You know something funny about Obama

I've got a few jokes to lighten the holiday mood. Feel free to share
them with whom ever you may like.

Obama is bush's shadow, he's goin for term 3

So where's all this money comin from? Was it borrowed or stolen? I
hope they didn't pick it off the stupid tree!

Did the homie hustlers get you?

I hope you know Obama and his whole argument is dyslexic.

The National Holiday is the American Dream.

I think they force fed Obama's guilty conscience drugs or sssomething.

I think China beat Russia to the Russian thing.

So how do you feel about the whole change to the first amendment?
Wasn't it ratified?

I'd say Obama is at least 1/3 as bad as bush. (cough Lybia)

Since everyone forgot high school, the least you could do is remember
5th grade. It's so elementary you don't even need
Watson.

Isn't it fair for Obama to "care" and give the American people
something we don't need, a tax, right when we need it the
most?

Look up cap and trade online. It's time to question weather Obama's
legislation is really helping the economy.

If Obama cared so much about the economy wouldn't he take care of our
BIGGEST EXPENSE, The entire region of the middle east!?

He has 3 wars in his name and he can't seem to get us out. It's not
fishy, there's nothing wrong.

Oh I see how it is. Obama can start a war against Lybia and he doesn't
seem to get blamed like the white dude.
It's ok, America's only being racist against the sand.

What? Obama doesn't hide behind a big black crutch. Never never never!

TV vs the radio. Whats the popular interest?

If my head was full of hot air do you think I could stand up against
an argument backed by sound principle?

Whats the AVERAGE of 1 US Dollar, 1 Canadian Dollar, and 1 Mexican
Peso¿

And after all, in the end wasn't the ultimate solution supposed to be
a bailout?

If you love America and you are thankful of all the many rights and
securities you enjoy on a daily basis please email this
message to as many people as you can. (keep Google groups in mind)
Thank you for your consideration.

--
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.

Reddit Drafts "The Freedom of Internet Act"

 

 

http://devoutinfidel.wordpress.com/2012/02/25/reddit-drafts-the-freedom-of-internet-act/

Reddit Drafts "The Freedom of Internet Act"

Unsatisfied with Washington's parade of corporate sell-out politicians, Reddit users have taken it upon themselves to draft legislation in place of SOPA and PIPA. Using a Google Doc open for anyone to help write and edit, they've come up with a draft version of "The Freedom of Internet Act".

The act addresses some basic tenets they've set forth, but these proclamations are subject to change as this is a living document:

• Censorship – No government of any form presiding over any land, people, or assets in any form within the United States of America shall pass any law, nor ratify any treaty, which imposes or administers any kind of censorship on the Internet, except content found to be illegal content in accordance with this act.
• Culpability – Only the creator or uploader of data is responsible for whether that data is legal to upload, possess or make available to other users or information services.
• Restrictions on the Internet - No federal union or sovereign state may pass unilateral restrictions on the Internet.
• Content removal - Notice must be given to an administrator of the information system and to the uploader of the content within at least 30 days in advance of any deletion of data from any information system or service, or within 24 hours of the transfer of the data in question from publicly accessible storage to privately accessible storage.
• Judicial proceedings - Anyone undergoing judicial proceedings based on this document must be judged in the courts of the nation where the alleged offence was committed.
• Appropriate punishment - TBD
• Rights of the user – Addresses right to anonymity, privacy, use of proxies, encryption without fear of discrimination or suspicion.
• Liability and Settlement of Copyright Infringement Claim - All calculations related to this are to be carried out in a consumer, retail, individual level pricing upon which the production cost, marketing cost will not influence, capped at 200% of calculated damage.

The sub-Reddit page for FIA is located here, where it was created by a user named "RoyalwithCheese22"

The act seeks to protect transformative works taken from copyrighted materials, such as mash-ups, memes and other types of content shared on sites like Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, Facebook and Twitter. It also aims to address issues at an international level not just in the U.S.

1) If an individual resided in more than one country when committing violation(s) of this document, they shall be judged based on their physical location at the time of the offence.

2) The individual in question may demand extradition to their country of residence or citizenship, where they must then be tried for the listed offences. The court proceeding shall judge the crime as if the offence had been committed in his country of residence or citizenship during the event of the crime.

3) No person is to be extradited, deported or forced to leave, nor forcibly taken from a country for the need of legal proceedings. Any legal proceeding must be conducted in the country of which the crime was committed.

 

 

--
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.

Hypocritical Muslims Dump Thousands of Korans in Raw Sewage Canal

 

Another sure way to make them smell better.

