Some people want a war in Iran. The recent events prove that militaristic extremists continue to try to provoke a war with Iran. The neo-conservatives are still here and they should be opposed justly. Peace is certainly better than war. America is a paradox. America has some of the realest, down to Earth people on Earth. While, at the same time, America has some of the most evil, materialistic, and war mongering people on Earth too. So, with America’s power, it certainly has the responsibility to do the right thing. The right thing entails ending the war on terror and America workinged with nations to constructively solve various complications. If America doesn’t wake up, America will go into Hell. WWI and especially WWII caused America to be hugely rich, powerful, respect, and yes hated in the world. Even after 9/11, more than 100,000 troops hare fighting in Afghanistan. Even former President George W. Bush was forced to cancel to go into Switzerland for fear of arrest for war crimes and torture. Real people haven’t forgotten about the Bush administrations actions, which are a violation of the Geneva Convention of Torture. So far, the present Barack Obama White House is trying to have diplomatic contacts with Iran, while extremist neo-cons desire a war with Iran. We still have issues. We have new technologies now that promote mind control, brainwashing, and the issuing of propaganda in the world. Congress is immersed with corporate interest and the military industrial complex. The Iran War has been promoted for years by reactionaries. There was the democratically elected and progressive government of Mossadegh in Iran. He was overthrown by the CIA and MI6 during 1953 since Mossadegh nationalized the oil resources (without Western control of Iran’s oil supplies). Once, the Shah was an ally in America after 1953. The populists defeated the Shah and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khoeomi took power in 1979. The Shah lived in huge luxury, but Iran experienced a police state. Nixon loved the Shah (with its corrupt SAVAK police force) and vice versa for oil interests. Nixon tacitly granted the Shah immunity from the crime of heroin production, one of the largest and most profitable industries on earth. This is a fact known by Interpol for decades. Then, America back Saddam Hussein of Iraq back in the 1980’s to attack Iran. Cheney’s daughter, Elizabeth Cheney served in the State Department as the conduit for $85 million per year in funds to “pro-democracy” organizations inside Iran – groups like the Mujaheddin e-Khalq, a Marxist Islamist paramilitary cult of celibate terrorists, commandos, assassins and agents who sublimate their sexual desires for the practice of assassination, bomb manufacture, espionage, torture and terrorism. The USA is funding the MEK to cause trouble in Iran. Even ex-Governor Howard Dean is working with Republicans to remove the MEK form the U.S. listing of terrorist groups when the MEK is a terrorist group. An U.S. drone spy plane was recently shot down over Iran. Even with President Barack Obama’s policies toward Iran, many Republicans think that he is acting too soft. By a margin of 410 to 11 - the House of Representatives just passed a bill that would criminalize diplomatic contact between the USA and Iran. The bill barring diplomacy with Iran is the work of Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, (R-FL) backed by Howard Berman, (D-CA). Like people have mentioned already, similarities between Republicans and Democrats (as being for war and empire) are being established as ever clear. The White House, the Department of State and key members of the Senate are working to ensure the failure of this egregious piece of legislation. So, the agitation for war is there. Even journalist Seymour Hersh believes that propaganda is being used by the now pro-Western IAEA as an excuse to exaggerate the nuclear program of Iran. Many Iranian scientists have mysteriously died by assassins. We should be wise enough to reject these tactics and believe in progressive efforts to stop the rush to war in Iran.
