United Nations' threat: No more parental rights
"Expert: Pact would ban spankings, homeschooling if children object"
*************************
Parents... YOU have to see this... and read it carefully... and then get hold of your Senators and insist that they vote against ratifying this treaty! Once ratified it becomes the law of the land... even though it originated in the UN!
Read the article at:
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87929
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Secret Trials and Continued Rendition the Obama Way!
Secret Trials and Continued Rendition the Obama Way!
By J. D. Longstreet
++++++++++++++++++What the heck is going on in Obama’s Oval Office? Is there something in the White House water? Here, of late, Obama’s actions tend to resemble, more and more, those of his predecessor, George W. Bush.
Remember Obama criticizing Bush for those Military Tribunals used to try captured terrorists… many of whom were/are incarcerated at Gitmo?? If you remember the campaign, to hear Obama tell it, why, it was terrible… truly awful to subject those poor terrorists to “secret” trials!
Well, guess what? Obama, himself, has approved “secret trials” for those same prisoners. Basically, all Obama has done is change the name of the court.
Under the Obama regime, they will not be Military Tribunals. It has been reported that the Obama administration may support the establishment of something called a “National Security Court,”, which will be, as we understand it, a court, within the civilian court system, to try Guantanamo prisoners and other alleged terrorists. But… the trials will be secret! So… is this hypocrisy, or political correctness… or both? It looks to us as if all the Obama administration will have done is… change the name of the court and change the judges clothing from military uniforms to civvies!
Look, Military Tribunals are as old as the country itself. (actually older) They became especially useful to the US government during, and immediately after, the American Civil War. The point is… there is nothing new about the use of Military Tribunals by the US.
In the sort of trials necessary, when trying “enemy combatants,” certain “facts” out of necessity, must be, and will be, brought out in testimony. Included will be certain information, which if made public in a public trial would, without doubt, give aid to the enemies of the US. There is no doubt the enemy would use it against us in their covert war, and even their overt war, resulting in the deaths of more Americans. So, the US cannot allow this information to be made public. No country can allow that.
There must, of necessity, be a way to try these individuals without endangering the lives of Americans or compromising the security of the country. There is. They are called Military Tribunals.
Obama continually complained about the use of those military tribunals and vowed to get rid of them if elected. Well, he was elected.
It can be an amazing transformation to watch someone who has only a portion of the truth suddenly change his public stance on an issue… once he has all the facts, isn’t it?
Remember Obama criticizing Bush for those Military Tribunals used to try captured terrorists… many of whom were/are incarcerated at Gitmo?? If you remember the campaign, to hear Obama tell it, why, it was terrible… truly awful to subject those poor terrorists to “secret” trials!
Well, guess what? Obama, himself, has approved “secret trials” for those same prisoners. Basically, all Obama has done is change the name of the court.
Under the Obama regime, they will not be Military Tribunals. It has been reported that the Obama administration may support the establishment of something called a “National Security Court,”, which will be, as we understand it, a court, within the civilian court system, to try Guantanamo prisoners and other alleged terrorists. But… the trials will be secret! So… is this hypocrisy, or political correctness… or both? It looks to us as if all the Obama administration will have done is… change the name of the court and change the judges clothing from military uniforms to civvies!
Look, Military Tribunals are as old as the country itself. (actually older) They became especially useful to the US government during, and immediately after, the American Civil War. The point is… there is nothing new about the use of Military Tribunals by the US.
In the sort of trials necessary, when trying “enemy combatants,” certain “facts” out of necessity, must be, and will be, brought out in testimony. Included will be certain information, which if made public in a public trial would, without doubt, give aid to the enemies of the US. There is no doubt the enemy would use it against us in their covert war, and even their overt war, resulting in the deaths of more Americans. So, the US cannot allow this information to be made public. No country can allow that.
There must, of necessity, be a way to try these individuals without endangering the lives of Americans or compromising the security of the country. There is. They are called Military Tribunals.
