Steven Gaal Posted March 23, 2013 Author Share Posted March 23, 2013 (edited) LEFTY OBAMA ?? Obama makes fun of heckler asking “who killed Rachel Corrie?” http://www.intifada-...-rachel-corrie/ Remembering Rachel Corrie | Global Research 3 days ago ... Rachel represented the best of courageous activism. She put her body on the line for justice. She did so because it matters. She's gone but not ... ################################################################# Her Name is Rachel Corrie | Global Research Mar 10, 2013 ... “My Name is Rachel Corrie” is based on the writings and journals of Rachel Corrie, the 23-year-old Evergreen State College student, who ... Edited March 23, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted March 27, 2013 Author Share Posted March 27, 2013 (edited) Lefty Obama ?? Obama Betrays Americans Again…with the Monsanto Protection Act Posted on March 27, 2013 by Daisy Luther The Organic Prepper Of course, it’s hard to honestly expect President Barack Obama to do the right thing, but many people held out hope that he would veto the most dangerous food act ever to pass the US Congress. After all, one of his campaign promises the first time around was to enforce the labeling of GMOs. His wife has that famous organic garden on the White House lawn. We can trust the Obamas, right? Wrong. Yesterday, that slender hope, the hope that Obama might finally do something for the good of the people instead of the good of the special interest groups that donate heavily to his campaigns, was dashed. Obama, once again, showed that he is for sale to the highest bidder – and this time that bidder is Monsanto. Despite a petition that garnered over 250,000 signatures in just a few days, he signed the Monsanto Protection Act into law, completely ignoring the wishes of the people. In fact, a press release has not even been issued by the White House to give the impression that the highly successful petition was considered. Food Democracy Now has not given up the battle, however: We regret to inform you that late last night President Barack Obama signed H.R. 933, which contained the Monsanto Protection Act into law. President Obama knowingly signed the Monsanto Protection Act over the urgent pleas of more than 250,000 Americans who asked that he use his executive authority to veto it. President Obama failed to live up to his oath to protect the American people and our constitution. Today we’re calling on President Obama to issue an executive order to call for the mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. Not only is GMO labeling a reasonable and common sense solution to the continued controversy that corporations like Monsanto, DuPont and Dow Chemical have created by subverting our basic democratic rights, but it is a basic right that citizens in 62 other countries around the world already enjoy, including Europe, Russia, China, India, South Africa and Saudi Arabia. Join us in demanding mandatory labeling of GMO foods. Now’s the time! Please take a moment to click the links above and get involved. We’ve lost the battle, but not the war. I’m personally pledging at least one article per week about Monsanto, their incestuous relationship with the government and their toxic grip on agriculture. I urge everyone to raise a deafening public outcry – every voice adds to the noise that we can create. Let’s make a noise that cannot be ignored. The Monsanto Protection Act was slipped quietly through the Congress, in the usual devious manner. Officially called the Farmer Assurance Provision, the resolution puts Monsanto, with all their toxins like the cheerfully dubbed Agent Orange and Round-up, as well as their genetically modified monstrosities, beyond the reach of the judicial system. The courts cannot stop the death brokering company from growing crops deemed to be potentially dangerous. (Ummm….that would be ALL OF THEM that have been produced by the Monsanto mad science club.) If ever there was a company that embodied evil, it would be the Monsanto Company. Last year I wrote about the company: The combination of unfettered corporate greed, a eugenics agenda and corrupt political manipulation forms an unholy trinity that could make Monsanto the real Cyberdyne Systems. In the Terminator movies, Cyberdyne Systems created the artificial intelligence computer system Skynet, which destroyed most life on earth and forced survivors to live underground. Proving once again that fact is indeed as strange as fiction, the Monsanto Company could single handedly cause TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It). Read more at Monsanto: The Real Cyberdyne Horrifyingly, this is just another step towards the science fictionesque predictions that I wrote about. While most people are constrained by morals, that clearly doesn’t apply with Monsanto. Now, they aren’t even limited by fear of prosecution. Pandora’s Box is unlocked, Obama just propped open the lid, and there’s no way to cram the evil back in. Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor. Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy onFacebook and Twitter, and you can email her at daisy@theorganicprepper.ca http://www.theorganicprepper.ca/obama-betrays-americans-again-with-the-monsanto-protection-act-03272013 Edited March 27, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted March 30, 2013 Author Share Posted March 30, 2013 LEFTY OBAMA ?? Expanding Guantanamo Wednesday, 27. March 2013 Obama Exceeds the Worst of Bush Administration Crimes In 2008, candidate Obama promised to close Guantanamo. Straightaway as president, he issued Executive Order titled “Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention Facilities.” Sec. 3 states: “Closure of Detention Facilities at Guantanamo. The detention facilities at Guantanamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than 1 year from the date of this order.” “If any individuals covered by this order remain, they shall be returned to their home country, released, transferred