• Feed RSS
There was an error in this gadget
0








 

To all you guys who "sag" your pants and show your butt and
underwear....did you know it originated in prison? It was a signal to
the other MEN that you are "available". So if you wanna keep going
around looking like your "available" for another dude to "tap that"...
then keep thinking your cool while I think you look like a Fool!!! 

BTW they call it PBS (Prison Bitch Syndrome)

 



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


YouTube Help Center | Change Email Preferences

ronpaul just uploaded a video:

You can unsubscribe from notifications for this user by visiting My Subscriptions.

© 2011 YouTube, LLC
901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0



Pedophilia - Time to Normalize?

lowtechgrannie | August 23, 2011 at 3:22 pm | Tags: decriminalize, normal, pedophilia | Categories: Children | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-8Uv

FYI, Matt Barber is Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action. He also serves as Associate Dean of Liberty University School of Law and co-hosts the nationally syndicated "Liberty Live" talk radio program on AFR Talk. Send comments to Matt at jmattbarber@comcast.net. (This information is provided for identification purposes only.)

Press Release

DATE: August 22, 2011
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
'Time to Normalize Pedophilia': Firsthand Report on B4U-ACT Conference 
Lynchburg, VA – On Wednesday, August 17, child advocates Matt Barber, Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action, and Dr. Judith Reisman, a visiting law professor at Liberty University School of Law, attended a Baltimore, MD conference hosted by the pedophile group B4U-ACT. Around 50 individuals were in attendance including a number of admitted pedophiles – or "Minor-Attracted Persons" as they prefer to be identified (MAP "sexual orientation") – as well as several supportive mental health professionals. World renowned "sexologist," Dr. Fred Berlin of Johns Hopkins University gave the keynote address, saying: "I want to completely support the goal of B4U-ACT."
Highlights of the conference:
  • Pedophiles are "unfairly stigmatized and demonized" by society.
  • There was concern about "vice-laden diagnostic criteria" and "cultural baggage of wrongfulness."
  •  "We are not required to interfere with or inhibit our child's sexuality."
  • "Children are not inherently unable to consent" to sex with an adult.
  • "In Western culture sex is taken too seriously."
  • "Anglo-American standard on age of consent is new [and 'Puritanical']. In Europe it was always set at 10 or 12. Ages of consent beyond that are relatively new and very strange, especially for boys. They've always been able to have sex at any age."
  • An adult's desire to have sex with children is "normative."
  • Our society should "maximize individual liberty. … We have a highly moralistic society that is not consistent with liberty."
  • "Assuming children are unable to consent lends itself to criminalization and stigmatization."
  • "These things are not black and white; there are various shades of gray."
  • A consensus belief by both speakers and pedophiles in attendance was that, because it vilifies MAPs, pedophilia should be removed as a mental disorder from the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), in the same manner homosexuality was removed in 1973.
  • Dr. Fred Berlin acknowledged that it was political activism, similar to that witnessed at the conference, rather than scientific considerations that successfully led to the declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder: The reason "homosexuality was taken out of DSM is that people didn't want the government in the bedroom," he said.
  • Dr. Berlin appeared to endorse the politically maligned clinical practice of "reparative therapy" for homosexuals and pedophiles alike, saying, "If someone, for their own reasons, doesn't want to live a homosexual lifestyle, I tell them that it's hard but I'll try to help them."
  • The DSM ignores that pedophiles "have feelings of love and romance for children" in the same way adult heterosexuals and homosexuals have romantic feelings for one another.
  • "The majority of pedophiles are gentle and rational."
  • The DSM should "focus on the needs" of the pedophile, and should have "a minimal focus on social control," rather than obsessing about the "need to protect children."
  • Self-descried "gay activist" and speaker Jacob Breslow said that children can properly be "the object of our attraction." He further objectified children, suggesting that pedophiles needn't gain consent from a child to have sex with "it" any more than we need consent from a shoe to wear it. He then used graphic, slang language to favorably describe the act of climaxing (ejaculating) "on or with" a child. No one in attendance objected to this explicit depiction of child sexual assault.
 To schedule an interview with Matt Barber or Dr. Judith Reisman, send an email request to jmattbarber@comcast.net.

Add a comment to this post



WordPress

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Publish text, photos, music, and videos by email using our Post by Email feature.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Optimists


Bush killed 112 children with his drone attacks, Obama has killed only 50 so far, but he's catching up... No money to save the poor or sick Americans though...


http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/08/the-children-the-cia-kills.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+andrewsullivan%2FrApM+%28The+Daily+Dish%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

The Children We Kill

2009.08.21-Syed-Wali-Shah-Aged-7-Ob32

A new report from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reveals the profound moral costs of drone warfare, waged by the unacccountable CIA:

The highest number of child deaths occurred during the Bush presidency, with 112 children reportedly killed. More than a third of all Bush drone strikes appear to have resulted in the deaths of children.

On only one occasion during Bush's time in office did a single child die in a strike. Multiple deaths occurred every other time.  On July 28 2008 for example, CIA drones struck a seminary in South Waziristan, killing al Qaeda's chemical weapons expert Abu Khabab al Masri along with his team. Publicly the attack was hailed a success.

