Schizophrenia Research
Volume 115, Issues 2-3, December 2009, Pages 130-135
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
doi:10.1016/j.schres.2009.09.012 | How to Cite or Link Using DOI
Copyright © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Cited By in Scopus (0)
Permissions & Reprints
Maternal age and paternal age are associated with distinct childhood behavioural outcomes in a general population birth cohort
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
Sukanta Sahaa, Adrian G. Barnettb, Stephen L. Bukad and John J. McGratha, c, e, ,
a Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research, The Park Centre for Mental Health, Locked Bag 500, Richlands, Q4077, Australia
b Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation and School of Public Health, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, QLD 4059, Australia
c Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Q4072, Australia
d Department of Community Health, Brown University, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI 02903, United States
e Department of Psychiatry, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Q4072, Australia
Received 23 June 2009; revised 7 September 2009; accepted 7 September 2009. Available online 24 September 2009.
Abstract
Background
Recent studies show that advanced paternal age (APA) is associated with an increased risk of neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. A body of evidence also suggests that individuals who develop schizophrenia show subtle deviations in a range of behavioural domains during their childhood. The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between paternal and maternal ages and selected behavioural measures in children using a large birth cohort.
Method
Participants were singleton children (n = 21,753) drawn from the US Collaborative Perinatal Project. The outcome measures were assessed at 7 years. The main analyses examined the relationship between parental age and behavioural measures when adjusted for a range of potentially confounding variables, including age of the other parent, maternal race, socio-economic measures, sex, gestation length, maternal marital status, parental mental illness, and child's age-at-testing.
Results
Advanced paternal age was associated with a significantly increased risk of adverse ‘externalizing’ behaviours at age seven years. For every five year increase in paternal age, the odds of higher ‘externalizing’ behaviours was increased by 12% (OR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.03, 1.21, p < 0.0001). The relationship persisted after adjusting for potential confounding factors. ‘Internalizing’ behavioural outcome was not associated with advanced paternal age. In contrast, advanced maternal age was significantly protective against adverse ‘externalizing’ behavioural outcomes, but associated with an increased risk of adverse ‘internalizing’ behavioural outcomes.
Discussion
The offspring of older fathers show a distinctly different pattern of behaviours compared to the offspring of older mothers. The diverse socio-cultural and biologically-mediated factors that underpin these findings remain to be clarified. In light of secular trends related to delayed parenthood, the mechanisms underlying these findings warrant closer scrutiny.
Keywords: Paternal age; Maternal age; Behaviour; Cohort
Abbreviations: APA, advanced paternal age; CPP, Collaborative Perinatal Project; AMA, advanced maternal age.
Article Outline
1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Assessment of behavioural outcomes
2.2. Statistical analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
Role of funding source
Contributors
Conflict of interest
Acknowledgements
References
Table 1.
Descriptive statistics of the behavioural factors for paternal and maternal ages (n = 21,753).
a Adjusted for sex of offspring, gestational age, other parent's age, age-at-testing, mother's race, family socio-economic index, marital status, and maternal and paternal psychiatric illnesses.
b Sample size slightly varies between externalizing and internalizing behavioural measures.
View Within Article
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2.
Association between increasing paternal age and maternal age, and behavioural measures in children (n = 21,753).
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001.
aAdjusted for sex of offspring, gestational age, other parent's age, age-at-testing, and mother's race.
bAdjusted for sex of offspring, gestational age, other parent's age, age-at-testing, mother's race, family socio-economic index, marital status, and maternal and paternal psychiatric illnesses.
View Within Article
Corresponding author. Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research, The Park Centre for Mental Health, Locked Bag 500, Richlands, Q4077, Australia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schizophrenia Research
Volume 115, Issues 2-3, December 2009, Pages 130-135
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Things We've Known That
Are On The Way Out
3-31-10
Whether these changes are good or bad depends in part on how we adapt to them. But, ready or not, here they come...or should I say...here they are already!
1. The Post Office. Get ready to imagine a world without the post office. They are so deeply in financial trouble that there is probably no way to sustain it long term.
Email, Fed Ex, and UPS have just about wiped out the minimum revenue needed to keep the post office alive. Most of your mail every day is junk mail and bills.
2. The Check. Britain is already laying the groundwork to do away with checks by 2018. It costs the financial system billions of dollars a year to process checks. Plastic cards and online transactions will lead to the eventual demise of the check. This plays right into the death of the post office If you never paid your bills by mail and never received them by mail, the post office would absolutely go out of business.
3. The Newspaper. The younger generation simply doesn't read the newspaper. They certainly don't subscribe to a daily delivered print edition. That may go the way of the milkman and the laundry man. As for reading the paper online, get ready to pay for it. The rise in mobile Internet devices and e-readers has caused all the newspaper and magazine publishers to form an alliance. They have met with Apple, Amazon, and the major cell phone companies to develop a model for paid subscription services.
4. The Book. You say you will never give up the physical book that you hold in your hand and turn the literal pages. I said the same thing about downloading music from iTunes. I wanted my hard copy CD. But I quickly changed my mind when I discovered that I could get albums for half the price without ever leaving home to get the latest music. The same thing will happen with books. You can browse a bookstore online and even read a preview chapter before you buy. And the price is less than half that of a real book. And think of the convenience! Once you start flicking your fingers on the screen instead of the book, you find that you are lost in the story, can't wait to see what happens next, and you forget that you're holding a gadget instead of a book.
5. The Land Line Telephone. Unless you have a large family and make a lot of local calls, you don't need it anymore. Most people keep it simply because they're always had it. But you are paying double charges for that extra service. All the cell phone companies will let you call customers using the same cell provider for no charge against your minutes.
6. Music. This is one of the saddest parts of the change story. The music industry is dying a slow death. Not just because of illegal downloading. It's the lack of innovative new music being given a chance to get to the people who would like to hear it. Greed and corruption is the problem. The record labels and the radio conglomerates simply self-destruction. Over 40% of the music purchased today is "catalog items," meaning traditional music that the public is familiar with. Older established artists. This is also true on the live concert circuit. To explore this fascinating and disturbing topic further, check out the book,
"Appetite for Self-Destruction" by Steve Knopper, and the video documentary, "Before the Music Dies."
7. Television. Revenues to the networks are down dramatically. Not just because of the economy. People are watching TV and movies streamed from their computers. And they're playing games and doing all lots of other things that take up the time that used to be spent watching TV. Prime time shows have degenerated down to lower than the lowest common denominator. Cable rates are skyrocketing and commercials run about every 4 minutes and 30 seconds.
I say good riddance to most of it It's time for the cable companies to be put out of our misery. Let the people choose what they want to watch online and
through Netflix.
7. The "Things" That You Own. Many of the very possessions that we used to own are still in our lives, but we may not actually own them in the future. They may simply reside in "the cloud." Today, your computer has a hard drive and you store your pictures, music, movies, and documents. Your software is on a CD or DVD, and you can always re-install it if need be. But all of that is changing. Apple, Microsoft, and Google are all finishing up their latest "cloud services." That means that when you turn on a computer, the Internet will be built into the operating system. So, Windows, Google, and the Mac OS will be tied straight into the Internet. If you click an icon, it will open something in the Internet cloud. If you save something, it will be saved to the cloud. And you may pay a monthly subscription fee to the cloud provider.
In this virtual world, you can access your music or your books, or your whatever from any laptop or handheld device. That's the good news. But, will you actually own any of this "stuff" or will it all be able to disappear at any moment in a big "Poof?" Will most of the things in our lives be disposable and whimsical? It makes you want to run to the closet and pull out that photo album, grab a book from the shelf, or open up a CD case and pull out the insert.
8. Privacy. If there ever was a concept that we can look back on nostalgically, it would be privacy. That's gone. It's been gone for a long time anyway. There are cameras on the street, in most of the buildings, and even built into your computer and cell phone. But you can be sure that 24/7 "They" know who you are and where you are, right down to the GPS coordinates, and the Google Street View. If you buy something, your habit is put
into a zillion profiles, and your ads will change to reflect those habits. And "They" will try to get you to buy something else. Again and again.
All we will have that can't be changed are Memories.
Are On The Way Out
3-31-10
Whether these changes are good or bad depends in part on how we adapt to them. But, ready or not, here they come...or should I say...here they are already!
1. The Post Office. Get ready to imagine a world without the post office. They are so deeply in financial trouble that there is probably no way to sustain it long term.
Email, Fed Ex, and UPS have just about wiped out the minimum revenue needed to keep the post office alive. Most of your mail every day is junk mail and bills.
2. The Check. Britain is already laying the groundwork to do away with checks by 2018. It costs the financial system billions of dollars a year to process checks. Plastic cards and online transactions will lead to the eventual demise of the check. This plays right into the death of the post office If you never paid your bills by mail and never received them by mail, the post office would absolutely go out of business.
3. The Newspaper. The younger generation simply doesn't read the newspaper. They certainly don't subscribe to a daily delivered print edition. That may go the way of the milkman and the laundry man. As for reading the paper online, get ready to pay for it. The rise in mobile Internet devices and e-readers has caused all the newspaper and magazine publishers to form an alliance. They have met with Apple, Amazon, and the major cell phone companies to develop a model for paid subscription services.
4. The Book. You say you will never give up the physical book that you hold in your hand and turn the literal pages. I said the same thing about downloading music from iTunes. I wanted my hard copy CD. But I quickly changed my mind when I discovered that I could get albums for half the price without ever leaving home to get the latest music. The same thing will happen with books. You can browse a bookstore online and even read a preview chapter before you buy. And the price is less than half that of a real book. And think of the convenience! Once you start flicking your fingers on the screen instead of the book, you find that you are lost in the story, can't wait to see what happens next, and you forget that you're holding a gadget instead of a book.
5. The Land Line Telephone. Unless you have a large family and make a lot of local calls, you don't need it anymore. Most people keep it simply because they're always had it. But you are paying double charges for that extra service. All the cell phone companies will let you call customers using the same cell provider for no charge against your minutes.
6. Music. This is one of the saddest parts of the change story. The music industry is dying a slow death. Not just because of illegal downloading. It's the lack of innovative new music being given a chance to get to the people who would like to hear it. Greed and corruption is the problem. The record labels and the radio conglomerates simply self-destruction. Over 40% of the music purchased today is "catalog items," meaning traditional music that the public is familiar with. Older established artists. This is also true on the live concert circuit. To explore this fascinating and disturbing topic further, check out the book,
"Appetite for Self-Destruction" by Steve Knopper, and the video documentary, "Before the Music Dies."
7. Television. Revenues to the networks are down dramatically. Not just because of the economy. People are watching TV and movies streamed from their computers. And they're playing games and doing all lots of other things that take up the time that used to be spent watching TV. Prime time shows have degenerated down to lower than the lowest common denominator. Cable rates are skyrocketing and commercials run about every 4 minutes and 30 seconds.
I say good riddance to most of it It's time for the cable companies to be put out of our misery. Let the people choose what they want to watch online and
through Netflix.
7. The "Things" That You Own. Many of the very possessions that we used to own are still in our lives, but we may not actually own them in the future. They may simply reside in "the cloud." Today, your computer has a hard drive and you store your pictures, music, movies, and documents. Your software is on a CD or DVD, and you can always re-install it if need be. But all of that is changing. Apple, Microsoft, and Google are all finishing up their latest "cloud services." That means that when you turn on a computer, the Internet will be built into the operating system. So, Windows, Google, and the Mac OS will be tied straight into the Internet. If you click an icon, it will open something in the Internet cloud. If you save something, it will be saved to the cloud. And you may pay a monthly subscription fee to the cloud provider.
In this virtual world, you can access your music or your books, or your whatever from any laptop or handheld device. That's the good news. But, will you actually own any of this "stuff" or will it all be able to disappear at any moment in a big "Poof?" Will most of the things in our lives be disposable and whimsical? It makes you want to run to the closet and pull out that photo album, grab a book from the shelf, or open up a CD case and pull out the insert.
8. Privacy. If there ever was a concept that we can look back on nostalgically, it would be privacy. That's gone. It's been gone for a long time anyway. There are cameras on the street, in most of the buildings, and even built into your computer and cell phone. But you can be sure that 24/7 "They" know who you are and where you are, right down to the GPS coordinates, and the Google Street View. If you buy something, your habit is put
into a zillion profiles, and your ads will change to reflect those habits. And "They" will try to get you to buy something else. Again and again.
All we will have that can't be changed are Memories.
PERMISSION GRANTED TO POST AND CROSS-POST
CALIFORNIA--Medical Exemption Bill AB 2000 ACTION ALERT!
California Assembly Member Curt Hagman has filed a bill which will insert a Medical Exemption Clause into California's Rabies Law. Assembly Bill AB200 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov./pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1951-2000/ab_2000_bill_20100217_introduced.html
"This bill would exempt from the vaccination requirement the owner of a dog that a licensed veterinarian determines, on an annual basis, may have a potentially lethal reaction to the vaccination."