to a third country, or transferred to another United States detention facility in a manner consistent with law and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.” Obama ordered an “immediate review of all” detainees within 30 days. He halted all proceedings in the “United States Court of Military Commission Review to which charges have been referred but in which no judgment has been rendered.” He mandated “humane standards of confinement” be observed in accordance with international humanitarian laws. He stressed Geneva Common Article 3 provisions. They prohibit: “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; outrages of personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;” carrying out sentences or executions “without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples;” and caring for wounded and sick detainees. In 2008, he said: “From both a moral standpoint and a practical standpoint, torture is wrong. Barack Obama will end the use torture without exception. He also will eliminate the practice of extreme rendition, where we outsource our torture to other countries.” He promised to “eliminate the practice of extreme rendition, where we outsource our torture to other countries.” In August 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder said Washington would seek “assurances from the receiving country” that suspects sent abroad wouldn’t be tortured. He lied. So did Obama. He broke every major promise made. Appalling human rights violations continue on his watch. Torture remains policy. It persists throughout Washington’s gulag. Obama bears full responsibility. Innocent victims remain incarcerated. Some won’t ever be freed. Rule of law principles don’t matter. Obama exceeds the worst of Bush administration policies. Indefinite detentions without charge or trial continue. Illegitimate military commissions are used. They assure guilt by accusation. Guantanamo remains open. The Pentagon’s Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) plans expanding it. It requested $49 million for new prison facilities. They’re for “special” detainees. Other renovations will be made. Congress ordered Guantanamo kept open indefinitely. Pentagon officials requested an estimated $195.7 million overall. Expect overruns to increase costs substantially. SOUTHCOM commander General John Kelly testified before Congress. He estimated $150 – $170 total cost. He excluded a special detainee facility. It wasn’t on the list of construction projects. He mentioned it only in passing, saying: “There’s other projects that I couldn’t talk about here in the open but do have to do with replacing one of the camp facilities where some of the detainees are – special detainees are housed. We could get into that offline if you want.” It’s a proposed Camp 7 replacement. It’s Guantanamo’s most secure facility. In its first two years of use, it was top secret. It’s for “high-value detainees.” Nothing proves it. Pentagon and CIA officials provide no evidence. Torture extracted information lacks credibility. Earlier Supreme Court decisions ruled it constitutionally inadmissible. In Brown v. Mississippi (February 1936), the court held: “The rack and torture chamber may not be substituted for the witness stand.” The ruling cited an earlier Fisher v. State (November 1926) High Court decision, stating: “Coercing the supposed state’s criminals into confessions and using such confessions so coerced from them in trials has been the curse of all countries.” “It was the chief iniquity, the crowing infamy of the Star Chamber (the notorious 15 – 17th century English court), and the Inquisition, and other similar institutions.” “The Constitution recognized the evils that lay behind these practices and prohibited them in this country wherever the court is clearly satisfied such violations exist, (and) it will refuse to sanction such violations and will apply the corrective.” Other requested facilities include $99 million for two barracks, $12 million for a new mess hall, and legal, medical, and communication replacement construction. Kelly acknowledged a “considerable bill.” It’s because “everything that’s built down there is at least twice as expensive.” Why he didn’t explain. He said renovations are needed to keep Guantanamo operating indefinitely. Nothing suggests otherwise. Closure’s not discussed. Detainees cleared for release aren’t freed. They may stay in gulag hell forever. In December 2010, bipartisan congressional legislation blocked transferring them to US prisons. At the time, Obama said ways were being considered to “make sure that we are not simply releasing folks who could do us grievous harm.” Few if any committed crimes. They don’t threaten America. Many are held uncharged. Dozens cleared for release are held indefinitely. Justice is shamelessly denied. Code Pink co-founder Media Benjamin expressed outrage, saying: “Here’s the president – who campaigned on closing Guantánamo Bay – extending and renovating it.” “What he needs to do is renovate his current policy and release the people who’ve been cleared for release, shut down the prison, and bring the rest of the prisoners to the United States for trial.” In January, the ACLU commented on Guantanamo’s 11th anniversary, saying: “Eleven years have passed since the first prisoner arrived in Guantanamo Bay, making it the longest-standing war prison in US history.” “Guantanamo has been a catastrophic failure on every front, and it is long past time for this shameful episode in American history to be brought to a close.” “Almost 800 men have passed through Guantanamo’s cells. Today, 166 remain. Most of them – 86 – have been cleared for release since at least 2009 but remain imprisoned.” “The prison at Guantanamo symbolizes our nation’s failure to adhere to the rule of law and human rights, and this ongoing betrayal of American values undermines our standing around the world and serves as a recruiting tool for our enemies.” “We continue to indefinitely detain without