Monday, August 31, 2009
French Government Plans Mass Swine Flu Vaccination Program
From http://www.infowars.com/french-government-plans-mass-swine-flu-vaccination-program/
French Government Plans Mass Swine Flu Vaccination Program
Text size
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, August 31, 2009
A shocking internal document outlines the French government’s plans to impose a mass swine flu vaccination program on the entire population which would be focused around regional vaccination centers and would be carried out by H1N1 injection teams, completely bypassing medical establishments and GP’s.
French Health Minister Roselyne Bachelot told the Associated Press last week that the vaccination campaign would be “voluntary,” but she urged all French residents to receive the shot when the vaccine becomes ready in mid-October. 94 million doses of the vaccine, more than enough to cover France’s population of 61.5 million, were purchased at a cost of €1 billion euros and the first batches have already been received.
However, a leaked internal government document signed by Batchelot and Minister of the Interior Brice Hortefeux describes a systematic procedure for vaccinating the entire population via specially secured “vaccination centers” that will be set up across the country and staffed by vaccine “teams” working in four hour bloc shifts.
According to the document, schoolchildren will also be vaccinated by mobile injection squads who will travel from school to school, covering the entire country. Babies from 6 months old will also be given the shot.
Crucially, GP’s and medical establishments will have no role in the vaccination program, a factor that leaves the plan resembling more of a military operation than a public health campaign.
While avoiding volatile rhetoric about “forced” injections, the document does state that the entire population will be vaccinated without exception, thereby implying that the shots will be mandatory, contradicting public statements made by Health Minister Batchelot.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Another vital aspect to the document is that it describes tracking procedures for keeping tabs on who has and who has not taken the vaccine, which will be done through microchipped state medical ID cards that all French residents hold by law. Data will be centralized to identify those citizens who have not taken the vaccine.
According to an analysis of the document posted on theflucase.com, “Data from the health insurance bodies are to be used to ensure that everyone receives the toxic “swine flu” jab. The need to implement measures to track every single person in France to determine whether they have been vaccinated or not is stressed.”
The August 21st document issued by the French government appears to be a chilling plan to initiate the mass murder of the French population by means of toxic vaccines under the cover of offering protection against a pandemic in just four weeks time.
Similar documents are believed to be circulating in all 194 member states of the WHO.
It is addressed to high ranking government officials who are ordered to prepare to supervise and coordinate the implementation of the forced vaccination programme in their regions, and to submit appropriate plans by the middle of September.
The general public is only to be “informed” at the end of September of the plans by means of communications to the local press.
The establishment of large-scale vaccine centers in “secure” facilities is a chilling echo of the Nazi concentration camps such as Buchenwald where inmates were killed by injections.
The French plan lists in detail the duties the “vaccination” teams are to perform, the layout of the vaccination centers, the location of the furniture, such as tables, and the number of vaccinations to be carried out in specific time frames by centers of various sizes.
The number of people prescribed to be vaccinated in four-hour sessions by a typical “vaccine team” is 360.
A typical vaccination “post” is to consist of “three agents”, one “agent” responsible for “preparing” the vaccines, one for administering them and one for tracking people who have been vaccinated.
The document mentions French laws (Article L3131-8 and Article L3131-9) that compel medical personnel to administer vaccines by government decree or face penalties, a factor which clearly implies that some health workers will face difficulties arising out of people who refuse to take the shot.
As we have previously documented, the swine flu vaccine is being rushed through safety procedures while governments have provided pharmaceutical companies with blanket immunity from lawsuits arriving out of the vaccine causing deaths and injuries.
It was previously revealed that some batches of the vaccine will contain mercury, a toxin linked with autism and neurological disorders. The vaccine will also contain the dangerous ingredient squalene, which has been directly linked with cases of Gulf War Syndrome and a host of other debilitating diseases.
It was also recently reported that the UK government sent a confidential letter to senior neurologists telling them to be on the alert for cases of a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.
While the fact that the government would plan to forcibly vaccinate people against their will, amidst rising awareness of the dangers associated with the untested H1N1 vaccine, is a shocking story in and of itself, the question of whether they would ultimately be successful in doing so is another matter entirely.
The French people are renowned for cherishing their personal liberty and resisting government enforced tyranny and are nowhere near as apathetic as their English neighbors across the channel. The French routinely go on strike, conduct mass demonstrations and set up blockades when the government attempts to force through unpopular measures, and the response to an attempt on behalf of the state to forcibly vaccinate people against their will would be no different.
French Government Plans Mass Swine Flu Vaccination Program
Text size
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, August 31, 2009
A shocking internal document outlines the French government’s plans to impose a mass swine flu vaccination program on the entire population which would be focused around regional vaccination centers and would be carried out by H1N1 injection teams, completely bypassing medical establishments and GP’s.
French Health Minister Roselyne Bachelot told the Associated Press last week that the vaccination campaign would be “voluntary,” but she urged all French residents to receive the shot when the vaccine becomes ready in mid-October. 94 million doses of the vaccine, more than enough to cover France’s population of 61.5 million, were purchased at a cost of €1 billion euros and the first batches have already been received.
However, a leaked internal government document signed by Batchelot and Minister of the Interior Brice Hortefeux describes a systematic procedure for vaccinating the entire population via specially secured “vaccination centers” that will be set up across the country and staffed by vaccine “teams” working in four hour bloc shifts.
According to the document, schoolchildren will also be vaccinated by mobile injection squads who will travel from school to school, covering the entire country. Babies from 6 months old will also be given the shot.
Crucially, GP’s and medical establishments will have no role in the vaccination program, a factor that leaves the plan resembling more of a military operation than a public health campaign.
While avoiding volatile rhetoric about “forced” injections, the document does state that the entire population will be vaccinated without exception, thereby implying that the shots will be mandatory, contradicting public statements made by Health Minister Batchelot.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Another vital aspect to the document is that it describes tracking procedures for keeping tabs on who has and who has not taken the vaccine, which will be done through microchipped state medical ID cards that all French residents hold by law. Data will be centralized to identify those citizens who have not taken the vaccine.
According to an analysis of the document posted on theflucase.com, “Data from the health insurance bodies are to be used to ensure that everyone receives the toxic “swine flu” jab. The need to implement measures to track every single person in France to determine whether they have been vaccinated or not is stressed.”
The August 21st document issued by the French government appears to be a chilling plan to initiate the mass murder of the French population by means of toxic vaccines under the cover of offering protection against a pandemic in just four weeks time.
Similar documents are believed to be circulating in all 194 member states of the WHO.
It is addressed to high ranking government officials who are ordered to prepare to supervise and coordinate the implementation of the forced vaccination programme in their regions, and to submit appropriate plans by the middle of September.
The general public is only to be “informed” at the end of September of the plans by means of communications to the local press.
The establishment of large-scale vaccine centers in “secure” facilities is a chilling echo of the Nazi concentration camps such as Buchenwald where inmates were killed by injections.
The French plan lists in detail the duties the “vaccination” teams are to perform, the layout of the vaccination centers, the location of the furniture, such as tables, and the number of vaccinations to be carried out in specific time frames by centers of various sizes.
The number of people prescribed to be vaccinated in four-hour sessions by a typical “vaccine team” is 360.
A typical vaccination “post” is to consist of “three agents”, one “agent” responsible for “preparing” the vaccines, one for administering them and one for tracking people who have been vaccinated.
The document mentions French laws (Article L3131-8 and Article L3131-9) that compel medical personnel to administer vaccines by government decree or face penalties, a factor which clearly implies that some health workers will face difficulties arising out of people who refuse to take the shot.
As we have previously documented, the swine flu vaccine is being rushed through safety procedures while governments have provided pharmaceutical companies with blanket immunity from lawsuits arriving out of the vaccine causing deaths and injuries.
It was previously revealed that some batches of the vaccine will contain mercury, a toxin linked with autism and neurological disorders. The vaccine will also contain the dangerous ingredient squalene, which has been directly linked with cases of Gulf War Syndrome and a host of other debilitating diseases.
It was also recently reported that the UK government sent a confidential letter to senior neurologists telling them to be on the alert for cases of a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.
While the fact that the government would plan to forcibly vaccinate people against their will, amidst rising awareness of the dangers associated with the untested H1N1 vaccine, is a shocking story in and of itself, the question of whether they would ultimately be successful in doing so is another matter entirely.
The French people are renowned for cherishing their personal liberty and resisting government enforced tyranny and are nowhere near as apathetic as their English neighbors across the channel. The French routinely go on strike, conduct mass demonstrations and set up blockades when the government attempts to force through unpopular measures, and the response to an attempt on behalf of the state to forcibly vaccinate people against their will would be no different.
Dan Brown and other information
Dan Brown's "The Lost Symbol" devles more into the history of Freemasonry than just the Illuminati. The Book is a fictional tale on early American history, but it does have truth mixed with falsehoods in it. The book accuses George Washington of being a traitor by working with the British government during the Revolutionary war. In the fictional story, Washington admitted to this in a deathbed confession, while his fellow Masons concealed this information. The confession was concealed in his coffin. What is true is that Freemason Benedict Arnold was a real traitor Arnold desired to surrender the fort at West Point to the British, so the tide of war could be won in the British military's favor. Washington was to meet Arnold on the day when the plot was discovered, but George Washington wasn't a traitor. Historian Robert Cooper, curator of the Grand Lodge of Scotland and a world authority on Freemasonry doesn't want the Rossayln effect (or treasure hunters going in to research the grail or other objects). Dan Brown's fiction is interesting and popular since he mixes real history with fiction in order to inspire inquiry among people. Suprisingly, Freemasons are so fearful of this new book that they are using websites to Dan' Brown's "The Lost Symbol" accurately protray George Washington as becoming a Mason in 1752 at age 20. James Madison and Benjamin Franklin are also Freemasons. According to Cooper, Scottish Masons took the principles of Freemasonry over to America in the first place. "Scotland is different from the rest of the world in that we go back before Freemasonry as an 18th century organisation. We were ordinary working guys - craft guilds - with our own ancient knowledge and rituals. It was the original egalitarian society, and that's what we took to America." He says the first known Freemasons in North America were Scotsmen from Aberdeen and Melrose. "That was in 1648, a hundred years before George Washington. A hundred years after George Washington, during a Masonic ceremony, a Scotsman laid the foundation stone for the Statue of Liberty. Not a bad bit of continuity..." It's not a secret that Scottish Freemasonry had a serious role in the creation of the Revolutionary War era. Some from the Lodge of St. Andrew met in the Green Dragon Tavern in Boston plus on St. Andrews's night on November 30th, 1773. This was done to coordinate the Boston Tea Party (where men dressed up as Mohawks to throw tea in the Boston Harbor). Paul Revere was another Mason involved in the Revolution. After the war, stonemasons from Scottish help build buildings across Washington D.C. The building included the White House and the Capitol Building. Dan Brown's story have Robert Langdon trying to find the secret buried about Washington in his coffin (Robert finds Masonic codes of reference and the researcher can't make sense of the symbolism he knows is a significant find). Langdon talks with a high level Freemason with knowledge of the symbolism of his Order. Dan Brown writes that the FBI and the CIA team up with the Craft in order to suppress the truth. Langdon is murdered before he can explain his findings. The CIA and the FBI are trying to find the confession in the fictional story in order to safegaurd America's intergriy plus its founding father. Probably, the most accurate portion of Dan Brown's "The Lost Symbol" is that Washington D.C. is filled with Masonic and occult symbolism.
The book admits that a Pentagram pattern does exist in the street layout north of the White House. Ironically, the Washington Post called D.C. The Pentagram City. The Pentagram with one side missing is still a specialized Pentagram according to 33rd Degree Freemason Manly P. Hall. The book accurately ponts out that the 1 Dollar Bill isn't just a picture. It has the All Seeing Eye hovering over the unfinished pyramid. As many realize the All Seeing Eye is a representation of the Masonic version of God (which is called the Eye of Providence or the GAOTU) or the Eye of Horus. That is the reason that this Eye isn't Almighty God since Almighty God isn't an eye at all. It admits that the Washington Monument is an obelisk, which it is. The obelisk is a representation of the sun god Ra, Baal or the masculine principle in the esoteric world. Back in the Old Testament days, God told the Israelites to destroy the pillars or obelisk in their lands since they represented old sun worship and paganism. "The Lost Symbol" has truth mixed with spin. What is interesting to point out that Masonic cornerstone rituals occur in D.C. like the Capitol (in the Corn, Wine, and Oil ceremony). The Corn, wine, and oil ritual relates to paganism, but Masons claim it is about joy and celebration.
Edward Kennedy was notoriously anti-Second Amendment. He passed away recently and that is a sad reality, but the truth ought to be known about his personal legacy. Senator Ted Kennedy wanted mandatory internal locks on every firearm and other forms of draconian measures that would heavily violate the rights of citizens to own guns. He must of have this visceral reaction to guns after the evil assassinations of his 2 brothers by assassins. Yet, it's illogical to blame objects for human hatred, while trying to punish innocent human beings. Ironically, Ted Kennedy's private bodyguard being arrested to carry a fully automatic Beretta machine pistol into a Government building. So, bodyguards of anti-gun people can own guns, but certain innocent citizens can't. Well, Ted Kennedy's death shouldn't be disresepected or exploited either for political gain. Kennedy was right on some issues and dead wrong on others. That's the total truth on the man of Edward Kennedy.