But the Agency's strike also killed three young boys and a woman. Despite the secrecy surrounding the drones campaign, details emerged in May of this year that not only was the US aware of this 'collateral damage', but that the then-CIA chief Michael Hayden personally apologised to Pakistan's Prime Minister Gilani for the error.

The Obama administration has also killed over 50 children, but seems to be trying to improve:

There are indications that the Obama administration is making efforts to reduce the number of children being killed. Following the incident in September 2010 that killed Din Mohammad's children, and another strike just weeks earlier in which a further three children died, there has been an apparent steep fall in the number of child fatalities reported by media.

That is partially in line with claims by some US intelligence officials that drone targeting strategies have been altered to reduce civilian casualties. Although the Bureau has demonstrated that CIA claims of 'zero casualties' are false, there are fewer reports of child casualties since August 2010.

(Photo: Syed Wali Shah Aged 7, killed in strike Ob32/Noor Behram.)






--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list (ronpaul-30@meetup.com)
This message was sent by Optimists (varebate@gmail.com) from The Arlington/Alexandria Ron Paul Meetup Group.
To learn more about Optimists, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here

Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | support@meetup.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAVyiJ1SINE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLUO-EIcvdk&feature=related

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.




Military's Plans Against Riots in America

You've seen the terrible riots in England.

We have them in America, too, such as the recent black riot at the Wisconsin State Fair. It's just that our media refuse to call them "riots," as if doing so will just magically make them go away.

That led the Investor's Business Daily to publish an editorial on August 12, 2011, pointing out that "Across the U.S., mobs of black youths are organizing on Facebook to loot stores and beat whites. Yet none dare call the 'flash mob' attacks hate crime, least of all the attorney general."

The media may play ostrich, but the U.S. military isn't.

An article by John Hudson for The Atlantic Wire, August 10, 2011, describes "The U.S. Military's Plan for London-Like Riots". The name of the plan is CONPLAN. Here are excerpts:

With British Prime Minister David Cameron authorizing the use of rubber bullets and water canons in wake of the turbulent London riots spreading through Britain, questions have been raised about how authorities in the U.S. would respond to a similar domestic disturbance threatening the nation's stability. According to National Journal's White House correspondent Marc Ambinder the U.S. already has a game plan in place.

"If what happened in London ever happened in the US, the military has plans -- CONPLAN 3501 and 3502 -- to suppress the 'insurrection,' he tweeted. [...]

According to the public policy organization GlobalSecurity.org, CONPLAN 3502 is the U.S. military's plan for assisting state and local authorities in the event of a riot or major civil disturbance: "Tasks performed by military forces may include joint patrolling with law enforcement officers; securing key buildings, memorials, intersections and bridges; and acting as a quick reaction force."

It derives its constitutional backing from Article I, Section 8 stating that "Congress shall have power... to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions" and is rumored to have been activated during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, during the 1999 Seattle WTO riots and during the 1992 Rodney King riots in Los Angeles. But, according to Nate Jones at the National Security Archive, "because historic Garden Plot activity was classified and current activity likely remains so, it is difficult to discern exactly how many times Garden Plot was evoked." What jarred Jones upon looking at internal military documents, were the "indicators of potential violence," which were especially racially oriented:

According to Global Security, the federal government's power to control civil disturbances was increased in 1970. Here's an outline of what that involved:

375,000 National Guardsmen and 14,000 Army Reservists had been trained in riot control as the year closed. The Army National Guard conducted, at the expense of regular training, sixteen hours of refresher civil disturbance training. Some states also carried out civil disturbance command post exercises in conjunction with local and state civil authorities. The Army Reserve had three infantry brigades which were part of the federal military contingency force for the control of civil disturbances. These units also conducted sixteen hours of refresher civil disturbance training at the expense of primary training. This additional responsibility of the Reserve Components called for their immediate availability in times of natural disasters, civil disturbances, and other emergencies.

Update: Ambinder also points to an Army slideshow detailing more about CONPLAN 3501. One of the slides has a breakdown of what army officers are in charge of which areas of the country. Click the link to see the whole slideshow.

~Eowyn

Add a comment to this post



WordPress

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Publish text, photos, music, and videos by email using our Post by Email feature.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0



Good News! Fairness Doctrine is Dead

Eowyn | August 23, 2011 at 9:47 am | Tags: FCC, free speech, Julius Genachowski, Obama administration | Categories: Liberals, Media, United States | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-8TT

Amidst dreary news about the economy, we have a piece of good news.

Yesterday, the Federal Communications Commission gave a killing karaté chop to the Orwellian-named "Fairness Doctrine"!

Brooks Boliek of Politico reports, August 22, 2011, that the FCC also axed more than 80 media industry rules.

Earlier this summer FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski already had agreed to erase the post WWII-era "doctrine", but the action Monday puts the last nail into the coffin for the regulation that sought to ensure discussion over the airwaves of controversial issues did not exclude any particular point of view. A broadcaster that violated the rule risked losing its license.