charge or trial terrorism suspects captured far from any theater of war.” “We continue to rely upon unconstitutional and secretive military commissions to try some of the most important cases in our nation’s history, even though the federal courts have proven to be reliable and secure.” “And we continue to allow political posturing to perpetuate the tragedy of indefinite detention for prisoners and their families, including for the 86 who have been cleared for release for years yet remain imprisoned.” Every branch of government shares responsibility for the continued stain that is Guantanamo.” “The Supreme Court has stood by while the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has eviscerated habeas protections for Guantanamo prisoners, rigging the rules in favor of the government and making it almost impossible for prisoners to meaningfully challenge their detention.” “Congress has repeatedly voted to restrict the president’s authority to transfer prisoners – even those cleared for release – from Guantanamo, doing so once again just weeks ago in the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act.” “President Obama threatened to veto that legislation but backed down as he has before. The president must rectify that wrong and undo the damage done by Guantanamo to the rule of law by using existing NDAA certification procedures to repatriate and resettle abroad all prisoners who are not charged with crimes.” “He must also swiftly end the unjust Guantanamo military commissions and work with Congress to ensure fair trials in civilian courts for any prisoner against whom there is sufficient evidence that is untainted by torture.” “For the sake of the rule of law and human rights, American security, and Guantanamo’s many victims, the prison must be closed.” Expansion plans reveal keeping it open indefinitely. Obama and most congressional members support doing so. Guantanamo is one of many US torture prisons. They operate globally. A recent report explained. It’s titled “Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition.” Information considered most sensitive remains classified. On September 16, 2001, Dick Cheney said: “We have to work (on) the dark side….We’ve got to spend time in the shadows in the intelligence world.” “A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies, if we’re going to be successful.” “That’s the world these folks operate in, and so it’s going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective.” Torture became official policy. Obama continues it. Media scoundrels suppress it. Dozens of countries comprise America’s torture network. Secret prisons operate illegally. Dozens of innocent victims are mistreated. Exact numbers aren’t known. Responsible officials aren’t held accountable. Rule of law principles don’t matter. Obama exceeds the worst of Bush administration crimes. Globalized torture expanded. Indefinite detention without charge or trial is policy. So is guilt by accusation or none at all. Detainees have no rights. Despair got over 100 at Guantanamo to resist their only way. They’re hunger striking for justice. They’ve done so for seven weeks. Abstaining from food this long is life threatening. Coverup is official policy. Information everyone needs to know is suppressed. Gitmo symbolizes injustice. Bush administration crimes continue under Obama. Nothing ahead suggests change. # # # # Stephen Lendman- BFP Contributing Author & Analyst Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. He received a Harvard BA in 1956 and a Wharton MBA in 1960. Since 2005, Mr. Lendman has been writing on vital world and national topics, including war and peace, American imperialism, corporate dominance, political persecutions, and a range of other social, economic and political issues. He hosts The Progressive Radio News Hour on The Progressive Radio Network. Visit Mr. Lendman’s blog site here. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 10, 2013 Author Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Lefty Obama ?? AFL-CIO and AARP Rip Into Obama Over Medicare and Social Security Cuts April 8th, 2013 10:41 AM The AFL-CIO, generally slavishly backing Obama, no matter how genocidal his policies for Americans, has potentially thrown off its chains over Obama's "chained CPI" scam, which will impose huge cuts on Social Security and Medicare. The union alliance sent an e-mail to its members and supporters Saturday calling for a mobilization and petitions to stop Obama's plan to include the chained CPI in his budget proposal this week. AFL-CIO director of policy Damon Silvers posted the following on his blog: "In a time of rampant income inequality and stagnant wages, a blow to retirement security is the last thing we need. It's unconscionable we're asking seniors, people with disabilities and veterans to be squeezed of every last penny when corporations and the wealthiest 2% are not paying their fair share of taxes, despite soaring profits. This year alone, the job-killing sequester will cost 750,000 people their jobs. We need to invest in America's workers, not pull the rug out from under them. The 'chained' CPI is based on a fraudulent premise that the CPI is rising faster than the actual cost of living experienced by seniors, veterans and millions of other vulnerable citizens living on meager incomes. In fact, because seniors in particular have limited flexibility and spend a disproportionate share of their income on health care, they tend to experience more rapid inflation than the general population. 