The Drug War has been called a failure by a global commission’s report. The report talked about U.S. officials and former Latin American Presidents. This report is from the Global Commission on Drug Policies. It is found in about 24 pages. “The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world,” the report states. The report wanted national and global drug control policy reforms after 40 years from the time that President Richard Nixon created the U.S. government’s war on drugs. The commission members have many well known people in it. These people include the following: former Brazilian president Fernando Cardoso, former Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo, former Colombian president Cesar Gaviria, ex-UN secretary general Kofi Annan, as well as former US Secretary of State George Shultz and former US Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker. The reportswant the end of criminalization of drug use. It wants reforms in the form of legal regulation of drugs mixed with investment in treatment and public health plus social programs. Such programs are aimed at preventing drug addiction in the first place. I don't believe in the recreational usage of drugs (especially for children), but I do agree with social programs to fight against drug addiction. I do believe that those anti-drug addiction programs are honorable and has worked in the UK, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and other nations worldwide I might add. Some of the committee members have been critical of the U.S. policies involving drugs, because these policies have extended the violence in Latin America. In a statement released by the Commission, Gaviria said, “We can no longer ignore the extent to which drug-related violence, crime and corruption in Latin America are the results of failed drug war policies.” You know the American government and the Mexican government vehemently oppose the criticism from the global report. White House “drug czar” Gil Kerlikowske called the report “misguided.” Office of National Drug Control Policy spokesman Rafael Lemaitre added, “Making drugs more available as this report suggests will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe.” Meanwhile, in Mexico, Alejandro Poiré Romero, an official on the country’s National Security Council, said that the government “categorically rejects the idea that in our country a greater effort to enforce the law by the authorities is responsible for an increase in violence by the narco-traffickers.” The report accurately responds to these criticisms that the policy hasn’t work. We have spent billions of dollars in expenditures, we have imprisoned millions of people, thousands of lives have been lost in the Drug War, etc. These actions haven’t radically decreased the supply or consumption of drugs period. According to U.N. estimates, between 1998 and 2008, the use of opiates (up 34.5 percent), cocaine, and marijuana has risen worldwide. The militarization of the war on drugs has made more homicide and violent crimes a reality. Now, the report proves that criminalization of drug use prevents needed services to prevent consumption and mitigate its effects (like HIV transmission among those who inject drugs). The War on Drugs strengthens the prison industrial complex, ruin families, and it doesn’t reducing the use of illicit drugs at all. It also fosters violent criminal organizations. The war on Drugs increased the rate of prisons in America. Entitled “Drug policy, criminal justice and mass imprisonment”, the paper was written by Bryan Stevenson, the executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative. “The increasing costs of mass imprisonment have eliminated funds for treatment and counseling services even though some of these services have proved to be very effective,” writes Stevenson. “In 1991, one in three inmates was receiving treatment while incarcerated; today the rate is down to one in seven.” There is little doubt, given the current round of devastating budget cuts, that the percentage being treated will become far smaller still. Of course, those in prison because of the evil War on Drugs are the poor and minorities in America. For example, only 14 percent of black Americans are drug users in America, but they make up 56 percent of those locked up for drug crimes. So, rational policies are needed to make solutions. In 2004, then Senator Barack Obama called the war on drugs an utter failure. Now, President Barack Obama hasn’t done enough to end this war on drugs. The militarized war on drugs continues in Mexico (which most Mexican people oppose a militarized drug war) and South America. When you think deeper, you see that the War on Drugs has been used as a pretext for the West to dominate influence in the Western Hemisphere. The War on Drugs regularly violates human civil liberties when folks with mere possession of drugs (without doing a violent crime) can be sentenced higher than a person convicted of manslaughter. That’s a total disgrace. Wall Street benefits from the war on drugs. A glimpse of the extent of this relationship was provided last year with Wachovia bank’s settlement with the Justice Department of a money-laundering case involving $378.4 billion dollars from Mexico’s Sinaloa drug cartel. The case was described by the British Observer as just “the tip of the iceberg” of the financial dealings between the major drug traffickers and the biggest US banks and finance houses. We don’t need unjust wars from the war on terror to the war on drugs at all. We need to need this prison industrial complex too that harms manhood and womanhood.
