthday presents to their two young daughters.

Obama tells the magazine’s Sandra Sobieraj Westfall in a seven-page cover story that he and his wife follow the unusual practice because they “want to teach some limits.”

Sure, BarryO. You want to teach your little punishment and your little mistake some “limits”. Nobody buys it. We know you don’t celebrate Christmas because you don’t believe in God. Jesus Christ. Funny thing is, Marxists and Muslims don’t celebrate birthdays or Christmas either. I suppose since you’re doing your best to make America a Socialist and Marxist nation; Best Buy figured they’d jump right on it.

Freudian slip, much?

Depuis six semaines, plusieurs milliers de travailleurs sans-papiers sont en grève dans de nombreuses entreprises et chantiers de notre pays. La détresse et l’exploitation de femmes et d’hommes qui travaillent souvent depuis longtemps en France sont inacceptables. Nicolas Sarkozy et la droite, en charge de la politique d’immigration depuis 7 ans, sont responsables du pourrissement de cette situation. Les promesses de Xavier Darcos de durcir les sanctions à l’égard des employeurs ne servent qu’à occulter qu’un arsenal juridique existe déjà et qu’une poignée seulement d’employeurs ont été inquiétés l’an dernier. De même que le placement d’enfants en rétention et les démembrements ou expulsions de familles dont les enfants sont scolarisés, le traitement indigne de ces travailleurs étrangers place cette politique migratoire sous le signe de l’injustice, du désordre et de l’inefficacité.

C’est pourquoi le Parti Socialiste demande pour les travailleurs sans-papiers, comme pour les familles dont les enfants sont scolarisés une large régularisation sur la base d’une procédure assouplie et simplifiée, s’appliquant à tous de manière égale sur le territoire national, selon des critères clairs et transparents, prenant en compte notamment les liens de travail, la scolarisation des enfants, une durée significative de présence, une intégration effective.

La France est riche des apports d’hommes et de femmes de toutes origines qui tout au long de son histoire ont contribué à son essor économique, à sa culture et à son rayonnement. Les Français le savent et souhaitent poursuivre dans cette voie. Ils nous le disent à chaque étape du Tour de France du projet du Parti socialiste. Pourtant, la droite s’acharne à mener une politique inhumaine et dégradante, par exemple lorsqu’elle porte gravement atteinte au droit d’asile en renvoyant avec les autorités britanniques 3 jeunes Afghans à Kaboul, lorsqu’elle s’associe aux autorités italiennes pour confier à la Libye le traitement de la demande d’asile et ou qu’elle invente les mariages gris.

Le monde du XXIe siècle connaît de nouvelles migrations. Leurs rythmes, leurs parcours, leurs motivations se sont diversifiés et les plus grands mouvements migratoires sont et seront des migrations de pays du Sud vers d’autres pays du Sud. C’est en prenant en compte cette nouvelle donne que les socialistes veulent promouvoir une politique d’immigration régulée, ambitieuse pour la France, fidèle à ses valeurs humanistes et équilibrée.

La France a besoin d’une politique d’immigration claire

C’est pourquoi l’immigration en France doit être organisée dans un cadre légal aussi stable que possible. À l’ère de la mondialisation, les migrations constituent un défi économique, social et culturel, tant pour les pays d’émigration que pour les pays d’accueil. Pour relever ce défi, la France, en concertation avec ses partenaires européens, doit bâtir une politique d’immigration sur trois piliers.

Premier pilier, des règles claires et justes : l’immigration doit, plus que jamais, être régie par le droit, par un droit lisible et stable tant pour assurer que les étrangers présents dans notre pays respectent les lois de la République que pour garantir leurs droits, notamment au regard des conventions internationales signées par la France. Nicolas Sarkozy a fait montre d’une hyperactivité législative qui s’est avérée aussi inutile que démagogique. Depuis 2002, la droite a modifié à plusieurs reprises la loi relative à l’entrée et au séjour des étrangers votée en 1998 : elle a supprimé la clause de régularisation après 10 ans de présence sur le territoire national. Ce processus permanent et progressif qui évitait les régularisations massives et qu’avait instauré le gouvernement Jospin devra être rétabli.De même, la politique du chiffre empêche les préfets d’agir selon une règle constante. Au lieu de créer du désordre en jetant des immigrés dans l’illégalité, les pouvoirs publics doivent concentrer leurs efforts sur la stabilité et la clarté des règles, et sur la rénovation des administrations de l’immigration (préfectures et consulats) pour leur permettre un traitement continu et équitable des dossiers des étrangers. Nous devons réaffirmer les droits et devoirs des migrants – en particulier le droit inaliénable à vivre en famille – alléger le traitement administratif et améliorer la sécurité juridique des étrangers.