By Timothy
The book admits that a Pentagram pattern does exist in the street layout north of the White House. Ironically, the Washington Post called D.C. The Pentagram City. The Pentagram with one side missing is still a specialized Pentagram according to 33rd Degree Freemason Manly P. Hall. The book accurately ponts out that the 1 Dollar Bill isn't just a picture. It has the All Seeing Eye hovering over the unfinished pyramid. As many realize the All Seeing Eye is a representation of the Masonic version of God (which is called the Eye of Providence or the GAOTU) or the Eye of Horus. That is the reason that this Eye isn't Almighty God since Almighty God isn't an eye at all. It admits that the Washington Monument is an obelisk, which it is. The obelisk is a representation of the sun god Ra, Baal or the masculine principle in the esoteric world. Back in the Old Testament days, God told the Israelites to destroy the pillars or obelisk in their lands since they represented old sun worship and paganism. "The Lost Symbol" has truth mixed with spin. What is interesting to point out that Masonic cornerstone rituals occur in D.C. like the Capitol (in the Corn, Wine, and Oil ceremony). The Corn, wine, and oil ritual relates to paganism, but Masons claim it is about joy and celebration.
Edward Kennedy was notoriously anti-Second Amendment. He passed away recently and that is a sad reality, but the truth ought to be known about his personal legacy. Senator Ted Kennedy wanted mandatory internal locks on every firearm and other forms of draconian measures that would heavily violate the rights of citizens to own guns. He must of have this visceral reaction to guns after the evil assassinations of his 2 brothers by assassins. Yet, it's illogical to blame objects for human hatred, while trying to punish innocent human beings. Ironically, Ted Kennedy's private bodyguard being arrested to carry a fully automatic Beretta machine pistol into a Government building. So, bodyguards of anti-gun people can own guns, but certain innocent citizens can't. Well, Ted Kennedy's death shouldn't be disresepected or exploited either for political gain. Kennedy was right on some issues and dead wrong on others. That's the total truth on the man of Edward Kennedy.
By Timothy
Newsweek's Eleanor Clift Wrong: Hyde Amdt Doesn't Stop Abortion in Health Care
From http://lifenews.com/nat5408.html
Newsweek's Eleanor Clift Wrong: Hyde Amdt Doesn't Stop Abortion in Health Care
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 31, 2009
addthis_pub = 'sertelt';
Email RSS Print
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In the latest example of the mainstream medical covering up what pro-life advocates already know and some media outlets have admitted, Newsweek's Eleanor Clift maintains that the Hyde amendment would stop abortion funding in health care. But a pro-life expert says that's not the case.
Clift's weekend column for the weekly magazine claims "opposition forces" have been trying to 'spread misconceptions" about the government-run health care plan funding abortions.
Clift's contention is that the Hyde Amendment, passed in the 1970s to stop abortion funding only in the Medicare program, will block abortion funding in the health care bill.
"It has been the law for more than 30 years to disallow federal money to pay for abortions through the Medicaid program as part of the health services it provides for low-income women," she writes.
"There has been no serious effort in the last three decades to dislodge the Hyde amendment, and it is certainly not part of the current health-care debate. But that hasn't stopped critics from suspecting that Democrats are looking for a back-door way to fund abortions," Clift claims.
Douglas Johnson, the legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, says Clift's analysis is "very tendentious" and that her column reads more like a "Planned Parenthood fundraising letter" than a serious news article attempting to separate fact from fiction.
"Clift's observations about the Hyde Amendment are, I am afraid, a big red herring," he tells LifeNews.com.
"The Hyde Amendment is not a government-wide law. It is a limitation, renewed year to year, that applies only to funds that flow through the annual Health and Human Services appropriations bill -- most importantly, funds for the long-established Medicaid program," Johnson explains.
Johnson says the government-run health care bills in the House and Senate create new programs that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Hyde Amendment.
The first program is a national health insurance plan run directly by the federal government (called "the public option") and the second is a program to provide subsidies to help tens of millions of people buy health insurance.
'The funds to establish these new programs, and the funds that these new programs would expend, would not flow through the HHS appropriations bill and would not be governed by the Hyde Amendment," he said.
So what law would guide abortion funding in these new programs?
The Capps Amendment, which a House committee added to HR 3200 this summer, would set forth the guidelines that Johnson says allow expansive abortion funding.
"Under the Capps Amendment, the Obama Administration would be explicitly authorized to pay for all abortions, from day one, under the big new 'public option' program," he tells LifeNews.com. "This means that a person would not be allowed to enroll in the new government plan unless he or she is willing to pay an additional premium to cover the cost of elective abortions -- in effect, an abortion surcharge."
"Indeed, the Capps Amendment explicitly requires that the federal official who runs the program must calculate the total cost of abortions and increase the premium for all enrollees enough to pay for them," he adds.
"The amendment specifies that this surcharge cannot be less than $12 per enrollee per year, but the amendment does not set an upper limit. Again, this premium specifically for elective abortions is not optional," he adds.
"Thus, under the Obama-backed bill, a federal agency would be writing checks to abortionists to pay for elective abortions, with funds drawn on a federal Treasury account," Johnson concludes. "This is 'government funding of abortion,' pure and simple."
"A vote for H.R. 3200 is indeed a vote for government funding of abortion on a huge scale," he says.
Related web sites:National Right to Life - http://www.NRLC.orgDocumentation - http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/Index.html
Newsweek's Eleanor Clift Wrong: Hyde Amdt Doesn't Stop Abortion in Health Care
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 31, 2009
addthis_pub = 'sertelt';
Email RSS Print
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In the latest example of the mainstream medical covering up what pro-life advocates already know and some media outlets have admitted, Newsweek's Eleanor Clift maintains that the Hyde amendment would stop abortion funding in health care. But a pro-life expert says that's not the case.
Clift's weekend column for the weekly magazine claims "opposition forces" have been trying to 'spread misconceptions" about the government-run health care plan funding abortions.
Clift's contention is that the Hyde Amendment, passed in the 1970s to stop abortion funding only in the Medicare program, will block abortion funding in the health care bill.
"It has been the law for more than 30 years to disallow federal money to pay for abortions through the Medicaid program as part of the health services it provides for low-income women," she writes.
"There has been no serious effort in the last three decades to dislodge the Hyde amendment, and it is certainly not part of the current health-care debate. But that hasn't stopped critics from suspecting that Democrats are looking for a back-door way to fund abortions," Clift claims.
Douglas Johnson, the legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, says Clift's analysis is "very tendentious" and that her column reads more like a "Planned Parenthood fundraising letter" than a serious news article attempting to separate fact from fiction.
"Clift's observations about the Hyde Amendment are, I am afraid, a big red herring," he tells LifeNews.com.
"The Hyde Amendment is not a government-wide law. It is a limitation, renewed year to year, that applies only to funds that flow through the annual Health and Human Services appropriations bill -- most importantly, funds for the long-established Medicaid program," Johnson explains.
Johnson says the government-run health care bills in the House and Senate create new programs that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Hyde Amendment.
The first program is a national health insurance plan run directly by the federal government (called "the public option") and the second is a program to provide subsidies to help tens of millions of people buy health insurance.
'The funds to establish these new programs, and the funds that these new programs would expend, would not flow through the HHS appropriations bill and would not be governed by the Hyde Amendment," he said.
So what law would guide abortion funding in these new programs?
The Capps Amendment, which a House committee added to HR 3200 this summer, would set forth the guidelines that Johnson says allow expansive abortion funding.
"Under the Capps Amendment, the Obama Administration would be explicitly authorized to pay for all abortions, from day one, under the big new 'public option' program," he tells LifeNews.com. "This means that a person would not be allowed to enroll in the new government plan unless he or she is willing to pay an additional premium to cover the cost of elective abortions -- in effect, an abortion surcharge."
"Indeed, the Capps Amendment explicitly requires that the federal official who runs the program must calculate the total cost of abortions and increase the premium for all enrollees enough to pay for them," he adds.
"The amendment specifies that this surcharge cannot be less than $12 per enrollee per year, but the amendment does not set an upper limit. Again, this premium specifically for elective abortions is not optional," he adds.
"Thus, under the Obama-backed bill, a federal agency would be writing checks to abortionists to pay for elective abortions, with funds drawn on a federal Treasury account," Johnson concludes. "This is 'government funding of abortion,' pure and simple."
"A vote for H.R. 3200 is indeed a vote for government funding of abortion on a huge scale," he says.
Related web sites:National Right to Life - http://www.NRLC.orgDocumentation - http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/Index.html
A Primer On “Martial Law”
From http://www.infowars.com/a-primer-on-martial-law/
A Primer On “Martial Law”
Text size
Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.
NewsWithViews
August 31, 2009
It is difficult these days not to come upon some pessimistic patriotic commentator expressing the fear that something called “martial law” may soon be imposed on this country, as the General Government’s response to a new “terrorist attack”, or to the economic and social chaos arising out of a collapse of the monetary and banking systems, or to some other dire event that frightens hapless Americans into trading a sure and certain loss of their liberties for a dollop of conjectural safety.
Whether or not the military personnel are following some specific “code of military law”, “martial law” in this sense purports to set aside the Constitution and all of the other “Laws of the Union” and to substitute therefore the orders of officers in the Armed Forces.
An optimistic patriot might scoff at such fears. But both pessimists and optimists typically share the same implicit first premise: namely, that the form of “martial law” they have in mind is legitimate. Most of the time, this is a rather glaring and dangerous error.
In legal analysis, definitions of terms make all the difference. And “martial law” can be defined in at least four ways:
·First, the term could denote the law that Congress may enact for governance of the Armed Forces and “the Militia of the several States”. This kind of “martial law” is plainly legitimate, because the Constitution delegates to Congress the powers “[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces” and “[t]o provide * * * for governing such Part of the[ Militia of the several States] as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States, respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”. [U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cls. 14 and 16.] With respect to “the land and naval Forces” such “martial law” applies at all times. With respect to the Militia, it applies only when the latter have been “call[ed] forth * * * to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”. [U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 15.] With respect to everyone else, though, it applies not at all. This absolute separation the Fifth Amendment confirms: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger”. “Martial law” (in this first sense), which may (but need not necessarily) dispense with “Grand Jur[ies]”, applies only to “the land and naval forces” and to the Militia in time of “War” (“repel[ling] Invasions”) or “public danger” (“execut[ing] the Laws of the Union” and “suppress[ing] Insurrections”), and to no one else.
Read entire article
A Primer On “Martial Law”
Text size
Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.
NewsWithViews
August 31, 2009
It is difficult these days not to come upon some pessimistic patriotic commentator expressing the fear that something called “martial law” may soon be imposed on this country, as the General Government’s response to a new “terrorist attack”, or to the economic and social chaos arising out of a collapse of the monetary and banking systems, or to some other dire event that frightens hapless Americans into trading a sure and certain loss of their liberties for a dollop of conjectural safety.
Whether or not the military personnel are following some specific “code of military law”, “martial law” in this sense purports to set aside the Constitution and all of the other “Laws of the Union” and to substitute therefore the orders of officers in the Armed Forces.
An optimistic patriot might scoff at such fears. But both pessimists and optimists typically share the same implicit first premise: namely, that the form of “martial law” they have in mind is legitimate. Most of the time, this is a rather glaring and dangerous error.
In legal analysis, definitions of terms make all the difference. And “martial law” can be defined in at least four ways:
·First, the term could denote the law that Congress may enact for governance of the Armed Forces and “the Militia of the several States”. This kind of “martial law” is plainly legitimate, because the Constitution delegates to Congress the powers “[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces” and “[t]o provide * * * for governing such Part of the[ Militia of the several States] as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States, respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”. [U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cls. 14 and 16.] With respect to “the land and naval Forces” such “martial law” applies at all times. With respect to the Militia, it applies only when the latter have been “call[ed] forth * * * to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”. [U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 15.] With respect to everyone else, though, it applies not at all. This absolute separation the Fifth Amendment confirms: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger”. “Martial law” (in this first sense), which may (but need not necessarily) dispense with “Grand Jur[ies]”, applies only to “the land and naval forces” and to the Militia in time of “War” (“repel[ling] Invasions”) or “public danger” (“execut[ing] the Laws of the Union” and “suppress[ing] Insurrections”), and to no one else.
Read entire article
Security Goon Crushes Free Speech: ‘This Ain’t America No More’
From http://www.prisonplanet.com/security-goon-crushes-free-speech-this-aint-america-no-more.html
Security Goon Crushes Free Speech: ‘This Ain’t America No More’
School officer threatens arrest for anti-Obama sign – unflattering representations of our dear leader are illegal
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, August 31, 2009
In a damning indictment of how the First Amendment has been eviscerated, footage from a recent town hall event shows a school security officer threatening a protester with arrest for holding up an anti-Obama sign while declaring that America has ceased to exist, arguing that unflattering representations of our dear leader are illegal.