February 27, 2012

Pakistan: Thousands of Qurans Dumped in Raw Sewage Canal

In case you actually believed that all of this unholy slaughter was about some nonsensical manufactured "religious indiscretion" and not about power, supremcacy and an excuse to kill infidel soldiers in the cause of Islam, get real:

Pakistan Korans: Thousands Dumped in Poop Sewer: Man Tries to Clean and Preserve February 26, 2012 By Maggie

Koran's used as toilet paper in Lahore, Pakistan? In the video, you will see some books are in tact, but many more, just pages and pages lying in the filth of a canal where sewage flows. A man drains the canal several times a year – been doing it for ten years. He rescues the pages and the books, and tries to clean them. He has begged his Government to use only paper that can be recycled, thinking they will be easier to clean! Apparently, Pakistan prints and supplies all the Korans in the country. His Government isn't interested in recycling.

"What can I say? I say O Allah save this population from throwing Allah's word into filth."

Today our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan for disposing of Korans used among prisoners to pass messages. To date, four dead, murdered by Afghan security, whom we are training. Today, reports of another seven of our military injured in a grenade attack (according to Fox News this minute) - yet Muslims are using their own holy book for their own intimate convenience, maybe in silent protest for the darkness it has brought to their lives. Who knows? Moonbattery has another idea. Thanks to HalalPorkChop for the video.

Posted by Pamela Geller on Monday, February 27, 2012 at 12:09 AM in The Truth About Islam | Permalink

Reblog (0) | | Digg This | Save to del.icio.us | |

|

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c60bf53ef0167630c9214970b

 

 

--
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.

Public Service Announcement

 

   https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/401081_2851218772405_1617597015_2476780_963404862_n.jpg

--
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.

Report: Homeland Security Lied to Congress About Spying on US Citizens

New post on Scotty Starnes's Blog Report: Homeland Security Lied to Congress About Spying on US Citizens by Scotty Starnes All this is happening under the Obama administration, yet those who complained about Bush listening to known terrorist associates are no longer screaming bloody murder because it's their guy who is running the show. Yes, the Department of Homeland Security has been caught in a lie. They are monitoring US citizens, including journalists, who oppose Obama's agenda (or use certain words) with the assistance of Facebook, Twitter and other forms of social media. DHS, under the Obama regime, believes US citizens are the enemy. From RawStory.com One of the nation's leading electronic privacy groups claimed this week that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) misled members of Congress during a recent hearing on whether the Department is paying a defense contractor $11.4 million to keep tabs on protected free speech and dissent against government policies on the Internet. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), which triggered the hearing by publishing a trove of secret government documents in January, told Raw Story on Thursday that a second round of documents they've obtained directly contradicts testimony given on Feb. 16, showing that the DHS instructed their analysts to do exactly what the Department denied. "There were several exchanges that they had with members of Congress in which they sort of distanced themselves from the idea — that they weren't engaging in this monitoring of public reaction to government proposals," McCall told Raw Story. "But that's… Well, it's not true, according to the documents we obtained." In a letter (PDF) sent Wednesday to the ranking members of the House Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, Ginger McCall, who directs EPIC's Open Government Project, explains that details within the document directly contradicttestimony given during the hearing(PDF). Altogether, the documents released by EPIC in January and in February reveal that the Department is paying defense contractorGeneral Dynamics to monitor the Internet for "reports that reflect adversely on DHS and response activities," including "reports that pertain to DHS and sub agencies — especially those that have a negative spin on DHS/Component preparation, planning, and response activities," among other things. "The DHS testimony, as well as the documents obtained by EPIC, indicate that the agency is monitoring constantly, under very broad search terms, and is not limiting that monitoring to events or activities related to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, or manmade disasters," McCall explained to lawmakers. "The monitoring is designed to be over-broad, and sweeps in large amounts of First Amendment activity. The DHS has no legal authority to engage in this monitoring." In an email exchange, DHS spokesman Matthew Chandler insisted that they only monitor social media "for situational awareness purposes only, within the clearly defined parameters articulated in our Privacy Impact Assessment (PDF), to ensure that critical information reaches appropriate decision-makers." He added that the DHS will "review the language contained in all materials to clearly and accurately convey the parameters and the intention of the program." Documents published by EPIC show that analysts were instructed to watch for "both positive and negative reports" about the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the strangely wide-ranging "organizations outside of DHS." Other "items of interest" include discussions about immigration policies, drug policies, cyber security matters, and U.S. foreign policy. About 300 pages of documents (PDF) obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit and published by EPIC in January revealed that analysts were specifically told to scour the Internet and social networks like Facebook and Twitter in search of "any media reports that reflect adversely on the U.S. Government," and to zero in on discussions criticizing government policies and proposals. Continue reading>>> Scotty Starnes | February 27, 2012 at 9:30 AM | Tags: Department of Homeland Security, DHS, EPIC, FaceBook, General Dynamics, House Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, Obama regime, spying on US citizens, The Electronic Privacy Information Center, Twitter | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-6IR Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/report-homeland-security-lied-to-congress-about-spying-on-us-citizens/ Thanks for flying with 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.