Obama continually complained about the use of those military tribunals and vowed to get rid of them if elected. Well, he was elected.
It can be an amazing transformation to watch someone who has only a portion of the truth suddenly change his public stance on an issue… once he has all the facts, isn’t it?
As President Obama was suddenly included “in the loop.” apparently, it became clear to him that the trials of those terrorists must be kept secret. But, he had to save face as well. So, the idea of the National Security Court is being floated around, in our opinion, only as a way to avoid embarrassment for Obama. In our opinion, Obama couldn’t make himself look anymore foolish than he already did by making such a naive vow to get rid of the Military Tribunals! It was just a dumb thing to say when he only had a portion of the facts at hand. Again, the National Security Court, if it becomes reality, will be nothing more than a “CYA move” by the Obama administration… nothing more.
What about rendition? That is the practice of shipping the prisoners overseas to prisons in countries friendly to the US, but countries that do not hew as closely to the “no torture type of inquisition” of prisoners as does the US. Well, under the new Obama rules, guess what? The renditions will continue!
There is some talk that the prisoners may be shipped to prisons in their homelands, whenever possible. Sounds humane, now doesn’t it. Well, maybe. But consider the systems of justice in many of the prisoner’s homelands. I mean, some of them don’t worry a great deal about “prisoner’s rights.” Their methods haven’t change much since, oh, about the 12th century. Some of them still practice beheading! But putting them in prisons in their homelands SOUNDS nice to our liberal brethren and sisteren.
Don’t you just hate it when someone thinks you are gullible enough to buy into the empty promises of politicians, any politician, especially when they are so arrogant as to be blatantly obvious about putting the lie to those promises as soon as they are sworn into office? Oh, wait! 53 % of the American electorate did just that!
The election of Obama was a victory for ignorance in America. As we watch the Obama appointments for the various government agencies in the Obama administration forced to take their names out of consideration, for one reason or another, Americans are getting out of bed each morning, pouring that first cup of coffee, and anxiously opening their morning newspapers to acquaint themselves with the latest Obama blunder. Less than a month in office and the Obama administration has become a joke. But 47% of the American electorate isn’t laughing!
What about rendition? That is the practice of shipping the prisoners overseas to prisons in countries friendly to the US, but countries that do not hew as closely to the “no torture type of inquisition” of prisoners as does the US. Well, under the new Obama rules, guess what? The renditions will continue!
There is some talk that the prisoners may be shipped to prisons in their homelands, whenever possible. Sounds humane, now doesn’t it. Well, maybe. But consider the systems of justice in many of the prisoner’s homelands. I mean, some of them don’t worry a great deal about “prisoner’s rights.” Their methods haven’t change much since, oh, about the 12th century. Some of them still practice beheading! But putting them in prisons in their homelands SOUNDS nice to our liberal brethren and sisteren.
Don’t you just hate it when someone thinks you are gullible enough to buy into the empty promises of politicians, any politician, especially when they are so arrogant as to be blatantly obvious about putting the lie to those promises as soon as they are sworn into office? Oh, wait! 53 % of the American electorate did just that!
The election of Obama was a victory for ignorance in America. As we watch the Obama appointments for the various government agencies in the Obama administration forced to take their names out of consideration, for one reason or another, Americans are getting out of bed each morning, pouring that first cup of coffee, and anxiously opening their morning newspapers to acquaint themselves with the latest Obama blunder. Less than a month in office and the Obama administration has become a joke. But 47% of the American electorate isn’t laughing!
Note from Ed:
Here are two articles in which you may be interested..
From the LA Times entitled:"Obama preserves renditions as counter-terrorism tool"
You'll find it HERE.
From the LA Times entitled:"Obama preserves renditions as counter-terrorism tool"
You'll find it HERE.
And this one from the World Socialist Website entitled: ""Obama's orders leave framework of torture, indefinite detention intact"
J. D. Longstreet
******************
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
The New Bad Deal ... by Alan Caruba
The New Bad Deal
By Alan Caruba
In 1939, ten years after the crash on Wall Street, the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., told the House Ways and Means Committee:
“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong…somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises…I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started…And an enormous debt to boot!”