Despite the fact that there were numerous other signs being displayed at the health care event in Reston, Va., security officer Wesley Cheeks Jr. ordered the protester to pull down the placard, which featured the depiction of Obama as the Joker from Batman with the words “Organizing for National Socialist Health Care – The Final Solution”.
An argument ensued before the protester declared, “This used to be America,” to which the officer responded, “It ain’t no more, OK?”
Cheeks claimed that the protester couldn’t display his sign because it included an image of Obama. Like he’s some kind of religious deity, authority figures somehow think that it is illegal to display a likeness of our dear leader that is anything but flattering.
As anyone with a basic grasp of history understands, when the authorities start oppressing people merely for ridiculing those in power, dictatorship and tyranny soon follows.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
“Sir, leave the picture down,” the officer said. “If you put the picture back up, you’ll be charged with trespassing.”
The officer also ascribes upon himself the power to interpret and invent laws, growling, “If I told you once to take it down and you put it back up, I can charge you with whatever I want to charge you with.”
Cheeks’ brazen contempt for the oath he swore to protect and defend the Constitution is laid bare as he openly trashes everything America stands for and claims that in his eyes the country and by extension the bill of rights itself no longer exists.
This should act as a wake up call to illustrate the shocking reversal of the role of police and security officers from peace officers to political enforcers for the corrupt state.
Officer Cheeks is a member of the Fairfax County Public Schools’ trained School Security Officer team (e mail them), who have refused to comment on the story until their office opens again today.
Watch the clip below.
Security Goon Crushes Free Speech: ‘This Ain’t America No More’
School officer threatens arrest for anti-Obama sign – unflattering representations of our dear leader are illegal
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, August 31, 2009
In a damning indictment of how the First Amendment has been eviscerated, footage from a recent town hall event shows a school security officer threatening a protester with arrest for holding up an anti-Obama sign while declaring that America has ceased to exist, arguing that unflattering representations of our dear leader are illegal.
Despite the fact that there were numerous other signs being displayed at the health care event in Reston, Va., security officer Wesley Cheeks Jr. ordered the protester to pull down the placard, which featured the depiction of Obama as the Joker from Batman with the words “Organizing for National Socialist Health Care – The Final Solution”.
An argument ensued before the protester declared, “This used to be America,” to which the officer responded, “It ain’t no more, OK?”
Cheeks claimed that the protester couldn’t display his sign because it included an image of Obama. Like he’s some kind of religious deity, authority figures somehow think that it is illegal to display a likeness of our dear leader that is anything but flattering.
As anyone with a basic grasp of history understands, when the authorities start oppressing people merely for ridiculing those in power, dictatorship and tyranny soon follows.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
“Sir, leave the picture down,” the officer said. “If you put the picture back up, you’ll be charged with trespassing.”
The officer also ascribes upon himself the power to interpret and invent laws, growling, “If I told you once to take it down and you put it back up, I can charge you with whatever I want to charge you with.”
Cheeks’ brazen contempt for the oath he swore to protect and defend the Constitution is laid bare as he openly trashes everything America stands for and claims that in his eyes the country and by extension the bill of rights itself no longer exists.
This should act as a wake up call to illustrate the shocking reversal of the role of police and security officers from peace officers to political enforcers for the corrupt state.
Officer Cheeks is a member of the Fairfax County Public Schools’ trained School Security Officer team (e mail them), who have refused to comment on the story until their office opens again today.
Watch the clip below.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
The U.S. Invades and Occupies Pakistan
From http://www.infowars.com/the-u-s-invades-and-occupies-pakistan/
The U.S. Invades and Occupies Pakistan
Text size
Talha Mujaddidi
Axis of Logic
August 30, 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
We are watching it happen in the streets. The recurring nightmare has become a grim, new reality for the people of Pakistan. After watching the horrors of the U.S. invasions and occupations of Iraq and neighboring Afghanistan for 8 years, the “war on terror” has finally arrived in The Land of the Pure. Obama is fulfilling his campaign promise to Pakistan. The sudden arrival of U.S. marines, U.S. military Hummers, the hired killers of Blackwater, houses barricaded for U.S. personnel in Islamabad and the construction of the world’s largest U.S. “Embassy” are terrorizing this nation of 180 million people. The U.S. slaughter and destruction in Iraq and neighboring Afghanistan for the last 8 years warn them of what may lie in store for them, their families, their land.
Read entire article
The U.S. Invades and Occupies Pakistan
Text size
Talha Mujaddidi
Axis of Logic
August 30, 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
We are watching it happen in the streets. The recurring nightmare has become a grim, new reality for the people of Pakistan. After watching the horrors of the U.S. invasions and occupations of Iraq and neighboring Afghanistan for 8 years, the “war on terror” has finally arrived in The Land of the Pure. Obama is fulfilling his campaign promise to Pakistan. The sudden arrival of U.S. marines, U.S. military Hummers, the hired killers of Blackwater, houses barricaded for U.S. personnel in Islamabad and the construction of the world’s largest U.S. “Embassy” are terrorizing this nation of 180 million people. The U.S. slaughter and destruction in Iraq and neighboring Afghanistan for the last 8 years warn them of what may lie in store for them, their families, their land.
Read entire article
Congress Seeks To Authorize & Legalize FEMA Camp Facilities
From http://www.infowars.com/congress-seeks-to-authorize-legalize-fema-camp-facilities/
Congress Seeks To Authorize & Legalize FEMA Camp Facilities
Text size
Dprogram
August 30, 2009
A new bill has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives called National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645. This bill if passed into law will direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers otherwise known as FEMA camp facilities on military installations. This is an incredibly disturbing piece of legislation considering that the powers that be have already set in motion an agenda to setup a nationwide marital law apparatus through U.S. Northern Command and the Department of Homeland Security. Apparently, the fusion centers, militarized police, surveillance cameras and a domestic military command is not enough. Even though we already know that detention facilities are already in place, they now want to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency. With the phony debt based economy getting worse and worse by the day, the possibility of civil unrest is becoming a greater threat to the establishment. One need only look at Iceland, Greece and other nations for what might happen in the United States next. With this in mind, it appears as if these so called national emergency centers will be used in a national emergency but only if the national emergency requires large groups of people to be rounded up and detained. If that isn’t the case, than why have these national emergency facilities built in military installations?
If passed HR 645 is passed into law it will direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers otherwise known as FEMA camp facilities on military installations.
Let’s look through the various portions of the bill. Here is section 2 of the bill taken directly from the proposed legislation.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure–
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
The legislation says that the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations. This means that the Secretary of Homeland Security can setup as many FEMA camps within military installations as they want, it just has to be more than 6 of them. On top of that, it also states that the facilities will be used to meet other appropriate needs as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. This could mean anything. If the Secretary of Homeland Security thinks it is appropriate to kill large groups of people like the Nazis did in World War II Germany, than it looks as if this bill would give them the authority to use these facilities for that purpose.
Below is section 3 taken from the bill.
SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be–
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
This section authorizes the Homeland Security Secretary to setup these FEMA camps in closed or open military installations and in regions around the nation. This essentially legalizes any existing FEMA camp infrastructure that has been built in either closed or open military installations and opens the door for additional facilities to be created.
Fortunately, the bill only authorizes $180,000,000 per year for these facilities, but considering that the majority of the detention facilities are probably already built, they won’t need much additional funding. There is no doubt judging from the language of this bill, that it is meant to legalize what they’ve already been doing. After all, FEMA has already been looking at ways to transport large quantities of people to camps, they held a FEMA camp drill which consisted of an illegal alien round up in Iowa and KBR/Halliburtion has already aided in the creation of detention facilities. The rationale behind this legislation is undoubtedly to serve as a mechanism of control if the authorities need facilities to hold large amounts of dissenting people. This is not to help people. One only needs to take a look at what happened during Hurricane Katrina and it is obvious that the government does not care about the people. They didn’t care then, and they don’t care now, and these facilities built or unbuilt will definitely not be utilized for the people’s interest.
Congress Seeks To Authorize & Legalize FEMA Camp Facilities
Text size
Dprogram
August 30, 2009
A new bill has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives called National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645. This bill if passed into law will direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers otherwise known as FEMA camp facilities on military installations. This is an incredibly disturbing piece of legislation considering that the powers that be have already set in motion an agenda to setup a nationwide marital law apparatus through U.S. Northern Command and the Department of Homeland Security. Apparently, the fusion centers, militarized police, surveillance cameras and a domestic military command is not enough. Even though we already know that detention facilities are already in place, they now want to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency. With the phony debt based economy getting worse and worse by the day, the possibility of civil unrest is becoming a greater threat to the establishment. One need only look at Iceland, Greece and other nations for what might happen in the United States next. With this in mind, it appears as if these so called national emergency centers will be used in a national emergency but only if the national emergency requires large groups of people to be rounded up and detained. If that isn’t the case, than why have these national emergency facilities built in military installations?
If passed HR 645 is passed into law it will direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers otherwise known as FEMA camp facilities on military installations.
Let’s look through the various portions of the bill. Here is section 2 of the bill taken directly from the proposed legislation.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure–
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
The legislation says that the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations. This means that the Secretary of Homeland Security can setup as many FEMA camps within military installations as they want, it just has to be more than 6 of them. On top of that, it also states that the facilities will be used to meet other appropriate needs as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. This could mean anything. If the Secretary of Homeland Security thinks it is appropriate to kill large groups of people like the Nazis did in World War II Germany, than it looks as if this bill would give them the authority to use these facilities for that purpose.
Below is section 3 taken from the bill.
SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be–
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
This section authorizes the Homeland Security Secretary to setup these FEMA camps in closed or open military installations and in regions around the nation. This essentially legalizes any existing FEMA camp infrastructure that has been built in either closed or open military installations and opens the door for additional facilities to be created.
Fortunately, the bill only authorizes $180,000,000 per year for these facilities, but considering that the majority of the detention facilities are probably already built, they won’t need much additional funding. There is no doubt judging from the language of this bill, that it is meant to legalize what they’ve already been doing. After all, FEMA has already been looking at ways to transport large quantities of people to camps, they held a FEMA camp drill which consisted of an illegal alien round up in Iowa and KBR/Halliburtion has already aided in the creation of detention facilities. The rationale behind this legislation is undoubtedly to serve as a mechanism of control if the authorities need facilities to hold large amounts of dissenting people. This is not to help people. One only needs to take a look at what happened during Hurricane Katrina and it is obvious that the government does not care about the people. They didn’t care then, and they don’t care now, and these facilities built or unbuilt will definitely not be utilized for the people’s interest.
Banks Hiding Tsunami of Foreclosures
From http://www.roguegovernment.com/Banks_Hiding_Tsunami_of_Foreclosures/17088/0/8/8/Y/M.html
Banks Hiding Tsunami of Foreclosures
Published on 08-29-2009 Email To Friend Print Version
Source: News Max
U.S. banks face a tsunami of home foreclosures soon, says David Karsbol, chief economist at Saxo Bank.
Homeowners may be faced with no choice and will just stop paying their mortgages, he warns.
“I believe we are about to see a tsunami of foreclosures in the U.S. A lot of homes have been held back because if the banks are foreclosing on them they will have to do a writedown on the mortgages they have on their balance (sheets),” Karsbol told CNBC.
“That’s why they have been reluctant to do so.”
Soon homeowners may be looking around their neighborhoods and realizing that their neighbors have opted to stop paying their mortgages and are living scot free, he said.
“The fact that many homeowners are allowed to stay in their houses without paying on their mortgages begs the question: Why should you pay on your mortgage when your neighbor doesn’t?” Karsbol said.
Rising unemployment in the United States is the main cause behind foreclosures, economists and bankers told the Washington Post. Subprime mortgages are becoming less of a culprit.
"It's a much harder nut to crack, unemployment," says Mark A. Calabria, director of financial regulation studies at the Cato Institute.
"It's much easier to bash lenders than to create jobs."
In 2009, the first three months reported the largest share of foreclosures moved to prime loans from subprime loans, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.
“Rising unemployment, for the sake of this downturn, has magnified things considerably,” notes John Snyder, manager of foreclosure programs for NeighborWorks, a large housing counseling group.
“It's less about the payment adjustment.”
Banks Hiding Tsunami of Foreclosures
Published on 08-29-2009 Email To Friend Print Version
Source: News Max
U.S. banks face a tsunami of home foreclosures soon, says David Karsbol, chief economist at Saxo Bank.
Homeowners may be faced with no choice and will just stop paying their mortgages, he warns.
“I believe we are about to see a tsunami of foreclosures in the U.S. A lot of homes have been held back because if the banks are foreclosing on them they will have to do a writedown on the mortgages they have on their balance (sheets),” Karsbol told CNBC.
“That’s why they have been reluctant to do so.”
Soon homeowners may be looking around their neighborhoods and realizing that their neighbors have opted to stop paying their mortgages and are living scot free, he said.
“The fact that many homeowners are allowed to stay in their houses without paying on their mortgages begs the question: Why should you pay on your mortgage when your neighbor doesn’t?” Karsbol said.
Rising unemployment in the United States is the main cause behind foreclosures, economists and bankers told the Washington Post. Subprime mortgages are becoming less of a culprit.