'Chained' CPI also hits the vulnerable people in the country people with disabilities who get long-term . Social Security benefits and women, because they live longer. America elected President Obama to protect us from bad Washington ideas like 'chained' CPI, not to advocate for them." Meanwhile the AARP (formerly called the American Association of Retired Persons) polled their members, and found that more than two-thirds of voters over 50 years old oppose Obama's murderous policy of the chained CPI. On the more general issue of cutting Social Security benefits to help balance the budget, a whopping 84% said no, with 87% saying the issue is "very important" to them. Edited April 10, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 13, 2013 Author Share Posted April 13, 2013 LEFTY OBAMA ?? I AGREE WITH BELOW ONE TRILLION %PERCENT% Obama’s Budget. US Heading Toward a Social Explosion. Millions More People to be Thrown into Poverty By Joseph Kishore Global Research, April 12, 2013 World Socialist Web Site The Obama administration’s budget released on Wednesday is a historic milestone. The Democratic Party administration is taking direct aim at the two core federal social programs established in the United States in the 20th Century, Social Security and Medicare. The consequences of Obama’s proposals are not hard to predict: millions more people, particularly the elderly, will be thrown into poverty or be cut off from life-preserving medical care. The corporate and financial elite that runs the United States has long complained of the “unreasonable” sums of money spent on preserving the health and well-being of the elderly. In the minds of the Wall Street speculators and corporate executives that control both political parties, broad sections of the population simply live too long. While the administration and the corporate media have sought to downplay the significance of the attack, the cuts proposed are a significant step in dismantling the programs altogether. The $400 billion in Medicare cuts, when combined with the $500 billion already included as part of the administration’s health care overhaul, add up to 13 percent of total spending on the program over the next decade. As for Social Security, by modifying the way the government calculates inflation, the program will be cut by $130 billion. According to one analysis, for a worker retiring at the age of 65, this will amount to a loss of $650 a year in benefits by the time the worker reaches 75, and a loss of $1,130 by the time he reaches 85. About 70 percent of seniors depend on the already meager benefits for at least half of their income, with 40 percent depending on it to keep them above the poverty line. The administration’s proposal, with a raft of other cuts in key social programs, is only the starting point for negotiations with Congressional Republicans, a process that will drive the whole discussion even further to the right. The dog and pony show of American politics will enter a new phase, as the two big business parties, united on all essentials, conspire to gut and eliminate programs that have the overwhelming support of the American population. To the extent the American ruling class had a policy of social reform, it is embodied in the two targets of Obama’s budget. Social Security was established in 1935, while Medicare came into being in 1965. Both were byproducts of mass social struggle and represented attempts to contain social conflict. Social Security was part of a series of reforms implemented by the administration of Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression, in the midst of insurrectionary class battles (including a series of general strikes throughout the US). The political backdrop was the Russian Revolution, which inspired working class struggles and provided the ruling class with a portent of its own future. Medicare came in the midst of the mass civil rights movement and the wave of strikes of the 1960s. Enacted as part of the Great Society program of Lyndon B. Johnson, it was the last gasp of social reform in America. In those periods, the ability of the ruling class to implement reform measures ultimately reflected the strength of American capitalism. The situation today is vastly different. The financial aristocracy that runs the United States has presided over a steady erosion of the country’s economic foundations. It has amassed its wealth primarily though looting and speculation. For four decades, the American ruling class has been engaged in an unrelenting attack on the working class, a social counterrevolution that has produced an enormous increase in inequality. Up until the present, however, it has been deemed politically impossible to directly attack Social Security and Medicare. Obama has taken up this task. Obama’s assault on health care programs began with the 2010 overhaul, hailed by the “left” supporters of the Democratic Party as a major social reform. Such attempts to cover up the reactionary character of the administration have now been thoroughly exposed. To the ruling class, Obama has made clear that, in the defense of their wealth, everything is “on the table.” There are no “sacred cows,” he wrote in a letter to Congress. In a move that has both immense symbolism and practical implications, the administration said it was also considering the sale of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the largest publicly-owned US power company, and the most significant public entity set up during the Great Depression to provide electricity to large parts of the American South. Earlier this week, Obama took the occasion of the death of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to associate his administration with the policies initiated by Thatcher in Britain and by Reagan in the United States during the 1980s, including efforts to “roll back” everything that detracted from corporate profits or restricted wealth accumulation. “Here in America,” Obama declared in a press release, “many of us will never forget [Thatcher] standing shoulder to shoulder with President Reagan, reminding the world that we are not simply carried along by the currents of history—we can shape them with moral conviction, unyielding courage and iron will.” The “iron will” that Obama is emulating is the will to ensure that trillions can continue to be handed to Wall Street, and that corporate profits can continue to soar, through an increasingly frontal attack on every social