The bill has gone to the Agriculture Committee, concerned pet owners should call the Committee Secretary (Mona Wood) at 916-319-2084 and/or contact the Committee members at the phone numbers or e-mail addresses below and leave a message for the Committee that you want them to recommend passage of this bill. Feline owners should request that cats be included as well.
Cathleen Galgiani - Chair Dem-17 (916) 319-2017 Assemblymember.Galgiani@assembly.ca.gov
Tom Berryhill - Vice Chair Rep-25 (916) 319-2025 Assemblymember.Berryhill@assembly.ca.gov
Connie Conway Rep-34 (916) 319-2034 Assemblymember.Conway@assembly.ca.gov
Jean Fuller Rep-32 (916) 319-2032 Assemblymember.Fuller@assembly.ca.gov
Jerry Hill Dem-19 (916) 319-2019 Assemblymember.Hill@assembly.ca.gov
Fiona Ma Dem-12 (916) 319-2012 Assemblymember.Ma@assembly.ca.gov
Tony Mendoza Dem-56 (916) 319-2056 Assemblymember.Mendoza@assembly.ca.gov
Mariko Yamada Dem-8 (916) 319-2008 Assemblymember.Yamada@assembly.ca.gov
CALIFORNIA--Medical Exemption Bill AB 2000 ACTION ALERT!
California Assembly Member Curt Hagman has filed a bill which will insert a Medical Exemption Clause into California's Rabies Law. Assembly Bill AB200 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov./pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1951-2000/ab_2000_bill_20100217_introduced.html
"This bill would exempt from the vaccination requirement the owner of a dog that a licensed veterinarian determines, on an annual basis, may have a potentially lethal reaction to the vaccination."
The bill has gone to the Agriculture Committee, concerned pet owners should call the Committee Secretary (Mona Wood) at 916-319-2084 and/or contact the Committee members at the phone numbers or e-mail addresses below and leave a message for the Committee that you want them to recommend passage of this bill. Feline owners should request that cats be included as well.
Cathleen Galgiani - Chair Dem-17 (916) 319-2017 Assemblymember.Galgiani@assembly.ca.gov
Tom Berryhill - Vice Chair Rep-25 (916) 319-2025 Assemblymember.Berryhill@assembly.ca.gov
Connie Conway Rep-34 (916) 319-2034 Assemblymember.Conway@assembly.ca.gov
Jean Fuller Rep-32 (916) 319-2032 Assemblymember.Fuller@assembly.ca.gov
Jerry Hill Dem-19 (916) 319-2019 Assemblymember.Hill@assembly.ca.gov
Fiona Ma Dem-12 (916) 319-2012 Assemblymember.Ma@assembly.ca.gov
Tony Mendoza Dem-56 (916) 319-2056 Assemblymember.Mendoza@assembly.ca.gov
Mariko Yamada Dem-8 (916) 319-2008 Assemblymember.Yamada@assembly.ca.gov
Law Places ‘Soviet-Style’ Capital Controls on Americans
New Obama Law Places ‘Soviet-Style’ Capital Controls on Americans
Patrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire
March 31, 2010
Americans’ ability to move their money across international borders may become restricted thanks to new legislation passed last week. Buried within Obama’s recent $17.5 billion “H.I.R.E.” Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (H.R. 2487) is a new U.S. Federal restriction on any foreign holdings which exceed the meager amount of $50,000 and leaves the door open for a new 30% transaction or ‘holdings’ tax to be enforced by the IRS. The new law amounts to an unprecedented extension of the US Government into the global sphere.
Why has the White House and its Federal Government decided passed such a law now? We should start by considering the big picture. The ramifications of this new under-the-radar federal move are large and far-reaching. Concerned readers would do well here to question both the fundamental and practical aspects of such a law. Consider for one moment the letter of the law- or the figure of $50,000. For extremely high net-worth individuals, this new regulation over their personal freedom amounts to a mere ’speed-bump’ in financial terms. With their money buried securely into property, foreign investments and strings of shell companies and complexed funds, financial elites will find this new super socialist state control affects only minor liquid cash amounts, or ‘pocket-money’. For the middle class or small investor, the picture is quite different. Fast-forward 12 or 18 months into the future where rising inflation and a severe devaluation of the dollar may occur. The ability for a middle class American to migrate his or her savings into the relative safe haven of a foreign currency or overseas investment is now controlled by the United States Federal Government.
Economists and historians will note that such “Capital Controls” are part and parcel of super-socialist states like the Soviet Union and its former satellite states. Even today, it’s common practice for struggling socialist governments located in regions like South America, Central America and Africa to impose periodic restrictions on cash leaving those countries- a sure sign of a currency and economy in decline. This practice also characterizes foreign states who are under the economic restructuring administration of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). One could also speculate that such restrictions imposed on Americans would certainly pave the way for a future IMF-type administration of the USA, making it markedly easier to manage for the World Bank.
Putting all speculation aside though, this new law amounts to a dangerous precedent where the Federal Government can, with the full enforcement of the IRS, lay down Capital Controls on any dollar amount- regardless of its size. In the event of a US currency devaluation(see US ‘Bank Holiday’) of the dollar, the said figure in the new bill- $50,000, could become a rather nominal sum amounting to only 2/3’s or 1/3 of it’s previous value. Do not count on the Federal Government to adjust its printed figure of “$50,000″ for inflation or devaluation, leaving a Capital Control on relatively smaller holdings, leaving no safe haven for the average American.
Throughout history, in countries where such Capital Controls are administered by the state, large black market cash courier industries have thrived. When a foreign currency is difficult or illegal for local citizens to acquire, they will either pay a tax to the government or a smaller black market premium to acquire it. If government transaction taxes are high enough(like the new 30% tax set by US law), punters may opt the black market. This certainly was the case in fledgling socialist countries like Italy in the 1960’s
where organized networks of independent couriers amassed large fortunes by smuggling cash over the border. Of course, new border restrictions and TSA surveillance technologies will make it almost impossible for an individual to move substantial amounts of cash through airports. Through color of law, such activities might already be considered illegal and deemed as tax evasion by the IRS. Read a full analysis on Obama’s new law here, courtesy of our friends at Zero Hedge:
It’s Official – America Now Enforces Capital Controls
It couldn’t have happened to a nicer country. On March 18, with very little pomp and circumstance, president Obama passed the most recent stimulus act, the $17.5 billion Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (H.R. 2487), brilliantly goalseeked by the administration’s millionaire cronies to abbreviate as HIRE. As it was merely the latest
in an endless stream of acts destined to expand the government payroll to infinity, nobody cared about it, or actually read it. Because if anyone had read it, the act would have been known as the Capital Controls Act, as one of the lesser, but infinitely more important provisions on page 27, known as Offset Provisions – Subtitle A—Foreign Account Tax Compliance, institutes just that. In brief, the Provision requires that foreign banks not only withhold 30% of all outgoing capital flows (likely remitting the collection promptly back to the US Treasury) but also disclose the full details of non-exempt account-holders to the US and the IRS. And should this provision be deemed illegal by a given foreign nation’s domestic laws (think Switzerland), well the foreign financial institution is required to close the account. It’s the law. If you thought you could move your capital to the non-sequestration safety of non-US financial institutions, sorry you lose – the law now says so. Capital Controls are now here and are now fully enforced by the law.
Let’s parse through the just passed law, which has been mentioned by exactly ZERO mainstream media outlets (HERE).
Patrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire
March 31, 2010
Americans’ ability to move their money across international borders may become restricted thanks to new legislation passed last week. Buried within Obama’s recent $17.5 billion “H.I.R.E.” Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (H.R. 2487) is a new U.S. Federal restriction on any foreign holdings which exceed the meager amount of $50,000 and leaves the door open for a new 30% transaction or ‘holdings’ tax to be enforced by the IRS. The new law amounts to an unprecedented extension of the US Government into the global sphere.
Why has the White House and its Federal Government decided passed such a law now? We should start by considering the big picture. The ramifications of this new under-the-radar federal move are large and far-reaching. Concerned readers would do well here to question both the fundamental and practical aspects of such a law. Consider for one moment the letter of the law- or the figure of $50,000. For extremely high net-worth individuals, this new regulation over their personal freedom amounts to a mere ’speed-bump’ in financial terms. With their money buried securely into property, foreign investments and strings of shell companies and complexed funds, financial elites will find this new super socialist state control affects only minor liquid cash amounts, or ‘pocket-money’. For the middle class or small investor, the picture is quite different. Fast-forward 12 or 18 months into the future where rising inflation and a severe devaluation of the dollar may occur. The ability for a middle class American to migrate his or her savings into the relative safe haven of a foreign currency or overseas investment is now controlled by the United States Federal Government.
Economists and historians will note that such “Capital Controls” are part and parcel of super-socialist states like the Soviet Union and its former satellite states. Even today, it’s common practice for struggling socialist governments located in regions like South America, Central America and Africa to impose periodic restrictions on cash leaving those countries- a sure sign of a currency and economy in decline. This practice also characterizes foreign states who are under the economic restructuring administration of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). One could also speculate that such restrictions imposed on Americans would certainly pave the way for a future IMF-type administration of the USA, making it markedly easier to manage for the World Bank.
Putting all speculation aside though, this new law amounts to a dangerous precedent where the Federal Government can, with the full enforcement of the IRS, lay down Capital Controls on any dollar amount- regardless of its size. In the event of a US currency devaluation(see US ‘Bank Holiday’) of the dollar, the said figure in the new bill- $50,000, could become a rather nominal sum amounting to only 2/3’s or 1/3 of it’s previous value. Do not count on the Federal Government to adjust its printed figure of “$50,000″ for inflation or devaluation, leaving a Capital Control on relatively smaller holdings, leaving no safe haven for the average American.
Throughout history, in countries where such Capital Controls are administered by the state, large black market cash courier industries have thrived. When a foreign currency is difficult or illegal for local citizens to acquire, they will either pay a tax to the government or a smaller black market premium to acquire it. If government transaction taxes are high enough(like the new 30% tax set by US law), punters may opt the black market. This certainly was the case in fledgling socialist countries like Italy in the 1960’s
where organized networks of independent couriers amassed large fortunes by smuggling cash over the border. Of course, new border restrictions and TSA surveillance technologies will make it almost impossible for an individual to move substantial amounts of cash through airports. Through color of law, such activities might already be considered illegal and deemed as tax evasion by the IRS. Read a full analysis on Obama’s new law here, courtesy of our friends at Zero Hedge:
It’s Official – America Now Enforces Capital Controls
It couldn’t have happened to a nicer country. On March 18, with very little pomp and circumstance, president Obama passed the most recent stimulus act, the $17.5 billion Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (H.R. 2487), brilliantly goalseeked by the administration’s millionaire cronies to abbreviate as HIRE. As it was merely the latest
in an endless stream of acts destined to expand the government payroll to infinity, nobody cared about it, or actually read it. Because if anyone had read it, the act would have been known as the Capital Controls Act, as one of the lesser, but infinitely more important provisions on page 27, known as Offset Provisions – Subtitle A—Foreign Account Tax Compliance, institutes just that. In brief, the Provision requires that foreign banks not only withhold 30% of all outgoing capital flows (likely remitting the collection promptly back to the US Treasury) but also disclose the full details of non-exempt account-holders to the US and the IRS. And should this provision be deemed illegal by a given foreign nation’s domestic laws (think Switzerland), well the foreign financial institution is required to close the account. It’s the law. If you thought you could move your capital to the non-sequestration safety of non-US financial institutions, sorry you lose – the law now says so. Capital Controls are now here and are now fully enforced by the law.
Let’s parse through the just passed law, which has been mentioned by exactly ZERO mainstream media outlets (HERE).
Population reduction enthusiast says “a few people with authority” should run the planet
Top Eco-Fascist Calls For End Of Freedom To Fight “Global Warming”
Population reduction enthusiast says “a few people with authority” should run the planet
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010
A renowned environmentalist, known for his advocacy of population reduction as a means of offsetting climate change, has called for “a more authoritative world” where freedom comes second to tackling what he sees as the devastating effects of global warming.
Futurist James Lovelock, tells the London Guardian that he believes “It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while,” in order to save humanity.
“We need a more authoritative world.” Lovelock states.
“We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that.” the 90 year old proponent of the Gaia hypothesis adds.
“You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.”
“But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.” Lovelock concludes.
Which “people with authority” could Lovelock have in mind for this tyrannical takeover in the name of mother Earth? Certainly not the disgraced UN affiliated climate scientists, whose involvement in several recent scandals even Lovelock admits is reprehensible:
“Fudging the data in any way whatsoever is quite literally a sin against the holy ghost of science. I’m not religious, but I put it that way because I feel so strongly. It’s the one thing you do not ever do. You’ve got to have standards.” he states in the interview.