"It's a much harder nut to crack, unemployment," says Mark A. Calabria, director of financial regulation studies at the Cato Institute.
"It's much easier to bash lenders than to create jobs."
In 2009, the first three months reported the largest share of foreclosures moved to prime loans from subprime loans, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.
“Rising unemployment, for the sake of this downturn, has magnified things considerably,” notes John Snyder, manager of foreclosure programs for NeighborWorks, a large housing counseling group.
“It's less about the payment adjustment.”
4 former employees of late term abortionist LeRoy Carhart have come forward with claims of unsafe and illegal practices
From http://www.valuesvoternews.com/2009/08/4-former-employees-of-late-term.html
4 former employees of late term abortionist LeRoy Carhart have come forward with claims of unsafe and illegal practices
Labels: Pro-Life
Related: YouTube yanks another pro-life video but check out the reason why and watch the video to see whether or not you agree
CNN video interview of Dr Carhart late term abortionist and friend of Dr Tiller and blames mainstream pro-lifers for murder of Tiller.
LeRoy Carhart in a US District Court case in 1997 testified that he would dismember unborn babies while the babies were still alive.
From Operation Rescue.....
Whistleblowers Come Forward With Accusations of Illegal, Unsafe Conditions At Carhart’s Abortion Clinic
Press conference today: Will discuss former Carhart employees who are telling of dirty conditions, unqualified staff illegally performing medical duties, illegal late-term abortions, and more
Bellevue, NE – Four former employees of late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart have come forward to tell of unsafe and illegal practices at LeRoy Carhart’s Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic.
Members of Operation Rescue and Rescue the Heartland were contacted directly by three of the women. A fourth woman is working directly with a pro-life attorney to tell her knowledge of illegal and unsafe conditions at Carhart’s clinic.
The women have made allegations that unlicensed staff illegally performed medical duties that they were not trained for or legally qualified to do, such as starting IVs, dispensing medication, and even assisting with surgeries. There were also allegations of general unclean conditions, including dried blood on surgical instruments. In addition, the women told of missing narcotics, illicit drug use by employees, and illegal post-viability abortions.
The women worked for Carhart at various times, yet they all made similar, if not identical allegations when interviewed.
Operation Rescue, Rescue the Heartland, and Nebraskans United for Life will hold a joint press conference to discuss this breaking news and their weekend events:
WHAT: Press Conference
WHEN: Friday, August 28, 2009, at 3:00 PM
WHERE: Nebraskans United For Life office located at 143 South 38th Street, Omaha, NE 68131
One former employee told of incidents where Carhart falsified the gestational age of viable babies in order to circumvent the law. This account matches information uncovered by Operation Rescue during an undercover investigation at the now-closed Women’s Health Care Services in Wichita, Kansas, where Carhart once worked. The worker caught falsifying gestational ages in Kansas now works for Carhart at his Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic. (Read full report.)
The women also chose to contact the Omaha World-Herald to blow the whistle on Carhart. An article detailing their allegations ran this morning. (Read the news story.)
The women have given sworn statements about illegal and unsafe activity at Carhart’s abortion clinic, which will be turned over to the Attorney General’s office and the Nebraska Department of Health, which is investigating Carhart. The women have agreed to cooperate with the investigation.
“We commend these brave women for coming forward to tell of unsafe and illegal conditions that exist at Carhart’s abortion mill,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “Their courage will help protect women whose health and safety at currently at risk.”
Operation Rescue is not releasing the identity of the women out of concern of reprisals against them from Carhart, but the authorities investigating Carhart will have access to that information.
“Rescue the Heartland, Nebraskans United for Life, and Operation Rescue are working together to insure that the information and experiences of these women are heard by the appropriate authorities,” said Newman.
“These allegations are serious and demand immediate action on the part of the authorities in the interest of public safety. We pray that Carhart’s abortion career, which has cost untold thousands of innocent lives and led to the exploitation of thousands of women, will be brought to a speedy and peaceful end through legal channels.”
4 former employees of late term abortionist LeRoy Carhart have come forward with claims of unsafe and illegal practices
Labels: Pro-Life
Related: YouTube yanks another pro-life video but check out the reason why and watch the video to see whether or not you agree
CNN video interview of Dr Carhart late term abortionist and friend of Dr Tiller and blames mainstream pro-lifers for murder of Tiller.
LeRoy Carhart in a US District Court case in 1997 testified that he would dismember unborn babies while the babies were still alive.
From Operation Rescue.....
Whistleblowers Come Forward With Accusations of Illegal, Unsafe Conditions At Carhart’s Abortion Clinic
Press conference today: Will discuss former Carhart employees who are telling of dirty conditions, unqualified staff illegally performing medical duties, illegal late-term abortions, and more
Bellevue, NE – Four former employees of late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart have come forward to tell of unsafe and illegal practices at LeRoy Carhart’s Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic.
Members of Operation Rescue and Rescue the Heartland were contacted directly by three of the women. A fourth woman is working directly with a pro-life attorney to tell her knowledge of illegal and unsafe conditions at Carhart’s clinic.
The women have made allegations that unlicensed staff illegally performed medical duties that they were not trained for or legally qualified to do, such as starting IVs, dispensing medication, and even assisting with surgeries. There were also allegations of general unclean conditions, including dried blood on surgical instruments. In addition, the women told of missing narcotics, illicit drug use by employees, and illegal post-viability abortions.
The women worked for Carhart at various times, yet they all made similar, if not identical allegations when interviewed.
Operation Rescue, Rescue the Heartland, and Nebraskans United for Life will hold a joint press conference to discuss this breaking news and their weekend events:
WHAT: Press Conference
WHEN: Friday, August 28, 2009, at 3:00 PM
WHERE: Nebraskans United For Life office located at 143 South 38th Street, Omaha, NE 68131
One former employee told of incidents where Carhart falsified the gestational age of viable babies in order to circumvent the law. This account matches information uncovered by Operation Rescue during an undercover investigation at the now-closed Women’s Health Care Services in Wichita, Kansas, where Carhart once worked. The worker caught falsifying gestational ages in Kansas now works for Carhart at his Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic. (Read full report.)
The women also chose to contact the Omaha World-Herald to blow the whistle on Carhart. An article detailing their allegations ran this morning. (Read the news story.)
The women have given sworn statements about illegal and unsafe activity at Carhart’s abortion clinic, which will be turned over to the Attorney General’s office and the Nebraska Department of Health, which is investigating Carhart. The women have agreed to cooperate with the investigation.
“We commend these brave women for coming forward to tell of unsafe and illegal conditions that exist at Carhart’s abortion mill,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “Their courage will help protect women whose health and safety at currently at risk.”
Operation Rescue is not releasing the identity of the women out of concern of reprisals against them from Carhart, but the authorities investigating Carhart will have access to that information.
“Rescue the Heartland, Nebraskans United for Life, and Operation Rescue are working together to insure that the information and experiences of these women are heard by the appropriate authorities,” said Newman.
“These allegations are serious and demand immediate action on the part of the authorities in the interest of public safety. We pray that Carhart’s abortion career, which has cost untold thousands of innocent lives and led to the exploitation of thousands of women, will be brought to a speedy and peaceful end through legal channels.”
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Media Matters
From http://www.infowars.com/media-matters-hit-piece-attempts-to-link-alex-jones-and-glenn-beck/
Media Matters Hit Piece Attempts to Link Alex Jones and Glenn Beck
Text size
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
August 29, 2009
On August 28, Media Matters posted a hit piece on Glenn Beck. In the article, Oliver Willis attempts to link the Fox News disinformation operative Beck to Alex Jones. “We’re used to Glenn Beck being ‘out there’, but today’s show was special,” writes Willis. “Beck’s hour (the second day in a row in which he didn’t say a thing about the passing of Sen. Kennedy) was all about the supposed secret army being built by President Obama. This secret army idea, not supported by any facts, though possibly written in invisible ink that Beck can interpret, is a pet cause of fringe radio host Alex Jones.”
In fact, during the election last year, Obama admitted his desire to create a national security force, what Mr. Willis calls a “secret army.” The U.S. “cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” and needs a “civilian national security force,” he said. Obama said his national security force needs to be as well funded — to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars — as the U.S. military. See the video clip below.
The idea did not disappear after the election. On March 12, during a speech at the National Defense University, Obama said the following: “America must also balance and integrate all elements of our national power. We cannot continue to push the burden on to our military alone, nor leave dormant any aspect of the full arsenal of American capability. And that’s why my administration is committed to renewing diplomacy as a tool of American power, and to developing our civilian national security capabilities.” (Emphasis added.)
It gets worse. In January, without any recognizable corporate media coverage, Rep. Bob Filner, a California Democrat, introduced H.R. 675. The bill would amend title 10 of the United States Code and extend to civilian employees of the Department of Defense the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. The bill was referred to the Armed Services Committee on January 26, 2009. At approximately the same time, the DoD issued a Defense Directive 1404.10 that establishes a “DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” and rescinds a prior Clinton era directive dealing with the emergency use of civilian personnel. The Obama administration describes the Civilian Expeditionary Workforce as follows:
Members of the DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce shall be organized, trained, cleared, equipped, and ready to deploy in support of combat operations by the military; contingencies; emergency operations; humanitarian missions; disaster relief; restoration of order; drug interdiction; and stability operations of the Department of Defense in accordance with DoDD 3000.05
In other words, Congress is busy proposing bills that would accomplish what Obama announced during his campaign speech in Colorado.
Mr. Willis and the Clintonite organized Media Matters are uncomfortable with the facts. Here is another one — the Obamas have organized a cadre for a civilian national security force since 1993. It’s called Public Allies and is modeled after the communist Saul Alinsky’s “people’s organizations.” It is under the watchful eye of Michelle Obama. It has received $75 million per year from private donors, including the Rockefellers and the Ford Foundation.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
In the lead up to the election, budding activists in the Marxist tradition of Alinsky were sent to Camp Obama. “Obama is not like other candidates, and part of this training is learning to mimic the methods he used before he was an elected official — back when he was a community organizer in Chicago following the textbook of legendary agitator Saul Alinsky,” the Chicago Sun Times reported in September, 2007. Camp Obama was described as a “national program for social change,” no doubt of the sort envisioned by Alinksy, who once said: “From all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”
Incidentally, taking money from globalists and bankers is not a problem for Media Matters. In 2005, CNS News uncovered the fact David Brock, the former conservative turned liberal and Media Matters CEO, had taken money from the arch globalist George Soros. In addition, Media Matters receives money from Democracy Alliance. George Soros is a member of this “progressive” organization.
Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, wrote a book entitled “The Plan: Big Ideas for America.” In the book, Emanuel states: “It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, all Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.” (Emphasis added.)
Emanuel calls this a “new social contract,” that is to say an obligation imposed on the people by the government. “If you forget everything else you read in these pages, please remember this: The Plan starts with you. If your leaders aren’t challenging you to do your part, they aren’t doing theirs. We need a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us by establishing, for the first time, an ethic of universal citizen service,” writes Rahmbo. “Universal citizen service will bring Americans of every background together to make America safer and more united in common purpose.”
It’s a “common purpose” envisioned by George Soros, the communist Alinksy, the Ford Foundation, and globalist “progressives.”
Mr. Willis declares there is nothing sinister about AmeriCorps, created under former president Clinton — a member in good standing with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group. Clinton’s administration was a virtual Who’s Who of CFR members and globalists, apparently a good thing for liberals like Mr. Willis.
Here’s what Willis and Media Matters didn’t tell you about AmeriCorps — the legislation initially called for “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people.” It anticipated requiring “all individuals in the United States” to become indentured servants for the government – including elementary school students. A Washington Examiner editorial on March 26, 2009, stated:
The bill also summons up unsettling memories of World War II-era paramilitary groups by saying the new program should “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service,” while establishing “campuses” that serve as “operational headquarters,” complete with “superintendents” and “uniforms” for all participants. It allows for the elimination of all age restrictions in order to involve Americans at all stages of life. And it calls for creation of “a permanent cadre” in a “National Community Civilian Corps.”
In short, the people who wrote the bill had the same totalitarian mindset as Joe Stalin and Mao.
No mention of the original bill or the mindset of its authors in Mr. Willis’ hit piece against Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. He mentions the fact George W. Bush was all for AmeriCorps and even met with AmeriCorps volunteers for Earth Day. But then “progressives” and those mesmerized by the false right-left paradigm always insist there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans and between Obama and Bush — never mind virtually nothing has changed under Obama, not the twin occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, not the unconstitutional surveillance of the American people, not the torture camps and the murder of hundreds of people in Pakistan — and certainly not the bogus global war on terror (although Obama’s people decided to play a semantic game with the term).
Finally, the article posted on the Media Matters website is a transparent effort to link Alex Jones to the Fox News disinformation operative Glenn Beck and thus discredit him. As a slick disinfo operative, Beck is tasked with taking down the truth and patriot movements by agreeing with their basic arguments while coming off as a kook that can be easily criticized and lampooned by the so-called “liberal” media, thus inflicting damage on the patriot community.