9/11 Foreknowledge Caught on Computers that Measure Global Mind

New post on COTO Report 9/11 Foreknowledge Caught on Computers that Measure Global Mind by Rady By Rady Ananda Activist Post Fascinating research into a "global mind" picked up startling data in the days and hours before the 9/11 attacks, indicating widespread foreknowledge. The Global Consciousness Project (GCP) uses electromagnetically-shielded computers located throughout the world that generate random numbers.  In its 13-year history, these computers show statistically significant deviations during global [...] Read more of this post Rady | February 27, 2012 at 9:44 am | Tags: 911 foreknowledge, 911 forewarnings, 911 insider trading, 911 mysteries, 911 sixth sense, 911 stand-down order, Allen Poteshman, crossing the rubicon, david ray griffin, ElectroGaiaGraph, global consciousness project, global mind, kevin ryan, Marc Chesney, michael ruppert, new pearl harbor revisited, odigo message, quantum entanglement, quantum mechanics, quantum mind, random number generator, roger nelson, SEC 38 stocks 911, sofia smallstorm, Thierry Meyssan, Wing-Keung Wong, zim shipping | Categories: 911 | URL: http://wp.me/pAnVO-5a7 Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://coto2.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/911-morphic-field-gcp/ Thanks for flying with 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.

The Four Horsemen of the Internet Apocalypse

http://www.copyblogger.com/the-four-horsemen-of-the-internet-apocalypse/

The Four Horsemen of the Internet Apocalypse

 

Just when you thought it was safe to get really excited about the fantastic possibilities of the Internet again, a dark cloud looms. The Internet as you have always known it is facing a serious threat that requires your attention.

The issue is Net Neutrality. If you're not sure what that means, I'll try to succinctly sum up its importance to you.

All of your current Internet marketing plans depend on Net Neutrality. And likely, a lot of what you do online outside of the scope of business depends on it too. Net Neutrality allows everyone to compete on a level playing field and is the reason that the Internet is a force for economic innovation, civic participation and free speech.

So who are the Four Horsemen looking to destroy the Internet as we know it?

The reformed AT&T wants the power to allow big corporations that pay Internet providers for dominant placing on the Web to muscle out startups and entrepreneurs. The little guy will be left in the "slow lane" with inferior Internet service, unable to compete.

Comcast would just love it if they could favor their own services, so you won't be able to choose more affordable providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet phone calls, and software that connects your home computer to your office.

Could Big Media partner with companies like Verizon to put bloggers out of business and silence the threat to their content monopolies? It would be simple under such an arrangement to skyrocket the costs to post and share video and audio clips—silencing citizen journalists and putting more power in the hands of a few corporate-owned media outlets.

Likewise, when Time Warner Cable has the ability to steer the choices of your customers (and you) to their preferred services for online banking, health care information, sending photos, planning vacations, etc, your business and your freedom are history.

This is not a conspiracy theory.

The US Congress is pushing a law that would abandon Network Neutrality, the Internet's First Amendment. Network neutrality currently prevents companies like AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner from deciding which Web sites work best for you — based on which site paid them the most. Without Network Neutrality, the scenarios outlined above are just the beginning. And it will affect people all over the world, not just in the States.

To learn more, and get involved, you can do several things:

1. Educate yourself about the issues. Read Doc Searls article from last year on the topic (this is what first alerted me to the issue, and allowed me to spread the word a bit, most notably to Liz Strauss, who took the ball and ran with it).
2. Visit the Save the Internet website and blog to learn more, and to send a quick and easy letter to Congress voicing your opposition.
3. Spread the word. There's a huge viral marketing campaign going on right now to spread awareness and galvanize support. Help spread the word with your blog, by email, or come up with a viral video concept. I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that if the big telcos and cable companies get their way, grass roots viral marketing will be a thing of the past.

They WILL win if we are apathetic. Do something, or find a way to earn a living that doesn't involve the Internet.

UPDATE: In a surprise victory, the House Judiciary Committee approved a bill that would require broadband providers to abide by strict Net neutrality principles, meaning that their networks must be operated in a "nondiscriminatory" manner.