While the commission voted in 1987 to do away with the rule — a legacy to a time when broadcasting was a much more dominant voice than it is today — the language implementing it was never removed. The move Monday, once published in the federal register, effectively erases the rule.

Monday's move is part of the commission's response to a White House executive order directing a "government-wide review of regulations already on the books" designed to eliminate unnecessary regulations.

Also consigned to the regulatory dustbin are the "broadcast flag" digital copy protection rule that was struck down by the courts and the cable programming service tier rate. Altogether, the agency tossed 83 rules and regs.

Genachowski said in a statement that the move was aimed at promoting "a healthy climate for private investment and job creation." Both the Obama administration and the FCC have come under criticism by business groups over laws and regulations such as health care reform and net neutrality rules.

I'm still incredulous that the Obama administration actually did something right....

~Eowyn

Add a comment to this post



WordPress

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Reach out to your own subscribers with WordPress.com.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2009/apr/county-gives-illegal-alien-
child-molester-4-million

Lawmakers in one of California's largest counties have secretly
approved
awarding an illegal immigrant child molester more than $4 million
because
he was beaten by fellow inmates while in custody.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors made the decision in a closed-
door
session, according to an local newspaper that made the settlement
public
this week. The lawsuit had been filed by an illegal immigrant from
Mexico
who was jailed after molesting a 6-year-old girl at a park.

The illegal alien, 24-year-old Fernando Ramirez, eventually pleaded
guilty
to a lesser charge of battery. While incarcerated at the county's
central
jail, Ramirez was severely beaten by other inmates and his attorney
says
deputies in charge were elsewhere during the attack.

Ramirez suffered brain damage and is unable to walk unassisted,
according
to his attorney, who says his client has also been left with the
intellect
of a 4-year-old child. That's two years younger than the girl he
molested.

The back door settlement, never the less paid with tax dollars, is the
county's largest ever for an in-custody incident involving sheriffs.
All
five Orange County Board of Supervisors refuse to comment on the deal
even
though constituents certainly have the right to know since it's their
money. The illegal alien's family will get $3.75 million and $900,000
will
go to medical liens rendered while in custody.

Located in southern California, Orange County is the state's third
most
populous with about 3 million residents. The area is well-known for
its
amusement-park attractions, such as Disneyland, and more than 40 miles
of
scenic coastline. Like every other municipality in the (not so) Golden
State, the area is suffering through an unprecedented financial
crisis.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


Another Reason We Don't Want Gingrich To Be President
Posted by Laurence Vance on August 23, 2011 07:39 AM

Some readers of this blog may not be old enough to remember the House banking scandal in 1992. Gingrich (and others of both parties) wrote a number of overdrafts. Gingrich even wrote a check for over $9,000 to the IRS as part of his abuse of check-writing privileges. And people think Newt will be a fiscal conservative in the White House?

Republicans have short memories. As long as a Republican didn't sell out yesterday, he is okay.
0

Legal Obedience
Walter E. Williams

What laws are we morally obligated to obey? Help with the answer can be found in "Economic Liberty and the Constitution," a 66-page pamphlet by Jacob G. Hornberger, founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

Hornberger offers a hypothetical whereby Congress enacts a compulsory church attendance law that requires children to attend church service each Sunday. Parents are penalized if their children fail to comply. Would there be any moral or constitutional legitimacy to such a congressional mandate? The law would be a clear violation of one's natural, or God-given, rights to life and liberty. As to whether it would be constitutional, we have to see whether mandating church attendance is one of those enumerated powers of Congress found in Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution. We'd find no such authority. Our anti-federalist Founding Fathers didn't trust Congress with religious liberty, so they sought to protect it with the First Amendment to explicitly deny Congress the power to mandate religious conduct. Suppose there's widespread popular support for a church-going mandate and the U.S. Supreme Court rules it constitutional; do Americans have a moral obligation to obey the law?

You might say, "Williams, while there are gray areas in the Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court would never brazenly rule against clear constitutional prohibitions!" That's nonsense. The first clause of Article 1, Section 10 mandates that "No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts." During the Great Depression, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Minnesota law that restricted the ability of banks to foreclose on overdue mortgages, thereby impairing contracts made between lender and borrower. To prevent this kind of contract impairment ­ routinely done under the Articles of Confederation ­ was precisely why the Framers added the clause.

Another, perhaps more egregious example of the Supreme Court's impairing contracts came during President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, when the government nationalized gold and made it a felony for any American to own gold.
Not only was gold ownership made illegal but it nullified all "gold clauses" in private and government contracts. Writing contracts in gold was a way people protected themselves against government theft, namely inflation. The Supreme Court upheld federal nationalization of gold and nullification of gold contracts in the famous Gold Clause Cases. Today many Americans have turned to gold, driving its price to an all-time high, as a safeguard against what they see as pending inflation. Here's my question to you: If Obama and Congress enacted a law demanding that you turn in your gold, would you be morally obligated to obey such a law?

