If someone tells you that they got their "facts" from "reputable" source, you should still check them, particularly if you want to refute them:
Stephen Hawking receives Presidential Medal of Freedom
But:
In an editorial on July 31, Investor's Business Daily warned of end-of-life counseling in health care reform by saying people like Stephen Hawking "wouldn't have a chance" in the such a system."People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."In fact, Professor Hawking lives in England, where he has been treated by their National Health Service. And by his own account, it saved his life. "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS," he told The Guardian. "I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived." The Hawking reference in the IBD editorial has since been removed, with this correction added: "This version corrects the original editorial which implied that physicist Stephen Hawking, a professor at the University of Cambridge, did not live in the UK." They don't acknowledge that the NHS has kept Hawking alive there.
In an editorial on July 31, Investor's Business Daily warned of end-of-life counseling in health care reform by saying people like Stephen Hawking "wouldn't have a chance" in the such a system.
"People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."
In fact, Professor Hawking lives in England, where he has been treated by their National Health Service. And by his own account, it saved his life. "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS," he told The Guardian. "I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived."
The Hawking reference in the IBD editorial has since been removed, with this correction added: "This version corrects the original editorial which implied that physicist Stephen Hawking, a professor at the University of Cambridge, did not live in the UK." They don't acknowledge that the NHS has kept Hawking alive there.
Henry M
Two tragic incidents happened during June and July 2009. One was covered extensively and every day by people and the FREE Western media, the other was briefly reported and then forgotten all about!
The first incident was the accidental shooting of an Iranian demonstrator called Neda by an unknown assailant. In this case there were a couple of cell phones with cameras filming Neda from the minute she got off her car till the moment when she passed away. After her unfortunate and accidental death, in a matter of minutes her picture was all over the Internet and in about couple of hours all over the so called free Western Broadcasters. It was covered extensively and commented on day after day. So far we could say that all of this was not planned and it just happened. The real assailant is still unknown and the President of Iran has ordered a detail investigation of this tragedy.
What was the difference between these two cases? In the first tragic incident the unknown assailant could have been a Moslem. In the second incident all known killers and assailants; the Neo Nazi woman/husband stabber as well as the German Police are all White Catholic Germans and members of the Superior Arian Race! Certainly extensive broadcasting of such an atrocity would NOT would sit well with other members of such a perfect and civilized race!?
1- It is a very sad fact but humanity and human rights; fairness, etc. are exploited every day by the so called Western free media and some other interested parties , either for political exploitation of unsuspecting nations or for sensationalism or both in order to get improved ratings and more advertising Dollars.
2- Unfortunately all of the above has always been used to create a rift between Iran and the US. So far those with such mal intentions have very much succeeded.
3- If the world stays indifferent to such racist hate crimes by White Racist Extremists Crazy Klan’s (W.R.E.C.K.) persons, then no one is safe. Thousands of years ago it was the Jewish people who were slaves in Babylon (Present day Iraq) and a Persian King called Cyrus the Great freed them all and told them they were free to worship, live and work as equals among other citizens. During the late 30s and early 40s the reprehensible act of the Holocaust happened. Couple of centuries ago the contemptible act of African slave trade occurred. Afterwards it was the anti Black, anti Chinese and anti Jewish despicable discriminations in the US and some parts of Europe during 19th and 20th Centuries. Then it was the sad anti Japanese American discriminations in the US during the World War II. Today it is the shameful Anti Moslem discriminations; tomorrow it will be anti Asian, anti African, anti Eastern European, anti American Indian, anti Latino and anti… Henceforth this type of racist attitude will harm us sooner than later. So we should CARE about what happens around us, even if it does not seem to harm us right away.
Then what shall we do? We shall UNITE against racism and discrimination. We should form an international NGO group called “Very Concerned about Racism Extremism (V.C.A.R.E.).” V also stands for VICTORY, so we will WIN! Presently there are quite a few anti racist groups protecting a certain minority or a few minorities, but as far as I know there isn’t a single NGO that would represent and protect all minorities. When these minorities are added up, then they will make an international and powerful majority with lots of positive lobbying clout. I look forward to that day.