 

--
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.

Japanese Fart Scrolls

http://www.tofugu.com/2012/02/18/japanese-fart-scrolls/

--
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.

Activists Respond to Tucson Book Ban with Caravan of Banned Books

Activists Respond to Tucson Book Ban with Caravan of Banned Books

Read This:

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/education/precollegiate/writers-caravan-bringing-banned-books-to-tucson/article_bd9020df-93fe-5da3-9f91-87df4b1daec5.html

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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.

Fwd: Bruce M wants to share an image

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Date: Monday, February 27, 2012
Subject: Bruce M wants to share an image
To: majors.bruce@gmail.com


<http://i1140.photobucket.com/albums/n567/BruceMajors/th_07a57648.jpg>

07a57648.jpg
Check out this image on Photobucket!

<http://pic.photobucket.com/logos/PbLogo.170.gif>

If you are having problems viewing this email, copy and paste the following into your browser:
http://s1140.photobucket.com/albums/n567/BruceMajors/?action=view&current=07a57648.jpg&evt=user_media_share

--
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.

Let’s Start Here

"Let me put it in concrete terms, using an everyday example: property taxes. Both the (so-called) left and right agree on the principle, with their differences coming down to the amount of the tax and how the monies extorted thereby are to be spent. The "Democrat" or "liberal" wants to make sure the local government schools are well-funded. The "conservative" or "Republican" agrees  -- he just wants to make sure the money doesn't go to fund the teaching of evolution or the advocacy of gay marriage. Neither of which ultimately matters, of course, to the former (more precisely, never was)  land or home owner. He pays, regardless. And if he declines to pay, both types of authoritarians -- on the "left" and the "right" -- will draw their knives and seek his blood. Literally, they will kill him, if it comes to that. If he declines to pay the money they demand -- and attempts to defend himself against their demands."

Let's Start Here
February 16, 2012
By eric

Before a sensible conversation is possible, everyone has to agree on definitions. The fact that millions of Americans don't agree on definitions is arguably the main reason why political conversation in this country is so often incoherent -- and we therefore get nowhere.

For example, we have the ongoing "debate" (so-called) between Republicans and Democrats, "conservatives" and"liberals." It is like the "debate" between the National Socialists of long-ago Germany and the communists of Soviet Russia. Fascism, communism -- they are both in fundamental agreement, much as they argue (often fiercely) about the particulars. It is the same with our Republicans and Democrats. They do not fundamentally disagree. Both urge that society be organized on an authoritarian collectivist basis -- though they each call this by a different name. They disagree merely on the ways in which this force is to be organized -- and how it is to be used.

Most Americans are either socialists or fascists, to one degree or another. On the political "left" we have those who favor economic redistribution in the name of "the poor." On the political "right," we have those who favor economic redistribution for the sake of "defense" and other cartelized manifestations of big business.

But both meet in the middle.

They agree that rights are really conditional privileges, granted (and limited) by "society." Neither respects ownership of our persons, let alone our property. Both exert their power over the individual by coercive, collectivist mechanisms which the individual is required to obey in exactly the same way as William Wallace of Braveheart renown was told he had committed treason against "his" king by refusing to Submit and Obey. When Wallace tells his inquisitors that "never in my life did I swear allegiance to him," the blase reply, "It matters not -- he is your king," is just exactly the same reply any individual American would receive today (by form letter) from, say, the IRS. And it would be affirmed by most Americans, too.

So, definitions.

To have a proper conversation in 2012 America, we should begin by dispensing with the intellectually dishonest and  conversationally incoherent terms, Republican and Democrat, liberal and conservative.

There are authoritarians of various inclinations – and people opposed to authoritarianism in all its manifestations.

Let me put it in concrete terms, using an everyday example: property taxes. Both the (so-called) left and right agree on the principle, with their differences coming down to the amount of the tax and how the monies extorted thereby are to be spent. The "Democrat" or "liberal" wants to make sure the local government schools are well-funded. The "conservative" or "Republican" agrees  -- he just wants to make sure the money doesn't go to fund the teaching of evolution or the advocacy of gay marriage. Neither of which ultimately matters, of course, to the former (more precisely, never was)  land or home owner. He pays, regardless. And if he declines to pay, both types of authoritarians -- on the "left" and the "right" -- will draw their knives and seek his blood. Literally, they will kill him, if it comes to that. If he declines to pay the money they demand -- and attempts to defend himself against their demands.