Decent people should not obey immoral laws. What's moral and immoral can be a contentious issue, but there are some broad guides for deciding what laws and government actions are immoral. Lysander S. Spooner, one of America's great 19th-century thinkers, said no person or group of people can "authorize government to destroy or take away from men their natural rights; for natural rights are inalienable, and can no more be surrendered to government ­ which is but an association of individuals ­ than to a single individual." French economist/philosopher Frederic Bastiat (1801-50) gave a test for immoral government acts: "See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime ." He added in his book "The Law," "When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law."

After reading Hornberger's "Economic Liberty and the Constitution," one cannot avoid the conclusion that the liberties envisioned by the nation's founders have been under siege, trivialized and nullified. Philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe explained that "no one is as hopelessly enslaved as the person who thinks he's free." That's becoming an apt description for Americans who are oblivious to ­ or ignorant of ­ the liberties we've lost.


http://www.creators.com/opinion/walter-williams.html

The Relevancy of Ron Paul vs. the Coming Irrelevancy of the Status-Quo
by Susan Westfall

On the heels of the Ames Straw Poll results, we find the media doing almost exactly that which Neil Cavuto proposed as a hypothetical situation during his interview with Dr. Paul from the Straw Poll grounds. Namely – what if you do well, and no one reports it? As expected by everyone with even a partial brain, Ron Paul did fantastically well in the Straw Poll. His message of individual liberty, sound money and free trade with all – minus the financial and military entanglements that have helped bring us to the brink of ruin – is resounding so strongly with people everywhere that the two candidates best thought by many to represent the popular freedom message, were able to capture over 9000 votes between them. That they did so in the very heartland of America is an implacable declaration of what people are looking for in their next president. Granted, Ms. Bachman can't really pass muster as a liberty candidate in most of her actions and votes, but she initially sounds good trying and the media were ecstatic, touting her first place victory from the highest media mountaintops. Ron Paul finished by capturing such a close second place win that 153 more votes would have put him in the lead. Even crickets would have been astounded at the total silence that accompanied Dr. Paul's achievement. None of the grassroots were too surprised, however. We've been watching the media play the same disgusting marginalization games since 2007. We predicted it would happen too, but didn't waste breath on the idea that it might be "hypothetical". Regardless, I salute Mr. Cavuto for actually pointing out the possibility that not only might the emperor be waltzing about buck-naked on the morrow, but he'd likely be stinking drunk as well. It's about time. The media has been complicit in the slow erosion of liberty and the disintegration of our Republic for far, far too long.

Let's begin with a Youtube video that made the rounds at a brisk pace last Sunday titled " Being Ron Paul: The Media Fix is In." It pretty much says it all and covers a variety of MSM contributions about the Straw Poll results. The ire and disgust at the pathetic and blatantly obvious removal or marginalization of Ron Paul's close finish with Michelle Bachman is evident in the poster's voice. That same sentiment was massively evidenced in the comments and responses to MSM articles and personal blog posts across the Internet world. The manner in which Matt Strawn reported the Straw Poll results live on CNN clearly announced the coming marginalization storm. Can anyone recall or point out another time in the recent history of Ames Straw Polls (or at any time in its history) when only the first place winner's name was announced, followed immediately by the announcer exiting stage right briskly and wordlessly? "Stunned" probably does not even begin to describe the reactions of millions of viewers to that event. Even the panel of commentators was thrown off stride. Their reactions called to my mind a panel scene from the 2008 elections, when CNN was reporting the South Carolina primary. I remember quite clearly Anderson Cooper's glazed look, when the reported numbers suddenly seemed to take a dramatically different track from where they had been previously going, magnified and reflected by the robotic expressions and stammered comments of the panel.

But I digress. Back to the video. At 3:11 a.m. Monday morning the view count was still stuck at 301 views – the exact same number it was on at 4 p.m. Sunday, when I viewed it the first time. Having seen links to it all over Twitter and Facebook on more occasions than I can count, I would expect it to have at least gone up some from when I first viewed it. Youtube has long been accused by many of suppressing view counts, which was of course poo-pooed as "conspiracy theory". Based on the improbable immobility of the view count on just this one video, it doesn't appear to be just theory in this case. Why? The "Gummy Bear" video can shoot up a million views in one day, but apparently something with real substance in it's content must be held down lest the citizenry get over-excited seeing the view count rise. An ineffectual technique at best, idiocy at the very least. Here's another excellent Youtube demonstrating media-weasel strong arm tactics. Now that your blood pressure is a least catching up (if not equal) to the slow pound mine has been building to for quite some time, here's a link to Jon Stewart's The Daily Show in which he echoes the incredulity of millions regarding the invisibility of Ron Paul. In the week since the Iowa Straw Poll there have been quite a number of stories in the media about Dr. Paul. A few of them honestly reporting his "top-tier" candidacy, as well as his fast growing influence and popularity. Many more continue to ignore, marginalize and weasel away. By far the majority address the media's own failure to report election news either realistically or honestly. An excellent example readily admits the collusion of all in the media phenomenon of "choosing" the candidates.