Nous condamnons l’indigne directive européenne « Retour » qui autorise, sans procès, la privation de liberté d’une personne sans papier jusqu’à 18 mois contrairement à tous les engagements de l’Union européenne en matière de droits de l’Homme. Il faut supprimer le « délit de solidarité » et soutenir les citoyens et les associations qui se mobilisent pour apporter leur aide aux migrants dans la défense de leurs droits fondamentaux, y compris dans les centres de rétention administrative (CRA). Enfin, les réseaux d’immigration illégale – passeurs, patrons voyous, marchands de sommeil, et plus généralement tous ceux qui exploitent les migrants illégaux – doivent être combattus jusqu’à leur démantèlement, comme toute forme de trafic et de corruption dans la délivrance de visas. La France doit aussi sanctuariser le droit d’asile et le statut de réfugié, tels que définis depuis la Convention de Genève, mettre en oeuvre la Directive « protection temporaire » de 2001 jamais appliquée et contribuer à élaborer de nouvelles formes de protections internationales, par exemple vis-à-vis des déplacés environnementaux.

Second pilier, l’accueil républicain : nous devons sans relâche concrétiser la promesse républicaine de la France qui accueille, intègre et émancipe de nouveaux citoyens. C’est pourquoi nous réaffirmons notre attachement au droit du sol. Notre système d’intégration culturelle est l’un des meilleurs au monde, mais l’intégration socio-économique ne fonctionne pas bien et doit être améliorée. Un véritable accueil, comportant un suivi et un soutien effectif des étrangers en situation régulière, doit créer un lien plus étroit entre le migrant et la France. La maîtrise de la langue française et l’accès à la formation, notamment pour les femmes, sont des priorités. Les conditions de vie des étrangers sont trop souvent mauvaises: le logement insalubre, la ségrégation urbaine et scolaire, l’exploitation des travailleurs migrants, les discriminations doivent être dénoncés et combattus avec fermeté. C’est pourquoi l’État doit assumer pleinement ses responsabilités : il doit soutenir, associer aux décisions publiques et s’engager dans la durée auprès des territoires et collectivités qui accueillent souvent seuls et sans moyens les populations immigrées. À l’inverse, opposer l’immigration à l’identité nationale comme le fait la droite est un facteur de stigmatisation démagogique et dangereuse des étrangers, de leurs familles, comme de français issus de l’immigration.

Troisième pilier, le partenariat : A l’opposé de la rhétorique dégradante de « l’immigration choisie ou subie », le Parti socialiste défend un partenariat équitable et respectueux entre pays d’accueil et pays d’émigration. Ce partenariat comme les politiques de codéveloppement doivent être menés dans un cadre européen. Au cours des prochaines décennies, l’immigration sera indispensable à la plupart des pays développés. Elle peut contribuer à préparer l’avenir dans les pays en développement. La réponse de long terme sera le développement des pays d’origine. Dès aujourd’hui, les jeunes doivent être aidés à construire leur avenir dans leur pays. Au-delà du cadre multilatéral et européen auxquels nous sommes attachés, nous devons affirmer que la France forme avec les pays du Maghreb et de l’Afrique un espace de dialogue et d’échanges privilégié. C’est pourquoi, la France doit remplir ses engagements en matière d’aide publique au développement, qui a diminué de moitié depuis 2006. Elle doit développer des systèmes de micro-finance, d’appui aux projets portés par les migrants eux-mêmes et par leurs associations, pour permettre leur réinstallation autant que l’émergence d’une société civile forte et d’une vie démocratique viable. Au lieu de fixer des quotas d’immigration rigides et bureaucratiques, l’État doit assouplir le recrutement des étrangers dans les secteurs qui en ont besoin.

A l’opposé du pillage des cerveaux, la coopération universitaire, la possibilité d’aller et venir des étudiants et des travailleurs (visas circulaires), les échanges culturels et techniques peuvent être facilités. Le cadre de ce partenariat doit être tracé par des conventions internationales, prenant en compte équitablement l’intérêt des pays d’origine, des migrants et des pays d’accueil, qu’il s’agisse du développement économique, de la coopération dans la lutte contre les réseaux mafieux et de la solidarité internationale.

This week, the Republican Party continued its slash-and-burn campaign against the left and center by putting forth a resolution that is designed to check the “purity” of Republican candidates.   It’s pretty simple – meet at least 8 of the 10 points in the resolution and you get to call yourself a bona fide, guns a’blazin, tobacco spittin’ genuine Republican.  Fail to meet at least 8 points and you can kiss that R next to your name good bye.

Now, some of the points in their “test” do make some sense regardless of which side you are on; such as “Containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat“.

But as expected, most others are designed to essentially purge anyone in the middle and leave only those on the far right.  Opposition to cap and trade, abortion, and gay marriage.   Support of troop surges in Iraq and Afghanistan as the only path to victory in both wars.  Renunciation of “Obama-style government run health care”.

Essentially, you need to believe that people should have easier access to an AK-47 than to affordable health care.

Personally, I am quite delighted with this resolution as I believe it will push some decent moderate Republicans out of the party paving the way for the coronation of Sarah Palin as Queen of the Wingnuts.