Lovelock also has little faith in renewable energies, carbon trading or cap and tax schemes, which he previously told the New Scientist are “verging on a gigantic scam”:
Carbon trading, with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It’s not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it’ll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning. I am not against renewable energy, but to spoil all the decent countryside in the UK with wind farms is driving me mad. It’s absolutely unnecessary, and it takes 2500 square kilometres to produce a gigawatt – that’s an awful lot of countryside.
Lovelock repeats this sentiment in his latest interview with the Guardian, noting:
I don’t know enough about carbon trading, but I suspect that it is basically a scam. The whole thing is not very sensible. We have this crazy idea that we are setting an example to the world. What we’re doing is trying to make money out of the world by selling them renewable gadgetry and green ideas. It might be worthy from the national interest, but it is moonshine if you think what the Chinese and Indians are doing [in terms of emissions].
So, perhaps Lovelock would point to his friends at The Optimum Population Trust, a notorious UK-based public policy group that campaigns for a gradual decline in the global human population to what it sees as a “sustainable” level.
Lovelock became a patron of the thinktank in 2009. In a statement released by the trust to mark the appointment, Lovelock called on the environmental movement as a whole to “recognise the truth and speak out” on the link between rising human numbers and global warming.
Lovelock said: “Those who fail to see that population growth and climate change are two sides of the same coin are either ignorant or hiding from the truth. These two huge environmental problems are inseparable and to discuss one while ignoring the other is irrational.”
He added: “How can we possibly decrease carbon emissions and land use while the number of emitters and the space they occupy remorselessly increases? When will the environmentalists who claim to be green recognise the truth and speak out?”
So, essentially Dr Lovelock advocates the destruction of freedom in order that an overriding authoritative global power can oversee the radical stemming of the planet’s human population – nice.
Roger Martin, chair of OPT, said of Lovelock’s appointment: “We desperately need to remember that future population growth is not a ‘fact’ to be passively accepted but something over which we have control, and that limiting it could therefore play a major role in curbing emissions. Tragically, the green movement has chosen to forget this. With the help of eminent individuals such as James Lovelock, we will do our best to remind them.”
The OPT also has as patrons controversial primatologist and environmentalist Jane Goodall, who thinks that caging chimps and other apes is better for them than letting them live free in the wild; Professor Aubrey Manning, president of the UK’s Wildlife Trusts; and Sir Crispin Tickell, the ex-diplomat credited with the “greening” of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
The OPT also boasts as a patron BBC darling wildlife broadcaster and film-maker Sir David Attenborough, who has called for a one child policy like that of Communist China to be implemented in Britain. The proposal is one of the OPT’s main initiatives.
The think tank is also home to Jonathon Porritt, former chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, one of Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, who has stated that Britain’s population must be cut in half from around 60 million to 30 million if it is to build a sustainable society.
We have exhaustively exposed the nonsense behind the idea that the Earth’s current population levels are exceeding sustainable levels and are contributing to devastating climate change, however, Lovelock and his ilk at the OPT remain in positions of influence.
Lovelock is also an ardent advocate of geoengineering the planet in the name of controlling the climate. In 2007 Lovelock proposed laying vast swathes of pipes under the world’s oceans in order to pump water from the bottom of the seas – rich in nutrients, but mostly dead – to the top. The idea being that the action would encourage algae to breed, absorb more carbon and release more dimethyl sulphide into the atmosphere, a chemical known to seed sunlight reflecting clouds.
Effectively, Lovelock wants to try and block out the sun, the source of all life on this planet – nice.
Lovelock is also a member of The Royal Society of Edinburgh, an organization that has thrown its full weight behind the global warming movement, lending its absolute support for legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 80%, a process that will devastate the global economy and living standards.
This organization has been even more vehement than national governments in its advocacy of the man-made cause of global warming, calling for such drastic CO2 cuts to be made in the short term, not even by the usual target date of 2050.
“In his most recent book The Vanishing Face of Gaia, Lovelock concludes that the damage caused by overpopulation, species decline and carbon emissions is already so great that modern civilisation is finished.” notes James Delingpole at the London Telegraph.
“Before the end of this century, he argues, rising sea levels and overheating will have rendered whole swathes of our planet uninhabitable and such few survivors as there are will have to make do as best they can.” Delingpole adds.
Lovelock, The Royal Society and the OPT may sound like crazy nutcases, but unfortunately for us, they are extremely influential within the environmental movement. They are also far from alone in their thinking.
Mass sterilization, one child policies and a“Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death were all core concepts put forth by John P. Holdren, the man now in control of science policy in the United States, in his co-authored 1977 book, Ecoscience.
Holdren and his colleagues are now at the forefront of efforts to combat “climate change” through similarly insane programs focused around geoengineering the planet. As we reported in April 2009, Holdren advocates “Large-scale geoengineering projects designed to cool the Earth,” such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” which many have pointed out is already occurring via the spraying of chemtrails.
Is Holdren another one off mad kook that has somehow wormed his way into a position of great influence? Not according to leading NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen, who fully endorses Holdren’s view that industrial civilization should be destroyed to save the planet.
The same talking points raised by the OPT and James Lovelock have been re-iterated again and again by public policy groups and environmentalists, as well as the most influential scientists in the US government.
While you and I may think the notions of sterilization and depopulation could never be accepted by the public, those very concepts are now being embraced and popularized as the way forward for humanity.
Linking environmental policy to depopulation agendas opens the door to eugenics and it is no surprise that through that door have come pouring hordes of elitist filth just begging to be on the front line of the extermination policy.
While they peddle their insane proposals, backed by rampant fearmongering over climate change on behalf of our governments and the mainstream media, it is we who are charged with saving the planet and our place on it by exposing their nefarious agenda of mass depopulation before it is too late.
Population reduction enthusiast says “a few people with authority” should run the planet
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010
A renowned environmentalist, known for his advocacy of population reduction as a means of offsetting climate change, has called for “a more authoritative world” where freedom comes second to tackling what he sees as the devastating effects of global warming.
Futurist James Lovelock, tells the London Guardian that he believes “It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while,” in order to save humanity.
“We need a more authoritative world.” Lovelock states.
“We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that.” the 90 year old proponent of the Gaia hypothesis adds.
“You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.”
“But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.” Lovelock concludes.
Which “people with authority” could Lovelock have in mind for this tyrannical takeover in the name of mother Earth? Certainly not the disgraced UN affiliated climate scientists, whose involvement in several recent scandals even Lovelock admits is reprehensible:
“Fudging the data in any way whatsoever is quite literally a sin against the holy ghost of science. I’m not religious, but I put it that way because I feel so strongly. It’s the one thing you do not ever do. You’ve got to have standards.” he states in the interview.
Lovelock also has little faith in renewable energies, carbon trading or cap and tax schemes, which he previously told the New Scientist are “verging on a gigantic scam”:
Carbon trading, with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It’s not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it’ll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning. I am not against renewable energy, but to spoil all the decent countryside in the UK with wind farms is driving me mad. It’s absolutely unnecessary, and it takes 2500 square kilometres to produce a gigawatt – that’s an awful lot of countryside.
Lovelock repeats this sentiment in his latest interview with the Guardian, noting:
I don’t know enough about carbon trading, but I suspect that it is basically a scam. The whole thing is not very sensible. We have this crazy idea that we are setting an example to the world. What we’re doing is trying to make money out of the world by selling them renewable gadgetry and green ideas. It might be worthy from the national interest, but it is moonshine if you think what the Chinese and Indians are doing [in terms of emissions].
So, perhaps Lovelock would point to his friends at The Optimum Population Trust, a notorious UK-based public policy group that campaigns for a gradual decline in the global human population to what it sees as a “sustainable” level.
Lovelock became a patron of the thinktank in 2009. In a statement released by the trust to mark the appointment, Lovelock called on the environmental movement as a whole to “recognise the truth and speak out” on the link between rising human numbers and global warming.
Lovelock said: “Those who fail to see that population growth and climate change are two sides of the same coin are either ignorant or hiding from the truth. These two huge environmental problems are inseparable and to discuss one while ignoring the other is irrational.”
He added: “How can we possibly decrease carbon emissions and land use while the number of emitters and the space they occupy remorselessly increases? When will the environmentalists who claim to be green recognise the truth and speak out?”
So, essentially Dr Lovelock advocates the destruction of freedom in order that an overriding authoritative global power can oversee the radical stemming of the planet’s human population – nice.
Roger Martin, chair of OPT, said of Lovelock’s appointment: “We desperately need to remember that future population growth is not a ‘fact’ to be passively accepted but something over which we have control, and that limiting it could therefore play a major role in curbing emissions. Tragically, the green movement has chosen to forget this. With the help of eminent individuals such as James Lovelock, we will do our best to remind them.”
The OPT also has as patrons controversial primatologist and environmentalist Jane Goodall, who thinks that caging chimps and other apes is better for them than letting them live free in the wild; Professor Aubrey Manning, president of the UK’s Wildlife Trusts; and Sir Crispin Tickell, the ex-diplomat credited with the “greening” of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
The OPT also boasts as a patron BBC darling wildlife broadcaster and film-maker Sir David Attenborough, who has called for a one child policy like that of Communist China to be implemented in Britain. The proposal is one of the OPT’s main initiatives.
The think tank is also home to Jonathon Porritt, former chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, one of Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, who has stated that Britain’s population must be cut in half from around 60 million to 30 million if it is to build a sustainable society.
We have exhaustively exposed the nonsense behind the idea that the Earth’s current population levels are exceeding sustainable levels and are contributing to devastating climate change, however, Lovelock and his ilk at the OPT remain in positions of influence.
Lovelock is also an ardent advocate of geoengineering the planet in the name of controlling the climate. In 2007 Lovelock proposed laying vast swathes of pipes under the world’s oceans in order to pump water from the bottom of the seas – rich in nutrients, but mostly dead – to the top. The idea being that the action would encourage algae to breed, absorb more carbon and release more dimethyl sulphide into the atmosphere, a chemical known to seed sunlight reflecting clouds.
Effectively, Lovelock wants to try and block out the sun, the source of all life on this planet – nice.
Lovelock is also a member of The Royal Society of Edinburgh, an organization that has thrown its full weight behind the global warming movement, lending its absolute support for legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 80%, a process that will devastate the global economy and living standards.
This organization has been even more vehement than national governments in its advocacy of the man-made cause of global warming, calling for such drastic CO2 cuts to be made in the short term, not even by the usual target date of 2050.
“In his most recent book The Vanishing Face of Gaia, Lovelock concludes that the damage caused by overpopulation, species decline and carbon emissions is already so great that modern civilisation is finished.” notes James Delingpole at the London Telegraph.
“Before the end of this century, he argues, rising sea levels and overheating will have rendered whole swathes of our planet uninhabitable and such few survivors as there are will have to make do as best they can.” Delingpole adds.
Lovelock, The Royal Society and the OPT may sound like crazy nutcases, but unfortunately for us, they are extremely influential within the environmental movement. They are also far from alone in their thinking.
Mass sterilization, one child policies and a“Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death were all core concepts put forth by John P. Holdren, the man now in control of science policy in the United States, in his co-authored 1977 book, Ecoscience.
Holdren and his colleagues are now at the forefront of efforts to combat “climate change” through similarly insane programs focused around geoengineering the planet. As we reported in April 2009, Holdren advocates “Large-scale geoengineering projects designed to cool the Earth,” such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” which many have pointed out is already occurring via the spraying of chemtrails.
Is Holdren another one off mad kook that has somehow wormed his way into a position of great influence? Not according to leading NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen, who fully endorses Holdren’s view that industrial civilization should be destroyed to save the planet.
The same talking points raised by the OPT and James Lovelock have been re-iterated again and again by public policy groups and environmentalists, as well as the most influential scientists in the US government.
While you and I may think the notions of sterilization and depopulation could never be accepted by the public, those very concepts are now being embraced and popularized as the way forward for humanity.
Linking environmental policy to depopulation agendas opens the door to eugenics and it is no surprise that through that door have come pouring hordes of elitist filth just begging to be on the front line of the extermination policy.
While they peddle their insane proposals, backed by rampant fearmongering over climate change on behalf of our governments and the mainstream media, it is we who are charged with saving the planet and our place on it by exposing their nefarious agenda of mass depopulation before it is too late.
Federal Textbook Act, Take control of the pricing and availability of the text books
Federal Textbook Act, Take control of the pricing and availability of the text books
Obama To Take Over Control of College Textbooks?
By Warner Todd Huston Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Candace de Russy over at National Review posted an alarming example of Obama power grab. Or perhaps more precisely it’s yet another alarming example of an Obama power grab. This time Obama apparently is setting the table to take control of what is printed in our nation’s college textbooks.
This one slipped past my radar in August of 2009, but apparently Barack Obama signed the Federal Textbook Act (Download .pdf file) that made provisions for the federal government to take control of the pricing and availability of the text books in our institutions of higher learning (at least the ones that take federal funding).
According to the language of the act, it is all about keeping textbooks affordable for students.