Now I don't have any exact numbers, but indications are excellent that the rest of America feels much as I do at this point in time. And I am bloody well tired of the media telling me what I should think, believe, understand or discuss. I am MORE than tired of them "choosing" pre-packaged, pre-approved and appropriately groomed candidates for my voting edification (and by groomed I don't mean attired, although I'm downright sick of the emphasis placed on that as well). I do NOT want to vote for the preferred cut-out-party doll of the day, week, or month. I don't give one whit what the "experts" paraded out each day by the media have to say about who is the front-runner or who is electable, nor do I believe a word they say. What makes them more expert than I or any other American? Their wonderfully prescient warnings regarding Fanny-Mae and Freddie-Mac? Their correctness regarding unconstitutional cake-walk wars? Their fantastic ability to predict the economic statistics they write? Thanks, but NO THANKS! I will do my own vetting and reach my own conclusions regarding any candidate that runs for office, high or low. The Internet offers each and every American the ability to easily check any candidates past voting record, their support for or against pertinent legislation, and a myriad of other insights into their character, beliefs and daily actions.

Given the choice that the Internet offers us all today, how long will we as a people continue to accept the endless lies pumped at us day in and day out by media hacks who neither represent the news honestly, nor have the guts to stand up and stop the idiocy themselves? That we should assign blame to the talking heads only and stop there however, is as ridiculous as their present efforts to pretend by omission that Ron Paul is not a top-tier contender in the GOP nominee election process. Those working in the media are at the very least guilty of misrepresenting the truth and at the worst complicit in cover-ups of God knows what criminal activities for those powerful entities that hand them their approved talking point and candidate lists on a daily basis. For decades, at least since the 60s, the media has been disgustingly subservient to "other interests" starting with the Federal Reserve and permeating through all the industrial complexes (military, medical, pharmaceutical, agricultural, etc.) as well as all their corporatist cronies. They haven't just been "wagging the dog", they've been wagging us to maintain the desired status-quo of wealth-transfer, empire-building, and war-for-plunder. Enough, I say.

Admitted or not, the American people are "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore." The tipping point has been reached and the people are done with games. Ron Paul and the ideas he speaks of, as well as the solutions he offers will not be swept under the rug again. Just because the revolution isn't being televised does not mean it won't and isn't occurring. It's not only occurring, but will overcome. Liberty and the restoration of the Republic will move forward to victory in the hands of the real grassroots, the American people – and they don't need a complicit media or approval from the "powers that be" to achieve it. As Ron Paul has often said, "An idea whose time has come will not be stopped by any government or any army [media or otherwise]."

http://ksa4liberty.com/2011/08/22/the-relevancy-of-ron-paul-vs-the-coming-irrelevancy-of-the-status-quo/

The 12 Scariest TSA Stories of All Time
InsuranceQuotes.org

1. Meg McLain Can't Get Home

What happens when you opt out of the backscatter scan and ask questions about the pat down? If you're Meg McLain, you get harassed and ultimately, get your ticket ripped up. Meg was cuffed in a chair and escorted out of the airport by 12 Miami cops after she questioned what would happen to her in the secondary screening pat down. Her US Airways ticket was torn up, and although US Airways promised to credit her for a new flight, they then refused to replace her ticket. As a talk show host with Free Keene, Meg's story received plenty of attention, with a wildly popular YouTube video, a visit to the Alex Jones Show, and an interview with The Consumerist. The TSA released surveillance videos of the incident in an attempt to lay the blame for the incident on McLain; however, some believe that the videos actually vindicate her.

2. Ninety-four-year-old stands for her patdown

At 94 years old, Marian Paterson is not as physically capable as others may be, and that means that it is not comfortable for her to stand for long periods of time. But nonetheless, Paterson was made to stand "for over ten minutes," as she reports, much longer than is necessary to complete a TSA patdown, and much longer than she felt physically able to handle. Her family believes that the TSA went too far, indicating that "they groped her…all over her body." Marian had trouble understanding why, "of all the people in America, they'd pick out some little old lady."

3. A terminal cancer patient is forced to remove her adult diaper

Another elderly woman, Jean Weber's 95-year-old mother, in the final stages of her leukemia battle, was forced to submit to a patdown just a week after receiving a blood transfusion. Her "wet and firm" diaper was deemed suspicious, and she was taken to a private room. They had to remove her diaper, and she was separated from her daughter Jean. She did not have an extra pair, and was forced to go through the airport without underwear. Although the procedure was technically correct, Weber feels that "the procedure needs to be changed," allowing more sensitivity to those with certain health needs.