I am so delighted, that I decided to come up with my own 10-point Republican purity test that I believe more accurately determines if someone is a true Republican in 2009.   So here it is:

1.  You believe it is fine to spend trillions of dollars on a useless war in Iraq, but it is disastrous to spend billions of dollars on fixing our own infrastructure to create jobs.

2.  You believe that global warming is a myth because it was not foretold in the Book of Revelation.

3.  You believe that it is not OK to pass enormous deficits on to our grandchildren, but it IS OK to puff cigarette smoke in their faces.

4.  You believe that any proposal coming from a Democrat is automatically socialist no matter what it is and will result in Adolf Hitler rising from the grave and taking over America.

5.  You like YOUR government run health care so much that you don’t want to share.

6.  You believe leaving the country to cheat on your wife is not an impeachable offense, but doing so in your office is.

7.  You believe Sarah Palin is actually the second coming of Jesus Christ.

8.  You believe in states’ rights, but only for states that oppose gay marriage.

9.  You believe that health care reform will violate Americans personal freedoms, but secret government wiretapping does not.

10.  You believe as a God fearing, pro-life person, that it is perfectly acceptable to kill an animal in cold blood, stuff it, and mount it over your fireplace.

 The issue is that the guy was “beaten up.” 

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it…

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

“I gave the detainee a glance over and then left,” the SEAL wrote. “I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health.”

Who cares?  Even if he was beaten to a pulp?  He is a terrorist!

They are taking the statements of a terrorist over the statemets of the Seals? 

This administration is a terrorist organization, because they are funding these people and they are using, us, the people, and our blood to die like lemmings over there.  They want to cut off the arms and legs of our DEFENSE.  This military is no longer a military.  I don’t know what it is.  This government wants us (the people of the US) to die. 

 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576646,00.html

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

 

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

“I gave the detainee a glance over and then left,” the SEAL wrote. “I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health.”

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that “Objective Amber” planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and “they had been tracking this guy for some time.”

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment

 Obama is an outright Muslim.   These families were devastated and now this?  This is an outragous insult to all of us little people who live in this country that supports his presidency.  All of us little people to whom the term of terrorist, freedom fighter, genocide, or act of war take on little  or no meaning when the freedom fighter has a gun and is pointing it at us.  The reasoning is crazy.  The idea that we are playing NICE with these murderers is CRAZY.  These oligarchs and tyrants (US and EU) who speak on our behalf are traitors to us.  They are not part of us, the little people.  Obama is a Muslim and he is making sure that the caliphate that is to be established here is funded as best as possible because he wants to WIN.  Winning without picking up a weapon.  Sun Tsu is proud.  But who’s side is Obama on? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s gotta be a duck and not a rooster. 

They may have been military, but they were not actively engage in combat.  They were not facing an enemy.  They were, in the barracks and therefore non- combatants.  But these arguments are mute.  These semantics are irrelevant.  Are Nazi’s terrorists or conducting a program of genocide? These people were UNARMED

 Bush was constantly called a Crusader and a baby killer.  I have no bad feelings about calling Obama a muslim.  He cow tows to them like a duck quacks. 

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/11/14/beirut_attack_victims_families_face_new_hurdle/

 

 

Adding insult to infamy

26 years after attack on Marine barracks in Beirut, families stymied again in bid for restitution

On Veterans Day, Christine Devlin stood in the cold in Westwood for the unveiling of a new memorial to local soldiers lost overseas, including her son Michael, one of the 241 servicemen killed in the bombing of the US Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983.

Devlin is among 30 Massachusetts relatives of victims of the Beirut attack who have been fighting for more than a decade to get compensation for what many consider the first major terrorist attack against the United States. After a federal judge ruled in 2007 that Iran was liable for $2.65 billion in damages to be shared by 150 families seeking restitution, they believed they were on the cusp of victory.

But now, the Obama administration is going to court to try to block payments from Iranian assets that the families’ lawyers want seized, contending that it would jeopardize sensitive negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program and establish a potentially damaging precedent.

In a little-noticed filing in federal court, the Justice Department is arguing that giving the money to the victims “can have significant, detrimental impact on our foreign relations, as well as the reciprocal treatment of the United States and its extensive overseas property holdings.’’

The Obama administration’s position is a blow to those like Devlin, who is still waiting for some measure of justice for her son, who was 21 when Hezbollah terrorists rammed a suicide truck bomb into the peacekeepers’ headquarters.

“It is offensive that our government – the government that [the Marines] were fighting for, who sent them there – are against us collecting from Iran,’’ Devlin said in an interview this week. “I felt justice was going to be served, but so far it hasn’t.’’

“We can’t go on with our lives,’’ said Marlys Lemnah, 62, of St. Albans, Vt., whose husband, Richard, a Marine sergeant nearing his 20-year retirement, was killed in Beirut. “It’s not about the money. We need something tangible: responsibility and accountability. We will fight until we have no more fight left.’’