right of the working class. All of this has consequences, for the Obama administration and the political establishment as a whole. In 2008, Obama was brought forward by sections of the ruling class seeking a facelift for its reactionary policies. He replaced George W. Bush, the most hated president in US history. The fact that he was the first African American president was used to promote the illusion of change, with the assistance of the upper middle class proponents of identity politics who orbit around the Democratic Party. The “transformative president” hailed by the liberal establishment and pseudo-left has become the most reactionary administration in American history. This will not dissuade the professional promoters of the Democratic Party, who will do everything they can to maintain political illusions in the two-party capitalist system, though with increasing difficulty. The United States is heading toward a social explosion. By its own actions, the ruling class is demonstrating the necessity for revolution. The immense anger and opposition that is building up in the American working class must and will increasingly be directed against the Democratic Party. \================0o0o0o0===================/ Related content: Scrapping the US “Social Safety Net”: Obama Budget Slashes Social Security, Medicare US President Barack Obama unveiled his budget proposal Wednesday, calling for a historic attack on Medicare and Social Security. The move, coming after the imposition of $1.4 trillion in spending cuts over the past two years, marks a new stage… Bipartisan Theatrics and the Obama Budget Crisis: “Deeper Cuts” to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security Less than two weeks after the start of $1.2 trillion in government spending cuts, under the so-called “sequester,” Republicans and Democrats have unveiled budget proposals that include far deeper cuts in social programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. Paul Ryan, the… Obama panel proposes destroying social programs US deficit panel launches offensive against social programs The proposals announced Wednesday by the Democratic and Republican chairmen of the Obama administration’s budget deficit panel amount to an all-out attack on the working class combined with even bigger tax cuts… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 13, 2013 Author Share Posted April 13, 2013 (edited) LEFTY OBAMA ?? “Covert Justice” for Bradley Manning: Prosecution Witnesses to Testify Anonymously By Naomi Spencer Global Research, April 12, 2013 World Socialist Web Site http://www.globalresearch.ca/covert-justice-for-bradley-manning-prosecution-witnesses-to-testify-anonymously/5330995 Edited April 13, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 15, 2013 Author Share Posted April 15, 2013 (edited) LEFTY OBAMA ?? Obama Approves Raising Permissible Levels of Nuclear Radiation in Drinking Water. Civilian Cancer Deaths Expected to Skyrocket Rollback in Nuclear Radiation Cleanup By Helen Caldicott Global Research, April 14, 2013 ##################################### Civilian Cancer Deaths Expected to Skyrocket Following Radiological Incidents The White House has given final approval for dramatically raising permissible radioactive levels in drinking water and soil following “radiological incidents,” such as nuclear power-plant accidents and dirty bombs. The final version, slated for Federal Register publication as soon as today, is a win for the nuclear industry which seeks what its proponents call a “new normal” for radiation exposure among the U.S population, according Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Issued by the Environmental Protection Agency, the radiation guides (called Protective Action Guides or PAGs) allow cleanup many times more lax than anything EPA has ever before accepted. These guides govern evacuations, shelter-in-place orders, food restrictions and other actions following a wide range of “radiological emergencies.” The Obama administration blocked a version of these PAGs from going into effect during its first days in office. The version given approval late last Friday is substantially similar to those proposed under Bush but duck some of the most controversial aspects: In soil, the PAGs allow long-term public exposure to radiation in amounts as high as 2,000 millirems. This would, in effect, increase a longstanding 1 in 10,000 person cancer rate to a rate of 1 in 23 persons exposed over a 30-year period; In water, the PAGs punt on an exact new standard and EPA “continues to seek input on this.” But the thrust of the PAGs is to give on-site authorities much greater “flexibility” in setting aside established limits; and Resolves an internal fight inside EPA between nuclear versus public health specialists in favor of the former. The PAGs are the product of Gina McCarthy, the assistant administrator for air and radiation whose nomination to serve as EPA Administrator is taken up this week by the Senate. Despite the years-long internal fight, this is the first public official display of these guides. This takes place as Japan grapples with these same issues in the two years following its Fukushima nuclear disaster. “This is a public health policy only Dr. Strangelove could embrace. If this typifies the environmental leadership we can expect from Ms. McCarthy, then EPA is in for a long, dirty slog,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that the EPA package lacks a cogent rationale, is largely impenetrable and hinges on a series of euphemistic “weasel words.” “No compelling justification is offered for increasing the cancer deaths of Americans innocently exposed to corporate miscalculations several hundred-fold.” Reportedly, the PAGs had been approved last fall but their publication was held until after the presidential election. The rationale for timing their release right before McCarthy’s confirmation hearing is unclear. Since the PAGs guide agency decision-making and do not formally