President Obama thank you for being the fantastic president you are. Although I know that you are the kind of character our country needs, we need someone stronger on civil liberty. The electronic age has caught us off guard. People’s right to privacy is violated continually as part of business. It has left all Americans exposed. I hope that you will pay more mind to our civil liberties in the future. It is what the times call for.
I will always love you President Obama. Unfortunately it is a tragic time to combine the greatest president ever, with a president soft on civil liberties. I will always support you, but my first commitment will always be to our country, and our constitution.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/68643.html
Cheney's speech ignored some inconvenient truthsFull text of Cheney's speech Luis Alvarez / APFormer Vice President Dick Cheney speaks Thursday at the American Enterprise Institute. By Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel | McClatchy Newspapers WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Dick Cheney's defense Thursday of the Bush administration's policies for interrogating suspected terrorists contained omissions, exaggerations and misstatements. In his address to the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative policy organization in Washington, Cheney said that the techniques the Bush administration approved, including waterboarding — simulated drowning that's considered a form of torture — forced nakedness and sleep deprivation, were "legal" and produced information that "prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people."He quoted the Director of National Intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, as saying that the information gave U.S. officials a "deeper understanding of the al Qaida organization that was attacking this country." In a statement April 21, however, Blair said the information "was valuable in some instances" but that "there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."A top-secret 2004 CIA inspector general's investigation found no conclusive proof that information gained from aggressive interrogations helped thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to one of four top-secret Bush-era memos that the Justice Department released last month.FBI Director Robert Mueller told Vanity Fair magazine in December that he didn't think that the techniques disrupted any attacks._ Cheney said that President Barack Obama's decision to release the four top-secret Bush administration memos on the interrogation techniques was "flatly contrary" to U.S. national security, and would help al Qaida train terrorists in how to resist U.S. interrogations.However, Blair, who oversees all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, said in his statement that he recommended the release of the memos, "strongly supported" Obama's decision to prohibit using the controversial methods and that "we do not need these techniques to keep America safe."_ Cheney said that the Bush administration "moved decisively against the terrorists in their hideouts and their sanctuaries, and committed to using every asset to take down their networks."The former vice president didn't point out that Osama bin Laden and his chief lieutenant, Ayman al Zawahri, remain at large nearly eight years after 9-11 and that the Bush administration began diverting U.S. forces, intelligence assets, time and money to planning an invasion of Iraq before it finished the war in Afghanistan against al Qaida and the Taliban.There are now 49,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan fighting to contain the bloodiest surge in Taliban violence since the 2001 U.S.-led intervention, and Islamic extremists also have launched their most concerted attack yet on neighboring, nuclear-armed Pakistan._ Cheney denied that there was any connection between the Bush administration's interrogation policies and the abuse of detainee at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, which he blamed on "a few sadistic guards . . . in violation of American law, military regulations and simple decency."However, a bipartisan Senate Armed Services Committee report in December traced the abuses at Abu Ghraib to the approval of the techniques by senior Bush administration officials, including former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld."The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of 'a few bad apples' acting on their own," said the report issued by Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and John McCain, R-Ariz. "The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality and authorized their use against detainees."_ Cheney said that "only detainees of the highest intelligence value" were subjected to the harsh interrogation techniques, and he cited Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the alleged mastermind of the 9-11 attacks.He didn't mention Abu Zubaydah, the first senior al Qaida operative to be captured after 9-11. Former FBI special agent Ali Soufan told a Senate subcommittee last week that his interrogation of Zubaydah using traditional methods elicited crucial information, including Mohammed's alleged role in 9-11.The decision to use the harsh interrogation methods "was one of the worst and most harmful decisions made in our efforts against al Qaida," Soufan said. Former State Department official Philip Zelikow, who in 2005 was then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's point man in an internal fight to overhaul the Bush administration's detention policies, joined Soufan in his criticism._ Cheney said that "the key to any strategy is accurate intelligence," but