One piece of good news is that Pennsylvania abortions have dropped in 2010. This information is proven by a new report says that the abortion rate dropped in the span of 1.4 percent from 2009 to 2010. 36,778 abortions were performed in PA during 2010. This is a 44.1 percent decrease from 1980 being 65,744 (or the highest number of recorded abortions in the Keystone state). These 2010 figurers outline a decrease of 506 or 1.4 percent from the 37,284 that occurred in 2009. The lowest annual number of abortions transpired in 1999 with about 34,494. The state health department shows nearly all abortions in 2010 (being 34, 207 or 93 percent) were performed in the first 14 weeks of the pregnancy. The first 14 weeks of pregnancy occurred in the first trimester. About 52 percent of all abortions performed in Pennsylvania were to white women and 15,393 or 42.0 percent were to black women — even though black women account for a smaller percentage of the state population as a whole. Abortions to women of Hispanic origin (regardless of race) accounted for 2,880 or 7.8 percent of all abortions in 2010. Over 87 percent of the 32,238 abortions performed in PA during 2010 were to unmarried women. In 2010, 16.1 percent of abortions (being 5,918 people) were performed for females aged 19 or under. Teenagers age 17 or younger accounted for 5.4 percent of abortions (being 1,971 abortions). The 2009 percentages for teenagers under 18 was similar at 6.0 percent. Six abortions were done on girls aged 12 or younger, 41 on girls aged 13, 143 on girls aged 14, and 345 on 15-year-olds — all done before girls are able to give consent for sexual relations. That means 535 abortions were done on victims of statutory rape. Of all the abortions that occurred in 2010 in Pennsylvania, 35,227 or 95.8 percent were performed on residents. The 2009 figure was similar at 95.7 percent. Residents of other states, territories and other countries accounted for 1,551 abortions in 2010, compared to 1,600 in 2009. The source for the number of abortions reported in Pennsylvania in 2010 is the “Report of Induced Termination of Pregnancy”, which is an individual report filed for each abortion. The source for the complications data is “Abortions: Report of Complications”, a separate reporting form completed by physicians who have provided medical care to a woman because of a complication resulting from an abortion or attempted abortion.
The government shouldn’t be for the rich by the rich. A study shown that almost half of the Congress members are millionaires. There are 535 legislators. There are 100 members of the Senate and 435 members of the House of Representatives. At least 250 of them are millionaires and their median net worth is $913,000. 67 Senators are millionaires and the median wealth of the body’s 100 members is $2.63 million. The Senate has long been a millionaire’s club. It’s recent that the House has member super rich people in them. For the last 25 years, the worth of House members (excluding home equity) has more than doubled. It was $280,000 in 1984 to $725,000 in 2009 in inflation adjusted dollars. During that same period, the median net worth of an American family fell from $20,600 to $20,500. The Washington Post and the New York Times gave front page treatment to the data. The figures come from the Center for Responsive Politics. There is the rising of personal wealth of the member of Congress. There is a growing wealth disparity between the representatives and the represented. The reality comes as debates exist over unemployment benefits, possible cuts in food stamps, and the millionaire tax. There is the proportion of members of Congress who have no net worth outside of their home equity (or the economic position of a majority of the working class). This proportion declined from one in five in 1984 to only one in twelve. The Times contacted the offices of 534 members of Congress to ask if they had friends or relatives who had lost homes or jobs since the 2008 financial crash. Only 18 responded and only 12 reported even a second hand contact with the impact of the economic crisis. The median wealth of the members of Congress rose 15 percent from 2004 to 2010. There is the financial collapse. At least 10 members of Congress are worth over $100 million like Congressman Darrell Issa (an auto alarm manufacturer. He has the largest single fortune), Senator John Kerry, and of course Senator Nancy Pelosi. The wealthy now have strong political influence with the rising costs of congressional election campaigns.The reason is that you need more money to complete a campaign. Some predict that President Barack Obama may be the first candidate to raise and spend $1 billion in 2012. The corporate media talks about Democrats vs. Republicans, but it’s really the working population (and the poor) vs. an isolated, arrogant financial aristocracy. Congress is very unpopular today. Some polls present the reality that only 11 percent of the American people approve of the activities from Congress. 2.5 million people left both the Democratic and Republican parties in America. Independents are growing. A separate survey by Scarborough Research last month found that nearly 50 percent of young voters classified themselves as independent or unaffiliated. More people are discussing about struggle over jobs, living standards, the defense of public services (like education and health care), etc. More people are against the internationalists and the new world order system. So, we can either be a force for oppression, imperialism and war or we can legitimate become the pillars of social justice.
By Timothy
No comments:
Post a Comment