Addendum
Regardless of the philosophy of the Marxist Saul Alinsky, Obama is not a communist, a fact underscored by the heavy presence of CFR and Bilderberg members in his administration.
Lawrence Summers, the Director of the White House’s National Economic Council, is a former Chief Economist at the World Bank and Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin, the former Director and Senior Counselor of Citigroup and Chairmen of Goldman Sachs. Summers is a member of the CFR. Timothy Geithner, the current United States Secretary of the Treasury, was previously the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Geithner also worked for Kissinger and Associates. In 2002 he left the Treasury to join the Council on Foreign Relations as a Senior Fellow in the International Economics department and was director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund.
“The council has gained a virtual lock-hold on the U.S. government, regardless of which party is in office,” writes John McManus. “No other organization comes close to boasting the kind of clout that the CFR members have held: eight presidents of the U.S.; seven vice presidents; 17 secretaries of state; 20 secretaries of war/defense; 18 secretaries of the Treasury; 15 directors of the CIA. And on it has gone throughout the Cabinets, in seriatim — through Democrat and Republican administrations — with hundreds of deputy secretaries, assistant secretaries, etc.”
One of Obama’s professors at Columbia Universality and an ardent supporter of his campaign — and his early foreign policy adviser — was Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski cofounded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller, a director of numerous multinational corporations and “endowment funds” and a central figure in the Council on Foreign Relations.
“If the Council on Foreign Relations could be said to be a spawning ground for the concepts of one-world idealism, then the Trilateral Commission was the ‘task force’ assembled to assault the beachheads. Already the Commission had placed its members in the top posts the U.S. had to offer.” writes Patrick Wood.
Bankers and one-worlders are not communists in the traditional sense, although they have traditionally used that political ideology to consolidate and centralize power and influence.
“If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs,” wrote the late Gary Allen. “Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.”
Media Matters Hit Piece Attempts to Link Alex Jones and Glenn Beck
Text size
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
August 29, 2009
On August 28, Media Matters posted a hit piece on Glenn Beck. In the article, Oliver Willis attempts to link the Fox News disinformation operative Beck to Alex Jones. “We’re used to Glenn Beck being ‘out there’, but today’s show was special,” writes Willis. “Beck’s hour (the second day in a row in which he didn’t say a thing about the passing of Sen. Kennedy) was all about the supposed secret army being built by President Obama. This secret army idea, not supported by any facts, though possibly written in invisible ink that Beck can interpret, is a pet cause of fringe radio host Alex Jones.”
In fact, during the election last year, Obama admitted his desire to create a national security force, what Mr. Willis calls a “secret army.” The U.S. “cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” and needs a “civilian national security force,” he said. Obama said his national security force needs to be as well funded — to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars — as the U.S. military. See the video clip below.
The idea did not disappear after the election. On March 12, during a speech at the National Defense University, Obama said the following: “America must also balance and integrate all elements of our national power. We cannot continue to push the burden on to our military alone, nor leave dormant any aspect of the full arsenal of American capability. And that’s why my administration is committed to renewing diplomacy as a tool of American power, and to developing our civilian national security capabilities.” (Emphasis added.)
It gets worse. In January, without any recognizable corporate media coverage, Rep. Bob Filner, a California Democrat, introduced H.R. 675. The bill would amend title 10 of the United States Code and extend to civilian employees of the Department of Defense the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. The bill was referred to the Armed Services Committee on January 26, 2009. At approximately the same time, the DoD issued a Defense Directive 1404.10 that establishes a “DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” and rescinds a prior Clinton era directive dealing with the emergency use of civilian personnel. The Obama administration describes the Civilian Expeditionary Workforce as follows:
Members of the DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce shall be organized, trained, cleared, equipped, and ready to deploy in support of combat operations by the military; contingencies; emergency operations; humanitarian missions; disaster relief; restoration of order; drug interdiction; and stability operations of the Department of Defense in accordance with DoDD 3000.05
In other words, Congress is busy proposing bills that would accomplish what Obama announced during his campaign speech in Colorado.
Mr. Willis and the Clintonite organized Media Matters are uncomfortable with the facts. Here is another one — the Obamas have organized a cadre for a civilian national security force since 1993. It’s called Public Allies and is modeled after the communist Saul Alinsky’s “people’s organizations.” It is under the watchful eye of Michelle Obama. It has received $75 million per year from private donors, including the Rockefellers and the Ford Foundation.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
In the lead up to the election, budding activists in the Marxist tradition of Alinsky were sent to Camp Obama. “Obama is not like other candidates, and part of this training is learning to mimic the methods he used before he was an elected official — back when he was a community organizer in Chicago following the textbook of legendary agitator Saul Alinsky,” the Chicago Sun Times reported in September, 2007. Camp Obama was described as a “national program for social change,” no doubt of the sort envisioned by Alinksy, who once said: “From all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”
Incidentally, taking money from globalists and bankers is not a problem for Media Matters. In 2005, CNS News uncovered the fact David Brock, the former conservative turned liberal and Media Matters CEO, had taken money from the arch globalist George Soros. In addition, Media Matters receives money from Democracy Alliance. George Soros is a member of this “progressive” organization.
Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, wrote a book entitled “The Plan: Big Ideas for America.” In the book, Emanuel states: “It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, all Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.” (Emphasis added.)
Emanuel calls this a “new social contract,” that is to say an obligation imposed on the people by the government. “If you forget everything else you read in these pages, please remember this: The Plan starts with you. If your leaders aren’t challenging you to do your part, they aren’t doing theirs. We need a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us by establishing, for the first time, an ethic of universal citizen service,” writes Rahmbo. “Universal citizen service will bring Americans of every background together to make America safer and more united in common purpose.”
It’s a “common purpose” envisioned by George Soros, the communist Alinksy, the Ford Foundation, and globalist “progressives.”
Mr. Willis declares there is nothing sinister about AmeriCorps, created under former president Clinton — a member in good standing with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group. Clinton’s administration was a virtual Who’s Who of CFR members and globalists, apparently a good thing for liberals like Mr. Willis.
Here’s what Willis and Media Matters didn’t tell you about AmeriCorps — the legislation initially called for “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people.” It anticipated requiring “all individuals in the United States” to become indentured servants for the government – including elementary school students. A Washington Examiner editorial on March 26, 2009, stated:
The bill also summons up unsettling memories of World War II-era paramilitary groups by saying the new program should “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service,” while establishing “campuses” that serve as “operational headquarters,” complete with “superintendents” and “uniforms” for all participants. It allows for the elimination of all age restrictions in order to involve Americans at all stages of life. And it calls for creation of “a permanent cadre” in a “National Community Civilian Corps.”
In short, the people who wrote the bill had the same totalitarian mindset as Joe Stalin and Mao.
No mention of the original bill or the mindset of its authors in Mr. Willis’ hit piece against Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. He mentions the fact George W. Bush was all for AmeriCorps and even met with AmeriCorps volunteers for Earth Day. But then “progressives” and those mesmerized by the false right-left paradigm always insist there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans and between Obama and Bush — never mind virtually nothing has changed under Obama, not the twin occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, not the unconstitutional surveillance of the American people, not the torture camps and the murder of hundreds of people in Pakistan — and certainly not the bogus global war on terror (although Obama’s people decided to play a semantic game with the term).
Finally, the article posted on the Media Matters website is a transparent effort to link Alex Jones to the Fox News disinformation operative Glenn Beck and thus discredit him. As a slick disinfo operative, Beck is tasked with taking down the truth and patriot movements by agreeing with their basic arguments while coming off as a kook that can be easily criticized and lampooned by the so-called “liberal” media, thus inflicting damage on the patriot community.
Addendum
Regardless of the philosophy of the Marxist Saul Alinsky, Obama is not a communist, a fact underscored by the heavy presence of CFR and Bilderberg members in his administration.
Lawrence Summers, the Director of the White House’s National Economic Council, is a former Chief Economist at the World Bank and Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin, the former Director and Senior Counselor of Citigroup and Chairmen of Goldman Sachs. Summers is a member of the CFR. Timothy Geithner, the current United States Secretary of the Treasury, was previously the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Geithner also worked for Kissinger and Associates. In 2002 he left the Treasury to join the Council on Foreign Relations as a Senior Fellow in the International Economics department and was director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund.
“The council has gained a virtual lock-hold on the U.S. government, regardless of which party is in office,” writes John McManus. “No other organization comes close to boasting the kind of clout that the CFR members have held: eight presidents of the U.S.; seven vice presidents; 17 secretaries of state; 20 secretaries of war/defense; 18 secretaries of the Treasury; 15 directors of the CIA. And on it has gone throughout the Cabinets, in seriatim — through Democrat and Republican administrations — with hundreds of deputy secretaries, assistant secretaries, etc.”
One of Obama’s professors at Columbia Universality and an ardent supporter of his campaign — and his early foreign policy adviser — was Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski cofounded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller, a director of numerous multinational corporations and “endowment funds” and a central figure in the Council on Foreign Relations.
“If the Council on Foreign Relations could be said to be a spawning ground for the concepts of one-world idealism, then the Trilateral Commission was the ‘task force’ assembled to assault the beachheads. Already the Commission had placed its members in the top posts the U.S. had to offer.” writes Patrick Wood.
Bankers and one-worlders are not communists in the traditional sense, although they have traditionally used that political ideology to consolidate and centralize power and influence.
“If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs,” wrote the late Gary Allen. “Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.”
Pro-Life Advocates Should be Upset by Veterans Guide Pushing Euthanasia
From http://lifenews.com/bio2942.html
Pro-Life Advocates Should be Upset by Veterans Guide Pushing Euthanasia
by Bradley Mattes
August 28, 2009
LifeNews.com Note: Bradley Mattes is the executive director of Life Issues Institute, a national pro-life educational group. Mattes is a veteran of the pro-life cause, with over 33 years of educational, political and humanitarian experience.
addthis_pub = 'sertelt';
Email RSS Print
First there were angry senior citizens at town hall meetings, literally fearing for their lives. They're worried that under the President’s proposed health care plan they'll be denied critical life-saving services because of their age. There’s good reason for their concern. And what’s come to light since then won't make them sleep any easier.
The Obama administration now seems to have our nation’s veterans in the crosshairs. Perhaps you've heard about the booklet Your Life Your Choices—also known as the Death Book for Veterans. This book is particularly alarming, so I want to share some detail you may not have heard.
I have the book on my desk. Part of it consists of reasonable dialogue on the importance of sharing your wishes regarding potential future medical treatment with trusted family members or friends. I agree that communication before a health crisis arises is key.
But look at one section titled “What makes your life worth living?” It lists 18 potential physical conditions, and the veteran is required to check which column reflects his outlook on life. One of those columns is “not worth living.” I'm all for personal autonomy in choosing appropriate health care, but this booklet clearly crosses the line.
Keep in mind it’s designed for veterans, some who've recently returned from the Middle East, missing limbs or sight. Others may be dealing with paralysis or traumatic brain injuries.
Many are looking at months or years of rehabilitation—facing a future that’s dramatically and often permanently altered. The physical wounds are accompanied by the infliction of psychological damage: depression, the fear of being dependent on others or financial concerns.
It is in this context that some of our war heroes will read Your Life Your Choices. After each of the 18 scenarios on page 21, a veteran is to ask himself or herself if life would be worth living. But a scant few actually reflect life-threatening situations.
Most indicate less critical burdens like being confined to a wheelchair, incontinence or not being able to “shake the blues.” Some don't reflect the physical condition of the veteran at all, but instead how others will be affected: being a financial burden, not able to contribute to the family well being, or causing stress for other family members. These make me wonder—whose suffering is this booklet designed to alleviate?
The “instructions” that follow sent a chill up my spine. If the veteran more than once checked the column called “worth living, but just barely,” he or she is asked what combination of those would it take to make his or her life “not worth living”? If the veteran checked “can't answer now” he or she is asked what would it take to “help you decide”? See page 21 in its entirety.
The obvious purpose of this booklet is to be an advance directive of sorts for medical treatment. Several of the pages even asked for the veteran’s initials and date. But at the back of the booklet where resources are listed, the only group indicated under “advance directives” is Choice in Dying, formerly known as the Euthanasia Society. The purpose of this organization is solely to advocate euthanasia.
The Veterans Administration might as well abandon all subtleties, dig a grave and push our nation’s heroes into it. We owe a debt of gratitude to America’s veterans that we can never repay. The VA has not only brought shame upon its department but also on our whole nation.
After the group Aging with Dignity brought this booklet to light, a disclaimer has been added that a revision is in the works. But no amount of change can take away the stain of the intended purpose—to nudge America’s war heroes toward the grave in an effort to protect limited government resources. If you'd like to see the entire publication, click here.
Please contact the Veterans Administration: vhaethics@va.gov Phone: 202.501.0364. Mail: National Center for Ethics in Health Care, Veterans Health Administration (10E), 810 Vermont Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20420.
Tell them America’s veterans deserve better.