the Bush administration ignored warnings from experts in the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department, the Department of Energy and other agencies, and used false or exaggerated intelligence supplied by Iraqi exile groups and others to help make its case for the 2003 invasion.Cheney made no mention of al Qaida operative Ali Mohamed al Fakheri, who's known as Ibn Sheikh al Libi, whom the Bush administration secretly turned over to Egypt for interrogation in January 2002. While allegedly being tortured by Egyptian authorities, Libi provided false information about Iraq's links with al Qaida, which the Bush administration used despite doubts expressed by the DIA.A state-run Libyan newspaper said Libi committed suicide recently in a Libyan jail._ Cheney accused Obama of "the selective release" of documents on Bush administration detainee policies, charging that Obama withheld records that Cheney claimed prove that information gained from the harsh interrogation methods prevented terrorist attacks."I've formally asked that (the information) be declassified so the American people can see the intelligence we obtained," Cheney said. "Last week, that request was formally rejected."However, the decision to withhold the documents was announced by the CIA, which said that it was obliged to do so by a 2003 executive order issued by former President George W. Bush prohibiting the release of materials that are the subject of lawsuits._ Cheney said that only "ruthless enemies of this country" were detained by U.S. operatives overseas and taken to secret U.S. prisons.A 2008 McClatchy investigation, however, found that the vast majority of Guantanamo detainees captured in 2001 and 2002 in Afghanistan and Pakistan were innocent citizens or low-level fighters of little intelligence value who were turned over to American officials for money or because of personal or political rivalries.In addition, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Oct. 5, 2005, that the Bush administration had admitted to her that it had mistakenly abducted a German citizen, Khaled Masri, from Macedonia in January 2004.Masri reportedly was flown to a secret prison in Afghanistan, where he allegedly was abused while being interrogated. He was released in May 2004 and dumped on a remote road in Albania.In January 2007, the German government issued arrest warrants for 13 alleged CIA operatives on charges of kidnapping Masri._ Cheney slammed Obama's decision to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and criticized his effort to persuade other countries to accept some of the detainees.The effort to shut down the facility, however, began during Bush's second term, promoted by Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates."One of the things that would help a lot is, in the discussions that we have with the states of which they (detainees) are nationals, if we could get some of those countries to take them back," Rice said in a Dec. 12, 2007, interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. "So we need help in closing Guantanamo."_ Cheney said that, in assessing the security environment after 9-11, the Bush team had to take into account "dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists."Cheney didn't explicitly repeat the contention he made repeatedly in office: that Saddam cooperated with al Qaida, a linkage that U.S. intelligence officials and numerous official inquiries have rebutted repeatedly.The late Iraqi dictator's association with terrorists vacillated and was mostly aimed at quashing opponents and critics at home and abroad.The last State Department report on international terrorism to be released before 9-11 said that Saddam's regime "has not attempted an anti-Western terrorist attack since its failed plot to assassinate former President (George H.W.) Bush in 1993 in Kuwait."A Pentagon study released last year, based on a review of 600,000 Iraqi documents captured after the U.S.-led invasion, concluded that while Saddam supported militant Palestinian groups — the late terrorist Abu Nidal found refuge in Baghdad, at least until Saddam had him killed — the Iraqi security services had no "direct operational link" with al Qaida.
Cheney's speech ignored some inconvenient truthsFull text of Cheney's speech
Luis Alvarez / AP
Former Vice President Dick Cheney speaks Thursday at the American Enterprise Institute. By Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Dick Cheney's defense Thursday of the Bush administration's policies for interrogating suspected terrorists contained omissions, exaggerations and misstatements.
In his address to the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative policy organization in Washington, Cheney said that the techniques the Bush administration approved, including waterboarding — simulated drowning that's considered a form of torture — forced nakedness and sleep deprivation, were "legal" and produced information that "prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people."
He quoted the Director of National Intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, as saying that the information gave U.S. officials a "deeper understanding of the al Qaida organization that was attacking this country."
In a statement April 21, however, Blair said the information "was valuable in some instances" but that "there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
A top-secret 2004 CIA inspector general's investigation found no conclusive proof that information gained from aggressive interrogations helped thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to one of four top-secret Bush-era memos that the Justice Department released last month.