4. Bladder cancer survivor humiliated and covered in urine

The TSA seems to have it out for those affected by cancer. Tom Sawyer wears a urostomy bag, a device necessary after his successful fight with bladder cancer. The TSA scanner picked up his bag, and he was chosen for a pat down. He had to ask for privacy during the screening, which he received, albeit not without eye rolling. During the procedure, he tried several times to explain his medical condition, and warned them that they could break the seal on his urostomy bag, covering him with urine. But despite his explanations, Sawyer was ignored, the seal was broken, and urine spilled all over his shirt, leg, and pants. The TSA agents' response? As Sawyer recounted, "he told me I could go. They never apologized. They never offered to help. They acted like they hadn't seen what happened. But I know they saw it because I had a wet mark." Without so much as an apology, Sawyer had to walk through the airport, still soaked in urine, board his plane, and wait until after takeoff to clean himself up. On the incident, Sawyer commented, "If this country is going to sacrifice treating people like human beings in the name of safety, then we have already lost the war."

5. Oops, your breasts are exposed. Good thing we have video

An Amarillo woman filed a suit against the TSA for publicly exposing her breasts at a Corpus Christi Airport. She was picked out for an extended search procedure before her flight in 2008, and "as the TSA agent was frisking plaintiff, the agent pulled the plaintiff's blouse completely down, exposing plaintiffs' breasts to everyone in the area." The victim filed an administrative claim against the TSA, but after the agency failed to respond, she filed a lawsuit. To further her embarrassment, the victim claims that TSA employees joked and laughed about her accident, with one male TSA employee sharing "that he wished he would have been there when she came through the first time and that 'he would just have to watch the video.'"

6. Removing nipple rings with pliers

The TSA indicates that "security officers are well trained to screen individuals with body piercings in sensitive areas with dignity and respect," but Mandi Hamlin did not receive such treatment. Instead, she was forced to remove her nipple piercings, one of which had to be taken out with pliers. The TSA's policy is to give individuals with body piercings either pat downs or have them remove the piercings in private; however, Hamlin was not given the option of the pat down – her only available option was to remove her piercings. In fact, she indicated that she could show a female agent her piercings, but was told she couldn't board her flight without removing all piercings. In a letter to the TSA, Hamlin's attorney reminded the agency that "After nipple rings are inserted, the skin can often heal around the piercing, and the rings can be extremely difficult and painful to remove," making what they forced Hamlin to do cruel, especially as reinserting them is also quite painful. And as if that wasn't enough, while Hamlin was removing her jewelry behind a curtain, she heard male TSA agents snickering at her plight. Her lawyer notes, "The last time that I checked, a nipple was not a dangerous weapon."

7. Sikh profiled for screening, forced to remove his turban

The TSA recommends removing all headwear, "but the rules accommodate those with religious, medical, or other reasons for which the passenger wishes not to remove the item." That is not the experience that Gurdeep Singh Bawa received at Chicago O'Hare in 2010. For religious reasons, Bawa does not let anyone touch his turban, and he does not take it off, an action that is very disrespectful. Despite clearing two tests for explosives trace detection, he was told he would have to take his turban off. After removing it in a private room, officers took it away, bringing it back minutes later. Bawa and other Sikhs in his community feel that they are being "religiously, racially profiled," and Bawa in particular feels that he was offended, noting, "I've never been humiliated like this in my life."

8. Taking a teddy bear away from a three-year-old girl

Kids often get very attached to toys, and three-year-old Mandy Simon is no exception. So when screeners took her teddy bear away from her to run it through the x-ray machine, she was very upset. Although it was standard procedure, the incident was jarring for little Mandy, and she was so upset about her teddy bear, she couldn't walk calmly through the metal detector, setting the machine off twice. It was at that point that she had to be patted down, still crying, and screaming, "Stop touching me!" Her dad, a Houston TV news reporter, caught the incident on video, which ended up getting lots of attention and pushback from Slashdot and a mention in several news outlets, including NY Daily News.

9. Suing for a concussion

In 2010, Robin Kassner sued the TSA for using abusive bodily force against her at the Reagan National Airport in 2007. The TSA claims that "was interfering with the screening process and refusing to follow security procedures." The security cameras show a scuffle, with Kassner wrestled to the floor by police, and taking an elbow to the head as she was slammed on a table. Kassner claims that she blacked out and suffered a concussion, which has led to memory problems. It's not clear what she did to provoke such a response. She is seeking $10 million in damages for the incident.

10. We don't care about your disability, little boy

Four-year-old Ryan Thomas was born sixteen weeks early, and as a result, is developmentally delayed: at the time of his TSA incident, he was just starting to walk. His parents use a stroller for him, as well as leg braces for his malformed legs with low muscle tone. Unable to walk steadily on his own, his mother initially walked him through the metal detector, and his leg braces set the alarm off. Ryan was forced to take off his leg braces, but his mother was not allowed to help him walk this time – he had to walk on his own. That's right, a disabled four-year-old just learning to walk with the assistance of leg braces had to walk, without any physical assistance or the use of his braces, through the detector for TSA. After Ryan's father went to the press, the TSA apologized to the family, and acknowledged that there are other ways to screen those with disabilities, including those that don't require a disabled child to do what is nearly impossible.