The lawsuit, specialists say, also demonstrates the enormous difficulty for terrorism victims in general to collect damages. Despite a host of court rulings in its favor and legislation passed by Congress to make it possible to sue foreign governments that sponsor terrorism, the executive branch has long resisted such payments, arguing that seizing the assets of another country could restrict the president’s ability to conduct diplomacy. There are also significant legal disagreements over what kind of assets can be seized.

“Two branches are supporting [the families’] position and the executive branch is directly trying to undermine them,’’ said David J. Strachman, a Providence lawyer who has represented numerous families in terrorism cases involving Iran, but is not involved in this case.

Even the courts have grown frustrated. Royce C. Lamberth, chief judge of the US District Court in Washington who ruled in favor of the Beirut families, wrote in a Sept. 30 opinion that “these case have consumed substantial judicial resources while achieving few tangible results for the victims.’’

Over the years, Iran, which since 1984 has been designated a state sponsor of terrorism by the US government, has been found liable for nearly $10 billion in damages for attacks on Americans attributed to the Lebanese Hezbollah and Palestinian terror groups including Hamas and Islamic Jihad that the United States says are financed and trained by Iran.

But in only a few cases have any Iranian funds been seized as compensation for the victims or their families – most notably from Iranian funds held by the US government before the two countries severed diplomatic relations in 1979.

Lawyers representing the Beirut families first went to court seeking damages in 2001, after Congress passed a law giving US courts jurisdiction over such lawsuits against nations that sponsor international terrorism.

Building the case took four years of depositions from victims’ relatives, US government officials, and even a former Hezbollah member, amounting to 30,000 pages of testimony, according to Thomas F. Fay, one of the lawyers representing the families.

The families’ first victory came in 2003 when the US District Court in Washington found that Iran’s Ministry of Information and Security helped plan and facilitate the Oct. 23, 1983, attack. Then, two years ago, the same court ruled the Iranian government was liable for the $2.65 billion in damages.

The families’ legal advisers and the Obama administration – like the Bush administration before it – disagree on how many Iranian assets could be legally seized in the case.

The Treasury Department estimates there is only $45 million in seizable Iranian assets in the United States and has argued in court that some of the property that the families’ lawyers have sought is outside the United States and cannot be legally seized.

“The total amount of judgments against terrorist states for exceeds the assets of debtor states known to exist within the jurisdiction of US courts,’’ an analysis published by the Congressional Research Service, which advises lawmakers, concluded last year.

But Fay maintains that he has identified as much as $2 billion worth of seizable Iranian assets, including securities held in a vault in New York that he said a senior US official has testified under oath is owned by Iran. Another source of funds he previously identified is an office tower in Manhattan, estimated to be worth $1 billion, that was among properties seized Thursday by federal prosecutors who assert they are owned by a foundation that is a front for the Iranian government.

“It is clear from the seizures of Iranian assets in New York and elsewhere that the government of Iran does indeed have significant tangible financial holdings in the United States,’’ Fay said yesterday.

Still, a deeper disagreement revolves around the possible consequences of seizing the assets of a foreign state and handing them over to victims of terrorism.

Fay and other lawyers who have represented terrorism victims assert that doing so would strengthen the government’s leverage with nations like Iran because there would be a clear price to pay for supporting terrorism.

The Justice Department declined to comment further on the administration’s position, but as the congressional analysis stated, “The issue has pitted the compensation of victims of terrorism against US foreign policy goals and some business interests.’’

Even before President Obama was elected right-wing nuts were sounding the alarm. According to them Obama is a socialist. Unfortunately, for those who are more interested in overusing one-word descriptions one cannot be a socialist unless they subscribe to the theories of socialism. Socialism, like most other words, has a well-defined set of definitions. So, in an effort to further your education I will paste the wiktionary definition of socialism below and then discuss why Obama’s policies are not those of a socialist.

Wiktionary defines Socialism as: “1. Any of various political philosophies that support social and economic equality, collective decision-making, and public control of productive capital
and natural resources, as advocated by socialists.
2. The socialist political philosophies as a group, including Marxism, libertarian socialism, democratic socialism, and social democracy.
3. (Leninism) The intermediate phase of social development between capitalism and full communism. This is a strategy whereby the State has control of all
key resource-producing industries and manages most aspects of the market, in contrast to laissez faire capitalism.
4. (Classical Marxism) The international communist society where classes and the state no longer exist.”

The second definition is simply a restatement of the historical political groupings that have been used to describe the socialism agenda. The third definition revolves around the theory of socialism made famous by Lenin after he took control of Russia. Under Lenin’s theory the state controls all industries and manages just about the entirety of the market. If you are cognizant enough to understand that the government does not own all grocery stores, gas stations, malls, and almost every other place you go—you should have figured out that Obama has not brought a Lenin-style government to Washington.