FBI Director Robert Mueller told Vanity Fair magazine in December that he didn't think that the techniques disrupted any attacks.
_ Cheney said that President Barack Obama's decision to release the four top-secret Bush administration memos on the interrogation techniques was "flatly contrary" to U.S. national security, and would help al Qaida train terrorists in how to resist U.S. interrogations.
However, Blair, who oversees all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, said in his statement that he recommended the release of the memos, "strongly supported" Obama's decision to prohibit using the controversial methods and that "we do not need these techniques to keep America safe."
_ Cheney said that the Bush administration "moved decisively against the terrorists in their hideouts and their sanctuaries, and committed to using every asset to take down their networks."
The former vice president didn't point out that Osama bin Laden and his chief lieutenant, Ayman al Zawahri, remain at large nearly eight years after 9-11 and that the Bush administration began diverting U.S. forces, intelligence assets, time and money to planning an invasion of Iraq before it finished the war in Afghanistan against al Qaida and the Taliban.
There are now 49,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan fighting to contain the bloodiest surge in Taliban violence since the 2001 U.S.-led intervention, and Islamic extremists also have launched their most concerted attack yet on neighboring, nuclear-armed Pakistan.
_ Cheney denied that there was any connection between the Bush administration's interrogation policies and the abuse of detainee at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, which he blamed on "a few sadistic guards . . . in violation of American law, military regulations and simple decency."
However, a bipartisan Senate Armed Services Committee report in December traced the abuses at Abu Ghraib to the approval of the techniques by senior Bush administration officials, including former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
"The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of 'a few bad apples' acting on their own," said the report issued by Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and John McCain, R-Ariz. "The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality and authorized their use against detainees."
_ Cheney said that "only detainees of the highest intelligence value" were subjected to the harsh interrogation techniques, and he cited Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the alleged mastermind of the 9-11 attacks.
He didn't mention Abu Zubaydah, the first senior al Qaida operative to be captured after 9-11. Former FBI special agent Ali Soufan told a Senate subcommittee last week that his interrogation of Zubaydah using traditional methods elicited crucial information, including Mohammed's alleged role in 9-11.
The decision to use the harsh interrogation methods "was one of the worst and most harmful decisions made in our efforts against al Qaida," Soufan said. Former State Department official Philip Zelikow, who in 2005 was then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's point man in an internal fight to overhaul the Bush administration's detention policies, joined Soufan in his criticism.
_ Cheney said that "the key to any strategy is accurate intelligence," but the Bush administration ignored warnings from experts in the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department, the Department of Energy and other agencies, and used false or exaggerated intelligence supplied by Iraqi exile groups and others to help make its case for the 2003 invasion.
Cheney made no mention of al Qaida operative Ali Mohamed al Fakheri, who's known as Ibn Sheikh al Libi, whom the Bush administration secretly turned over to Egypt for interrogation in January 2002. While allegedly being tortured by Egyptian authorities, Libi provided false information about Iraq's links with al Qaida, which the Bush administration used despite doubts expressed by the DIA.
A state-run Libyan newspaper said Libi committed suicide recently in a Libyan jail.
_ Cheney accused Obama of "the selective release" of documents on Bush administration detainee policies, charging that Obama withheld records that Cheney claimed prove that information gained from the harsh interrogation methods prevented terrorist attacks.
"I've formally asked that (the information) be declassified so the American people can see the intelligence we obtained," Cheney said. "Last week, that request was formally rejected."
However, the decision to withhold the documents was announced by the CIA, which said that it was obliged to do so by a 2003 executive order issued by former President George W. Bush prohibiting the release of materials that are the subject of lawsuits.
_ Cheney said that only "ruthless enemies of this country" were detained by U.S. operatives overseas and taken to secret U.S. prisons.
A 2008 McClatchy investigation, however, found that the vast majority of Guantanamo detainees captured in 2001 and 2002 in Afghanistan and Pakistan were innocent citizens or low-level fighters of little intelligence value who were turned over to American officials for money or because of personal or political rivalries.