11. Amputee separated from her four-year-old son

Peggy is a mother of a four-year-old, and she also has a below-knee amputation. Both she and her son were subjected to invasive pat downs, and were also separated from each other. Peggy had to sit and watch without helping or comforting her son as he was patted down, which included a peek in his diaper, an experience that left him shaking but still not able to seek the comfort of his mother. Peggy had her own, far worse embarrassment to deal with after her son's ordeal. She had to remove not just her prosthetic leg, but her prosthetic liner, and run them through the x-ray scanner. Her prosthetic liner must be kept sanitary to avoid infection and a possible higher level amputation, and above that, protects from sight a part of Peggy's body that she feels "is on par with one's genitals." She was gawked at while her liner was run through the machine with no attempt to keep it sanitary, and was then thrown haphazardly into her lap. Peggy's story reached Boing Boing, and is a focal point of the Amputee Coalition of America's Call for Improved Screening Procedures for TSA.

12. TSA agents took my son

The TSA doesn't seem to respect the bond and safety of mother and child. In 2009, Nicole White claims she was separated from her 16-month-old son, Jackson. According to the TSA, they "will not ask you to do anything that will separate you from your child or children," but that was not Nicole and Jackson's experience. After his pacifier clip set off an alarm, Nicole and Jackson were escorted together to a plastic box, where they waited and became increasingly late for their flight. They were eventually patted down, but instead of patting down Jackson in Nicole's lap, a TSA agent insisted that he had to be picked up, and Nicole handed him to the agent. It was at that point the agent walked away with her son, and despite Nicole's questions and tears, she could not see Jackson and was ignored until the TSA threatened to involve the authorities. She was separated from her son for an estimated 10 minutes, during which time she had a panic attack. The TSA posted videos to discredit her story, but Nicole, just like Meg McLain, maintains that the full incident was not posted, including the time when Jackson was taken away and Nicole made two phone calls to her husband and mother.

http://www.insurancequotes.org/the-12-scariest-tsa-stories-of-all-time/
0

More on the Electric Edsel
August 20, 2011
By eric

Well, here's a surprise – the Chevy Volt electric car isn't selling.

Only 3,200 of these $41,000 "economy" cars have found buyers so far – most of them probably in the Hollywood hills, where it is trendy for the rich to show green (Leonardo DiCaprio owns a $100k Tesla electric roadster).

But out in the real world, the idea of a $41k "economy" car doesn't parse. Yes, the Volt is a brilliant piece of engineering. But that's neither here nor there if it costs more to operate than a standard economy car, which is ultimately the only criteria that matters as far as the marketplace viability of electric cars.

This is so obvious that you'd think it might have also occurred to the people running GM. It probably did – but the reason it doesn't matter to them is that the Volt (like the Tesla) is a taxpayer-funded money machine for GM. Even if they never sell enough cars to make an honest profit, there's already been a huge profit to GM in the form of massive federal subsidies and of course, the massive bailout of GM itself back in 2008.

Why not throw money at the electric car boondoggle? After all, it's not GM's money.

And that is the nut of this tragedy. And it is a tragedy, because we should be developing (or at least looking into) alternative means of transport. The idea is not bad. The problem is the distortions created by government meddling – by corporatist-statist polices that throw enormous resources at projects that make no sense.

You know, like a $41,000 "economy" car that costs as much to buy as a fully loaded BMW 3-Series but which can't match the day-to-day performance of a $15,000 Toyota Corolla.

Consider:

It is 1890 and horse travel is becoming problematic. The horses poo all over the place, making a disgusting mess in crowded urban areas – and they're just not practical for speedy, efficient travel in a rapidly industrializing nation. Did the government start throwing billions (well, millions in those days) at politically connected big businesses to develop an alternative?

The answer, of course, is no.

Inventors thought about the problem and tinkered. The internal combustion engine (gas and diesel) was invented – and perfected. It became reliable – and soon, affordable. Henry Ford and others like him came along. Cars replaced horses. And – a key fact – impractical cars such as the early steam-powered and electric cars – were dropped in favor of practical cars like the Model T, which put the country (not just the elites) behind the wheel.

There was no federal subsidization of steam or electric cars, so when it became clear these kinds of cars could not compete in the market with internal combustion-powered cars, they were abandoned. For the most part, people stopped trying to make them because – revelation – very few customers were interested in buying them.

If we had a free market today, the Volt would never have been built – because it's obvious to anyone with half a brain that no potential buyer concerned about the cost of transportation (note, not gas per se) is going to be the least bit interested in laying out $41,000 to buy a vehicle that will take years – perhaps decades – of driving to become cost-competitive with any standard-issue gas powered economy car.

Instead, we have a billion-dollar electric car boondoggle. And not only won't they (GM and Tesla) take the hint and quit, they'll keep at it – demanding more tax dollars, more subsidies, more rebates to "encourage" sales of these otherwise unsalable electric Edsels.

Meanwhile, all the money that has been sucked out of the private sector is no longer available to let a latter-day tinkerer – a latter-day Henry Ford – develop an electric (or other alternative) car that might actually make sense. One that people might actually buy because it is more efficient, more cost-effective, than a current gas-powered car.

And not only that.