set standards or repeal statutory requirements, such as the Safe Drinking Water Act and Superfund, they will go into full effect following a short public comment period. Nonetheless, the PAGs will likely determine what actions take place on the ground in the days, weeks, months and, in some cases, years following a radiological emergency. Edited April 15, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 15, 2013 Share Posted April 15, 2013 No citations, how compelling! (Yes there's a link but it doesn't support the stated claims) And let's not forget that there never has been a dirty-bomb attack anywhere and the last and only nuclear plant accident was in 1979 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 16, 2013 Author Share Posted April 16, 2013 (edited) Helen Caldicott Ive seen her speek twice. Total credibility, a great person with important things to say. COLBY IVE SEEN THOUSANDS OF HIS POSTS ....like Colby's second favorite group the FUGS SING ......all is nothing. Edited April 16, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Unlike most of the sources you cite she does seem credible but even so she should be able to have cited a source, the claim "Civilian Cancer Deaths Expected to Skyrocket Following Radiological Incidents" is problematic for two reasons 1) no evidence or experts are cited 2) the likelyhood of such incidents happening is quite small, there never has been a dirty bomb attack anywhere in the world and many doubt one could do much damage and in the 55 years since the 1st nuclear plant opened and 70 years since research began at Los Alamos there has only been one relatively minor incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 16, 2013 Author Share Posted April 16, 2013 (edited) SHE MADE HER ARTICLE AFTER THIS RELATED SYMPOSIUM. Helen Caldicott Foundation’s Fukushima Symposium Posted on December 27, 2012 Symposium on The Medical and Ecological Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident To Be Held at the New York Academy of Medicine in March 2013 A unique, two-day symposium at which an international panel of leading medical and biological scientists, nuclear engineers, and policy experts will make presentations on, and discuss the bio-medical and ecological consequences of the Fukushima disaster, will be held at the New York Academy of Medicine on March 11-12, 2013 the second anniversary of the accident. The public is welcome. Chaired by Donald Louria, MD, Chairman Emeritus of the Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health of the University of Medicine and Denistry, New Jersey, the symposium is a project of the Helen Caldicott Foundation and is open to the public. Confirmed speakers include: Dr. Tim Mousseau, Professor of Biological Sciences, University of South Carolina – Chernobyl, Fukushima and other Hot Places, Biological Consequences Ken Buesseler, Marine Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute – Consequences for the Ocean of the Fukushima-Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident David Lochbaum, the Union of Concerned Scientists – Another Unsurprising Surprise Dr Wladimir Wertelecki, Chairman Department of Medical Genetics and Birth Defects Center, University South Carolina – Congenital Malformations in Rivne Polossia associated with the Chernobyl Accident Dr. Marek Niedziela, Professor of Pediatrics, Poznan (Poland) University of Medical Sciences – Thyroid Pathology in Children with Particular Reference to Chernobyl and Fukushima Dr. Alexy Yablokov, Russian Academy of Sciences – Lessons from Chernobyl Akio Matsumura, Founder of Global Forum for Parliamentary Leaders on Global Survival – What did the World Learn from the Fukushima Accident? Robert Alvarez, Senior Scholar, Institute for Policy Studies DerBachmannRocker on April 11, 2013 at 8:37 pm said: Link to the official symposium video:http://www.totalwebc...m/view/?id=hcf# Edited April 16, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 16, 2013 Author Share Posted April 16, 2013 (edited) LEFTY OBAMA ?? Obama Signs Bill Killing Anti-Corruption, Pro-Transparency STOCK Act Provisions April 16, 2013 Source: Daily Kos Last week, the Senate and House passed a secret, barely-debated bill to limit the scope and effectiveness of the STOCK Act that was passed last year to limit corruption and promote transparency of public officials' financial activity. The purpose of the STOCK Act, which stands for STOP TRADING ON CONGRESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, is described by the Center of Responsive Politics: The STOCK Act, which was passed by Congress a year ago, requires online posting of the personal financial disclosure statements that lawmakers and congressional candidates, the president and vice president, members of the cabinet and high-ranking congressional and executive branch staff file each year. The data is supposed to be made available in machine readable format that is to be ready to download this October. And at the time of its passage, Obama had this to say: "It's a good first step," he said after passage. "And in the months ahead, Congress should do even more to help fight the destructive influence of money in politics and rebuild the trust between Washington and the American people." Watchdog groups had hailed the passage of the bill last year, as it had wide bi-partisan support and satisfied the public need for added transparency. However, just months after the 2012 election, Congress furtively stripped the bill of major powers: Both chambers of Congress quickly — and near silently — approved the repeal legislation at the end of last week by unanimous consent, just before heading home to their districts. ... The Senate advanced the bill Thursday by unanimous consent, without debate or even briefly describing what it would do. The House signed off on the bill Friday using the same approach. And, unfortunately, yesterday, President Obama completed this rope-a-dope deception by signing this new bill, which stripped