Pro-Life Advocates Should be Upset by Veterans Guide Pushing Euthanasia
by Bradley Mattes
August 28, 2009
LifeNews.com Note: Bradley Mattes is the executive director of Life Issues Institute, a national pro-life educational group. Mattes is a veteran of the pro-life cause, with over 33 years of educational, political and humanitarian experience.
addthis_pub = 'sertelt';
Email RSS Print
First there were angry senior citizens at town hall meetings, literally fearing for their lives. They're worried that under the President’s proposed health care plan they'll be denied critical life-saving services because of their age. There’s good reason for their concern. And what’s come to light since then won't make them sleep any easier.
The Obama administration now seems to have our nation’s veterans in the crosshairs. Perhaps you've heard about the booklet Your Life Your Choices—also known as the Death Book for Veterans. This book is particularly alarming, so I want to share some detail you may not have heard.
I have the book on my desk. Part of it consists of reasonable dialogue on the importance of sharing your wishes regarding potential future medical treatment with trusted family members or friends. I agree that communication before a health crisis arises is key.
But look at one section titled “What makes your life worth living?” It lists 18 potential physical conditions, and the veteran is required to check which column reflects his outlook on life. One of those columns is “not worth living.” I'm all for personal autonomy in choosing appropriate health care, but this booklet clearly crosses the line.
Keep in mind it’s designed for veterans, some who've recently returned from the Middle East, missing limbs or sight. Others may be dealing with paralysis or traumatic brain injuries.
Many are looking at months or years of rehabilitation—facing a future that’s dramatically and often permanently altered. The physical wounds are accompanied by the infliction of psychological damage: depression, the fear of being dependent on others or financial concerns.
It is in this context that some of our war heroes will read Your Life Your Choices. After each of the 18 scenarios on page 21, a veteran is to ask himself or herself if life would be worth living. But a scant few actually reflect life-threatening situations.
Most indicate less critical burdens like being confined to a wheelchair, incontinence or not being able to “shake the blues.” Some don't reflect the physical condition of the veteran at all, but instead how others will be affected: being a financial burden, not able to contribute to the family well being, or causing stress for other family members. These make me wonder—whose suffering is this booklet designed to alleviate?
The “instructions” that follow sent a chill up my spine. If the veteran more than once checked the column called “worth living, but just barely,” he or she is asked what combination of those would it take to make his or her life “not worth living”? If the veteran checked “can't answer now” he or she is asked what would it take to “help you decide”? See page 21 in its entirety.
The obvious purpose of this booklet is to be an advance directive of sorts for medical treatment. Several of the pages even asked for the veteran’s initials and date. But at the back of the booklet where resources are listed, the only group indicated under “advance directives” is Choice in Dying, formerly known as the Euthanasia Society. The purpose of this organization is solely to advocate euthanasia.
The Veterans Administration might as well abandon all subtleties, dig a grave and push our nation’s heroes into it. We owe a debt of gratitude to America’s veterans that we can never repay. The VA has not only brought shame upon its department but also on our whole nation.
After the group Aging with Dignity brought this booklet to light, a disclaimer has been added that a revision is in the works. But no amount of change can take away the stain of the intended purpose—to nudge America’s war heroes toward the grave in an effort to protect limited government resources. If you'd like to see the entire publication, click here.
Please contact the Veterans Administration: vhaethics@va.gov Phone: 202.501.0364. Mail: National Center for Ethics in Health Care, Veterans Health Administration (10E), 810 Vermont Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20420.
Tell them America’s veterans deserve better.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Bush Tortured
From http://www.nationalexpositor.com/News/1703.html
Bush Tortured
David Swanson on 28 August, 2009 10:33:13 26 times read
It seems almost trivial to accuse someone who launched an illegal war that has killed over a million people of torture. But if we are going to prosecute the lowest ranked torturers, it makes sense to look up the chain of command.
There is no doubt that George W. Bush conspired to commit torture, cruel and inhuman treatment, and murder. How do I know? He said so.
In his January 28, 2003, State of the Union, Bush said: "All told more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. And many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: they are no longer a problem to the United States."
Too vague and wink-wink for you? Try this:
On April 11, 2008, ABC News produced a video interview of Bush during which he was asked about meetings his top subordinates had held to approve specific instances of torture. Bush said: "And yes, I'm aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved." The National Security Council's Principals Committee, which held the meetings, included Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet, and Attorney General John Ashcroft. In the same interview, Bush defended the use of the drowning torture on prisoner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, saying: "We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it. And no, I didn't have any problem at all trying to find out what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed knew."
On January 11, 2009, Fox News aired a video interview of Bush in which he admitted personally authorizing the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, saying: "One such person who gave us information was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. … And I’m in the Oval Office and I am told that we have captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the professionals believe he has information necessary to secure the country. So I ask what tools are available for us to find information from him and they gave me a list of tools, and I said are these tools deemed to be legal? And so we got legal opinions before any decision was made."
Does anyone else verify this? Well, how about John Yoo and Dick Cheney? On January 29, 2009, John Yoo, a former official in the Office of Legal Counsel who had drafted secret memos authorizing torture, published an article in the Wall Street Journal with the headline "Obama Made a Rash Decision on Gitmo," in which he wrote: "On the advice of his intelligence advisers, the president could have authorized coercive interrogation methods like those used by Israel and Great Britain in their antiterrorism campaigns. (He could even authorize waterboarding, which he did three times in the years after 9/11.)"
On May 10, 2009, former Vice President Cheney appeared on the CBS News television program "Face the Nation." Asked what Bush had known about torture methods, Cheney replied, "I certainly, yes, have every reason to believe he knew -- he knew a great deal about the program. He basically authorized it. I mean, this was a presidential-level decision. And the decision went to the president. He signed off on it."
This is Yoo and Cheney saying "If you come after us you'll have to come after Bush." Pretty generous of them, I think. Douglas Feith, whose fate is also on the line here, argued in the Wall Street Journal on April 3, 2009, that it would make no sense to prosecute those who advised Bush without prosecuting Bush. Sign him up for the witness stand!
OK, but did Bush put his approval down in writing anywhere? He certainly did. On Sept. 17, 2001, Bush produced an executive order authorizing the CIA to set up unacknowledged detention facilities around the world. For years after this date, prisoners in these facilities were not identified to the International Committee of the Red Cross or provided due process. On February 7, 2002, Bush produced a Memorandum for the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, Chief of Staff to the President, Director of Central Intelligence, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on the subject of "Humane Treatment of al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees." In this memorandum, Bush "determined" that "none of the provisions of Geneva apply to our conflict with al Qaeda in Afghanistan or elsewhere throughout the world," and "[C]ommon article 3 of Geneva does not apply to either al Qaeda or Taliban detainees," and "[T]he Taliban detainees are unlawful combatants and, therefore, do not qualify as prisoners of war under article 4 of Geneva," and "al Qaeda detainees also do not qualify as prisoners of war." On June 29, 2006, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that the Geneva Conventions apply to prisoners held under Bush's command at Guantanamo Bay. On December 30, 2005, Bush signed a signing statement, "President's Statement on Signing of H.R. 2863," in which he claimed the power to ignore a new prohibition on torture contained in the bill he had just signed into law.
Bush's subordinates, through the years of his presidency, established an official policy of torture, and cruel and inhuman treatment. The CIA produced secret guidelines authorizing torture. The Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice produced secret opinions authorizing torture. Bush's subordinates engaged in the widespread use of officially sanctioned torture. Incidents of torture, cruel and inhuman treatment, and murder by torture are extensively documented, including by a February 2007 International Committee of the Red Cross Report on the Treatment of Fourteen 'High Value Detainees' in CIA Custody.
Numerous incidents of torture by Bush's team have resulted in murder. On October 24, 2005, the government released to the ACLU military records that included 44 autopsies and death reports as well as a summary of autopsy reports of individuals apprehended in Iraq and Afghanistan. The documents showed that detainees died during or after interrogations by Navy Seals, Military Intelligence and "OGA" (Other Governmental Agency) -- a term used to refer to the CIA. According to the documents, 21 of the 44 deaths were homicides. Eight of the homicides appeared to have resulted from abusive techniques used on detainees, in some instances, by the CIA, Navy Seals and Military Intelligence personnel. On March 16, 2005, the Associated Press reported that "At least 108 people have died in American custody in Iraq and Afghanistan, most of them violently, according to government data provided to The Associated Press. Roughly a quarter of those deaths have been investigated as possible abuse by U.S. personnel."
On January 15, 2009, Susan Crawford, the convening authority for the Guantanamo military commissions, was quoted in the Washington Post as saying that the United States had tortured prisoner Mohammed al-Qahtani. "We tortured Qahtani," she said. "His treatment met the legal definition of torture."
Bush never voluntarily made public what he knew about torture, cruel and inhuman treatment, or murder by his subordinates. Instead, for years, he publicly denied that the United States ever used torture. When evidence of torture was made public, including photographs from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq made public in 2004, Bush did not investigate the problem, remove those responsible from office, or punish them. The military convicted several low-ranking soldiers, but did not pursue responsibility up the chain of command.
As an employee of the executive branch, Bush was governed by Executive Orders 12674 and 12731, which provide that executive branch employees hold their positions as a public trust and that the American people have a right to expect that they will fulfill that trust in accordance with certain ethical standards and principles. These include abiding by the Constitution and laws of the United States, as well as not using their offices to further private goals and interests.
Pursuant to the Constitution, his oath of office, his status as executive branch employee, and his presence in the United States, Bush is required to obey Amendment VIII of the Constitution which prohibits the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment; as well as treaties which under Article VI of the Constitution are the supreme law of the land, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; the Third Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions which prohibits violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture, as well as outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which requires that the United States work to prevent all forms of torture; as well as Title 18, United States Code, Section 2340A which prohibits conspiring to torture; and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2441 which prohibits conspiring to torture or inflict cruel or inhuman treatment or murder.
Give him the fair trial he denied to so many others. Then and only then can we look forward to a future without torture.
--
David Swanson is the author of the new book "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union" by Seven Stories Press. You can pre-order it below.
Bush Tortured
David Swanson on 28 August, 2009 10:33:13 26 times read
It seems almost trivial to accuse someone who launched an illegal war that has killed over a million people of torture. But if we are going to prosecute the lowest ranked torturers, it makes sense to look up the chain of command.
There is no doubt that George W. Bush conspired to commit torture, cruel and inhuman treatment, and murder. How do I know? He said so.
In his January 28, 2003, State of the Union, Bush said: "All told more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. And many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: they are no longer a problem to the United States."
Too vague and wink-wink for you? Try this:
On April 11, 2008, ABC News produced a video interview of Bush during which he was asked about meetings his top subordinates had held to approve specific instances of torture. Bush said: "And yes, I'm aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved." The National Security Council's Principals Committee, which held the meetings, included Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet, and Attorney General John Ashcroft. In the same interview, Bush defended the use of the drowning torture on prisoner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, saying: "We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it. And no, I didn't have any problem at all trying to find out what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed knew."
On January 11, 2009, Fox News aired a video interview of Bush in which he admitted personally authorizing the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, saying: "One such person who gave us information was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. … And I’m in the Oval Office and I am told that we have captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the professionals believe he has information necessary to secure the country. So I ask what tools are available for us to find information from him and they gave me a list of tools, and I said are these tools deemed to be legal? And so we got legal opinions before any decision was made."
Does anyone else verify this? Well, how about John Yoo and Dick Cheney? On January 29, 2009, John Yoo, a former official in the Office of Legal Counsel who had drafted secret memos authorizing torture, published an article in the Wall Street Journal with the headline "Obama Made a Rash Decision on Gitmo," in which he wrote: "On the advice of his intelligence advisers, the president could have authorized coercive interrogation methods like those used by Israel and Great Britain in their antiterrorism campaigns. (He could even authorize waterboarding, which he did three times in the years after 9/11.)"
On May 10, 2009, former Vice President Cheney appeared on the CBS News television program "Face the Nation." Asked what Bush had known about torture methods, Cheney replied, "I certainly, yes, have every reason to believe he knew -- he knew a great deal about the program. He basically authorized it. I mean, this was a presidential-level decision. And the decision went to the president. He signed off on it."
This is Yoo and Cheney saying "If you come after us you'll have to come after Bush." Pretty generous of them, I think. Douglas Feith, whose fate is also on the line here, argued in the Wall Street Journal on April 3, 2009, that it would make no sense to prosecute those who advised Bush without prosecuting Bush. Sign him up for the witness stand!
OK, but did Bush put his approval down in writing anywhere? He certainly did. On Sept. 17, 2001, Bush produced an executive order authorizing the CIA to set up unacknowledged detention facilities around the world. For years after this date, prisoners in these facilities were not identified to the International Committee of the Red Cross or provided due process. On February 7, 2002, Bush produced a Memorandum for the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, Chief of Staff to the President, Director of Central Intelligence, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on the subject of "Humane Treatment of al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees." In this memorandum, Bush "determined" that "none of the provisions of Geneva apply to our conflict with al Qaeda in Afghanistan or elsewhere throughout the world," and "[C]ommon article 3 of Geneva does not apply to either al Qaeda or Taliban detainees," and "[T]he Taliban detainees are unlawful combatants and, therefore, do not qualify as prisoners of war under article 4 of Geneva," and "al Qaeda detainees also do not qualify as prisoners of war." On June 29, 2006, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that the Geneva Conventions apply to prisoners held under Bush's command at Guantanamo Bay. On December 30, 2005, Bush signed a signing statement, "President's Statement on Signing of H.R. 2863," in which he claimed the power to ignore a new prohibition on torture contained in the bill he had just signed into law.