An anti-authoritarian is repelled by the spectacle. Because he rejects, in principle, the shedding of blood to lubricate the machinery of authoritarianism. You are either a free man -- the owner of your person and any property you duly pay for, without restriction of condition. Or you are not. Free men are not reduced to "company town" servitude by the making of their "ownership" of property conditional on paying rent to the government each year in perpetuity. You either own your land, your home -- or you do not. Similarly, either your physical person is yours -- or it is not. "Democrat" "liberals" believe that it is not -- that your physical person is merely a constituent cell of the Great Collective. Hence, for example, seatbelt laws. And on the "Republic" and "conservative" side, the war on (some) drugs. Your body is not yours.  The collective claims it first.

Here again, the anti-authoritarian takes a fundamentally different view. He does not point guns at you "for your own good" -- or for any other reason, except in self-defense.

It is time to choose sides. You are either an authoritarian of one description or another. Or you are opposed to authoritarianism. There is no middle ground, no having your authoritarianism and your liberty, too. So-called "moderate" authoritarians believe the latter is possible but in fact, it is only a transitory condition. When it comes to human rights, once ground has been given for any reason, you will soon find yourself without any ground at all left to stand upon. It is only question of time before whatever remnant remains of your former rights are shredded in their entirety. It is like a steer trying to stay on its feet amid a pack of hungry lions, hoping they will only rip off some of his flesh and be satisfied with that.

So, let's begin with proper definitions -- and call things by their right name, openly.

It will be a good start.

Throw it in the Woods?

http://epautos.com/2012/02/16/lets-start-here/

Pull Them Out Now, Mr. President

"After all, if Muslims get angry over the burning of the Koran, why wouldn't they get angry over the stationing of U.S. troops near the holiest lands of the Muslim religion? Why wouldn't they get angry over U.S. support of Saddam Hussein during his war on Iran during the 1980s, only to turn on him and kill countless Iraqis in the Persian Gulf intervention? Why wouldn't they get angry over the intentional destruction of Iraq's water and sewage treatment plants, with the intent of spreading infectious illnesses among the Iraqi people? Why wouldn't they get angry over the 11 years of brutal sanctions that contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children? Why wouldn't they get angry over the callous pronouncement by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Madeleine Albright, that the deaths of half a million Iraqi children from the sanctions were "worth it"? Why wouldn't they get angry over the illegal no-fly zones over Iraq that killed more Iraqis, including more children? Why wouldn't they get angry over unconditional foreign aid delivered both to the Israeli regime and to brutal dictatorial regimes in the Middle East, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, and others?"

Monday, February 27, 2012
Pull Them Out Now, Mr. President
by Jacob G. Hornberger

Let's give credit where credit is due. At least U.S. officials are not claiming that the recent killing of two U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan was owing to generalized hatred for our "freedom and values," which was the claim made by U.S. officials after the 9/11 attacks. Perhaps they know that given the U.S. military's recent burning of multiple copies of the Koran, most Americans just wouldn't fall for that explanation.

In the past several days, top U.S. officials, including President Obama, have issued public apologies for what the military did. The apologies are an implicit acknowledgement that what the U.S. government does to people overseas is fully capable of inciting anger and rage to such a large extent that people resort to killing Americans in retaliation.

It was no different, of course, when the photographs and videotapes showing torture and abuse of Iraqi citizens at the hands of U.S. forces, both military and CIA, at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Confronted with the irrefutable evidence of what had transpired inside those prison walls, U.S. officials knew that denial was out of the question. Moreover, by that time everyone knew that Iraq didn't have any weapons of mass destruction and that all the victims at Abu Ghraib were totally innocent of the 9/11 attacks.

Despite the fact that U.S. officials had opened the floodgates for torture and abuse, they deemed it advisable to disassociate themselves with what occurred at Abu Ghraib and to issue public apologies for the misconduct. They also hid away photos and videos that showed much more egregious conduct than what the released photos had shown.

Why did they do that?

They knew that the Iraqi people were horribly angry over what had taken place at Abu Ghraib, and U.S. officials were trying to diffuse the anger to diminish the potential for retaliatory action against U.S. forces in Iraq. Their profuse apologies were, once again, an implicit acknowledgement that people overseas oftentimes get very angry over what the U.S. does to them and end up retaliating against Americans by killing them, even at the cost of losing their own lives.

So, why can't U.S. officials (and U.S. interventionists) simply admit that that was the motivating factor behind the 9/11 attacks -- that is, the horrific things that U.S. officials had done to people in the Middle East prior to 9/11? Why all the ridiculous charade of "Oh, they just hate us for our 'freedom and values'"?