Thanks to Everests of federal (EPA, DOT) red tape it is almost impossible for anyone other than a "major automaker" – that is, a corporate cartel – to lawfully build and sell a car of any kind at all. There is a reason why we only have a relative handful of car brands – all of them massive combines – because only massive combines have the economic resources to do things like destroy 100 brand-new cars in crash tests to prove to Uncle that they comply with the ukase Uncle has set forth. Oh, and also to get huge handouts from the government to prop up inefficient business models and let them build pie-in-the-sky engineering demonstrators without any real consideration of their practical or economic viability.

If government got out of the motors business I have no doubt we'd not only have 70 MPG conventional cars that cost less than $10,0000 we'd also in short order have commercially viable electric cars as well as cars powered by sources we haven't even heard of yet. There are countless ingenious backyard inventors out there. There is probably almost nothing they could not achieve, given the opportunity – and if they were allowed to proceed.

But the octupus of government stands in the way, richly rewarding the impossible -and the incompetent – while strangling anything that might actually work in its crib.


http://epautos.com/2011/08/20/more-on-the-electric-edsel/
0

 
 
 


Sometime this year,  we taxpayers will again receive another 'Economic Stimulus' payment.  

This is indeed a very exciting program,  and I'll explain it by
using a Q & A format:
 
 
Q.  What is an 'Economic Stimulus' payment ?
 
A.  It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.
 
 
Q..  Where will the government get this money?
 
A.  From taxpayers.
 
 
Q.  So the government is giving me back my own
money?
 
A.  Only a smidgen of it.
 
 
Q.  What is the purpose of this payment?
 
A.  The plan is for you to use the money to purchase a
high-definition TV set,  thus stimulating the economy.
 
 
Q.  But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?
 
A.  Shut up.
 
 
Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the U.S. economy by spending your stimulus check wisely:      
 
 
         
*  If you spend the stimulus money at Wal-Mart,  the money will go to China or Sri Lanka .
 
 
*  If you spend it on gasoline,  your money will go to the Arabs.
 
 
*  If you purchase a computer, it will go to India , Taiwan or China .
 
     
 
*  If you purchase fruit and vegetables,  it will go to Mexico , Honduras , and Guatemala ..
 
     
 
*  If you buy an efficient  car, it will go to Japan or Korea .

 
   
*  If  you purchase useless stuff,  it will go to Taiwan .
 
   

*  If you pay your credit cards off, or buy stock,  it will go
to management bonuses and they will hide it offshore.
 
 
Instead,  keep the money in America by:
 
 
1)  Spending it at yard sales,  or    
 
2)  Going to ball games,  or  
 
3)  Spending it on prostitutes,  or    

4)  Beer or    
 
5) Tattoos.
 
 
(These are the only American businesses still operating in the U.S. )


Conclusion:
 
Go to a ball game with a tattooed prostitute that you
met at a yard sale and drink beer all day!

 
No need to thank me,  I'm just glad I could be of help.




 

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0




Something from the British riots…….
 
 
True, but tragic…
 
Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)
 
 
 



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


View as Webpage
Georgetown Patch
Today s 83° 65° Tomorrow s 86° 71°

August 23, 2011

Your News

District Files Motion to Dismiss ACLU Suit Over Georgetown Incident

Shaun Courtney | Aug 23, 2011 | 0 Comments

image A suit filed in June alleges that police officers violated a photographer's First Amendment rights

DDOT News Release: First Streetcar Line Ready in 2013

Shaun Courtney | Aug 22, 2011 | 0 Comments

image DDOT action will enable opening of the first streetcar line no later than mid-2013.

HMX Group Retail Store to Fill Former Reiss Space on Wisconsin Avenue

Shaun Courtney | Aug 22, 2011 | 0 Comments

image The upscale men's clothier will open at 1254 Wisconsin Ave.

Verizon Strike Ends, But Negotiations Still Appear Rocky

Dusty Smith | Aug 22, 2011 | 0 Comments

image Workers to return, but company, unions still have not reached agreement on a contract.

St. Albans Selects New Headmaster and Athletic Director from Within

Marty Chase | Aug 22, 2011 | 0 Comments

image The Bulldogs also added new staff, including football coach Cornelius Greene

See more News »

Video Profile

Fitness Together

image Located in Georgetown, Fitness Together prides itself on providing individual attention to each of its members. Fitness Together is …

Watch Video »

Things to Do

12:00am

Writopia Lab Creative Writing Workshops

    Writopia Lab is an award-winning non-profit organization that holds creative writing workshops for kids and teens. Week-long …

6:00am

Sew-in Hair Extensions (Undetectable) and Custom Wig Party

image Georgetown! Hollywood Celebrity Hair Stylist Sapphire is coming to YOU!! Want to look like the celebrities?? Ready to upgrade your …

See more Events »

You can also:

Answer community questions »

Buy and sell stuff »

Send us news tips »

Follow us
TWITTER FACEBOOK RSS

You got this email because you asked for it! (At Georgetown Patch) But if you want to stop getting it—or get other updates—you can manage your newsletter settings here.

Manage Subscriptions | Privacy Policy

Patch Media Corporation 584 Broadway, Suite 808, New York, NY 10012


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.