The forth definition of socialism focuses on the philosophy of Marx. Under Marx’s ideology, the state controls everything and the government is a dictatorship. Since many of you have been allowed to freely protest things, like health care reform, that make sense it should be obvious to you that Obama is not a dictator. And, again, his government controls very few of the businesses you deal with every day.

Your best hope for accurately defining Obama as a socialist can be found in the first definition. It is true that Obama strongly prefers “collective decision-making,” but it is also true that no government could function if every decision was made by the collective. If you do not believe me look at the mess too much involvement by an uninformed electorate in California has contributed to. And, once again, Obama’s government has almost no involvement with the vast majority of businesses and industries you deal with on a daily basis.

As you should now understand Obama does not subscribe to Socialism. So, he can not intelligently be called a socialist. It is fine if you want to oppose Obama’s ideas, but it would be very helpful to the debate if you spent some time attempting to learn something about the issues you are discussing and the meaning of the words you are using to describe them before showing us how uninformed you really are. Simple words have the power to insult and label, but when used incorrectly they only seek to reflect poorly on those who are using them.

This poll (Rasmussen) is the best reporting poll on the Net. I don’t always like the numbers (:-)) but I feel they are honest. Take a quick read on what they have to say belwo about Barack Hussein Obama and how he and his policies are currently perceived by the voting public:

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Tuesday, November 24, 2009

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 27% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -15. This is the lowest Approval Index rating yet measured for President Obama.
Fifty-two percent (52%) of Democrats Strongly Approve while 68% of Republicans Strongly Disapprove. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, just 16% Strongly Approve and 51% Strongly Disapprove (
Forty-five percent (45%) want U.S. troops home from Afghanistan either right away or within a year.Forty-three percent (43%) are opposed to such a firm timetable.
Fifty-three percent (53%) of voters worry that the federal government will do too much when it comes to reacting to the nation’s financial problems. That’s up seven points since President Obama took office.
The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.
Overall, 45% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That matches the lowest level of total approval yet measured for this president. Eighty-one percent (81%) of Democrats approve as do 33% of unaffiliated voters. Eighty-three percent (83%) of Republicans disapprove.
Among all voters, 54% now disapprove. (of Obama that is)
Support for the health care plan proposed by the President and Congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low of 38%. Sixty percent (60%) of voters believe passage of the bill will lead to higher health care costs.

All in all, it appears that Barack Hussein Obama is failing/falling in the eyes of the voters. It also appears that like the mid-term elections in 1994 when the Republicans took back both houses of Congress, it may happen again in 2010. Holy Moley, I hope so! I have to ask, as I often do, why is it that NONE of this is reported in the mainstream media?

RWD

(my comments appear in italics)

Cass Sunstein: Progressive Idiot

The battle to censor anyone who disagrees with Obama continues. First it was Anita “Mao” Dunn attacking Fox News because they actually report the news that Obama doesn’t want people to hear. In particular ACORN, SEIU and green jobs commie, Van Jones. Obama and “Mao” Dunn did not want the alphabet-media to take a page from Fox News and actually start investigating the words Obama was saying or his associations with these corrupt communist/socialists he has appointed to his administration.

 Now that Anita “Mao” Dunn is gone, Obama’s regulations czar is taking up the same talking points. This Progressive czar believes that websites should be required to remove “false rumors” he deems to be untrue and he wants to alter libel laws so it would be easier to sue for spreading such “rumors.”

WND reports:

In his recently released book, “On Rumors,” Sunstein specifically cited as a primary example of “absurd” and “hateful” remarks, reports by “right-wing websites” alleging an association between President Obama and Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers.

He also singled out radio talker Sean Hannity for “attacking” Obama regarding the president’s “alleged associations.”

In the era of the Internet , it has become easy to spread false or misleading rumors about almost anyone,” Sunstein writes.

 ”Some right-wing websites liked to make absurd and hateful remarks about the alleged relationship between Barack Obama and the former radical Bill Ayers; one of the websites’ goals was undoubtedly to attract more viewers,” he writes.

Sunstein continues: “On the Internet as well as on talk radio, altruistic propagators are easy to find; they play an especially large role in the political domain. When Sean Hannity, the television talk show host, attacked Barack Obama because of his alleged associations, one of his goals might have been to promote values and causes that he cherishes.”

We have progressive with positions inside Obama’s administration that believe in censorship and have the power to change the rules to fit their socialist agendas. Cass Sunstein is one and FCC Diversity Czar, Mark Lloyd is another. Both of these progressives have admitted their love for socialism and Marxism.

Cass Sunstein also has some bat-shit crazy beliefs like that trees can sue people. He also wants to ban hunting and repeal the 2nd amendment. The sad fact is that this libtard made it through congressional confirmation, despite his radical beliefs. However, Obama has shown his desire to be surrounded by radicals.

Coming from the NY Times, this actually surprises me.  This is a bit off the reservation for them.  I understand that the White House was none too pleased about it either.  Seems that the truth can be a bit embarrassing sometimes.