key provisions from the STOCK Act and rolled back a lot of the progress that the original bill made in promoting transparency and open government. The bill was signed without any cameras or fanfare, which is in stark It seems President Obama was glad to parade around the signing of the pro-transparency bill, but was not so open about his reversal of the most important parts of it a year later! Open Secrets describes the key provisions stripped out of the bill and labels this action "A reversal of the STOCK Act":The elements of the STOCK Act that were removed include: Creation of searchable, sortable disclosure of the information contained in reports even for Congress, the president, vice president, the president’s cabinet and congressional candidates. Required electronic filing for Congress, the president, vice president, the president’s cabinet and congressional candidates, as well as high-level executive and congressional branch employees. Even images of the staffers' filings will not be available for viewing on the web. The original bill was praised for providing transparency of records to be searchable online, applying to staffers, high-level employees. And this reversal signed yesterday by President Obama will make it even harder to hold public officials accountable and give them less requirements for disclosure. Read More... Edited April 16, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 SHE MADE HER ARTICLE AFTER THIS RELATED SYMPOSIUM. Helen Caldicott Foundation’s Fukushima Symposium [...] And??? How is that relevant to the problems with her claims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 17, 2013 Author Share Posted April 17, 2013 LEFTY OBAMA ?? Obama Joins the Club Monday, 15 April 2013 10:26 By William Rivers Pitt TRUTHOUT President Barack Obama and Jeffrey Zients, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, during a news conference about Obama's budget proposal in the Rose Garden at the White House, in Washington, April 10, 2013. (Photo: Christopher Gregory / The New York Times) I spent the week trying to think of new and novel ways to call the president stupid for putting a Social Security benefit cut into his budget, because coughing up this Chained CPI thing raced into the Unforced Political Errors Hall Of Fame so fast it left skid marks and smoke, and is currently jostling elbows with Nixon firing Archie Cox and Clinton offering the intern a cigar for the marquee spot at the top of the list. Think I'm exaggerating? Serving up a cut to Social Security benefits - and it is a cut, no matter what the Smart People tell you - was galactically stupid from a tactical perspective. Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), the anointed mouthpiece for the GOP's House re-election campaign, has already called the president's budget a "shocking attack," and accused the White House of "trying to balance this budget on the backs of seniors." Get ready for a lot more of that. Never mind the hypocrisy of Republicans attacking the president for doing exactly what they wanted him to do - a comprehensive lack of shame is, after all, the GOP's greatest political strength - and remember the 2010 midterm elections, when the Republicans ran a very similar game against Obama regarding Medicare and very nearly took over all of Congress. Every Democrat running for re-election in 2014 will have this stinking dead albatross hanging around their neck, and the smart ones are already putting daylight between themselves and the White House. Feature this response to the president's budget proposal from Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN): "They cannot lay that dead cat at our door. I don't know how it's going to affect the president's brand, but it would be completely unfair to affect the House Democratic Caucus brand, because we had nothing to do with it and most of us are affirmatively and explicitly against it." If you're in the business of getting anyone with a (D) after their name elected in 2014, it's time to start stocking up on canned goods and survival gear when an excellent Democrat like Keith Ellison gets to talking about dead cats and "the president's brand" in the same breath. The rest of us get to spend the coming election cycle watching this communication -deficient administration try to square that circle with seniors who will already be terrified by the GOP's blistering message campaign. The best answer the White House will be able to conjure is, "Yeah, cutting Social Security benefits was in our budget, but we didn't really mean it, it was only a negotiating tactic, trust us." Quiz: which political demographic shows up in great numbers for mid-term elections? Answer: seniors. Do the math. The single biggest impediment to this administration's agenda is the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, and with this budget proposal, President Obama obliterated any chance the Democrats have of reclaiming that chamber at a time when the Republican Party is very publicly flying apart at the seams. An opportunity of historic proportions was available here - not just in this election cycle, but in the next one, and the one after that - to beat back the madness of these deliberately destructive conservatives at a time when they are falling upon each other like sharks in a blood pool. All Mr. Obama had to do was hold his coalition together, a task easily within his means. Instead, he threw a live hand grenade at his own people. A Democratic president has put Social Security on the negotiating table. The fact of it is offensive in itself, whether or not this budget ever sees the light of day. Rank-and-file Democrats are astonished at this turn of events; it is a profound betrayal from a president who was re-elected on the promise to defend that which he now offers as fodder in a deficit debate that should not include Social Security to begin with. See, all the "responsible" people in Washington DC and the "news" media push very hard on the idea that working