Does history repeat itself? Yes, it does. And there is every appearance that the White House and the Congress intends to repeat many of the errors of the last Depression that came to be known as Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal.
With exquisite timing, after ten years of research, professor of history, Burton Folsom, Jr. has published “New Deal or Raw Deal? How FDR’s Economic Legacy has Damaged America” ($27.00, Threshold Editions).
To get an idea of just how bad the U.S. economy was during the 1930’s, Folsom notes that, even though the U.S. had budget surpluses in 1930 and 1931, government spending “ballooned and far outstripped revenue from taxes.” It was the Wall Street Crash of 1929 that precipitated the Depression, but it was FDR’s “solutions” that deepened and lengthened it, actually preventing any solution.
Initially voted into office in 1933, from 1937 to 1939 “the value of all stocks dropped almost in half…Car sales plummeted one-third in those same years, and were lower in 1939 than in any of the last seven years of the 1920s. Business failures jumped 50 percent from 1937 to 1939; patent applications for inventions were lower in 1939 than for any years of the 1920s. Real estate foreclosures, which did decrease steadily in the 1930s, were still higher in 1939 than in any years during the next two decades.”
FDR was an enormously popular President in his day. His photo could be found everywhere in people’s homes and apartment, in barbershops, in businesses, and just about anywhere people gathered, but he not only did not solve the nation’s economic problems, he made them worse with the help of a Congress. By 1936 Congress was totally dominated by the Democrat Party in ways that exceeded any previous party for 150 years.
Obama’s youth and lack of experience to occupy the Oval Office should worry people. He arrived with a very slim resume and not even a single completed term as a Senator. What he knows and believes about the conduct of business in America is anyone’s guess, but it clearly reflects that bad economic policies of his party that have got us to this point.
As Prof. Folsom points out, “In part, his family’s wealth immunized him from having to learn how business worked or how to earn money.” He had been a mediocre student, getting by with a C average. Though he did not finish law school, he did pass the bar exam, but he showed little talent or interest in the practice of law. Oliver Wendell Holmes later observed of Roosevelt that he had “a second class intellect, but a first-class temperament.”
It was Roosevelt’s sunny and apparently endless optimism that buoyed up a nation that listen to his radio “fireside chats” and speeches. He was always convinced that whatever new program the New Dealers tried was bound to turn the economy around. Not only did they not achieve this, they saddled generations of Americans with a Ponzi scheme called Social Security and poured money into states and areas for solely political, not economic, purposes.
FDR was Governor of New York when the Wall Street Crash precipitated the Depression. Prof. Folsom identified several factors that led up to it. The First World War (U.S. participation from 1917-1918) had been a financial and social catastrophe that drove up the national debt from $1.3 to $24 billion in just three years. Ten billion loaned to European nations during the war largely went unpaid after the conflict.
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, debated and passed during 1929 and 1930, instituted the highest tariffs ever, intended to protect U.S. industries by taxing 3,218 imported items. It enraged Europe, the nation’s greatest trading partner at the time. “Our exports, therefore, dropped from $7 billion in 1929 to $2.5 billion in 1932” and, with them, went the jobs of Americans.
“The third cause of the Great Depression,” writes Prof. Folsom, “was the poor performance of the Federal Reserve…In practice, the Fed had raised interest rates four times, from 3.5 to 6 percent, during 1928 and 1929. This made it harder for businessmen to borrow money to invest, which hindered economic growth.” In addition, the Fed let hundreds of banks fail rather than lending them money to continue operating.
In the same way President Obama spoke of “spreading the money around” as his economic plan to keep Americans prosperous, FDR spoke of a “more equitable distribution of the national income.” Giving money to people who don’t even pay taxes is an example of this.