As bad as this article may sound, it still sugar coats the truth.  We are in a financial dungeon, and right now China holds the keys to our cell.  If that rotting carcass of a health care bill passes, or some form of the cap-and-tax or other climate change bill passes, then China will throw away the key.  Our debt and currency will be worthless and unmarketable.

Yet the socialist/communist democrats just want to continue spending as if money grows on trees.  Money may be made from trees, but the value behind it is much more difficult to come by.  The democrats are doing a smashing job (pun intended) of destroying that as well.

Wave of Debt Payments Facing U.S. Government

WASHINGTON — The United States government is financing its more than trillion-dollar-a-year borrowing with i.o.u.’s on terms that seem too good to be true.

But that happy situation, aided by ultralow interest rates, may not last much longer.

Treasury officials now face a trifecta of headaches: a mountain of new debt, a balloon of short-term borrowings that come due in the months ahead, and interest rates that are sure to climb back to normal as soon as the Federal Reserve decides that the emergency has passed.

Even as Treasury officials are racing to lock in today’s low rates by exchanging short-term borrowings for long-term bonds, the government faces a payment shock similar to those that sent legions of overstretched homeowners into default on their mortgages.  (This is why you don’t let liberals be in charge of anything.  They think that the reason they failed is because we just didn’t let them implement enough of their liberal madness.)

With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically. Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher.

In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The potential for rapidly escalating interest payouts is just one of the wrenching challenges facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means.

The surge in borrowing over the last year or two is widely judged to have been a necessary response to the financial crisis and the deep recession, and there is still a raging debate over how aggressively to bring down deficits over the next few years. But there is little doubt that the United States’ long-term budget crisis is becoming too big to postpone.  (Wrong.  It wasn’t necessary.  If I have 3 maxed out credit cards and can’t pay the bills, I don’t go get another credit card to make those payments.  That is exactly what our government is doing.  Overlooking the fact that the democrats BEFORE George Bush set the stage for the housing crash back during the Clinton administration, had we let the bad institutions (and auto companies) fail, there would have been an immediate recession.  However, now that we have dug our financial hole deeper than our ladder is high and are continuing to dig, we are headed for a depression that will make the 1930’s look like a party.  There is no such thing as a pain-free life.  The more you run from the consequences of your actions, the larger those consequences become.)

Americans now have to climb out of two deep holes: as debt-loaded consumers, whose personal wealth sank along with housing and stock prices; and as taxpayers, whose government debt has almost doubled in the last two years alone, just as costs tied to benefits for retiring baby boomers are set to explode.

The competing demands could deepen political battles over the size and role of the government, the trade-offs between taxes and spending, the choices between helping older generations versus younger ones, and the bottom-line questions about who should ultimately shoulder the burden.

“The government is on teaser rates,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that advocates lower deficits. “We’re taking out a huge mortgage right now, but we won’t feel the pain until later.”  (That’s what the democrats are banking on.  They hope they will be long gone by the time the pain hits.)

So far, the demand for Treasury securities from investors and other governments around the world has remained strong enough to hold down the interest rates that the United States must offer to sell them. Indeed, the government paid less interest on its debt this year than in 2008, even though it added almost $2 trillion in debt.

The government’s average interest rate on new borrowing last year fell below 1 percent. For short-term i.o.u.’s like one-month Treasury bills, its average rate was only sixteen-hundredths of a percent.  (Returns that low are why they can’t sell the long term bonds.  If you buy them and rates go up, you lose.)

“All of the auction results have been solid,” said Matthew Rutherford, the Treasury’s deputy assistant secretary in charge of finance operations. “Investor demand has been very broad, and it’s been increasing in the last couple of years.”

The problem, many analysts say, is that record government deficits have arrived just as the long-feared explosion begins in spending on benefits under Medicare and Social Security. The nation’s oldest baby boomers are approaching 65, setting off what experts have warned for years will be a fiscal nightmare for the government.  (The liberals robbed the so-called Social Security “lock box” a long time ago.  The program began with more than 60 people paying taxes for each SS recipient.  Now that is down to about 4-to-1.  Pretty soon, taxpayers will just have to let a SS recipient just move in with them.  It’s past time for SS to go away.)

“What a good country or a good squirrel should be doing is stashing away nuts for the winter,” said William H. Gross, managing director of the Pimco Group, the giant bond-management firm. “The United States is not only not saving nuts, it’s eating the ones left over from the last winter.”

The current low rates on the country’s debt were caused by temporary factors that are already beginning to fade. One factor was the economic crisis itself, which caused panicked investors around the world to plow their money into the comparative safety of Treasury bills and notes. Even though the United States was the epicenter of the global crisis, investors viewed Treasury securities as the least dangerous place to park their money.