people have to eat cuts to the benefits they've already paid for, because these responsible people think that is the only responsible way to be responsible about the deficit. William Greider explains why that whole argument is howling nonsense: Again and again, self-righteous critics have portrayed Social Security as the profligate monster borrowing from the Treasury and sucking the life out of federal government. Guess what? It's the other way around. The federal government borrows from Social Security. The Treasury has been borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund for 30 years, and the debt to Social Security beneficiaries now totals nearly $3 trillion. The day is approaching when that money will be needed for its original purpose: paying Social Security benefits to the working people who contributed to the fund. That is the real crisis that makes the financial barons and their media collaborators so anxious to cut Social Security benefits. They would like to get out of repaying the debt-that is, giving the money back to the people who earned it. The only way to do this is cut the benefits-over and over again. Count on it. If the president and Congress succeed in this malicious scheme, they will come back again and again to cut more and more. Mr. Obama has, finally and forever, joined the club. He has sided with the people who stole the Social Security trust, and who now argue that the only "responsible" thing to do is to make old, sick people pay the freight for that theft. They don't want to pay back what they took, and the president has chosen to play their game. He did not have to do this - indeed, he was elected twice on the promise to defend what he now begs to give away - but he did it anyway, and in doing so, he sold out the people who put him where he is. A lot of people still think George W. Bush was stupid, and a failure as president. All he did was translate billions of taxpayer dollars into the bank accounts of his friends by way of tax cuts and war profiteering. He was not stupid. In fact, one can argue that, according to the metrics of those he most closely represented, Mr. Bush was the most successful president in American history. Mr. Obama is not stupid, either. It was no mistake, and according to the metrics of those Mr. Obama most closely represents, this will also be considered a success. The final attack on Social Security has begun, and it was a Democratic president who struck the blow. Even if his budget goes nowhere, or is voted down by his fellow Democrats, the deed is done. Disgraceful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted April 18, 2013 Author Share Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) LEFTY OBAMA ?? The US has No Intention of Leaving Afghanistan: Military Presence in Afghanistan to Maintain US Geostrategic Interests By Rick Rozoff Global Research, April 18, 2013 Press TV and Stop NATO The U.S. has no intention of leaving Afghanistan after the 2014 deadline for withdrawing its troops because of the geostrategic importance of the country, says Rick Rozoff from the Stop NATO organization. On Tuesday, Gen. Joseph Dunford, the current U.S. commander in occupied Afghanistan, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that U.S. troops should remain in Afghanistan after 2014. Dunford said he had not made any assessments on the U.S. troop level beyond 2014. In January, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Pentagon plans to leave roughly 3,000, 6,000, or 9,000 U.S. troops in after the 2014 deadline for NATO operations in the country. Earlier this month, Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also expressed his support for maintaining 8,000 to 12,000 NATO troops in the war-torn country after the 2014 deadline for the withdrawal of occupying forces. “In a nation that borders Iran, borders Pakistan, borders China, and is not terribly far from Russia as well, the U.S. and its Western military allies intend to maintain military operational capabilities,” said Rozoff in a phone interview with the U.S. Desk on Wednesday. “The U.S. has massively upgraded air force bases that were built, in some cases modernized, decades ago by former Soviet Union, those in Bagram, Shindand, Kandahar and other places. “These are bases that have been increased by a factor of several times in size and in sophistication and are capable, or could be capable in short order, of hosting strategic bombers, that is, even long-range U.S. military aircraft that could be used for any military conflict within the general region,” added Rozoff. Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine: http://groups. yahoo...pnato/ messages Stop NATO website and articles: http://rickrozoff. wordpress. com To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status: stopnato-subscribe@ yahoogroups. com ###################### Related content: NATO Smit: “Enduring Presence In Afghanistan” Beyond 2014 NATO summit to define presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014WASHINGTON: The upcoming NATO summit in Chicago will determine its long-term presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014, the top commander of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) told audience in the United States… ^^^^^^^^^^######## America’s Long War: “U.S., NATO Want To Remain In Afghanistan Indefinitely” There is a growing sense among the Afghan people that all talk about withdrawal of foreign troops is only partially true and that the US and NATO intend to maintain a military presence in the country indefinitely, ^^^^^^^^^^######## NATO Airstrikes in Afghanistan Kill Civilians ^^^^^^^^^^######### Leaving Afghanistan by Staying Is staying in Afghanistan OK with you as long as we call it leaving? President Obama has signed an agreement with President Karzai to keep a major U.S. military presence in Afghanistan (currently about three times the size Obama began… Edited April 18, 2013 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now