Purpose and Intent- The purpose of this section is to ensure that students have access to affordable course materials by decreasing costs to students and enhancing transparency and disclosure with respect to the selection, purchase, sale, and use of course materials. It is the intent of this section to encourage all of the involved parties, including faculty, students, administrators, institutions of higher education, bookstores, distributors, and publishers, to work together to identify ways to decrease the cost of college textbooks and supplemental materials for students while supporting the academic freedom of faculty members to select high quality course materials for students.
Sounds good, right?
Maybe not so much.
National Review quotes George Mason economics professor Donald J. Boudreaux as saying that this act seems to be “a first step toward federal oversight of the contents of college textbooks.” As proof he points specifically to section C, the publisher requirements section.
(C) A description of the substantial content revisions made between the current edition of the college textbook or supplemental material and the previous edition, if any.
Why does Obama’s overlords need to know what revisions have been made to a textbook? This act is supposed to be concerned with pricing and availability, not content… isn’t it?
Of course, we all know that once government gets its tendrils into your business, it takes all power away from you and reassigns it to government. So, once this act is implemented, any federal money involved will give government the opening to begin controlling everything in the process of creating and distributing college textbooks.
As prof Boudreaux points out, if people are upset over the recent newfound control that the conservative-leaning Texas textbook commission had over new textbooks, then how upset might they be if the federal government takes over our college textbooks? There should be no difference at all in the reaction if it was really government control that was being opposed.
Naturally, its always about whose ox is being gored with liberals. Texas textbook control: baaaaad. Obama textbook control: gooooood.
I would also point out one other thing. Many professors in our nation’s colleges and universities have hit the lottery by writing textbooks for their own classes, books that their university will then adopt as the “official” textbook for class work. These professors make a tidy sum of money on these expensive, small print run books that their captive student audience is forced to buy. It would seem to me that this Federal Textbook Act could easily eliminate this lucrative but under-the-radar source of income for professors everywhere. Not that I am against that, but it is something for those lefty profs that so love their Obammessiah to think about.
This bill was originally signed in 2008 by President Bush and was introduced by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. It took effect this year during Obama’s presidency. But regardless of who signed it — and this shows that Bush was as bad as Obama for his love of big government — it is a bad idea to allow the federal government to get involved in the production of text books.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFP Tools
Share | More
(0) Reader Feedback | Subscribe | Print friendly | Contact Us | Send this page to a friend! |
Warner Todd Huston Bio
Warner Todd Huston Most recent columns
Warner Todd Huston’s thoughtful commentary, sometimes irreverent often historically based, is featured on many websites such as renewamerica.us, townhall.com, opinioneditorials.com, and americandaily.com, among many, many others. He has also written for several history magazines, and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture,” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of Publius’ Forum.
Obama To Take Over Control of College Textbooks?
By Warner Todd Huston Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Candace de Russy over at National Review posted an alarming example of Obama power grab. Or perhaps more precisely it’s yet another alarming example of an Obama power grab. This time Obama apparently is setting the table to take control of what is printed in our nation’s college textbooks.
This one slipped past my radar in August of 2009, but apparently Barack Obama signed the Federal Textbook Act (Download .pdf file) that made provisions for the federal government to take control of the pricing and availability of the text books in our institutions of higher learning (at least the ones that take federal funding).
According to the language of the act, it is all about keeping textbooks affordable for students.
Purpose and Intent- The purpose of this section is to ensure that students have access to affordable course materials by decreasing costs to students and enhancing transparency and disclosure with respect to the selection, purchase, sale, and use of course materials. It is the intent of this section to encourage all of the involved parties, including faculty, students, administrators, institutions of higher education, bookstores, distributors, and publishers, to work together to identify ways to decrease the cost of college textbooks and supplemental materials for students while supporting the academic freedom of faculty members to select high quality course materials for students.
Sounds good, right?
Maybe not so much.
National Review quotes George Mason economics professor Donald J. Boudreaux as saying that this act seems to be “a first step toward federal oversight of the contents of college textbooks.” As proof he points specifically to section C, the publisher requirements section.
(C) A description of the substantial content revisions made between the current edition of the college textbook or supplemental material and the previous edition, if any.
Why does Obama’s overlords need to know what revisions have been made to a textbook? This act is supposed to be concerned with pricing and availability, not content… isn’t it?
Of course, we all know that once government gets its tendrils into your business, it takes all power away from you and reassigns it to government. So, once this act is implemented, any federal money involved will give government the opening to begin controlling everything in the process of creating and distributing college textbooks.
As prof Boudreaux points out, if people are upset over the recent newfound control that the conservative-leaning Texas textbook commission had over new textbooks, then how upset might they be if the federal government takes over our college textbooks? There should be no difference at all in the reaction if it was really government control that was being opposed.
Naturally, its always about whose ox is being gored with liberals. Texas textbook control: baaaaad. Obama textbook control: gooooood.
I would also point out one other thing. Many professors in our nation’s colleges and universities have hit the lottery by writing textbooks for their own classes, books that their university will then adopt as the “official” textbook for class work. These professors make a tidy sum of money on these expensive, small print run books that their captive student audience is forced to buy. It would seem to me that this Federal Textbook Act could easily eliminate this lucrative but under-the-radar source of income for professors everywhere. Not that I am against that, but it is something for those lefty profs that so love their Obammessiah to think about.
This bill was originally signed in 2008 by President Bush and was introduced by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. It took effect this year during Obama’s presidency. But regardless of who signed it — and this shows that Bush was as bad as Obama for his love of big government — it is a bad idea to allow the federal government to get involved in the production of text books.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFP Tools
Share | More
(0) Reader Feedback | Subscribe | Print friendly | Contact Us | Send this page to a friend! |
Warner Todd Huston Bio
Warner Todd Huston Most recent columns
Warner Todd Huston’s thoughtful commentary, sometimes irreverent often historically based, is featured on many websites such as renewamerica.us, townhall.com, opinioneditorials.com, and americandaily.com, among many, many others. He has also written for several history magazines, and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture,” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of Publius’ Forum.
Once a socialist/communist dictator gets into power, like terminal cancer he and his administration smother and take control of every aspect of the economy, educational system, health care system and military
Obamacare is just the beginning of a total take over of America
By Dr. Laurie Roth Tuesday, March 30, 2010
America must not and will not become like the seduced German people in 1933. We will not stand by and watch Obama turn our country into Frankenstein’s laboratory, shredding our constitution, bill of rights and freedom as Hitler did with his country.
Tyrants and Dictators are predictably similar in how they take over. They ride in as the savior of change and hope. They offer health care, jobs for all, a refreshed national identity and protection from danger and harm….that is danger and harm they usually create to blame on enemies…..you know those groups who didn’t vote for them. The rope circles around the seduced neck of the people only after the dictator bribes his way in or gets voted in.
One thing is for sure looking at recent history. Once a socialist/communist dictator gets into power, like terminal cancer, he and his administration smother and take control of every aspect of the economy, educational system, health care system and military. They shred and control media, entertainment and religion.
In 1919, Lenin wrote after his takeover of Russia that the way to control a country is to first take over the industry, the land, and the banks. Lenin tricked and inspired millions and so did Hitler. These dictators didn’t come in appearing like monsters. They were the messiahs of change and hope. Their exhaustive plans involved developing a huge and seduced ‘fan’ base at first while aggressively and quickly finding and destroying anyone against them.
Kitty Werthmann was living in Austria when Hitler took over Germany next door. She recalls how deeply depressed Austria was in 1938. Nearly one-third of their workforce was unemployed. They had 25% inflation and 25% interest rates on bank loans.
People were begging for food and bankruptcies were happening daily. Austria was in a mess, so they were thrilled when Hitler promised big things and was elected into power. There was no talk of persecuting or attacking the Jews. The Austrians were promised jobs, healthcare, protection and recovery.
Kitty said that after the election was over there was instantly law and order. German officials were appointed everywhere and there was dancing in the streets. Though Austria was largely a Catholic country, suddenly in schools everywhere, all Catholic symbols and crosses were taken down and pictures of Hitler were put up everywhere.
Hitler targeted and controlled education and stopped religious instruction for kids in schools. The new church for the children of Austria and Germany was still every Sunday, but it now was forced attendance at the National Youth Day. The first two hours was political indoctrination every Sunday, then the rest of the day they played all kinds of sports. Naturally, the equipment was free. Children went home thrilled each Sunday and were getting brainwashed. Parents had no choice but to send their children each Sunday or else be fined or taken to jail.
Hitler immediately introduced socialist health care. People were going to the hospital for everything now, lines were huge and doctors were paid a salary by the Government. The Austrians soon paid 80% of their income in taxes. Government gave loans for the newly married, and took care of everything from day care needs to paying all College tuition.
As the noose tightened around education, religion, healthcare and enforcement, the ‘mercy killings’ started in. Kitty, then a student teacher in a small village in the Alps, described 15 mentally retarded adults who were known in the community and did good manual work. One day they were rounded up and taken to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade and various skills. Their families where forced to sign papers saying that they wouldn’t visit them for 6 months. They were told that any visits could cause homesickness and disrupt the program.
The letters started arriving back to the parents after several months saying these people had died natural deaths. Of course, they all knew 15 completely healthy adults could not, six months later, have all died natural deaths. They knew they were killed. Euthanasia started to become more common as Hitler’s real world view of perfection started to come out.
Hitler’s final control step of the Germans and Austrians was Gun laws and control. He started with gun registration. Once that was done, he said that guns were causing too much crime and that it was best for all to turn in their guns. They knew that authorities already knew who owned what so they complied.
When you look at Hitler, Saul Alinsky, Stalin, Lenin, Chavez, Castro and others, you see huge similarities with the strategy and world view of Obama. It is the same, promise of health care, jobs and opportunities. There is always a contrived crises or two the big Government has to magically solve, while blaming the enemies they want to create.
Obama is on the same control and dictatorship path as Hitler. First we saw the massive seduction over 15 months; now the controls and intimidation grow with his administration.
This Health care bill might as well have been Hitler’s Enabling Act of March 23rd, 1933. It also shreds our constitution and forces socialized health care on the people, rationing care for the unwanted and expensive seniors as they age, and forcing us all to pay for the Government slaughter of babies; abortion. This bill, run by the IRS, might as well be the Nazi party, as it encourages euthanasia, abortion and rationed care as Hitler did early on in Austria and Germany.
Rep. Burgess stated the obvious about this nightmare bill when asked about the use of the ‘Commerce clause’ excusing forced mandates by the Government. In a CNSNews.com interview Rep. Burgess, a doctor, stated, “No, I personally do not, and I think that is exactly right. Never before in the history of this country have we had the ability to coerce American citizens to purchase something and then invoke the Commerce clause after we coerce that purchase.” He went on…..”It just flies in the face of what a free society should be, so I’m perfectly comfortable with the attorneys general bringing suit against this bill,”
Yes, law suits are flying by Attorney Generals and other groups. We must stand no matter how awkward, inconvenient or expensive it is. Our freedom and country is at stake.
Obama isn’t stopping with forced Health care and the controls attached to that. He is going to manipulate votes by pushing amnesty for illegal aliens; controlling American businesses through cap and trade, then he will find a manipulative, back door way to come for our guns….most likely with a UN Treaty he is already working toward.
Obama continues to mock anyone who disagrees with him, and is now, according to the Wall Street Journal, stepping up Confrontation . Obama must be voted out. I don’t see any tin helmet on my head, and yes…..Obama comes from the same essence and evil as Hitler.
Obamacare is just the beginning of a total take over of America
By Dr. Laurie Roth Tuesday, March 30, 2010
America must not and will not become like the seduced German people in 1933. We will not stand by and watch Obama turn our country into Frankenstein’s laboratory, shredding our constitution, bill of rights and freedom as Hitler did with his country.
Tyrants and Dictators are predictably similar in how they take over. They ride in as the savior of change and hope. They offer health care, jobs for all, a refreshed national identity and protection from danger and harm….that is danger and harm they usually create to blame on enemies…..you know those groups who didn’t vote for them. The rope circles around the seduced neck of the people only after the dictator bribes his way in or gets voted in.
One thing is for sure looking at recent history. Once a socialist/communist dictator gets into power, like terminal cancer, he and his administration smother and take control of every aspect of the economy, educational system, health care system and military. They shred and control media, entertainment and religion.
In 1919, Lenin wrote after his takeover of Russia that the way to control a country is to first take over the industry, the land, and the banks. Lenin tricked and inspired millions and so did Hitler. These dictators didn’t come in appearing like monsters. They were the messiahs of change and hope. Their exhaustive plans involved developing a huge and seduced ‘fan’ base at first while aggressively and quickly finding and destroying anyone against them.
Kitty Werthmann was living in Austria when Hitler took over Germany next door. She recalls how deeply depressed Austria was in 1938. Nearly one-third of their workforce was unemployed. They had 25% inflation and 25% interest rates on bank loans.