In addition, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Oct. 5, 2005, that the Bush administration had admitted to her that it had mistakenly abducted a German citizen, Khaled Masri, from Macedonia in January 2004.
Masri reportedly was flown to a secret prison in Afghanistan, where he allegedly was abused while being interrogated. He was released in May 2004 and dumped on a remote road in Albania.
In January 2007, the German government issued arrest warrants for 13 alleged CIA operatives on charges of kidnapping Masri.
_ Cheney slammed Obama's decision to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and criticized his effort to persuade other countries to accept some of the detainees.
The effort to shut down the facility, however, began during Bush's second term, promoted by Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
"One of the things that would help a lot is, in the discussions that we have with the states of which they (detainees) are nationals, if we could get some of those countries to take them back," Rice said in a Dec. 12, 2007, interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. "So we need help in closing Guantanamo."
_ Cheney said that, in assessing the security environment after 9-11, the Bush team had to take into account "dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists."
Cheney didn't explicitly repeat the contention he made repeatedly in office: that Saddam cooperated with al Qaida, a linkage that U.S. intelligence officials and numerous official inquiries have rebutted repeatedly.
The late Iraqi dictator's association with terrorists vacillated and was mostly aimed at quashing opponents and critics at home and abroad.
The last State Department report on international terrorism to be released before 9-11 said that Saddam's regime "has not attempted an anti-Western terrorist attack since its failed plot to assassinate former President (George H.W.) Bush in 1993 in Kuwait."
A Pentagon study released last year, based on a review of 600,000 Iraqi documents captured after the U.S.-led invasion, concluded that while Saddam supported militant Palestinian groups — the late terrorist Abu Nidal found refuge in Baghdad, at least until Saddam had him killed — the Iraqi security services had no "direct operational link" with al Qaida.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/11/colin-powell-slams-sarah_n_150394.html
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell took aim at Sarah Palin and the Republican party's emphasis on small-town values during an interview with CNN's Fareed Zakharia that will air this Sunday. Powell also says that we should rethink its "don't ask, don't tell" policy on homosexuals in the military. And he tells Republicans that they should stop listening to Rush Limbaugh:"Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh?" Powell asked. "Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?"As noted by Think Progress, Powell says:Gov. Palin, to some extent, pushed the party more to the right, and I think she had something of a polarizing effect when she talked about how small town values are good. Well, most of us don't live in small towns. And I was raised in the South Bronx, and there's nothing wrong with my value system from the South Bronx. And when they came to Virginia and said the southern part of Virginia is good and the northern part of Virginia is bad. The only problem with that is there are more votes in the northern part of Virginia than there are in the southern part of Virginia, so that doesn't work.
Powell also says that we should rethink its "don't ask, don't tell" policy on homosexuals in the military. And he tells Republicans that they should stop listening to Rush Limbaugh:
"Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh?" Powell asked. "Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?"
As noted by Think Progress, Powell says:
Gov. Palin, to some extent, pushed the party more to the right, and I think she had something of a polarizing effect when she talked about how small town values are good. Well, most of us don't live in small towns. And I was raised in the South Bronx, and there's nothing wrong with my value system from the South Bronx. And when they came to Virginia and said the southern part of Virginia is good and the northern part of Virginia is bad. The only problem with that is there are more votes in the northern part of Virginia than there are in the southern part of Virginia, so that doesn't work.
And when they came to Virginia and said the southern part of Virginia is good and the northern part of Virginia is bad. The only problem with that is there are more votes in the northern part of Virginia than there are in the southern part of Virginia, so that doesn't work.
Make a difference when you vote! Ask yourself, what is the BEST for all of us here in the USA. Our efforts will benefit the whole world. But you have to start with one person- that is YOU. I pray for President Obama and his family all the time. I am hoping my life will make a difference in my family, my community, my country, and the world.
The Vice President and Secretary Gates are also very special and important pillars of this administration. GOD BLESS & HELP THEM BOTH.
Afghanistan 'rape' law puts women's rights front and center
Obama called the law abhorrent. Would Bush have? Obama appears to be trying to change things in Afghanistan? Was Bush, really?