After all, if Muslims get angry over the burning of the Koran, why wouldn't they get angry over the stationing of U.S. troops near the holiest lands of the Muslim religion? Why wouldn't they get angry over U.S. support of Saddam Hussein during his war on Iran during the 1980s, only to turn on him and kill countless Iraqis in the Persian Gulf intervention? Why wouldn't they get angry over the intentional destruction of Iraq's water and sewage treatment plants, with the intent of spreading infectious illnesses among the Iraqi people? Why wouldn't they get angry over the 11 years of brutal sanctions that contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children? Why wouldn't they get angry over the callous pronouncement by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Madeleine Albright, that the deaths of half a million Iraqi children from the sanctions were "worth it"? Why wouldn't they get angry over the illegal no-fly zones over Iraq that killed more Iraqis, including more children? Why wouldn't they get angry over unconditional foreign aid delivered both to the Israeli regime and to brutal dictatorial regimes in the Middle East, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, and others?

Enough is enough. The U.S. government has been occupying Afghanistan for more than a decade. During that time, it's been killing, maiming, detaining without trial, and torturing countless Afghanis. That makes people angry too. And the longer the occupation continues, the deeper the anger becomes. The larger the rage, the greater the possibility that more Americans are going to be killed in retaliation.

It's time to bring the troops home ­ now, not later. It's time to restore a normal way of life for America, one that does not have the constant and perpetual sense of crisis, chaos, war, and preparation for war ­ where Americans are freely living out their lives without fear that someone is going to kill them in retaliation for what the U.S. government has done to foreigners, their families, their friends, or their countrymen.

It's time to let the U.S. government's crooked, corrupt, puppet dictatorship in Afghanistan fly on its own. Pull them out now, Mr. President. At least then the U.S. government will no longer be making the matter worse, both for the people of Afghanistan and the people of America.

http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2012-02-27.asp

Who Is At Greater Risk in a “Routine Traffic Stop” — The Cop or the Citizen?

Posted on 27 February 2012
Who Is At Greater Risk in a "Routine Traffic Stop" — The Police or the Citizen?
by William Grigg

For police, there is no higher priority than "officer safety," and the FBI's recent propaganda about the supposed menace of "sovereign citizens" plays on the anxieties of police officers by grotesquely exaggerating the risks they confront during a "routine traffic stop." Reasonable people should understand that in any encounter between a citizen and an armed stranger wearing government-issued insignia and authorized to employ deadly force, it is the former who is threatened, not the latter — a fact amply demonstrated by this video.

In this January 2006 traffic stop captured by a South Carolina police officer's dashboard camera, a motorist is stopped for speeding. The officers put the driver through a battery of sobriety tests, all of which he passes easily.When one officer asks the driver how much he had been drinking, the motorist makes the unfortunate error of answering "not much" — rather than simply ignoring the question.

Always remember: The police are looking for an excuse to arrest you; they are trained to invent one, if necessary, and are authorized to lie in order to do so. Don't assume they're honest or honorable, because they don't have to be. While you shouldn't lie to them, don't assume that you will earn their favor by being honest. Don't help them by answering any of their questions, or consenting to a search of any kind.

From the beginning of this encounter, the police treat the driver as if he were a threat: within seconds of ordering the man out of the car, one of the officers reaches for his pepper spray canister and moves to flank him. This underscores another important tactical point: When confronted by multiple police officers, always keep them in front of you, if at all possible — don't let one get behind you, or position himself in such a way that he can blind-side you.

Understandably frustrated to be dealing with officious armed busy-bodies, the driver quietly and politely protests his innocence, which infuriates the cops. They have no evidence that he was impaired or involved in actual criminal behavior, but "Contempt of Cop" simply can't be allowed to go unpunished. So they call a group of their boyfriends for backup and form a six-officer thugscrum that swarms the unresisting driver — who is struck and tasered while on the ground, despite his utter passivity.

That spectacle understandably enrages the victim's elderly mother — and she, in turn, is set upon by the valiant bullies in blue, who gang up on her, slam her to the pavement, and treat her to a dose of weaponized capiscum spray as well.

"Having neutralized the threat of the completely passive driver, the cops turn their attention to the pressing matter of his elderly mother, who they pepper-spray into submission," observes the incredulous British narrator. "This is almost like a microcosm of America's foreign policy."

Whether at home or abroad, the Regime's armed enforcers treat even the most fleeting displays of resistance as a form of terrorism. According to Stuart McArthur, deputy assistant director of the FBI's counterterrorism division, the prevalence of "sovereign citizens" means that any traffic stop "has a potential to go high and right very fast" — that is, each time a police officer stops a car, he should be prepared to escalate the encounter very quickly, because he never knows if he's dealing with the threat posed by a "sovereign."