People were begging for food and bankruptcies were happening daily. Austria was in a mess, so they were thrilled when Hitler promised big things and was elected into power. There was no talk of persecuting or attacking the Jews. The Austrians were promised jobs, healthcare, protection and recovery.
Kitty said that after the election was over there was instantly law and order. German officials were appointed everywhere and there was dancing in the streets. Though Austria was largely a Catholic country, suddenly in schools everywhere, all Catholic symbols and crosses were taken down and pictures of Hitler were put up everywhere.
Hitler targeted and controlled education and stopped religious instruction for kids in schools. The new church for the children of Austria and Germany was still every Sunday, but it now was forced attendance at the National Youth Day. The first two hours was political indoctrination every Sunday, then the rest of the day they played all kinds of sports. Naturally, the equipment was free. Children went home thrilled each Sunday and were getting brainwashed. Parents had no choice but to send their children each Sunday or else be fined or taken to jail.
Hitler immediately introduced socialist health care. People were going to the hospital for everything now, lines were huge and doctors were paid a salary by the Government. The Austrians soon paid 80% of their income in taxes. Government gave loans for the newly married, and took care of everything from day care needs to paying all College tuition.
As the noose tightened around education, religion, healthcare and enforcement, the ‘mercy killings’ started in. Kitty, then a student teacher in a small village in the Alps, described 15 mentally retarded adults who were known in the community and did good manual work. One day they were rounded up and taken to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade and various skills. Their families where forced to sign papers saying that they wouldn’t visit them for 6 months. They were told that any visits could cause homesickness and disrupt the program.
The letters started arriving back to the parents after several months saying these people had died natural deaths. Of course, they all knew 15 completely healthy adults could not, six months later, have all died natural deaths. They knew they were killed. Euthanasia started to become more common as Hitler’s real world view of perfection started to come out.
Hitler’s final control step of the Germans and Austrians was Gun laws and control. He started with gun registration. Once that was done, he said that guns were causing too much crime and that it was best for all to turn in their guns. They knew that authorities already knew who owned what so they complied.
When you look at Hitler, Saul Alinsky, Stalin, Lenin, Chavez, Castro and others, you see huge similarities with the strategy and world view of Obama. It is the same, promise of health care, jobs and opportunities. There is always a contrived crises or two the big Government has to magically solve, while blaming the enemies they want to create.
Obama is on the same control and dictatorship path as Hitler. First we saw the massive seduction over 15 months; now the controls and intimidation grow with his administration.
This Health care bill might as well have been Hitler’s Enabling Act of March 23rd, 1933. It also shreds our constitution and forces socialized health care on the people, rationing care for the unwanted and expensive seniors as they age, and forcing us all to pay for the Government slaughter of babies; abortion. This bill, run by the IRS, might as well be the Nazi party, as it encourages euthanasia, abortion and rationed care as Hitler did early on in Austria and Germany.
Rep. Burgess stated the obvious about this nightmare bill when asked about the use of the ‘Commerce clause’ excusing forced mandates by the Government. In a CNSNews.com interview Rep. Burgess, a doctor, stated, “No, I personally do not, and I think that is exactly right. Never before in the history of this country have we had the ability to coerce American citizens to purchase something and then invoke the Commerce clause after we coerce that purchase.” He went on…..”It just flies in the face of what a free society should be, so I’m perfectly comfortable with the attorneys general bringing suit against this bill,”
Yes, law suits are flying by Attorney Generals and other groups. We must stand no matter how awkward, inconvenient or expensive it is. Our freedom and country is at stake.
Obama isn’t stopping with forced Health care and the controls attached to that. He is going to manipulate votes by pushing amnesty for illegal aliens; controlling American businesses through cap and trade, then he will find a manipulative, back door way to come for our guns….most likely with a UN Treaty he is already working toward.
Obama continues to mock anyone who disagrees with him, and is now, according to the Wall Street Journal, stepping up Confrontation . Obama must be voted out. I don’t see any tin helmet on my head, and yes…..Obama comes from the same essence and evil as Hitler.
What Doctors Don't Tell You
Home Blogs Forums
Lynne McTaggart - What Doctors Don't Tell You
Monkeying with the truth
The US and UK governments and the press are exulting in the recent highly public hanging of Dr Andrew Wakefield, found guilty of misconduct by the British General Medical Council (GMC). Wakefield, you may recall, is the British gastroenterologist who first raised the alarm bells over the measles–mumps–rubella vaccine (MMR).
In the minds of many medicos and in the press, the MMR vaccine now stands fully vindicated. The scientist who claimed that the MMR vaccine causes autism has been discredited. Order has been restored.
In our Special Report this month, publisher Bryan Hubbard set out both to investigate the Wakefield decision and to uncover any evidence purporting to demonstrate the safety of the vaccine.
Wakefield never maintained that the MMR vaccine caused autism. All he did was raise a cautious alarm after finding that a number of children with autism were presenting with the same gut problems that seemed to have developed right after their MMR jabs.
Now, he and his colleagues in America have carried out a subsequent study on monkeys, which demonstrated that the hepatitis B vaccine can cause neurological damage and progressively severe chronic inflammation in gastrointestinal tissue—exactly what he originally discovered with the MMR vaccine and autistic children.
Despite being exhaustively peer-reviewed and accepted for publication, Wakefield’s monkey study was subsequently pulled as ‘not suitable’ for publication after the GMC delivered its verdict. The pulling of the study ultimately became the centrepiece of our story. The more that Bryan dug into this issue, the more layers of deceit he uncovered in the form of censorship, data-massaging and burying of damning data.
He found dirty tricks at the heart of medicine that would have made Richard Nixon’s Watergate henchmen proud. He found journalism bought and paid for by drug companies.
But what has been most shocking to us as journalists is the misinformation spread about by our own colleagues in the press. Virtually no major newspaper, or TV or radio station (save the Huffington Post) has bothered to look beyond the official releases of the GMC or government agencies to learn the truth about MMR. Some journalists have even allowed themselves to get in bed with drug companies.
The safety of the vaccine is now beside the point. Wakefield’s error was to challenge medicine’s most sacred cow: vaccination is now in a sense a standard-bearer for a certain mindset. It represents the triumph of Science over the randomness of Nature. Most doctors look to vaccination as proof that medicine has conquered infectious disease.
Researchers, scientific publications, doctors, drug companies and even journalists are willing to do almost anything to maintain that assumption of a priori benefit. Vaccination is now performed for its own sake—whether or not it is necessary, beneficial or even safe. To attack anything about any jab has come to be viewed as treason.
What needs to be put on display is not an honest scientist like Wakefield, but the level of deceit that is now routine—among scientists, researchers and reporters—all in the name of the public ‘interest’.
Lynne McTaggart - What Doctors Don't Tell You
Monkeying with the truth
The US and UK governments and the press are exulting in the recent highly public hanging of Dr Andrew Wakefield, found guilty of misconduct by the British General Medical Council (GMC). Wakefield, you may recall, is the British gastroenterologist who first raised the alarm bells over the measles–mumps–rubella vaccine (MMR).
In the minds of many medicos and in the press, the MMR vaccine now stands fully vindicated. The scientist who claimed that the MMR vaccine causes autism has been discredited. Order has been restored.
In our Special Report this month, publisher Bryan Hubbard set out both to investigate the Wakefield decision and to uncover any evidence purporting to demonstrate the safety of the vaccine.
Wakefield never maintained that the MMR vaccine caused autism. All he did was raise a cautious alarm after finding that a number of children with autism were presenting with the same gut problems that seemed to have developed right after their MMR jabs.
Now, he and his colleagues in America have carried out a subsequent study on monkeys, which demonstrated that the hepatitis B vaccine can cause neurological damage and progressively severe chronic inflammation in gastrointestinal tissue—exactly what he originally discovered with the MMR vaccine and autistic children.
Despite being exhaustively peer-reviewed and accepted for publication, Wakefield’s monkey study was subsequently pulled as ‘not suitable’ for publication after the GMC delivered its verdict. The pulling of the study ultimately became the centrepiece of our story. The more that Bryan dug into this issue, the more layers of deceit he uncovered in the form of censorship, data-massaging and burying of damning data.
He found dirty tricks at the heart of medicine that would have made Richard Nixon’s Watergate henchmen proud. He found journalism bought and paid for by drug companies.
But what has been most shocking to us as journalists is the misinformation spread about by our own colleagues in the press. Virtually no major newspaper, or TV or radio station (save the Huffington Post) has bothered to look beyond the official releases of the GMC or government agencies to learn the truth about MMR. Some journalists have even allowed themselves to get in bed with drug companies.
The safety of the vaccine is now beside the point. Wakefield’s error was to challenge medicine’s most sacred cow: vaccination is now in a sense a standard-bearer for a certain mindset. It represents the triumph of Science over the randomness of Nature. Most doctors look to vaccination as proof that medicine has conquered infectious disease.
Researchers, scientific publications, doctors, drug companies and even journalists are willing to do almost anything to maintain that assumption of a priori benefit. Vaccination is now performed for its own sake—whether or not it is necessary, beneficial or even safe. To attack anything about any jab has come to be viewed as treason.
What needs to be put on display is not an honest scientist like Wakefield, but the level of deceit that is now routine—among scientists, researchers and reporters—all in the name of the public ‘interest’.
Pet Vaccinations
How to Be a Smart Vaccine Consumer
1.Discuss what kinds of vaccines your pet needs, and how often, with your veterinarian. I strongly encourage you to seek out a holistic vet to care for your pet, and especially when it comes to vaccinations.
If you can’t locate a holistic vet in your area, make sure not to take your pet to any veterinary practice that promotes annual or more frequent re-vaccinations, or sells “puppy packages,” where you get all the vaccines for a “bargain price.” And don’t use any boarding facility, groomer, training facility or other animal service that requires you to vaccinate your pet more than necessary.
Ideally, well educated people in the pet community accept titers -- seek out and support these businesses.
2.Make sure each vaccine your dog or cat receives meets the following criteria:
◦It is for a serious disease (this eliminates many on the list immediately)
◦Your pet has the opportunity to be exposed to the disease (indoor cats have little to no exposure)
◦The vaccine is considered both effective and safe
◦If you do vaccinate your pet, ask your holistic vet to provide a homeopathic vaccine detox called Thuja (for all vaccines except Rabies)
3.Do not vaccinate your dog or cat if it has had a serious life-threatening vaccine reaction.
4.Rabies vaccines are required by law. There are two varieties of the same vaccine – the 1-year type and the 3-year type. Ask for the 3-year vaccine, and ask your holistic vet about the homeopathic rabies vaccine detoxifier called Lyssin. There is also an immunologically less reactive vaccine called Purevax, but it’s only labeled for 1-year duration. If you are working with a holistic vet, ask to have the rabies vaccine given after 4 months of age, preferably closer to 6 months, to reduce possible reactions.
5.Insist on a Vaccine Titer Test. This test will help you and the doctor determine whether your pet has adequate immunological protection from previous vaccinations. Antibody levels can be measured from a blood draw. The type of titer that best assesses immune system response to vaccines is called the indirect immunofluorescent antibody (IFA) test.
Many veterinary state teaching hospitals will offer this test, as do private veterinary labs such as Antech or Idexx. Remember, you can’t add immunity to an already immune pet, so don’t keep vaccinating!
6.Discuss with your vet the risks vs. benefits of the vaccines you’re considering, as well as the likelihood your pet will be exposed to each disease.
7.If your cat lives indoors and never goes outside to risk exposure to infectious diseases, she does not need to be vaccinated annually. It is my belief that over-vaccination is one of the primary reasons the general health of housecats is deteriorating.
What About Puppy and Kitten Shots – Are They Really Safe?
Companion animals are not born with lifelong protective immunity, it must be established. And unlike many of the human infectious diseases that have been eradicated from this country, there are still lots of outbreaks of parvo and distemper across the country every year.
As Dr. Ron Schultz (head of the Immunology Department of the University of Wisconsin Veterinary School) says (and I paraphrase), ideally “more immunized dogs would have less vaccines and less immunized dogs would have more vaccines.”
In essence, vets still see lots of young pets die from preventable infectious diseases. The reason these diseases have not been eradicated is there is a pool of unvaccinated domesticated pets that are harboring these diseases.
Dr. Schultz argues that if these animals had been protected against disease, less disease would be transmitted. Likewise, if we would stop unnecessarily vaccinating already-protected pets, less degenerative disease would occur, and he’s right.
At my clinic, Natural Pet Animal Hospital, we tailor make all vaccine protocols to minimize risk and maximize protection, taking into account the breed, background (was the pup orphaned, etc.), nutritional status and overall vitality.
Most of the time, with healthy animals, we follow Dr. Schultz’s protocol of providing a single parvo and distemper vaccine at or before 12 weeks of age, and a set after 14 weeks of age. We titer pets 2 weeks after the last vaccine and if they have been successfully immunized, they are protected for life.
Nice, huh?
Should the titer tests indicate vaccine levels are low, we recommend a booster for only the specific virus or viruses that titered low. Hence the importance of working with a holistic vet that carries single vaccines.
