There is a Texas School demanding students to submit an intrusive census form. This State of Texas Census report has been distributed to students. The 7th grader who recieved the form was promised an A if he completed it. Also, students were subjected to a pep talk on how it is their duty as American citizens to complete the census form and submit it to the school and presumably Texas authorities. “Sound pretty nosy, doesn’t it?” a paragraph at the bottom of the form states. “But a census is very important. The information is used for all kinds of purposes, including setting budgets, zoning land, determining how many schools to build, and much more. The census helps Texas leaders plan for the future needs of its citizens. Hey, that’s you!” The US. Census is one thing. Yet, there is no constitutional authority for school districts in Texas or any state to have these sort of questions to exist in that form. The Constitution says that a simple enumeration every ten years in order to apportion the number of seats in the House of Representatives is needed. The U.S. Census is used to record the number of pople in a househoold. Undelegated powers that is assumed by the federal government according to Thomas Jefferson are unauthoritative, void, and of no force. This applies to Texas. Children shouldn't be brainwashed to believe that the government has the authority to gain all personal and private information from citizens. Parents shouldn't force kids to inculate them and they shouldn't worship the state nor free markets at all. Schools should be places of learning not indoctrination centers.
The financial crisis in Greece is important to know about, because it can teach lesson on how we conduct our own financies. In many cases, the wealthy don't pay that much taxes, but the rest of the citizenry do. Many of the protesters in Greece and the Tea Party movement reject an oligarchy shifting the tax burden unto labor. Other Tea Party members have lost so much faith in government that they desire to ignore reforming the government in order to give it the power to check predatory finance and wealth. A fair fiscal policy is needed in American instead of a regressive economic policy that benefits those who are massively wealthy. Some of the Tea Party's lust to shrink government so much as to ruin their interests doesn't work either. The neo cons and the elite are using the Greek crisis to promote the borderline fascist policy of cutting social services, Medicare, Social Security, etc. This is the opposite of what the Greek demonstrators are demanding: to reverse the global tax shift off property and finance onto labor, and to give labor’s financial claims for retirement pensions priority over claims by the banks to get fully paid on hundreds of billions of dollars of recklessly bad loans recently reduced to junk status. The Greece bailout is similar to TARP for German and other European bankers (among global speculators). So, almost $1 trillion is provided by the governments (like Germany) to be sent to Greek government to pay foreign bondholders. This is occuring while reimbursements occur on Euro-governments, the IMF, and even the U.S. Treasury. So, the bondholders are being given money as an excuse to cut Greek public services, pensions, and other government spending. It's junk economics to believe that the economy can pay down their debt by using austerity measures and give bankers more bonuses. Less public spending on social programs will leave more bailout money to pay the banks for their exponentially rising bad debts that cannot possibly be paid in the end. It is inevitable that loans and bonds will default in the usual convulsion of bankruptcy. Financial experts realize this. The good news is that many in Greek labor are fighting for their rights and liberty. The Baltic states have used slashing public sector employment and wages causing their GDP to fall as well. Latvia's austerity measures were opposed in December of 2008. The EU and the IMF austerity measures have influenced Europe as well. At least Iceland and the Baltics have the option of re-denominating loans in their own currency, writing down their foreign debts at will and taxing property to recapture for the government the revenue that has been pledged to foreign bankers. Greece is submerged in the euro currency. In America, high finance have more control over spending programs. The doctrine of the submission of the financial sector under the needs of economic growth causes massive economic growth from 1945 to the early 1970's. Bondholders and financial speculators have ganged up to demand EU, IMF and US support for them to take their gains before the financial game crashes. Some of the Tea Party people need to realize that a regressive tax shift isn't reforming the govenrment at all. The people should control government in creating economic populism without austerity measures and putting the tax burden on labor (and industry). There is no right of giant corporations to dominate our government. The U.S. spending billions of dollars in foreign wars isn't apart of fiscal responsibility and allowing Wall Street to do what it wants whenever it wants (with any form of regulation) is wrong too. Some U.S. corporations are intent on continuing — and even expanding — foreign wars, low taxes for the wealthy, and when needed, further bank/corporate bailouts. Less government does not necessarily equate to better government at every circumstance. With critical thinking tea party zealots must recognize that it was not excessive government action that caused the Great Recession, bur rather too little government action to stem the greedy actions among banks and other financial institutions. The core problem is not excessive government but corruption of government by private sector corporate and other special interests.
Other news are happening in the world. The central banks of the European Union are accused by deliberately controlling the Greek debt crisis so they can consolidate their power. It's easy to see that the moves by the EU is to try their best to perserve the euro currency. The EU was a brainwash of the Black Nobility bloodlines and the Vatican in order to centralize power in Europe (even if its means that violation of the national sovereignities of European nations). The unprecedented €750bn EU bailout even among people from across the political spectrum isn't being utilized correctly. Some in the Financial Times believe that key players believe that the bailout is apart of an overall consolidation plan in Europe to cause a giant step toward a fiscal union in the eurozone. A central bank in control of numerous nations have been a goal of elitists for a very long time. Right now, some want us Americans to bailout Greece in their crisis. There is nothing wrong with legitimate assistance, but the USA is suffering its economic troubles too. Getting money from Americans isn't the answer to this crisis. People realize that the Great Depression was crated by the giant Wall Street bubble of the 1920's. This was wehn bank deposits came about on speculative gambling, which is why Glass-Steagall was passed. This caused a run on American banks. Some believe that the 2nd leg of the depression was caused by Euroepan defaults. The 2nd leg of the Great Depression was worse than the first. The second leg down was primarily initiated by the failure of the Creditanstalt bank in Austria. Creditanstalt (also spelled Kreditanstalt) declared bankruptcy in May 1931. This caused a financial panic spreading worldwide. One reason for the Greece crisis is by the corrupt policies of the IMF, the international bankers' promotion of toxic waste & derivatives, and other reasons. Spain unveils billions in deficit cuts to halt eurozone crisis fears. Spain will slash public spending by €6bn and cut civil servants' by 5pc salaries this year as part of a plan to ease fears the country could slide into a debt crisis like that of Greece.
The Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan attacked Pro-Life advocates in a 1980 essay. This may give insight into her views of aboriton. The article she wrote was for the Daily Princetonian. This article was written a week after Ronald Reagan's victory in the 1980 election. Kagan disparged pro-life advocates. Reagan won a landslide victory over President Jimmy Carter and Kagan's essay lamented the victory. She hoped for a more leftists left in the 1984 elections. “Even after the returns came in, I found it hard to conceive of the victories of these anonymous but Moral Majority-backed opponents" of certain pro-abortion candidates, Kagan wrote. She called pro-lifers avengers of innocent life who were "beneficiaries of a general turn to the right and a profound disorganization on the left.” Douglas Johnson is the legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. Johnson said that the comment and the scare quotes around the phrase "innocent life" infers that pro-life advocates have misread on the moral status of unborn children. "Kagan may have betrayed a possible personal animus towards the pro-life movement in a 1980 essay lamenting Republican gains in the 1980 election, in which she referred disparagingly to [pro-life candidates]," Johnson told LifeNews.com. Johnson believed that Kagan denied the belief that unborn children are apart of the human family by using innocent life in quote marks or does she have another explanation. He asked if she would be able to set aside any animus she has towards those who fight to protect innocent human life, when reviewing laws duly enacted for that purpose. Kagan seems to be very strongly pro-abortion. That is why Johnson wants it to be an obligation to probe that in committee hearings. He said that Senators have an obligation to probe on whether Elena Kagan will tolerate limits on abortion, enacted through normal democratic channels, or will seek to impose extreme pro-abortion views by judicial decree. Kagan argued strongly back in 1995 that such inquiries by senators are legitimate and apart of the confirmation process (in a lengthy book review published by the University of Chicago Law Review). Johnson said that it's troubling indications that Ms. Kagan generally favors an activist results oriented approach to constiutional law. Kagan is accused by her critics of being an activist on the court and having little experience. It is true that Kagan could be an activist, but she does have some experience as a lawyer and workers in numerous administrations. She was quoted as saying, “That someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law — indefinite detention without a trial — even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than a physical battle zone.” Kagan supports the Bush administration's interpretation of detainees. So under that definition, if you send money to a charity later linked with some nebulous terrorist group then you are financing Al-Qaeda and could be thrown in Gitmo or some other CIA black site never to be seen again. But today under the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, executing persons detained as a result of armed conflict without a fair trial before a regularly constituted court constitutes a grave war crime. And this is the woman being forwarded to sit on a body that is supposed to safeguard civil liberties? Kagan said that he loves the Federalist Society, which is apart of the neo-conservative network. Likewise, five Justices on the current U.S. Supreme Court were/are members of the Federalist Society: Harvard Law Graduate Roberts; Harvard Law Graduate Scalia; Harvard Law Graduate Kennedy; Yale Law Graduate Thomas; and Yale Law Graduate Alito. She believes that the govenrment can ban some free speech she deemed "offensive." In a 1993 University of Chicago Law review article, Kagan wrote, “I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation.” “In a 1996 paper, “Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine,” Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government,” reports World Net Daily. The government in an evil fashion to ban or censor speech deemed offensive publicly or privately is against the First Amendment.
The Militarization of space is every real. The Defense Department wants to have new weapons in orbit as another battlespace. The AFSPC or the Air Force Space Command wants space dominance. The Pentagon plans to have a robust anti-satellite ASAT capability that can disable, damage, or destroy the satellites of other nations for "defensive" purpsoes. General W. Lord was then commander of AFSPC. He told an Air Force conference (as recorded by the New York Times back in 2005) that space superiority by America is a birthright. He wants space supremacy as a vision for the future. This mission is apart of the Obama administration too. This may be net-centric warfare. The Air Force in April 22, 2010 successfully launched it robot space chuttle called the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV), from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. This device was a decades' long dream by the Department of Defense. The DoD wanted to filed a reusable spacecraft that combines an airplane's agility with the means to travel at 5 miles per second in orbit. In the Pentagon's eyes, the X-37B may be the start of new devices. These system can be weaponized, bu the Air Force Deputy Undersecretary of Space Programs, Gary Payton denies these charges. There is the Global Security.org showing that a project is envisaged as a "reusable space architecture" that would provide "aircraft-like operability, flexibility, and responsiveness, supporting AF Space Command mission areas." Some technologies haven't worked because of technological constraints. In a 2006 piece in Air Force Print News (AFPN) however, we were informed that the X-37B will "will serve as a test platform for satellites and other space technologies. The vehicle allows satellite sensors, subsystems, components and associated technology to be transported into the environment where they will be used--space." It is uncertain how the X-37B device will pan out. The Pentagon certainly wants influence in the atmosphere of space though. The militarization of space is still a threat.
By Timothy
No comments:
Post a Comment