If you're a feminist, you can't sanction the cultural relativism that says that "it's part of their tradition, so who are we to say that it's wrong."
Misogyny was part of many societies’ history, including most religions and regions. Women only started to gain rights in the USA 100 years ago. Until then, and for many, even now, their disenfranchisement was traditional and believed to be dictated by their god. If that change was good, and helping women worldwide is required of a nation with the global power/influence of the USA, then the academic posturing of cultural relativism is deservedly dead.
During a Sunday interview at CNN, General Patreas said there are no additional threats against the US this year than previous years, sorry to disappoint you Mr. Cheney! If the present positive trend of President Obama’s peaceful gestures continues, then I am sure the world will be a much safer place. Meanwhile I too do believe the US has a lot more international prestige and is safer than the Bush/Cheney era, mark my word Mr. Cheney! If you still have any doubts, then wait and see the kind of reception Mr. Obama will get at G20. Wouldn’t you love to be in Mr. Biden’s shoes? Certainly NOT because you have not learnt your lesson yet! Now Mr. Cheney, plaese don't go around hoping for some thing wrong to happen, just to prove your point.
YOU REPUBLICAN DICKYs ChANGED MY BLOG. Don't do it again because I will correct it over and over again.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-sweeney/taking-the-pro-pot-positi_b_179653.html
Fast-forward to today's online town hall, and once again, marijuana legalization proved to be one of the most popular questions, with the most-approved-of pro-pot question being: "Should the U.S. legalize pot as a way to grow jobs and stimulate the economy?"With all of his usual charisma and endearing jocularity, our president laughed off the question, stating "I don't know what this says about the online audience, but, no, I don't think that is a good strategy to grow the economy." The mewling sycophants in the East Room audience laughed and burst into applause.Once again, the Obama administration has greeted this question with an out-and-out rejection, with no reasoning underlying their position. Let's ignore for a moment that Obama's answer, in and of itself, is deeply wrong and ill-informed; moving from zero taxes on weed to any taxes is obviously an increase in revenue, not to mention the shift of growing and supplying jobs from the black market to legitimacy, which means more revenue in income taxes and more jobs.Now, couple this with the millions, if not billions, of dollars that would be saved without the government being responsible for the care and feeding of hundreds of thousands of nonviolent drug offenders. From 1965 through the election of Barack Obama, our government arrested 20 million people for possession of marijuana. That, folks, is a lot of stoners.In 2006 alone -- the last year for which statistics are available -- 829,625 people were arrested on marijuana-related charges, according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report. Of these, 89 percent were arrested for simple possession.So, couple the tax revenues, both sales and income, with the savings involved in keeping potheads out on the streets instead of in the pen. Now, put that Everest-sized pile of cash aside for a moment and think about this: Who's losing money in the deal?According to Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, fully 75 percent of Mexican drug cartels' cash comes from the sale of marijuana. Legalizing marijuana would, of course, take away that massive source of income for the cartels, just as ending prohibition cut bootlegging as a source of revenue for La Cosa Nostra.Combining all of the above effects, the legalization of marijuana means billions of dollars saved or made, the creation of jobs and the curbing of violence along the Mexican border, which in turn means saving thousands of lives.Barack Obama can certainly be against legalization, but he owes it to nonviolent drug offenders caught in the horror show that is the U.S. prison system, the families of innocent victims of the Mexican drug wars and economically bloodied U.S. taxpayers to explain why. Ganja may cause the giggles, but legalization shouldn't be a laughing matter. And it certainly shouldn't be treated as cavalierly as it has by the current administration, especially when it has been proven to be a popular issue every time Obama has tried to go straight to the people.
Fast-forward to today's online town hall, and once again, marijuana legalization proved to be one of the most popular questions, with the most-approved-of pro-pot question being: "Should the U.S. legalize pot as a way to grow jobs and stimulate the economy?"
With all of his usual charisma and endearing jocularity, our president laughed off the question, stating "I don't know what this says about the online audience, but, no, I don't think that is a good strategy to grow the economy." The mewling sycophants in the East Room audience laughed and burst into applause.