We do not use or recommend combination vaccines (six to eight viruses in one shot), which is the traditional yearly booster. We also offer the option to boost a pet’s immunity naturally with homeopathic nosodes rather than traditional vaccination. Nosodes cannot be guaranteed to be effective and will not result in a measurable titer.
Reference:
Vaccinations in Veterinary Medicine: Dogs and Cats
1.Discuss what kinds of vaccines your pet needs, and how often, with your veterinarian. I strongly encourage you to seek out a holistic vet to care for your pet, and especially when it comes to vaccinations.
If you can’t locate a holistic vet in your area, make sure not to take your pet to any veterinary practice that promotes annual or more frequent re-vaccinations, or sells “puppy packages,” where you get all the vaccines for a “bargain price.” And don’t use any boarding facility, groomer, training facility or other animal service that requires you to vaccinate your pet more than necessary.
Ideally, well educated people in the pet community accept titers -- seek out and support these businesses.
2.Make sure each vaccine your dog or cat receives meets the following criteria:
◦It is for a serious disease (this eliminates many on the list immediately)
◦Your pet has the opportunity to be exposed to the disease (indoor cats have little to no exposure)
◦The vaccine is considered both effective and safe
◦If you do vaccinate your pet, ask your holistic vet to provide a homeopathic vaccine detox called Thuja (for all vaccines except Rabies)
3.Do not vaccinate your dog or cat if it has had a serious life-threatening vaccine reaction.
4.Rabies vaccines are required by law. There are two varieties of the same vaccine – the 1-year type and the 3-year type. Ask for the 3-year vaccine, and ask your holistic vet about the homeopathic rabies vaccine detoxifier called Lyssin. There is also an immunologically less reactive vaccine called Purevax, but it’s only labeled for 1-year duration. If you are working with a holistic vet, ask to have the rabies vaccine given after 4 months of age, preferably closer to 6 months, to reduce possible reactions.
5.Insist on a Vaccine Titer Test. This test will help you and the doctor determine whether your pet has adequate immunological protection from previous vaccinations. Antibody levels can be measured from a blood draw. The type of titer that best assesses immune system response to vaccines is called the indirect immunofluorescent antibody (IFA) test.
Many veterinary state teaching hospitals will offer this test, as do private veterinary labs such as Antech or Idexx. Remember, you can’t add immunity to an already immune pet, so don’t keep vaccinating!
6.Discuss with your vet the risks vs. benefits of the vaccines you’re considering, as well as the likelihood your pet will be exposed to each disease.
7.If your cat lives indoors and never goes outside to risk exposure to infectious diseases, she does not need to be vaccinated annually. It is my belief that over-vaccination is one of the primary reasons the general health of housecats is deteriorating.
What About Puppy and Kitten Shots – Are They Really Safe?
Companion animals are not born with lifelong protective immunity, it must be established. And unlike many of the human infectious diseases that have been eradicated from this country, there are still lots of outbreaks of parvo and distemper across the country every year.
As Dr. Ron Schultz (head of the Immunology Department of the University of Wisconsin Veterinary School) says (and I paraphrase), ideally “more immunized dogs would have less vaccines and less immunized dogs would have more vaccines.”
In essence, vets still see lots of young pets die from preventable infectious diseases. The reason these diseases have not been eradicated is there is a pool of unvaccinated domesticated pets that are harboring these diseases.
Dr. Schultz argues that if these animals had been protected against disease, less disease would be transmitted. Likewise, if we would stop unnecessarily vaccinating already-protected pets, less degenerative disease would occur, and he’s right.
At my clinic, Natural Pet Animal Hospital, we tailor make all vaccine protocols to minimize risk and maximize protection, taking into account the breed, background (was the pup orphaned, etc.), nutritional status and overall vitality.
Most of the time, with healthy animals, we follow Dr. Schultz’s protocol of providing a single parvo and distemper vaccine at or before 12 weeks of age, and a set after 14 weeks of age. We titer pets 2 weeks after the last vaccine and if they have been successfully immunized, they are protected for life.
Nice, huh?
Should the titer tests indicate vaccine levels are low, we recommend a booster for only the specific virus or viruses that titered low. Hence the importance of working with a holistic vet that carries single vaccines.
We do not use or recommend combination vaccines (six to eight viruses in one shot), which is the traditional yearly booster. We also offer the option to boost a pet’s immunity naturally with homeopathic nosodes rather than traditional vaccination. Nosodes cannot be guaranteed to be effective and will not result in a measurable titer.
Reference:
Vaccinations in Veterinary Medicine: Dogs and Cats
NEW EPA Alerts Pet Owners to Dangers of Flea/Tick Products
NEW! EPA Alerts Pet Owners to Dangers of Flea/Tick Products
Email this article to a friend Bookmark & Share Previous Post Next Post
Please or to continue.
Save Options Private Favorites (This will appear on your saved articles for later viewing)
Shared Favorites (This will appear on your profile as one of your favorites)
Invite Your Friends Invite Your Friends Email this article to a friend
In mid-March the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held a free, public webinar titled “Evaluation of Pet Spot-on Flea and Tick Products and Next Steps.”
The purpose of the webinar was to discuss findings from a five-year study of flea and tick products. The increased scrutiny was prompted by rising rates of adverse effects from these products.
"(Current) label warnings simply are not working,” according to Steve Owens, assistant administrator of EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
To combat it, the EPA is calling for new labeling requirements including warnings, a listing of possible symptoms, better labeling instructions, dosage guidelines for consumers and even possible restrictions of certain ingredients. No products are being banned, but Owens says EPA isn't ruling out such drastic measures in the future.
Sources:
dvm360, March 16, 2010
dvm360, March 17, 2010
Dr. Becker's Comments:
In April of last year, the EPA issued an advisory about “spot-on” chemical products. These are products applied to the neck or back of dogs and cats as a flea and tick preventive.
The advisory was issued due to a significant increase in reported adverse reactions -- everything from mild skin irritation to seizures and death. In 2008, over 44,000 reactions presumed to be tied to spot-on products were reported by pet owners, veterinarians and other animal caretakers.
If you’re wondering why the EPA is involved in regulation of a pet medication, it’s because these particular products are considered pesticides, and pesticides fall under the EPA’s jurisdiction.
At the time the advisory was issued, manufacturers of spot-on flea and tick products predictably pointed out that no cause-and-effect relationship between the products and reported adverse reactions had been confirmed.
Common sense and the first-hand experience of people who have used the products, however, points to the extremely high likelihood that 44,000 reports in a single year do indeed link application of the products with adverse reactions.
And in fact, the 44,000 reported incidents in 2008 is a significant jump from 28,000 the prior year, and includes 600 deaths.
In my opinion, the risks of these products are simply too great to warrant their routine (monthly) use. I encourage my dog and cat owner clients to avoid these pesticides in favor of safer alternatives.
I’ll discuss my recommendations for harmless, natural flea and tick control a little later in this article.
What the EPA Found
1.Most adverse reactions were seen in dogs weighing between 10 and 20 pounds.
2.Reactions in mixed breed dogs were most commonly reported, however, the Chihuahua, Shih Tzu, Miniature Poodle, Pomeranian, Dachshund, Maltese, Yorkshire Terrier and Bichon Frise seem particularly at risk.
3.Products containing cyphenothrin and permethrin were especially problematic for small breed dogs.
4.Most incidents occurred in dogs under three years old, likely at their first exposure to a spot-on product.
5.Adverse reactions for both dogs and cats were primarily skin, GI tract and nervous system related. Skin reactions included redness, itching, hair loss, sores and ulcers.
6.Gastrointestinal symptoms included vomiting, diarrhea and salivation.
7.Reported nervous system symptoms included lethargy, nervousness, ataxia (movement problems), tremors and seizure.
8.A number of adverse reactions in cats were the result of the cat either being treated with a product intended for dogs, or through exposure to a treated dog. Cats treated with products intended for dogs had an especially rate of serious reactions and fatalities.
9.Inert ingredients in spot-on products were generally assumed to contribute to toxicity.
10.Dosage ranges were considered to be too wide in some cases.
11.Product labeling was identified as needing a revamp in many cases.
12.The EPA’s Companion Animal Studies guidelines are insufficient to predict the toxicity of spot-on products.
The full EPA report can be found here, and includes a list of the specific products reviewed and the adverse reactions reported for each. For more information, you can also review the EPA Analysis and Mitigation Plan.
My Recommendations for Safe, Natural Flea and Tick Control
In addition to the risks associated with spot-on treatments, there is simply no chemical based pest control pill, dip, solution, shampoo, or collar that is without the potential for side effects.
Just because a compound is applied to or worn on your pet’s fur doesn’t mean it’s safe. Remember: what goes on your pet goes in your pet, by absorption through the skin or ingestion during grooming.
Fleas, ticks, mosquitoes and other parasites feed first on unhealthy animals. So the goal of preventive pest control is to bring your dog or cat to optimal health, which will make him naturally more resilient and less attractive to parasites.
Toward that end, I encourage you to work with your holistic vet -- visit the American Holistic Veterinary Medicine Association to find one who should also be able to provide a number of natural products for pest control.
Here are just a few suggestions:
•Essential oil sprays containing lavender, peppermint, geranium, lemongrass or citronella can be very effective as parasite deterrents. You need to purchase a pre-blended product or work with an animal aromatherapist to make sure you’re using safe oils at the correct concentration as dog and cat doses are different
•Cedar oil is a long-recognized flea eradicator, and products exist that are specially formulated for cats and dogs.
•Natural, food-grade diatomaceous earth helps to remove fleas and ticks from your pet’s body.
•Fresh garlic can be given to dogs and cats to prevent internal as well as external parasites. Work with your vet to determine a safe amount for your pet’s body weight.
If You Must Use a Chemical Pest Preventive, Here Are Some Tips for Reducing the Risk to Your Pet
1.Be very careful to follow dosing directions on the label, and if your pet is at the low end of a dosage range, step down to the next lowest dosage. Be extremely cautious with small dogs, especially if you own one of the breeds reported to be at high risk for adverse reactions. And do not under any circumstances apply dog product to your cat.
2.Don’t depend exclusively on chemical treatments. Rotate natural preventives with chemical ones. An every other month rotation works well for many pet owners. In many parts of the country owners find they can successfully control ticks with 2 doses a year: one in the spring and one in the late summer.
3.Monitor your pet for adverse reactions after you apply a chemical product – especially when using one for the first time. Keep an eye out for symptoms like those described in numbers 5, 6 and 7 above under “What the EPA Found.”
4.Since your pet’s liver will be tasked with processing the chemicals that make it into the bloodstream, it can be very beneficial to give your dog or cat a supplement to help detoxify her liver. I recommend milk thistle, which is a detox agent and also helps to actually regenerate liver cells.
You can get milk thistle through your holistic vet, who should also guide you on how much to give your pet depending on her age, weight and the medications she’s taking. I recommend one dose daily for seven days following any flea, tick or heartworm application.
5.Another product I recommend is chlorella, a super green food that is a very powerful detox agent. Your holistic vet should also advise you about how much chlorella to give your pet.
Remember -- keeping your pet’s immune system healthy and strong is the best way to help him fight off parasites as well as disease. A high quality, species appropriate diet is the foundation upon which your pet’s good health and long life must be built.
Related Links:
These Meds Might Be 'Safe' for You... But They Can KILL Your Pet
What to Do When Your Pet has Allergies...
How Often Should You Bathe Your Pet?
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
A Hidden Tax on Annuities Lurks in the Health Care Reform Law
A Hidden Tax on Annuities Lurks in the Health Care Reform Law
By SARA HANSARD
Posted 2:30 PM 03/29/10 Retirement, Economy, Investing, Health Care, Taxes, Insurance
Comments: 278Print E-mail More Text Size A A A The Obama administration is trying to encourage people to buy annuities to ensure that they don't outlive their savings. But a little-noticed provision of the new health care reform law will slap a 3.8% tax on payouts from annuities purchased by high-income earners outside their workplace. And, not surprisingly, the life insurance industry isn't happy about that.
Life insurers, which have sold approximately 15 million so-called "nonqualified" policies containing some $710 billion in assets, hope to get this particular provision of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 repealed. The health care reconciliation bill made amendments that House wanted for the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act, which President Obama signed into law on March 23.
"This is a countermand to all that this administration has been doing since they took office in encouraging saving for retirement and using annuities as guaranteed lifetime income," says Catherine Weatherford, president and chief executive officer of the Insured Retirement Institute (IRI), a Washington, D.C., trade association that represents the annuity industry.
A Plea Fell on Deaf Ears
To help pay for the $940 billion health care reform measure, the administration and congressional Democrats included a 3.8% Medicare payroll tax on single people who earn more than $200,000 a year and couples earning over $250,000 a year. Starting in 2013, the tax will be applied to annuity distributions, interest, dividends, capital gains, rents and royalties. While there are no estimates of how much the annuity portion of the tax may raise, all of the investment taxes are expected to contribute $210 billion over the next 10 years to Treasury's coffers.