On top of that, the Fed used almost every tool in its arsenal to push interest rates down even further. It cut the overnight federal funds rate, the rate at which banks lend reserves to one another, to almost zero. And to reduce longer-term rates, it bought more than $1.5 trillion worth of Treasury bonds and government-guaranteed securities linked to mortgages.  (The government buying its own debt.  Remember that credit card shell game I spoke of earlier?)

Those conditions are already beginning to change. Global investors are shifting money into riskier investments like stocks and corporate bonds, and they have been pouring money into fast-growing countries like Brazil and China.

The Fed, meanwhile, is already halting its efforts at tamping down long-term interest rates. Fed officials ended their $300 billion program to buy up Treasury bonds last month, and they have announced plans to stop buying mortgage-backed securities by the end of next March.

Eventually, though probably not until at least mid-2010, the Fed will also start raising its benchmark interest rate back to more historically normal levels.

The United States will not be the only government competing to refinance huge debt. Japan, Germany, Britain and other industrialized countries have even higher government debt loads, measured as a share of their gross domestic product, and they too borrowed heavily to combat the financial crisis and economic downturn. As the global economy recovers and businesses raise capital to finance their growth, all that new government debt is likely to put more upward pressure on interest rates.

Even a small increase in interest rates has a big impact. An increase of one percentage point in the Treasury’s average cost of borrowing would cost American taxpayers an extra $80 billion this year — about equal to the combined budgets of the Department of Energy and the Department of Education.

But that could seem like a relatively modest pinch. Alan Levenson, chief economist at T. Rowe Price, estimated that the Treasury’s tab for debt service this year would have been $221 billion higher if it had faced the same interest rates as it did last year.

The White House estimates that the government will have to borrow about $3.5 trillion more over the next three years. On top of that, the Treasury has to refinance, or roll over, a huge amount of short-term debt that was issued during the financial crisis. Treasury officials estimate that about 36 percent of the government’s marketable debt — about $1.6 trillion — is coming due in the months ahead.  (What happens if China decides not to buy?  Economic collapse.)

To lock in low interest rates in the years ahead, Treasury officials are trying to replace one-month and three-month bills with 10-year and 30-year Treasury securities. That strategy will save taxpayers money in the long run. But it pushes up costs drastically in the short run, because interest rates are higher for long-term debt.

Adding to the pressure, the Fed is set to begin reversing some of the policies it has been using to prop up the economy. Wall Street firms advising the Treasury recently estimated that the Fed’s purchases of Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities pushed down long-term interest rates by about one-half of a percentage point. Removing that support could in itself add $40 billion to the government’s annual tab for debt service.

This month, the Treasury Department’s private-sector advisory committee on debt management warned of the risks ahead.

“Inflation, higher interest rate and rollover risk should be the primary concerns,” declared the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, a group of market experts that provide guidance to the government, on Nov. 4.

“Clever debt management strategy,” the group said, “can’t completely substitute for prudent fiscal policy.”  (No kidding.  It’s called “don’t spend more than you have.  The turds floating in the punch bowl of Washington, D.C. have forgotten that it’s not Monopoly money they’re spending, it’s OUR money.  But most of them never had to earn an honest day’s wage in their lives, so how should we expect them to understand?)

+

I stated this in Jan and I’m sticking to it!

Man-Made Global Warming is a HOAX! An Al Gore PONZIE SCHEME! The man should be arrested and treated like Bernie Maddoff!

If Madoff had gone into politics, he would NOT be in jail right now. Too bad he was so short sighted! His bad!!!! LOL

Posted by:
LisaInTX

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-201632

I have heard the term “Global Warming” for many years now and I, like many other Americans, believed in those that were ‘experts’ in the field. However, this recent claim that Antarctica is warming because of Man-Kind, has GOT to be about the BIGGEST HOAX I’ve heard of! As the photo above CLEARLY shows, there is a mountain range which separates the East from the West. GUESS WHAT?

The red area is RED because of Volcanic activity. Yes, that hot molten lava melts ice and heats up the atmosphere. Yes folks, Antarctica, the coldest place on Earth, is also home to volcanic fire. Looming above the frigid sea is Mount Erebus, a volcano that has erupted frequently over the last 200 years. The volcano is located beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet in the Hudson Mountains at latitude 74.6°South, longitude 97°West.

Volcanoes are an important component of the Antarctic region.

They formed in diverse tectonic settings, mainly as a result of mantle plumes acting on the stationary Antarctic plate. The region also includes amongst the world’s best examples of a long-lived continental margin arc (Antarctic Peninsula), a very young marginal basin (Bransfield Strait) and an oceanic island arc (South Sandwich Islands).

Many extinct volcanoes are very well preserved and others are still active (e.g. Deception Island, Mount Erebus, and the South Sandwich Islands). The measures being proposed to meet what President Obama last week called the need to “roll back the specter of a warming planet” threaten to land us with the most colossal bill mankind has ever faced. (Does Obama plan to STOP Volcanoes now?) It might therefore seem peculiarly important that we can trust the science on which all the alarm over global warming is based, But nothing has been more disconcerting in this respect than the methods used by promoters of the warming cause over the years to plug some of the glaring holes in their scientific argument.