Roosevelt and his “brain trust” of academics, most of whom had never met a payroll in their lives, really put the nation’s economy on the skids with their National Industrial Recovery Act in 1933. “It allowed American industrialists to collaborate to set the prices of their products, and even the wages and hours that went into making them.” The competition in the marketplace ceased and one could actually be sent to jail for offering a product or service for less than the fixed amount.
The NRA and the Agricultural Adjustment Act both had what are commonly called “unintended consequences”, another way of saying that were the worst possible solution because they imposed a centralized planning structure that involved the vast expansion of the federal government to oversee their requirements. Paying farmers not to plant crops, a practice that exists to this day was one of the more idiotic aspects of the AAA.
If this current recession is ever to be ended, massive spending programs that are largely political in nature have to be avoided. Isolating the bad debt acquired by banks, loan companies, and others like the insurance giant, AIG, has to be the top priority.
It is not likely to happen. President Obama, combining the same charm and lack of business acumen as FDR, is likely to pursue the same course of action as he did; he will use the present crisis to build up support for the Democrat Party through various forms of patronage. Employment by various government agencies is likely to expand.
FDR’s popularity was conditional during his first two terms in office. The American public knew he and Congress were not ending the Depression. Today, polls clearly indicate that the American public considers wants the economy strengthened. The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press recently released the findings of a national survey that revealed the economy and jobs are the top priority; higher than at any point in the past decade.
Thus, spending millions or billions to construct “more than 3,000 miles of transmission lines to convey this (solar and wind) new energy from coast to coast” repeats the errors of the past. Solar and wind represent barely one percent of the electricity generated or needed nationwide. The solar and wind farms are always located far from the major urban centers that require megawatts of electricity, currently provided primarily by coal and nuclear power. How much better and wiser it would be to update the current electrical grid and to build plants closer to where they are needed than to waste money on just this one project?
Politics, the pursuit of power, and the liberal’s distrust of capitalism will likely force a new generation of Americans to repeat what those in the 1930s experienced for no good reason.
Alan Caruba writes a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/. Every week, he posts a column on the website of The National Anxiety Center, http://www.anxietycenter.com/.
Monday, February 2, 2009
I Do Not Hate Obama!
.jpg)
I Do Not Hate Obama! J. D. Longstreet
*********************
A few days ago, a dear friend, who happens to be a liberal, accused me of hating Obama. At first I was shocked. Then I began to reason it out and came to understand that the intolerance, within which the liberal left lives, would certainly trigger that extreme response to one who simply does not agree with another man’s political philosophy.
I do not hate Obama. I don’t even KNOW the guy! What I DO know and what I DO hate is his socialist political philosophy. You know, I might even lighten up a bit on socialism if it were not a proven fact of history that it destroys nations and rots free men’s souls. It is the most cruel of all political philosophies on the earth currently. Some day there might be something worse, but, frankly, I cannot see how anything short of Satan, himself, setting up rule on earth that could possibly be any worse that socialism and Obama is the leader of the socialist movement in America today, by right of his having gained the office of President of the United States.
It is Mr. Obama’s socialism I hate.
Of course, he has many other failings. He is quite likely the most naive President this country has ever had. He has, indisputably, a “Messiah Complex”. The Messiah Complex is said to be the will, the intention, and yes, the compulsion to be a messiah, to be the redeemer and savior of the world. Surely you have seen this complex in Mr. Obama. And this is what makes it so troubling: The messianic wish is not just a wish to improve things generally for the better, but the wish of that person with the complex TO BE, personally, the messiah, the redeemer, of the world.
People with the messiah complex are dangerous. You see, if a group of people considers an individual to be a messiah, that person doesn't actually have to claim to be a messiah himself. But if he is treated as such, by his followers, then he can, rightly, be said to be a person with a Messiah Complex. Confusing, what? What you then have… is a cult. I think it is safe to say we have a national cult built around Mr. Obama in this country today… and it is headed toward disaster.