"We've got a retirement spike coming," Weatherford says. "Saving for retirement using this vehicle will give them that paycheck for life."
The IRI along with the American Council of Life Insurers, the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors and the National Association for Fixed Annuities co-signed a March 24 letter that urged the Senate in vain to leave the annuity provision out of the bill. As defined-benefit pensions continue to vanish from the workplace, "Individual annuities are an important tool used by millions of Americans to accumulate retirement savings and to secure lifetime retirement income," the letter said, noting that 78 million working Americans lack access to a workplace retirement plan.
The 3.8% Medicare tax on income received from individual annuities "would serve as a disincentive to save in a product that uniquely allows an individual to accumulate retirement savings and to guarantee that savings can never be outlived," the letter said, and it concluded: "In today's savings-poor environment, policy-makers need to create incentives for retirement planning."
An Inconsistent Strategy
Insurers also point out that the Obama administration has taken steps to try to promote annuities in other areas. The administration's Middle Class Task Force report issued in January included a call for "promoting the availability of annuities and other forms of guaranteed lifetime income, which transform savings into guaranteed future income, reducing the risks that retirees will outlive their savings or that . . . retirees' living standards will be eroded by investment losses or inflation."
The Labor and Treasury Departments have issued a request for information to look at possible impediments to the use of annuities and other types of lifetime guaranteed income in employer-sponsored plans and Individual Retirement Accounts. In his fiscal 2011 budget, President Obama also included a provision that would make it easier for holders of nonqualified annuities to take partial payouts without having to exchange their annuity contracts.
"The inclusion of annuities in the [Medicare] tax flies in the face of what we're trying to achieve here on lifetime security," comments Alane Dent, vice president of federal affairs for the American Council of Life Insurers.
Maintaining "Favorable Tax Treatment"
The administration disagrees that the tax will discourage people from choosing annuities. In a March 23 letter to the IRI, Michael Mundaca, acting assistant Treasury secretary for tax policy, said the tax is "not a proposal that is designed to or should discourage individuals from saving through purchasing annuities." The tax "does nothing to alter the favorable tax treatment of annuities inherent in deferring taxation of annuity earnings until annuity payments are made and then treating a portion of each payment as a return of the previously taxed funds used to purchase the annuity," he wrote.
Mundaca also noted that the tax applies only when an annuitant's income exceeds the $200,000 or $250,000 annual threshold.
But nonqualified annuities aren't typically sold to low-income people, say Diane Boyle, director of federal government relations for the National Association of Insurance Financial Advisors. Such plans usually aren't suitable for lower-income earners, who may not have the funds to purchase annuities, she says. Moreover, the income threshold "isn't that high for areas like Washington, New York and [Philadelphia]," where two-earner middle-income couples easily make that much, she adds.
"The financing of health care reform should not be paid for on the backs of individuals who are planning their retirement," Boyle says. Even if it affects only high-income people, "It does have a chilling effect any time you begin taxing lifetime income," the IRI's Weatherford says.
Coming Back for More?
Complicating the tax is that while it's fashioned as a tax primarily on annuity payouts from nonqualified plans, income from employer-sponsored plans such as 401(k)s will also be hit. While annuity income on qualified plans above the threshold amounts won't be subject to the 3.8% tax, all annuity income, including income from qualified plans, is considered in calculating income to meet the tax threshold, Dent of the American Council of Life Insurers explains.
And the insurance industry fears that this won't be the last time it's eyed for new tax proposals. "We're concerned this is a Congress that is looking for ways to finance different initiatives and programs," Boyle says. "They're looking at all areas of the tax code to find revenue. It's concerning that they're finding it in investments and programs that are designed to assist people with their long-term financing for retirement."
Weatherford pledges to try to get the tax repealed: "We think this is so important, we are going to continue to work with this administration and Congress to see if we can look toward repeal of this provision."
Tagged: annuities, health care reform, Life Insurance, payroll tax
See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/9CkD7k
By SARA HANSARD
Posted 2:30 PM 03/29/10 Retirement, Economy, Investing, Health Care, Taxes, Insurance
Comments: 278Print E-mail More Text Size A A A The Obama administration is trying to encourage people to buy annuities to ensure that they don't outlive their savings. But a little-noticed provision of the new health care reform law will slap a 3.8% tax on payouts from annuities purchased by high-income earners outside their workplace. And, not surprisingly, the life insurance industry isn't happy about that.
Life insurers, which have sold approximately 15 million so-called "nonqualified" policies containing some $710 billion in assets, hope to get this particular provision of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 repealed. The health care reconciliation bill made amendments that House wanted for the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act, which President Obama signed into law on March 23.
"This is a countermand to all that this administration has been doing since they took office in encouraging saving for retirement and using annuities as guaranteed lifetime income," says Catherine Weatherford, president and chief executive officer of the Insured Retirement Institute (IRI), a Washington, D.C., trade association that represents the annuity industry.
A Plea Fell on Deaf Ears
To help pay for the $940 billion health care reform measure, the administration and congressional Democrats included a 3.8% Medicare payroll tax on single people who earn more than $200,000 a year and couples earning over $250,000 a year. Starting in 2013, the tax will be applied to annuity distributions, interest, dividends, capital gains, rents and royalties. While there are no estimates of how much the annuity portion of the tax may raise, all of the investment taxes are expected to contribute $210 billion over the next 10 years to Treasury's coffers.
"We've got a retirement spike coming," Weatherford says. "Saving for retirement using this vehicle will give them that paycheck for life."
The IRI along with the American Council of Life Insurers, the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors and the National Association for Fixed Annuities co-signed a March 24 letter that urged the Senate in vain to leave the annuity provision out of the bill. As defined-benefit pensions continue to vanish from the workplace, "Individual annuities are an important tool used by millions of Americans to accumulate retirement savings and to secure lifetime retirement income," the letter said, noting that 78 million working Americans lack access to a workplace retirement plan.
The 3.8% Medicare tax on income received from individual annuities "would serve as a disincentive to save in a product that uniquely allows an individual to accumulate retirement savings and to guarantee that savings can never be outlived," the letter said, and it concluded: "In today's savings-poor environment, policy-makers need to create incentives for retirement planning."
An Inconsistent Strategy
Insurers also point out that the Obama administration has taken steps to try to promote annuities in other areas. The administration's Middle Class Task Force report issued in January included a call for "promoting the availability of annuities and other forms of guaranteed lifetime income, which transform savings into guaranteed future income, reducing the risks that retirees will outlive their savings or that . . . retirees' living standards will be eroded by investment losses or inflation."
The Labor and Treasury Departments have issued a request for information to look at possible impediments to the use of annuities and other types of lifetime guaranteed income in employer-sponsored plans and Individual Retirement Accounts. In his fiscal 2011 budget, President Obama also included a provision that would make it easier for holders of nonqualified annuities to take partial payouts without having to exchange their annuity contracts.
"The inclusion of annuities in the [Medicare] tax flies in the face of what we're trying to achieve here on lifetime security," comments Alane Dent, vice president of federal affairs for the American Council of Life Insurers.
Maintaining "Favorable Tax Treatment"
The administration disagrees that the tax will discourage people from choosing annuities. In a March 23 letter to the IRI, Michael Mundaca, acting assistant Treasury secretary for tax policy, said the tax is "not a proposal that is designed to or should discourage individuals from saving through purchasing annuities." The tax "does nothing to alter the favorable tax treatment of annuities inherent in deferring taxation of annuity earnings until annuity payments are made and then treating a portion of each payment as a return of the previously taxed funds used to purchase the annuity," he wrote.
Mundaca also noted that the tax applies only when an annuitant's income exceeds the $200,000 or $250,000 annual threshold.
But nonqualified annuities aren't typically sold to low-income people, say Diane Boyle, director of federal government relations for the National Association of Insurance Financial Advisors. Such plans usually aren't suitable for lower-income earners, who may not have the funds to purchase annuities, she says. Moreover, the income threshold "isn't that high for areas like Washington, New York and [Philadelphia]," where two-earner middle-income couples easily make that much, she adds.
"The financing of health care reform should not be paid for on the backs of individuals who are planning their retirement," Boyle says. Even if it affects only high-income people, "It does have a chilling effect any time you begin taxing lifetime income," the IRI's Weatherford says.
Coming Back for More?
Complicating the tax is that while it's fashioned as a tax primarily on annuity payouts from nonqualified plans, income from employer-sponsored plans such as 401(k)s will also be hit. While annuity income on qualified plans above the threshold amounts won't be subject to the 3.8% tax, all annuity income, including income from qualified plans, is considered in calculating income to meet the tax threshold, Dent of the American Council of Life Insurers explains.
And the insurance industry fears that this won't be the last time it's eyed for new tax proposals. "We're concerned this is a Congress that is looking for ways to finance different initiatives and programs," Boyle says. "They're looking at all areas of the tax code to find revenue. It's concerning that they're finding it in investments and programs that are designed to assist people with their long-term financing for retirement."
Weatherford pledges to try to get the tax repealed: "We think this is so important, we are going to continue to work with this administration and Congress to see if we can look toward repeal of this provision."
Tagged: annuities, health care reform, Life Insurance, payroll tax
See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/9CkD7k
Scientists Say F.D.A. Ignored Radiation Warnings
Scientists Say F.D.A. Ignored Radiation Warnings
By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: March 28, 2010
. WASHINGTON — Urgent warnings by government experts about the risks of routinely using powerful CT scans to screen patients for colon cancer were brushed aside by the Food and Drug Administration, according to agency documents and interviews with agency scientists.
By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: March 28, 2010
. WASHINGTON — Urgent warnings by government experts about the risks of routinely using powerful CT scans to screen patients for colon cancer were brushed aside by the Food and Drug Administration, according to agency documents and interviews with agency scientists.
Is America ‘Yearning for Fascism’
Is America ‘Yearning for Fascism’?
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/is_america_yearning_for_fascism_20100329/
Posted on Mar 29, 2010
By Chris Hedges
The language of violence always presages violence. I watched it in war after war from Latin America to the Balkans. The impoverishment of a working class and the snuffing out of hope and opportunity always produce angry mobs ready to kill and be killed. A bankrupt, liberal elite, which proves ineffectual against the rich and the criminal, always gets swept aside, in times of economic collapse, before thugs and demagogues emerge to play to the passions of the crowd. I have seen this drama. I know each act. I know how it ends. I have heard it in other tongues in other lands. I recognize the same stock characters, the buffoons, charlatans and fools, the same confused crowds and the same impotent and despised liberal class that deserves the hatred it engenders.
“We are ruled not by two parties but one party,” Cynthia McKinney, who ran for president on the Green Party ticket, told me. “It is the party of money and war. Our country has been hijacked. And we have to take the country away from those who have hijacked it. The only question now is whose revolution gets funded.”
The Democrats and their liberal apologists are so oblivious to the profound personal and economic despair sweeping through this country that they think offering unemployed people the right to keep their unemployed children on their nonexistent health care policies is a step forward. They think that passing a jobs bill that will give tax credits to corporations is a rational response to an unemployment rate that is, in real terms, close to 20 percent. They think that making ordinary Americans, one in eight of whom depends on food stamps to eat, fork over trillions in taxpayer dollars to pay for the crimes of Wall Street and war is acceptable. They think that the refusal to save the estimated 2.4 million people who will be forced out of their homes by foreclosure this year is justified by the bloodless language of fiscal austerity. The message is clear. Laws do not apply to the power elite. Our government does not work. And the longer we stand by and do nothing, the longer we refuse to embrace and recognize the legitimate rage of the working class, the faster we will see our anemic democracy die.
The unraveling of America mirrors the unraveling of Yugoslavia. The Balkan war was not caused by ancient ethnic hatreds. It was caused by the economic collapse of Yugoslavia. The petty criminals and goons who took power harnessed the anger and despair of the unemployed and the desperate. They singled out convenient scapegoats from ethnic Croats to Muslims to Albanians to Gypsies. They set in motion movements that unleashed a feeding frenzy leading to war and self-immolation. There is little difference between the ludicrous would-be poet Radovan Karadzic, who was a figure of ridicule in Sarajevo before the war, and the moronic Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin. There is little difference between the Oath Keepers and the Serbian militias. We can laugh at these people, but they are not the fools. We are.
The longer we appeal to the Democrats, who are servants of corporate interests, the more stupid and ineffectual we become. Sixty-one percent of Americans believe the country is in decline, according to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, and they are right. Only 25 percent of those polled said the government can be trusted to protect the interests of the American people. If we do not embrace this outrage and distrust as our own it will be expressed through a terrifying right-wing backlash.