As this video documents, that was the approach being followed by armed revenue farmers years ago — before the FBI and its allies in the SPLC devised the "sovereign citizen" pretext to justify such methods.

http://bit.ly/zKV4cl

5 Reasons Iran is NOT a Threat to the U.S.

Monday, February 27, 2012
5 Reasons Iran is NOT a Threat to the U.S.

The Obama Administration, by Executive Order, has moved another step closer to preemptive war with Iran by declaring a National Emergency to deal with this supposed threat.  A National Emergency, which gives the president extraordinary power to subvert the Constitution, is legally defined as "A situation beyond the ordinary which threatens the health or safety of citizens and which cannot be properly addressed by the use of other law."

Given the immense power the executive receives during such "emergencies", one would think the U.S. must face a clear and present danger in order to justify such actions.  Yet, all recent wars fought by America and paid for by U.S. tax dollars were preceded by little more than an Executive Order declaring a national emergency.  And, notably, the president makes these declarations without the need for a vote by the Congress as stipulated by the U.S. Constitution.

So what has changed with Iran that now requires a National Emergency?  It seems the U.S. is just itching for another fight, because it's clear that Iran poses no threat to the 'health and safety' of U.S. citizens that cannot be dealt with by 'other laws'.

Here are 5 reasons why a National Emergency should not be declared to deal with Iran:

Never Attacked US:  Iran has never attacked the United States, or even any of her interests overseas.  In fact, they have not attacked or invaded anyone in at least 270 years. And they haven't even threatened to harm the U.S. unless of course they are attacked first.  Do we want to continue to be a nation that attacks others without provocation, or one that defends our country against genuine aggressors?  Iran is not an aggressor and certainly not a national emergency threat.

No Nuclear Weapon: Claims that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon seems to be the only argument warmongers have to suggest a preemptive strike.  Yet, all U.S. intelligence agencies universally agree that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program.  Even if they did, why is that a reason to attack them?  Just having a weapon doesn't make a country a threat.  Plenty of countries have nuclear weapons and we don't consider them a threat.

Self Preservation:  Iran will not attack the West militarily with a nuclear weapon, or even conventionally, because they know they would be inviting their immediate destruction.  Iran is a sophisticated secular society, much like Iraq was before America invaded. In fact, Iran has the third largest Jewish population in the world who live in harmony with Muslims and others.  In other words, they have a lot to lose to invite war with anyone, and they know that any move viewed as aggression would be met with swift and overwhelming force. The West wants the world to believe their leadership is primitive and stupid, but they aren't.

Surrounded By U.S. Bases:  Over 45 U.S. bases surround Iran.  These bases are in addition to the fleets of U.S. warships parked in waters near Iran. A picture is worth a thousand words.  Who's the real threat here?

Conventional War is Obsolete: Iran actually has a modern armed forces that could fight back conventionally. However, conventional war is completely obsolete.  It should be likened to sticks and stones compared to the known advanced technology the world powers possess.  Besides nuclear weapons and other WMDs, there are secret weather weapons, space-based weapons, microwave weapons etc.  Russia admits to having a weather weapon that can destroy the U.S. in 15 minutes.  Surely America and Europe have the same technology, and probably China, too.  These make conventional warfare nothing more than manufactured violence for economic control and managed population reduction.  Again, Iran represents nothing resembling a threat to America in the face of such technology.

America was never attacked or even threatened with attack by Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, or Somalia. Yet by executive decree, taxpayers continue to fund the U.S. war machine to murder and maim innocent civilians in those countries.  Conveniently, the "war on terror" has given America the excuse to preemptively strike any nation who is said to oppose them.  And it seems Iran is next unless the American people stop living in fear of manufactured threats.

http://bit.ly/y0Rqp1

Gay Marriage Equality Editorial

Gay Marriage Equality Editorial

Marriage Equality is coming. Get used to it. Accept it. Embrace it.
Stop the hate. -T

"New Rule: Gay marriage won't lead to dog marriage. It is not a
slippery slope to rampant inter-species coupling. When women got the
right to vote, it didn't lead to hamsters voting. No court has
extended the Equal Protection Clause to salmon. And for the record,
all marriages are same sex marriages. You get married, and every
night, it's the same sex."

~ Bill Maher

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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.