Another example last week was the much-publicized claim, contradicting all previous evidence, that Antarctica, the world’s coldest continent, is in fact warming up, Antarctica has long been a major embarrassment to the warmists. Al Gore and co may have wanted to scare us that the continent which contains 90 per cent of all the ice on the planet is heating up, because that would be the source of all the melt water which they claim will raise sea levels by 20 feet. However, to provide all their pictures of ice-shelves “the size of Texas” calving off into the sea, they have had to draw on one tiny region of the continent, the Antarctic Peninsula – the only part that has been warming.

The vast mass of Antarctica, all satellite evidence has shown, has been getting colder over the past 30 years. Last year’s sea-ice cover was 30 per cent above average. So it predictably made headlines across the world last week when a new study, from a team led by Professor Eric Steig, claimed to prove that the Antarctic has been heating up after all. As on similar occasions in the past, all the usual supporters of the cause were called in to whoop up its historic importance. The paper was published in Nature and heavily promoted by the BBC. This, crowed journalists such as Newsweek’s Sharon Begley, would really be one in the eye for the “deniers” and “contrarians”. But then a good many experts began to examine just what new evidence had been used to justify this dramatic finding. It turned out that it was produced by a computer model based on combining the satellite evidence since 1979 with temperature readings from surface weather stations.

The problem with Antarctica, though, is that it has so few weather stations. So what the computer had been programmed to do, by a formula not yet revealed, was to estimate the data those missing weather stations would have come up with if they had existed. In other words, while confirming that the satellite data have indeed shown the Antarctic as cooling since 1979, the study relied ultimately on pure guesswork, to show that in the past 50 years the continent has warmed – by just one degree Fahrenheit. One of the first to express astonishment was Dr Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist with the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and a convinced believer in global warming, who wryly observed “it is hard to make data where none exists”. A disbelieving Ross Hayes, an atmospheric scientist who has often visited the Antarctic for Nasa, sent Professor Steig a caustic email ending: “with statistics you can make numbers go to any conclusion you want. It saddens me to see members of the scientific community do this for media coverage.” But it was also noticed that among the members of Steig’s team was Michael Mann, author of the “hockey stick”, the most celebrated of all attempts by the warmists to rewrite the scientific evidence to promote their cause. The greatest of all embarrassments for the believers in man-made global warming was the well-established fact that the world was significantly warmer in the Middle Ages than it is now. “We must get rid of the Mediaeval Warm Period,” as one contributor to the IPCC famously said in an unguarded moment. It was Dr Mann who duly obliged by getting his computer-model to produce a graph shaped like hockey stick, eliminating the mediaeval warming and showing recent temperatures curving up to an unprecedented high. This instantly became the warmists’ chief icon, made the centerpiece of the IPCC’s 2001 report. But Mann’s selective use of data and the flaws in his computer model were then so devastatingly torn apart that it has become the most comprehensively discredited artefact in the history of science.

The fact that Dr Mann is again behind the new study on Antarctica is, alas, all part of an ongoing pattern. But this will not prevent the paper being cited ad nauseam by everyone from the BBC to Al Gore, when he shortly addresses the US Senate and carries on advising President Obama behind the scenes on how to roll back that “spectre of a warming planet”. So, regardless of the science, and until the politicians finally wake up to how they have been duped, what threatens to become the most costly flight from reality in history will continue to roll remorselessly on its way. CNN Reported: Rather than being the last bastion to resist global warming, U.S. research has found that for the past 50 years much of the continent of Antarctica has been getting warmer. For years common belief among scientists studying climate change was that a large part of Antarctica, the East Antarctic Ice Sheet, has been getting colder while the rest of the world has warmed. However the new research from the University of Washington has found that warming in West Antarctica exceeded one-tenth of a degree Celsius per decade for the past 50 years, which more than offsets the cooling in East Antarctica.

“West Antarctica is a very different place than East Antarctica, and there is a physical barrier, the Transantarctic Mountains, that separates the two,” said Professor Eric Steig, lead author of the research paper. The study’s findings appeared in Thursday’s issue of the scientific journal Nature. At 6,000 feet (1,829 meters) above sea level the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is around 4,000 feet lower than East Antarctica and subject to warm, moist storms and more snowfall.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/4332784/Despite-the-hot-air-the-Antarctic-is-not-warming-up.html Volcanic Activity in Antarctica

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/antarctic-04d.html

Recent Volcanic Eruptions in Antarctica

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080120160720.htm

CNN Report: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/01/21/eco.warmingantarctic/#cnnSTCText

More on Global Warming the Hoax:

http://votingfemale.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/climate-warmers-global-conspiracy-ugly-science-of-lies-uncovered-at-last/

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php

http://www.wnho.net/global_warming.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/73230554.html