Bush's subordinates, through the years of his presidency, established an official policy of torture, and cruel and inhuman treatment. The CIA produced secret guidelines authorizing torture. The Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice produced secret opinions authorizing torture. Bush's subordinates engaged in the widespread use of officially sanctioned torture. Incidents of torture, cruel and inhuman treatment, and murder by torture are extensively documented, including by a February 2007 International Committee of the Red Cross Report on the Treatment of Fourteen 'High Value Detainees' in CIA Custody.
Numerous incidents of torture by Bush's team have resulted in murder. On October 24, 2005, the government released to the ACLU military records that included 44 autopsies and death reports as well as a summary of autopsy reports of individuals apprehended in Iraq and Afghanistan. The documents showed that detainees died during or after interrogations by Navy Seals, Military Intelligence and "OGA" (Other Governmental Agency) -- a term used to refer to the CIA. According to the documents, 21 of the 44 deaths were homicides. Eight of the homicides appeared to have resulted from abusive techniques used on detainees, in some instances, by the CIA, Navy Seals and Military Intelligence personnel. On March 16, 2005, the Associated Press reported that "At least 108 people have died in American custody in Iraq and Afghanistan, most of them violently, according to government data provided to The Associated Press. Roughly a quarter of those deaths have been investigated as possible abuse by U.S. personnel."
On January 15, 2009, Susan Crawford, the convening authority for the Guantanamo military commissions, was quoted in the Washington Post as saying that the United States had tortured prisoner Mohammed al-Qahtani. "We tortured Qahtani," she said. "His treatment met the legal definition of torture."
Bush never voluntarily made public what he knew about torture, cruel and inhuman treatment, or murder by his subordinates. Instead, for years, he publicly denied that the United States ever used torture. When evidence of torture was made public, including photographs from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq made public in 2004, Bush did not investigate the problem, remove those responsible from office, or punish them. The military convicted several low-ranking soldiers, but did not pursue responsibility up the chain of command.
As an employee of the executive branch, Bush was governed by Executive Orders 12674 and 12731, which provide that executive branch employees hold their positions as a public trust and that the American people have a right to expect that they will fulfill that trust in accordance with certain ethical standards and principles. These include abiding by the Constitution and laws of the United States, as well as not using their offices to further private goals and interests.
Pursuant to the Constitution, his oath of office, his status as executive branch employee, and his presence in the United States, Bush is required to obey Amendment VIII of the Constitution which prohibits the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment; as well as treaties which under Article VI of the Constitution are the supreme law of the land, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; the Third Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions which prohibits violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture, as well as outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which requires that the United States work to prevent all forms of torture; as well as Title 18, United States Code, Section 2340A which prohibits conspiring to torture; and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2441 which prohibits conspiring to torture or inflict cruel or inhuman treatment or murder.
Give him the fair trial he denied to so many others. Then and only then can we look forward to a future without torture.
--
David Swanson is the author of the new book "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union" by Seven Stories Press. You can pre-order it below.
Internment Camps and More News
Many Americans realize that internment camps are being constructed in the USA. There are legitimate criticisms about why such infrastructures are being developed in America. Even the U.S. Army solicitied recruitment for a "Internment/Resettlement Specialist" online. Liars like Glenn Beck and Popular Mechanics try to say that there are no internment camps or plans for it. That's a lie since FEMA was given millions of dollars to build such camps in cases of an emergency. Chuck Baldwin has written about this subject as well. He recieved information from a retired Air Force colonel (who is still active in the military assoication and stays well-informed on military issues). The colonel said that there is a continuity of operations still going on now and that FEMA is involved in such a program. The colonel never challenged the existed of internment camps, but linked them to the military-based FEMA program (and he saw nothing wrong with it). Other military figures expressed dissent with these plans since they violate personal freedoms and the constitutional government. Even U.S. Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA) said that the U.S. government was trying to get martial law. A bill introduced in the House is H.R. 645 or the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act. This Act will give Homeland Security the power to form no fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations. Rep. Henry Gonzalez, D-Texas, clarified the question of the existence of civilian detention camps. In an interview a few years ago, he said, 'the truth is yes--you do have these standby provisions, and the plans are here . . . whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism . . . evoke the military and arrest Americans and put them in detention camps.' They DO exist." The government built internment camps as early as WWII. The federal government has a role in our society, but they shouldn't be trusted unconditionally at all. That is why governments at all levels are limited in what they can't and can do by the U.S. Constitution including the Bill of Rights. As President George Washington put it, "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." We should keep our eyes open to make sure that we protect our liberties and expose these internment camps existing in our land.
There is a new pro-life documentary called "Blood Money." A group of filmakers have completed this work. It will expose the evil, terrible reality of abortion. It definitely focuses on how the abortion industry is a multimillion dollar indusry. It interviews leaders of the pro-life movement that expose how abortion and its industry effects women negatively. It covers Roe V. Wade, Planned Parenthood, and the scientific fact that life starts up at conception. Abortion effecting women in evil ways is exposed in the documentary as well. The director of the film is David K. Kyle. Kyle said that the money part of abortion keep coming up and that iswhy he didn't name the title of the documentary as "The American Holocaust." Kyle said that he did the film since that issue of abortion was not significantly exposed by the media. He worked with John Zipp, who is the producer of the movie. Kyle also worked with Steve and Michael Peroutka, who are pro-life activists in Maryland. The film will be finished by the end of September since it's in post-production. Pro-abortion proponents won't talk about the money side of abortion. People are getting millions of dollars via the murder of innocent babies. Women have suffer emotional distress and other side effects from abortion for years. The film wants pro-life people to do something in motivation. The documentary also talks about folks waking up and leaving the pro-abortion side. One person is Carol Everette, who used to run abortion mills in Dallas. Now, Everette is a pro-life speaker who advocates the rights of unborn children. In the preview for the movie released Friday on Youtube, Everette says, "We would give them [young girls] a low-dose birth control pill they would get pregnant on or a defective condom. Our goal was 3-5 abortions for every girl between the ages of thirteen and eighteen." "Blood Money" doesn't have a distributor yet. That is why Kyle wants people to register at the website or watch a preview on Youtube to outline their support for their movie (especially since 250,000 to 300,000 people come to D.C. every January for the pro-life march). Many hard hitting pro-life films are coming forward from Maafa 21 to "Blood Money." Abortion is murder and indeed relates to blood money.
There is a issue of religious. A judge refuses to sen a teenage Christian girl back to her Muslim parents. There is a judge from Florida hearing arguments about a young Christian who ran away from her Muslim parents in Ohio. The young girl claims that her father allegedly threatened to kill her , because she converted to Christianity. Now, the parents of the girl want her returned to Ohio imediately. The 17 year old girl is named Fathima Rifqa Bary. She is an honor student and a cheerleader that was raised in a Muslim household from Columbus, Ohio. She became a Christian 4 years ago. It occured by the interactions with children at school. Bary is a native from Sri Lanka. She claimed that her family was going to kill her in an honor killing, so she hitchhiked to a bus station and ran away from home on July 19. She said that her father severely beat her many times. In the Islamic tradition, a honor killing is the killing of a person who is believed to have brought dishonor to his or her family. John Stemberg, who is an attorney representing the teen said that the Columbus area is densely populated with Muslims that have connections with radical Islam and al-Qaeda. Wafa Sultan, a Syrian-born psychiatrist, human rights activist and author, wrote on JihadWatch.org that the case ‘highlights the danger of creeping jihad in the Western world. This is not only because of the imminent danger the teenage girl may face right here in the U.S., had the court decided to have her return to her parents’ home, but also because of the mainstream media’s weak response to the severity of this case.’ Dr. Phyllis Chesler, author of ‘Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?’ told Fox News Bary’s life will be in danger if she is forced to return to her parents. Dr. Chesler believes that anyone leaving Islam is considered an apostate and apostacy is a capital crime. Muslim girls are murdered for far less in Muslim theocracies indeed. The truth is that the girls' parents are Muslims and they deny abusing her, yet the girl claims otherwise. The U.N. finds that 5,000 honor killing occur yearly worldwide. Some even occur in America. One case was when a Muslim TV network founder was charged with beheading his wife. So, Fathima Rifqa Bary has a right to be a Christian as this is apart of her religious liberty rights. I believe she should stay in Florida if she is really in danger of her life. I believe her parents should see her sometime in the future, but with some type of supervision to make sure that nothing happens to Fathima.
Triple helix DNA has been created by sicentists. This is when one strand beinds to a B form DNA double helix through Hoogsteen or a reversed Hoogsteen hydrogen bonds. Biotechnology companies are investigating this issue. The Scientific American's Peter E. Nielsen have written about the possibility of a triple helix used to design a new molecule of life. In 1987 the late Claude Hélène, then at the National Museum of Natural History in Paris, and Peter B. Dervan of the California Institute of Technology independently demonstrated that the triple helix structure could indeed be exploited to design oligonucleotides (DNA strands about 15 nucleotides long) that read the sequence in double-stranded DNA and bind their Hoogsteen complementary target. These developments are certainly related to transhumanism since transhumanists obsess with the idea of genetic manipulation. ne of the earliest proponents of transhumanism according to Eric Steinhart was Jesuit Pierre Theilhard de Chardin.
It's kind of ironic, but not suprising that Custance Cumbey would praise Ted Kennedy while acknowledging his flaws. She said that may he rest in peace. Even though I don't agree with Eric Jon Phelp on racial issues, he is right to talk about Ted Kennedy's apostacy and errors. Eric Jon Phelps certainly write about Ted Kennedy's real history. He wasn't accepting of real Christianity, but the Papacy. This doesn't mean I will revel in his death. His death was tradegy and even the Bible says that God doesn't wish anyone to go Hell, but people do go into Hell. The good news is that Ted Kennedy's life and death is a lesson for us to how we shouldn't live our lives. Everyone reading these words are alive and have a chance to go to Heaven. As Eric said, Ted Kennedy was an adulterer (George Greene in a video accused Edward Kennedy of trying to have sex with his daughter), a liar, once was a drunkard and a murderer. Edward Kennedy is representative of the liberal side of the political Hegelian Dialetic of American politics (while the other side is the Vatican-influenced, CNP, CFR, and Masonic controlled Republican Party). Even the Papal Knights of Malta and the Knights of Columbus influence both sides today. They permit agitation while the ultimate government policy would be controlled and pro-elite. Even Ted admitted that he allowed his personal aide Mary Joe Kopechne to die. Kopechne didn't even recieved an autopsy, which is in violation of state law. He was silent on his brothers' assassination (who are John and Robert Kennedy). Edward Kennedy was strongly anti-Second Amendment and of course support the murder of unborn children or abortion. Some are exploiting Edward Kennedy's death as an excuse to promote the Obama Health Care bill, which is sick. Fundamentally, I agree with him on some issues and I disagree with with him on other issues.
By Timothy
There is a new pro-life documentary called "Blood Money." A group of filmakers have completed this work. It will expose the evil, terrible reality of abortion. It definitely focuses on how the abortion industry is a multimillion dollar indusry. It interviews leaders of the pro-life movement that expose how abortion and its industry effects women negatively. It covers Roe V. Wade, Planned Parenthood, and the scientific fact that life starts up at conception. Abortion effecting women in evil ways is exposed in the documentary as well. The director of the film is David K. Kyle. Kyle said that the money part of abortion keep coming up and that iswhy he didn't name the title of the documentary as "The American Holocaust." Kyle said that he did the film since that issue of abortion was not significantly exposed by the media. He worked with John Zipp, who is the producer of the movie. Kyle also worked with Steve and Michael Peroutka, who are pro-life activists in Maryland. The film will be finished by the end of September since it's in post-production. Pro-abortion proponents won't talk about the money side of abortion. People are getting millions of dollars via the murder of innocent babies. Women have suffer emotional distress and other side effects from abortion for years. The film wants pro-life people to do something in motivation. The documentary also talks about folks waking up and leaving the pro-abortion side. One person is Carol Everette, who used to run abortion mills in Dallas. Now, Everette is a pro-life speaker who advocates the rights of unborn children. In the preview for the movie released Friday on Youtube, Everette says, "We would give them [young girls] a low-dose birth control pill they would get pregnant on or a defective condom. Our goal was 3-5 abortions for every girl between the ages of thirteen and eighteen." "Blood Money" doesn't have a distributor yet. That is why Kyle wants people to register at the website or watch a preview on Youtube to outline their support for their movie (especially since 250,000 to 300,000 people come to D.C. every January for the pro-life march). Many hard hitting pro-life films are coming forward from Maafa 21 to "Blood Money." Abortion is murder and indeed relates to blood money.