New blogger

http://julieershadi.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.

interesting take on the iran war

American Jews' look of surprise when, upon meeting me, they learn of
the existence of Jews in Iran for the first time, despite the fact
that Iran still remains the largest home to Jews in the Middle East
outside of Turkey and Israel.

As early as the sixth century B.C., Jews, exiled in Babylonia, found a
savior in Persia's Cyrus the Great, who helped them return to Israel.
In the early 1940s, Iran became a refuge to Jews, who were this time
fleeing Hitler's army. Thousands owed their lives to the valorous
conduct of Abdol-Hossein Sardari, the head of Iran's diplomatic
mission in France, who defied Nazi orders by issuing thousands of
passports and travel documents to Jews. Even when President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad was in top Holocaust-denying form, the descendants of the
Polish survivors who chose to settle in Iran were laying flowers upon
the graves of their loved ones in what's known as the Polish Cemetery
in Tehran.

Would the two nations allow their rulers to begin a war if they were
aware of their depth of indebtedness to each other? By bombing Iran,
Israel would be bombing a portion of Jewish history.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/opinion/sunday/iran-and-israel-share-bonds.html

--
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.

Inflation in One Page

Inflation in One Page
Henry Hazlitt
May 1978 • Volume: 28 • Issue: 5 •

A correspondent, heading a group of "Inflation Fighters," recently sent me a one-page typewritten summary of their case against inflation, and asked for my opinion of it. The statement was sincere and well-intentioned, but as with the great bulk of what is being written about inflation, it was confused in both its analysis and its recommendations.

I wrote approving his effort to "do something," and approving also his idea of trying to state the cause and cure for inflation on a single page, but suggested the following substitute statement.


Cause and Cure of Inflation

1. Inflation is an increase in the quantity of money and credit. Its chief consequence is soaring prices. Therefore inflation -- if we misuse the term to mean the rising prices themselves -- is caused solely by printing more money. For this the government's monetary policies are entirely responsible.

2. The most frequent reason for printing more money is the existence of an unbalanced budget. Unbalanced budgets are caused by extravagant expenditures which the government is unwilling or unable to pay for by raising corresponding tax revenues. The excessive expen­ditures are mainly the result of government efforts to redistribute wealth and income­in short, to force the productive to support the unproductive. This erodes the working incentives of both the productive and the unpro­ductive.

3. The causes of inflation are not, as so often said, "multiple and complex," but simply the result of printing too much money. There is no such thing as "cost-push" inflation. If, without an increase in the stock of money, wage or other costs are forced up, and producers try to pass these costs along by raising their selling prices, most of them will merely sell fewer goods. The result will be reduced output and loss of jobs. Higher costs can only be passed along in higher selling prices when consumers have more money to pay the higher prices.

4. Price controls cannot stop or slow down inflation. They always do harm. Price controls simply squeeze or wipe out profit margins, disrupt production, and lead to bottlenecks and shortages. All government price and wage control, or even "monitoring," is merely an attempt by the politicians to shift the blame for inflation on to producers and sellers instead of their own monetary policies.

5. Prolonged inflation never "stimulates" the economy. On the contrary, it unbalances, disrupts, and misdirects production and employment. Unemployment is mainly caused by excessive wage rates in some industries, brought about either by extortionate union demands, by minimum wage laws (which keep teenagers and the unskilled out of jobs), or by prolonged and over-generous unemployment insurance.

6. To avoid irreparable damage, the budget must be balanced at the earliest possible moment, and not in some sweet by-and-by. Balance must be brought about by slashing reckless spending, and not by increasing a tax burden that is already undermining incentives and pro­duction.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/inflation-in-one-page/

NATO promises Afghans trial for alleged Koran burners

What they gonna be tried for?  Failure to have the proper trash burning permit?  Failure to have a dog pee on the trash before burning it?

New post on Creeping Sharia NATO promises Afghans trial for alleged Koran burners by creeping And from the news reports we've seen those on trial would be American soldiers, unless they hang (no pun intended) some other NATO or Afghani's out to dry. At what point do we hold NATO or the Joint Chiefs responsible for the useless killing of American soldiers? via Joint Statement by the Delegations Assigned to [...] Read more of this post creeping | February 27, 2012 at 9:00 AM | Tags: Creeping Sharia, islam, Jihad, law, Legal, Life, Media, Military, Muslim, News, Obama, Politics, Random, Religion, Sharia, terrorism | Categories: Alerts, Creeping Sharia, Legal, Media, Military, News, Obama, Politics, Religion, Sharia | URL: http://wp.me/pbU4v-aX1 Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/nato-promises-afghans-trial-for-alleged-koran-burners/ Thanks for flying with 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.