Mr. Obama strikes me as a person with a strong Inferiority Complex, as well. As such, he must (he is compelled to) continually prove his superiority. In an individual this can lead to all sorts of trouble. In an individual who happens to be a leader of a nation it can lead to national disaster. All one has to do is look to the history of the nation of Germany to learn how a leader with a monstrous inferiority complex can lead a nation to ruin.
I can’t see how anyone, having observed the outpouring of love for the man, (or messiah) Obama, during the two years of campaigning leading up to his election can possible deny there is an Obama cult in America. What makes it doubly dangerous is the fact that it has, indeed, become a national cult very similar to that in Germany in the 1930’s.
Then, there is Mr. Obama’s globalist view. His IS a globalist. Globalists believe... at their core, in global governance… a one world government. That is another Utopian idea of the leftists, the Marxists and the Socialists
Having said all this... let me reemphasize that Mr. Obama’s overt socialism troubles me more than any of the other problems of this, in my opinion, deeply flawed man. Of all his problems this is the one that will bring the most pain and suffering to the people of this nation.
It is some comfort to know that 46% of the electorate of this country were not taken in by the slick packaging of Mr. Obama, which played on his would be messiah image. That means that a little less than half of the electorate have not loss their grasp on reality.
The question now is... how long before the cult, which has sprung up around Mr,. Obama, will turn on him? And turn on him they will, for he certainly cannot fulfill their hopes and dreams and the incredibly high expectations they have of their "messiah".
Mr. Obama is doomed to failure. I hate the effects of what will happen between the people of the Obama cult and the sane people in this country when Obama’s failure becomes so acute that even the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party, the Mainstream Media, will not be able to cover it up with their reams of propaganda.
No, I don’t hate Mr. Obama. I hate what he stands for and what he represents… mainly socialism.
J. D. Longstreet
***************
Obama Prepares To Talk With Iran; Israel Prepares To Attack
Obama Prepares To Talk With Iran; Israel Prepares To Attack J. D. Longstreet
As it becomes more and more likely that the Obama regime is going to embrace Iran, Israel appears to have given up any hope it had that the US, under Obama, would be a real friend to Israel and assist in Israel’s coming attack on the Persian nation to destroy their Atom Bomb making capabilities.
With Israel’s election a little less than two weeks away now it is looking more likely that our favorite Benjamin Netanyahu is going to be the next Prime Minister of Israel. A former Israeli Special Forces officer, Bebe Netanyahu is no push over and he seems always ready for a fight. He will not hold back from a preemptive strike against Iran.
Netanyahu said last week at the World Economic Forum that neutralizing Iran's leaders would reduce the danger posed to Israel and others by Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah militants in south Lebanon. "We have had two wars with two Iranian proxies in two years and Persia has now two bases on the eastern Mediterranean," said Netanyahu. He went on to say: “"I think we are going to have to deal with neutralizing the power of the mother regime." The “mother regime,” of course, is the country of Iran, itself.
The new US Secretary of State is going to have her hands full with Bebe. Mrs. Clinton may be smart, but Netanyahu is no slouch in the brains department and he is quick on his feet and a fighter to boot. And, unlike so many world leaders today, including “The Obama”, Netanyahu is not fooling himself as to Iran’s actions nor Iran’s intentions once she possess the atom bomb. Netanyahu said: "We have never had, since the dawn of the nuclear age, nuclear weapons in the hands of such a fanatical regime,”. He said Iran’s possession of the nuclear bomb is the world’s greatest challenge at the start of this new century.
Hamas, according to Netanyahu, will never be at peace with Israel. He questions what kind of agenda Israel can have with an organization that seeks to wipe Israel from the face of the planet. Netanyahu insists that stopping Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons ranks above dealing with the meltdown of the world’s economy, explaining that the economy problems are reversible, but Iran obtaining nuclear weapons is not.
You’ll find an excellent article on this HERE.
Meantime, back at the ranch… here in the states, of course, Obama's aides have drafted a letter in his name to Iranian leaders that aims to thaw relations between the two countries. This is according to an article in “The Guardian”, a British newspaper. The Guardian goes on to say that at least three drafts of the letter have been composed. The report says the letter seeks to assure the Iranian leaders that the US does not want to change the regime in Iran, the US merely seeks to change the behavior of the Persian state.