There is a issue of religious. A judge refuses to sen a teenage Christian girl back to her Muslim parents. There is a judge from Florida hearing arguments about a young Christian who ran away from her Muslim parents in Ohio. The young girl claims that her father allegedly threatened to kill her , because she converted to Christianity. Now, the parents of the girl want her returned to Ohio imediately. The 17 year old girl is named Fathima Rifqa Bary. She is an honor student and a cheerleader that was raised in a Muslim household from Columbus, Ohio. She became a Christian 4 years ago. It occured by the interactions with children at school. Bary is a native from Sri Lanka. She claimed that her family was going to kill her in an honor killing, so she hitchhiked to a bus station and ran away from home on July 19. She said that her father severely beat her many times. In the Islamic tradition, a honor killing is the killing of a person who is believed to have brought dishonor to his or her family. John Stemberg, who is an attorney representing the teen said that the Columbus area is densely populated with Muslims that have connections with radical Islam and al-Qaeda. Wafa Sultan, a Syrian-born psychiatrist, human rights activist and author, wrote on JihadWatch.org that the case ‘highlights the danger of creeping jihad in the Western world. This is not only because of the imminent danger the teenage girl may face right here in the U.S., had the court decided to have her return to her parents’ home, but also because of the mainstream media’s weak response to the severity of this case.’ Dr. Phyllis Chesler, author of ‘Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?’ told Fox News Bary’s life will be in danger if she is forced to return to her parents. Dr. Chesler believes that anyone leaving Islam is considered an apostate and apostacy is a capital crime. Muslim girls are murdered for far less in Muslim theocracies indeed. The truth is that the girls' parents are Muslims and they deny abusing her, yet the girl claims otherwise. The U.N. finds that 5,000 honor killing occur yearly worldwide. Some even occur in America. One case was when a Muslim TV network founder was charged with beheading his wife. So, Fathima Rifqa Bary has a right to be a Christian as this is apart of her religious liberty rights. I believe she should stay in Florida if she is really in danger of her life. I believe her parents should see her sometime in the future, but with some type of supervision to make sure that nothing happens to Fathima.
Triple helix DNA has been created by sicentists. This is when one strand beinds to a B form DNA double helix through Hoogsteen or a reversed Hoogsteen hydrogen bonds. Biotechnology companies are investigating this issue. The Scientific American's Peter E. Nielsen have written about the possibility of a triple helix used to design a new molecule of life. In 1987 the late Claude Hélène, then at the National Museum of Natural History in Paris, and Peter B. Dervan of the California Institute of Technology independently demonstrated that the triple helix structure could indeed be exploited to design oligonucleotides (DNA strands about 15 nucleotides long) that read the sequence in double-stranded DNA and bind their Hoogsteen complementary target. These developments are certainly related to transhumanism since transhumanists obsess with the idea of genetic manipulation. ne of the earliest proponents of transhumanism according to Eric Steinhart was Jesuit Pierre Theilhard de Chardin.
It's kind of ironic, but not suprising that Custance Cumbey would praise Ted Kennedy while acknowledging his flaws. She said that may he rest in peace. Even though I don't agree with Eric Jon Phelp on racial issues, he is right to talk about Ted Kennedy's apostacy and errors. Eric Jon Phelps certainly write about Ted Kennedy's real history. He wasn't accepting of real Christianity, but the Papacy. This doesn't mean I will revel in his death. His death was tradegy and even the Bible says that God doesn't wish anyone to go Hell, but people do go into Hell. The good news is that Ted Kennedy's life and death is a lesson for us to how we shouldn't live our lives. Everyone reading these words are alive and have a chance to go to Heaven. As Eric said, Ted Kennedy was an adulterer (George Greene in a video accused Edward Kennedy of trying to have sex with his daughter), a liar, once was a drunkard and a murderer. Edward Kennedy is representative of the liberal side of the political Hegelian Dialetic of American politics (while the other side is the Vatican-influenced, CNP, CFR, and Masonic controlled Republican Party). Even the Papal Knights of Malta and the Knights of Columbus influence both sides today. They permit agitation while the ultimate government policy would be controlled and pro-elite. Even Ted admitted that he allowed his personal aide Mary Joe Kopechne to die. Kopechne didn't even recieved an autopsy, which is in violation of state law. He was silent on his brothers' assassination (who are John and Robert Kennedy). Edward Kennedy was strongly anti-Second Amendment and of course support the murder of unborn children or abortion. Some are exploiting Edward Kennedy's death as an excuse to promote the Obama Health Care bill, which is sick. Fundamentally, I agree with him on some issues and I disagree with with him on other issues.
By Timothy
Maryland Town Mayor Hoists Gadsen Flag in Protest
From http://www.infowars.com/maryland-town-mayor-hoists-gadsen-flag-in-protest/
Maryland Town Mayor Hoists Gadsen Flag in Protest
Text size
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars August 28, 2009
The mayor of Hampstead, Maryland, will replace the town’s municipal flag with the Gadsen flag on September 1, a press release reports. Newly elected mayor Haven N. Shoemaker ordered the switch through executive order to protest anticipated cuts in state funding to local governments including Hampstead.
Tea Party activists in Sacramento, California, display the Gadsen flag.
“We have the so-called stimulus which is nothing more than an unprecedented issuance of debt. We have ObamaCare. In Maryland, we have a complete failure by Governor O’Malley and the Legislature to balance the state budget,” Shoemaker said. “The $3.8 billion in federal money sent to Maryland was wasted on pork barrel projects and social program spending rather than on rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. Now the State is dumping their failure of fiscal leadership into our laps.”
Shoemaker hopes other mayors will follow suit. “Maybe this won’t amount to anything. Maybe other local governments will decide to join us. In any event, the people in Hampstead will know that there is still one level of government left in America that is of the people, by the people and for the people.”
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
The flag was designed by and is named after American general and statesman Christopher Gadsden. The use of the timber rattlesnake on the yellow flag as a symbol of the American colonies can be traced back to the publications of Benjamin Franklin. In 1751, he made the first reference to the rattlesnake in a satirical commentary published in his Pennsylvania Gazette. It had been the policy of Britain to send convicted criminals to America, and Franklin suggested that they thank the British by sending rattlesnakes to England. During the Revolutionary War, the snake image was used as a symbol of the colonies. Since the Revolution, the flag has seen times of reintroduction as both a symbol of American patriotism and as a symbol of disagreement with the government.
The Gadsen flag was adopted by the Tea Party movement. Earlier this year, the Missouri Information Analysis Center characterized the flag as “anti-government propaganda” displayed by militia members.
In the months ahead, as state and local governments go bankrupt and are unable to fulfill their commitments, the “rightwing extremist” Gadsen flag may be adopted by other cities and municipalities around the country as a form of protest against an out of control federal government.
Fox News Poll: Majority Think Swine Flu Vaccine Deadlier Than Virus
From http://www.prisonplanet.com/fox-news-poll-majority-think-swine-flu-vaccine-deadlier-than-virus.html
Fox News Poll: Majority Think Swine Flu Vaccine Deadlier Than Virus
Global revolt against dangerous untested jab builds momentum
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, August 28, 2009
According to a Fox News poll, the majority of respondents think that the swine flu vaccine is deadlier than the actual virus itself, emphasizing the growing momentum in the revolt against government plans to institute mass H1N1 vaccination programs.
Despite attempts on behalf of governments and their lapdog corporate media allies to push the necessity of the H1N1 vaccination, large numbers of the general public along with health workers have made it known that they will refuse to take the shot.
The latest effort on behalf of the establishment to push the vaccine occurred earlier this week when Dr. Nancy Snyderman, billed as chief medical editor at NBC News, stated during an MSNBC panel discussion that people should reject “conspiracy theories” about the vaccine’s safety, trust the government and “get your damn vaccine”.
The desperation and anger in Snyderman’s snarly voice was clearly a result of frustration arising out of the fact that vast numbers of people are getting educated about what will actually be in the vaccine.
The swine flu vaccine is being rushed through safety procedures while governments have provided pharmaceutical companies with blanket immunity from lawsuits arriving out of the vaccine causing deaths and injuries.
It was previously revealed that some batches of the vaccine will contain mercury, a toxin linked with autism and neurological disorders. The vaccine will also contain the dangerous ingredient squalene, which has been directly linked with cases of Gulf War Syndrome and a host of other debilitating diseases.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
It was also recently reported that the UK government sent a confidential letter to senior neurologists telling them to be on the alert for cases of a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.
The Fox News poll on the issue is not scientific but is impossible to “game” for one side or the other because votes are restricted to one per IP address.
The results show that 50% think the vaccine is a greater risk than the virus, 32% think not taking the vaccine is the greater risk, while 19% are undecided.
The poll arrives on the back of a study published in the world’s foremost peer-reviewed medical journal which found that half of Hong Kong’s medical workers would refuse to take the swine flu vaccine because of fears about its safety.
Research conducted by the University of Hong Kong and made public by the British Medical Journal consistently found that less than half of 8,500 doctors and nurses in public hospitals would accept vaccination against H1N1 influenza.
“The major barriers identified were fear of side effects and doubts about efficacy.” The study reveals.
Microbiologists and infectious disease experts involved in the study also suggest that the number of dissenters is likely to be broadly representative of health workers worldwide.
This followed a survey conducted by Nursing Times magazine in which it was discovered that just 37 per cent of nurses and frontline health workers said they would take the swine flu vaccine in a survey conducted by Nursing Times magazine. 30 per cent said they would not be immunized and 33 per cent said they were unsure.
Two separate polls of GPs in Britain have also revealed that one in two doctors have severe reservations over the safety of the forthcoming H1N1 flu vaccine, raising serious questions over the government’s planned mass vaccination program.
A poll of doctors for Pulse magazine found that 49% would reject the vaccine with 9% still undecided.
56 of the 115 GPs surveyed said they did not intend to receive the jab, according to the UK’s leading medical weekly publication for health professionals.
A second poll conducted by GP magazine reveals that Up to 60% of GPs have severe doubts over the proposed vaccine. Of 216 GPs surveyed, 29% say they will outright refuse to be vaccinated, while a further 29% remain unsure. Only 41% of doctors said they would definitely take the shot.
Fox News Poll: Majority Think Swine Flu Vaccine Deadlier Than Virus
Global revolt against dangerous untested jab builds momentum
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, August 28, 2009
According to a Fox News poll, the majority of respondents think that the swine flu vaccine is deadlier than the actual virus itself, emphasizing the growing momentum in the revolt against government plans to institute mass H1N1 vaccination programs.
Despite attempts on behalf of governments and their lapdog corporate media allies to push the necessity of the H1N1 vaccination, large numbers of the general public along with health workers have made it known that they will refuse to take the shot.
The latest effort on behalf of the establishment to push the vaccine occurred earlier this week when Dr. Nancy Snyderman, billed as chief medical editor at NBC News, stated during an MSNBC panel discussion that people should reject “conspiracy theories” about the vaccine’s safety, trust the government and “get your damn vaccine”.
The desperation and anger in Snyderman’s snarly voice was clearly a result of frustration arising out of the fact that vast numbers of people are getting educated about what will actually be in the vaccine.
The swine flu vaccine is being rushed through safety procedures while governments have provided pharmaceutical companies with blanket immunity from lawsuits arriving out of the vaccine causing deaths and injuries.
It was previously revealed that some batches of the vaccine will contain mercury, a toxin linked with autism and neurological disorders. The vaccine will also contain the dangerous ingredient squalene, which has been directly linked with cases of Gulf War Syndrome and a host of other debilitating diseases.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
It was also recently reported that the UK government sent a confidential letter to senior neurologists telling them to be on the alert for cases of a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.
The Fox News poll on the issue is not scientific but is impossible to “game” for one side or the other because votes are restricted to one per IP address.
The results show that 50% think the vaccine is a greater risk than the virus, 32% think not taking the vaccine is the greater risk, while 19% are undecided.
The poll arrives on the back of a study published in the world’s foremost peer-reviewed medical journal which found that half of Hong Kong’s medical workers would refuse to take the swine flu vaccine because of fears about its safety.
Research conducted by the University of Hong Kong and made public by the British Medical Journal consistently found that less than half of 8,500 doctors and nurses in public hospitals would accept vaccination against H1N1 influenza.
“The major barriers identified were fear of side effects and doubts about efficacy.” The study reveals.
Microbiologists and infectious disease experts involved in the study also suggest that the number of dissenters is likely to be broadly representative of health workers worldwide.
This followed a survey conducted by Nursing Times magazine in which it was discovered that just 37 per cent of nurses and frontline health workers said they would take the swine flu vaccine in a survey conducted by Nursing Times magazine. 30 per cent said they would not be immunized and 33 per cent said they were unsure.
Two separate polls of GPs in Britain have also revealed that one in two doctors have severe reservations over the safety of the forthcoming H1N1 flu vaccine, raising serious questions over the government’s planned mass vaccination program.
A poll of doctors for Pulse magazine found that 49% would reject the vaccine with 9% still undecided.
56 of the 115 GPs surveyed said they did not intend to receive the jab, according to the UK’s leading medical weekly publication for health professionals.
A second poll conducted by GP magazine reveals that Up to 60% of GPs have severe doubts over the proposed vaccine. Of 216 GPs surveyed, 29% say they will outright refuse to be vaccinated, while a further 29% remain unsure. Only 41% of doctors said they would definitely take the shot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)