Once again, the Obama administration has greeted this question with an out-and-out rejection, with no reasoning underlying their position. Let's ignore for a moment that Obama's answer, in and of itself, is deeply wrong and ill-informed; moving from zero taxes on weed to any taxes is obviously an increase in revenue, not to mention the shift of growing and supplying jobs from the black market to legitimacy, which means more revenue in income taxes and more jobs.
Now, couple this with the millions, if not billions, of dollars that would be saved without the government being responsible for the care and feeding of hundreds of thousands of nonviolent drug offenders. From 1965 through the election of Barack Obama, our government arrested 20 million people for possession of marijuana. That, folks, is a lot of stoners.
In 2006 alone -- the last year for which statistics are available -- 829,625 people were arrested on marijuana-related charges, according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report. Of these, 89 percent were arrested for simple possession.
So, couple the tax revenues, both sales and income, with the savings involved in keeping potheads out on the streets instead of in the pen. Now, put that Everest-sized pile of cash aside for a moment and think about this: Who's losing money in the deal?
According to Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, fully 75 percent of Mexican drug cartels' cash comes from the sale of marijuana. Legalizing marijuana would, of course, take away that massive source of income for the cartels, just as ending prohibition cut bootlegging as a source of revenue for La Cosa Nostra.
Combining all of the above effects, the legalization of marijuana means billions of dollars saved or made, the creation of jobs and the curbing of violence along the Mexican border, which in turn means saving thousands of lives.
Barack Obama can certainly be against legalization, but he owes it to nonviolent drug offenders caught in the horror show that is the U.S. prison system, the families of innocent victims of the Mexican drug wars and economically bloodied U.S. taxpayers to explain why. Ganja may cause the giggles, but legalization shouldn't be a laughing matter. And it certainly shouldn't be treated as cavalierly as it has by the current administration, especially when it has been proven to be a popular issue every time Obama has tried to go straight to the people.
Committee Meeting
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Call To Order: Order
First order of business, nomination for Secretary
Susan Smith volunteers.
Nomination for President: Kyle Bussey
Vote to adopt Mission Statement. From fax sent to Senator Wyden
Ss: yes
KB: yes
Selection of Lane County Oregon as pilot county to focus on.
KB: moves to send e-mail to Faye Stewart requesting affiliations and committee information. What stimulus money he expects to be handling?
Ss: moves to send e-mail to Bill Dwyer requesting affiliations and committee information. What stimulus money he expects to be handling?
Report on Initial Contacts by KB
We have sent a fax outlining our proposal to Senator Wyden in his DC office care of Jacquelyn Elder.
Attention Jacquelyn Elder
Kyle Bussey
47822 HWY 101
Bandon, Oregon 97411
541 347-3509
Iris@theEYElady.org
Friday, March 20, 2009 I spoke with the DC office about Accountability to the citizens of the United States of America for how the Stimulus funds are being spent. I want to speak with you about the Citizen Oversight Committee system outlined below.
Sen. Ron Wyden (DEM)
District: 0S2 United States Senate 230 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510-0001 Phone: (202) 224-5244
Fax: (202) 228-2717
Accountability to the Citizens of the United States of America for how the Stimulus funds are being spent.
The citizens of The United States of America wish to exercise their right to know how the people’s money is being spent. To this end, we request that strict detailed accounting measures be put in place so that we, as a nation, can track and account how the Trillions of the people’s money in the Stimulus Funds of 2008-2009 are being dispersed and ultimately spent. We wish to be able to track and account for the funds as it goes from the Federal Treasury to the States to the County level, to the city level and down through the “Not for Profit”, NGO, Contractor level. The detail of accounting information should include the prices for materials, wage\hour, fees, and be detailed enough to provide a complete break down on every project, how the recipients were chosen, complete access to board/committee correspondence and meeting notes in which the peoples business is being conducted, who had influence in the selection process and what prior business they have had with the granting agencies. This accounting information and grantee database information should be made available and stored in a standardized easily usable format so that any citizen could access and scrutinize the databases from any public library or home computer. I propose the setting up of citizen monitoring committees, which would be organized at the county level, with full access to the data. Saturday, March 20, 2009 my wife and I are having a public meeting to start the process in Bandon, Oregon. (http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/gptq7y )
Kyle Bussey & Susan Smith
Idol young people who have delayed educations, inadequate educations, and difficulty finding jobs are expected to delay marrying and having families. This fights biology as a persons most fertile period is in their late teens and early 20s. We need to analyze and deal with these facts.