Although the letter will be addressed to the Iranian people it will be sent directly to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, or it may be released as an just an open letter.
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is calling for an apology, from the US, for what it feels are past wrongs done to Iran by the US. Ahmadinejad is quoted as having said: "Those who say they want to make change, this is the change they should make: They should apologize to the Iranian nation and try to make up for their dark background and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation,"
So, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton begins her tenure in office and she cannot look forward to dealing with these two hot spots on the map. She should understand that, hopefully, with Netanyahu at the helm in Israel, Israel will do pretty much what Israel chooses simply because the Israeli government does not trust the Obama government. Israel will not be seeking guidance or input from the US when it comes to matters of Israel’s national security.
As far as Iran is concerned… Iran is going to do whatever it wants regardless of what the US promises, even after an apology from the US. Iran wants to see the US grovel as it did during the Carter administration. Ahmadinejad is convinced the US has another Carter in the White House and, on that, we agree with Ahmadinejad.
If we could make a simple suggestion to the Obama regime, which would solve both problems at once, we would suggest that the US shut up, and get out of Israel’s way and allow the IDF to take care of the Persian Problem. But don’t hold your breath. With a Prima Donna in the White House and another at the office of Sec. State they are not about to allow anything to happen without their very public fingerprints all over it. After all, whatever it is, it is, first and foremost, about them!
J. D. Longstreet
+++++++++++++++++++++
href="http://technorati.com/tag/Conservative+Netanyahu+Obama+Iran" rel="tag">Conservative+Netanyahu+Obama+Iran
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Obama’s Climate Czar Listed as Member of Commission Sponsored by Socialist International
Obama’s Climate Czar Listed as Member of Commission Sponsored by Socialist International
For details on this eye-opening story see the article HERE.
Freedom's Dream Is Not Dead! ... by J. D. Longstreet
Freedom’s Dream is Not Dead!
J. D. Longstreet
**************
Now let’s see: Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, and yes, even Lebanon, to some degree. All these nations are on their way to becoming democratic.
So “war solves nothing”, huh? Care to rethink you position on that? I thought not. When one entrenches oneself into self doubt as deeply as the peaceniks have, it is nigh impossible to extract them. So, we will simply overlook them, as we have always done. They line the fringes of our society, anyway.
No one likes war. But, contrary to what the peaceniks tell us, war does bring change for the better. Ask the Brits, the French, the Germans the Belgium’s, the Jews…. and the list goes on. (The French may still be too arrogant to admit it, but, regardless of what they tell themselves, the remainder of the world knows they exist as a nation only because of the efforts of US and allied servicemen in two world wars.)
War changes things. The Middle East, for better or for worse, is changed forever. The US has a beachhead in the Middle East and we will be there forever. We are not going to leave. As the democracies begin to shape up, and form up, and freedom begins to spread, those who hold the dictator’s reins now will find themselves out of a job. Those who would hold the Middle East back in the 14th century will find they, alone, are left in the past. The people are going to move on to liberty and freedom. One a people have tasted freedom. It is not possible to strip them of it again.
Now we can only hope that liberty will blossom, and bloom, in the Middle East. If it does it will be the US to thank. The US took a stand in the Middle East when the rest of the world would not. The US alone had a vision of a free people who would seek after democracy. Old Europe, now irrelevant, stood on the sidelines as history passed them by. There they will remain. What they do, or say is of no consequence to anyone but themselves. It is sad to see a continent commit suicide.
In the meantime, America marches on. Ronald Reagan’s dream of America as a great “shining city on a hill” is in deep peril with the current administration of socialists in charge both in the White House and in the Congress. Among conservative Americans, Reagan’s dream still perseveres. We conservatives still believe that Reagan’s dream is, in fact, the last hope of a world, which lost its way. We include America among those nations that have lost their way today. It is truly sad.
********************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)