Personally as a pediatrician, I found the highest teen birth rates in three groups. 1. Teens in distressed families (drug addict or absent parents [not single moms], poverty where parents are working 2-3 jobs, overextended and therefore technically absent and rich parents with unsupervised kids); 2. Teens in very religious families relying on abstinence, that wouldn't talk about sex, leaving kids to figure it out on their own (these kids constantly were super rebellious); and 3. idol teens who had no hobbies except hanging out with friends and who had self-esteem problems such that they would do anything to appear popular.
The saddest case that is a commentary on how we talk but don't help distressed teens and families was an eighth grade girl who told me she purposely got pregnant because she wanted someone to "love her." She had lived mainly on the streets taking care of herself in South Carolina (the bible belt) where social services were inadequate to help her. Her parents were unavailable. The churches, schools, and social services viewed her as important and worthwhile as a dead dog. What do you expect! Three girls in her class were pregnant that year.
Until we promote individual worth; provide adequate eduation so that kids are motivated to learn and therefore kept busy with self motivation(our high school education is like a junior high education in most civilized countries - teachers are in general miserably undertrained); teach kids the value of being involved with others and with activities such as the arts, volunteering, involvement with government and social services, gardening, sports without a goal of being a major leager; teach that community and family is more important than self and instant gratification or material goods; promote a village atmosphere where people in one small neighborhood or a few blocks in a city know each other, meet regularly with each other (difficult with two jobs and long commutes) and help each other (70 % of Americans don't know their neighbors); make real job training and jobs available to young men and women; reform laws so that like in Europe women can stay home with a child the first two years of life and still have a job available and career available when they return to work, we will make no progress in regards to teen births or abortions.
We need to shift our priorities and donations to the REAL problems that result in teen pregnancies and abortions. If we simply fight about ideology nothing will be accomplished. United We Stand, Divided We Fall. Perhaps it is time to agree to disagree on ideology and work together on issues that we all agree upon!
The benefits would be enormous. We would not just deal with teen pregnancies and reduce abortions, we would reduce crime and increase our countries productivity saving huge amounts of money and rebuilding our economy.
We have long, hard work ahead of us before people stop being afraid of a diverse USA that is unified in their desire to rebuild America's moral standing in the wold and through that, it's wealth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk is more popular than are videos of Barack Obama. Think about that and do something about it!
KCUF, 128 Kb/s on Shoutcast Unlimited: http://tinyurl.com/kcuf-on-shoutcast-limited/ to play, http://www.urdomain.us/playing.html to see what's playing, and now available on RECIVA Internet-Radio receivers, http://tinyurl.com/kcuf-on-reciva
KCUF can now be listened to using a Windows Vista Sidebar Gadget: http://gallery.live.com/results.aspx?bt=1&q=KCUF
If you haven't already, please add your name to this online petition for a Truth Commission. What you are signing on to:
I hereby join Senator Patrick Leahy's call for the establishment of a truth and reconciliation commission, to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's constitutional abuses so we make sure they never happen again. These abuses may include the use of torture, warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.A truth and reconciliation commission should be tasked with seeking answers so that we can develop a shared understanding of the failures of the recent past. Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuit of what actually happened. The best way to move forward is getting to the truth and finding out what happened -- so we can make sure it does not happen again. Signed by:[Your name]
I hereby join Senator Patrick Leahy's call for the establishment of a truth and reconciliation commission, to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's constitutional abuses so we make sure they never happen again. These abuses may include the use of torture, warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.A truth and reconciliation commission should be tasked with seeking answers so that we can develop a shared understanding of the failures of the recent past. Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuit of what actually happened. The best way to move forward is getting to the truth and finding out what happened -- so we can make sure it does not happen again.