“It is time for us to stop talking about right and left,” McKinney told me. “The old political paradigm that serves the interests of the people who put us in this predicament will not be the paradigm that gets us out of this. I am a child of the South. Janet Napolitano tells me I need to be afraid of people who are labeled white supremacists but I was raised around white supremacists. I am not afraid of white supremacists. I am concerned about my own government. The Patriot Act did not come from the white supremacists, it came from the White House and Congress. Citizens United did not come from white supremacists, it came from the Supreme Court. Our problem is a problem of governance. I am willing to reach across traditional barriers that have been skillfully constructed by people who benefit from the way the system is organized.”
We are bound to a party that has betrayed every principle we claim to espouse, from universal health care to an end to our permanent war economy, to a demand for quality and affordable public education, to a concern for the jobs of the working class. And the hatred expressed within right-wing movements for the college-educated elite, who created or at least did nothing to halt the financial debacle, is not misplaced. Our educated elite, wallowing in self-righteousness, wasted its time in the boutique activism of political correctness as tens of millions of workers lost their jobs. The shouting of racist and bigoted words at black and gay members of Congress, the spitting on a black member of the House, the tossing of bricks through the windows of legislators’ offices, are part of the language of rebellion. It is as much a revolt against the educated elite as it is against the government. The blame lies with us. We created the monster.
When someone like Palin posts a map with cross hairs on the districts of Democrats, when she says “Don’t Retreat, Instead—RELOAD!” there are desperate people cleaning their weapons who listen. When Christian fascists stand in the pulpits of megachurches and denounce Barack Obama as the Antichrist, there are messianic believers who listen. When a Republican lawmaker shouts “baby killer” at Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak, there are violent extremists who see the mission of saving the unborn as a sacred duty. They have little left to lose. We made sure of that. And the violence they inflict is an expression of the violence they endure.
These movements are not yet full-blown fascist movements. They do not openly call for the extermination of ethnic or religious groups. They do not openly advocate violence. But, as I was told by Fritz Stern, a scholar of fascism who has written about the origins of Nazism, “In Germany there was a yearning for fascism before fascism was invented.” It is the yearning that we now see, and it is dangerous. If we do not immediately reincorporate the unemployed and the poor back into the economy, giving them jobs and relief from crippling debt, then the nascent racism and violence that are leaping up around the edges of American society will become a full-blown conflagration.
Left unchecked, the hatred for radical Islam will transform itself into a hatred for Muslims. The hatred for undocumented workers will become a hatred for Mexicans and Central Americans. The hatred for those not defined by this largely white movement as American patriots will become a hatred for African-Americans. The hatred for liberals will morph into a hatred for all democratic institutions, from universities to government agencies to the press. Our continued impotence and cowardice, our refusal to articulate this anger and stand up in open defiance to the Democrats and the Republicans, will see us swept aside for an age of terror and blood.
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/is_america_yearning_for_fascism_20100329/
Posted on Mar 29, 2010
By Chris Hedges
The language of violence always presages violence. I watched it in war after war from Latin America to the Balkans. The impoverishment of a working class and the snuffing out of hope and opportunity always produce angry mobs ready to kill and be killed. A bankrupt, liberal elite, which proves ineffectual against the rich and the criminal, always gets swept aside, in times of economic collapse, before thugs and demagogues emerge to play to the passions of the crowd. I have seen this drama. I know each act. I know how it ends. I have heard it in other tongues in other lands. I recognize the same stock characters, the buffoons, charlatans and fools, the same confused crowds and the same impotent and despised liberal class that deserves the hatred it engenders.
“We are ruled not by two parties but one party,” Cynthia McKinney, who ran for president on the Green Party ticket, told me. “It is the party of money and war. Our country has been hijacked. And we have to take the country away from those who have hijacked it. The only question now is whose revolution gets funded.”
The Democrats and their liberal apologists are so oblivious to the profound personal and economic despair sweeping through this country that they think offering unemployed people the right to keep their unemployed children on their nonexistent health care policies is a step forward. They think that passing a jobs bill that will give tax credits to corporations is a rational response to an unemployment rate that is, in real terms, close to 20 percent. They think that making ordinary Americans, one in eight of whom depends on food stamps to eat, fork over trillions in taxpayer dollars to pay for the crimes of Wall Street and war is acceptable. They think that the refusal to save the estimated 2.4 million people who will be forced out of their homes by foreclosure this year is justified by the bloodless language of fiscal austerity. The message is clear. Laws do not apply to the power elite. Our government does not work. And the longer we stand by and do nothing, the longer we refuse to embrace and recognize the legitimate rage of the working class, the faster we will see our anemic democracy die.
The unraveling of America mirrors the unraveling of Yugoslavia. The Balkan war was not caused by ancient ethnic hatreds. It was caused by the economic collapse of Yugoslavia. The petty criminals and goons who took power harnessed the anger and despair of the unemployed and the desperate. They singled out convenient scapegoats from ethnic Croats to Muslims to Albanians to Gypsies. They set in motion movements that unleashed a feeding frenzy leading to war and self-immolation. There is little difference between the ludicrous would-be poet Radovan Karadzic, who was a figure of ridicule in Sarajevo before the war, and the moronic Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin. There is little difference between the Oath Keepers and the Serbian militias. We can laugh at these people, but they are not the fools. We are.
The longer we appeal to the Democrats, who are servants of corporate interests, the more stupid and ineffectual we become. Sixty-one percent of Americans believe the country is in decline, according to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, and they are right. Only 25 percent of those polled said the government can be trusted to protect the interests of the American people. If we do not embrace this outrage and distrust as our own it will be expressed through a terrifying right-wing backlash.
“It is time for us to stop talking about right and left,” McKinney told me. “The old political paradigm that serves the interests of the people who put us in this predicament will not be the paradigm that gets us out of this. I am a child of the South. Janet Napolitano tells me I need to be afraid of people who are labeled white supremacists but I was raised around white supremacists. I am not afraid of white supremacists. I am concerned about my own government. The Patriot Act did not come from the white supremacists, it came from the White House and Congress. Citizens United did not come from white supremacists, it came from the Supreme Court. Our problem is a problem of governance. I am willing to reach across traditional barriers that have been skillfully constructed by people who benefit from the way the system is organized.”
We are bound to a party that has betrayed every principle we claim to espouse, from universal health care to an end to our permanent war economy, to a demand for quality and affordable public education, to a concern for the jobs of the working class. And the hatred expressed within right-wing movements for the college-educated elite, who created or at least did nothing to halt the financial debacle, is not misplaced. Our educated elite, wallowing in self-righteousness, wasted its time in the boutique activism of political correctness as tens of millions of workers lost their jobs. The shouting of racist and bigoted words at black and gay members of Congress, the spitting on a black member of the House, the tossing of bricks through the windows of legislators’ offices, are part of the language of rebellion. It is as much a revolt against the educated elite as it is against the government. The blame lies with us. We created the monster.
When someone like Palin posts a map with cross hairs on the districts of Democrats, when she says “Don’t Retreat, Instead—RELOAD!” there are desperate people cleaning their weapons who listen. When Christian fascists stand in the pulpits of megachurches and denounce Barack Obama as the Antichrist, there are messianic believers who listen. When a Republican lawmaker shouts “baby killer” at Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak, there are violent extremists who see the mission of saving the unborn as a sacred duty. They have little left to lose. We made sure of that. And the violence they inflict is an expression of the violence they endure.
These movements are not yet full-blown fascist movements. They do not openly call for the extermination of ethnic or religious groups. They do not openly advocate violence. But, as I was told by Fritz Stern, a scholar of fascism who has written about the origins of Nazism, “In Germany there was a yearning for fascism before fascism was invented.” It is the yearning that we now see, and it is dangerous. If we do not immediately reincorporate the unemployed and the poor back into the economy, giving them jobs and relief from crippling debt, then the nascent racism and violence that are leaping up around the edges of American society will become a full-blown conflagration.
Left unchecked, the hatred for radical Islam will transform itself into a hatred for Muslims. The hatred for undocumented workers will become a hatred for Mexicans and Central Americans. The hatred for those not defined by this largely white movement as American patriots will become a hatred for African-Americans. The hatred for liberals will morph into a hatred for all democratic institutions, from universities to government agencies to the press. Our continued impotence and cowardice, our refusal to articulate this anger and stand up in open defiance to the Democrats and the Republicans, will see us swept aside for an age of terror and blood.
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)
That underwear drawer is starting to look like a better and better idea all the time.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/21480
SEIU pushing for federalization of our 401(k) savings accounts
The Underwear Drawer
By Tim Dunkin Monday, March 29, 2010
I remember once when I was a wee lad, my mother was telling me about the evils of Communism. This was at a point when the Soviet Union was still extant, Ronald Reagan was our President, and everyone who had any sense knew where the lines were drawn, and which side they should be on. Because I was so young, one way that she used to explain it to me was this, “The government can just come in and take your money from you, and it doesn’t matter what you think about it.” Even at my young age, this struck me as quite unjust.
They can just take what they want from you, even though it’s yours? Even though you worked for it? In my juvenile way of thinking, I formulated what I thought would be the perfect way to keep this from happening, which would be to hide the money in a place where nobody would ever want to look for it. So I blurted out to her, “I’d hide my money in my dirty underwear drawer!”
Looking back on it – and this is one of those odd things from childhood that you sometimes recall, but are never quite sure why – I sort of laugh at the childishness of the response. Sure. Hide it in your dirty underwear drawer. Whatever kid, like that would work.
Yet, one cannot really laugh at the sentiment itself. After all, it is fundamentally unjust to use the police powers of the state to hold a gun to somebody’s head and rob them of their hard-earned wealth and savings, especially when you intend to distribute that money to people who refused to work hard themselves. And this is, when you get right down to it, what government-run health care, TARP, Porkulus, cap’n’trade, and the rest of the big government agenda are all about. Taking money away from those who earned it – those who worked and sweated and went to school and gave years of their lives to some company or to their own business and delayed gratifying their wants and desires – and giving it to those who can’t be bothered with little things like “personal responsibility” or “gainful employment.”
Marxism, Wealth redistribution
Let’s face it, this is what the Obama agenda will do. The plans that Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of their gang have for us are pure Marxism, pure wealth redistribution designed to entice ever greater numbers of Americans into dependency upon the government for their support. This, in turn, guarantees an ever-expanding pool of voters through whom “democratic socialism” can be more firmly implemented, until we finally reach a point, such as Sweden is at now, where the nation has been so thoroughly socialized that even when the “Conservative” Party has a rare opportunity to lead the nation, they dare not touch any of the “entitlements” for fear of electoral backlash. Obama and Co. are merely the “democratic” wing of the Marxist movement, using ballots bought with tax monies stolen from the productive classes to secure their power, rather than the bullets of overt revolution.
And steal from the productive classes they are doing. ObamaCare, which does not “officially” begin to operate until 2014, will begin this year to collect the massive tax increases needed to fund it. So, the productive classes get hit with a double whammy – higher taxes and the unconstitutional mandate to purchase health insurance from Obama’s cronies in the insurance industry at inflated prices (what else do you think will happen when insurance companies are guaranteed an oligopoly over a captive consumer base?) or pay a huge fine. And just wait until they get cap’n’trade pushed through, and your energy prices (and taxes) go up. And just wait until they start raising taxes to service our ever-increasing debt. And don’t forget that the Bush tax cuts expire this year, and won’t be renewed – a golden opportunity to raise taxes without voting to do so. Oh, and did I mention that Obama and the Dems have quietly rolled back all of the welfare reform that the Republicans had forced onto Clinton back in the 1990s? Get ready to pay for more lazy bums on welfare, too.
Federalization of our 401(k) savings accounts
And now it looks like the Democrat coalition is getting serious about coming after your savings, too. MoneyNews reported recently that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) – a public-sector union which provides a lot of monetary and manpower support to the advancement of the Obama agenda – is working with other left-wing groups to push for the federalization of our 401(k) savings accounts. The idea, apparently, is to roll everyone’s retirement accounts into a federally-controlled retirement program, similar in many ways to Social Security. This way, everybody who retired get their “fair share,” even though they hadn’t bothered to put anything back during all the years that they could have.
This plan is, of course, just another wealth redistribution program. As Ross Eisenbrey, a union wonk cited by the article, notes, “The failure is broad and deep. It’s not just a few people falling through the cracks: most of us already are in the ravine. Three in 10 have only a 401(k) or similar savings plan, and the rest of us are totally out of luck.” Hence, the obvious answer is to take from that 30%, and redistribute it to the other 70%. Because, as we all know, the only reason that 30% had savings in their 401(k)s is because of “luck.” It had nothing to do with, you know, “hard work,” or “foresight,” or “financial wisdom.” It’s all about luck. They had it, “the rest of us” didn’t, and that’s just unfair and needs to be rectified by theft and the threat of government violence. That’s what is in the works when you decide to federalize something had by 30%, and roll it all together into a program that will be accessed by 100% when they retire.
Oh, and guess what, once your money goes in, it stays in. Benefits can only be accessed when you retire. Until then, it’s in a government “lockbox” that you can’t touch. At least with current private plans, you can get your money if you need it, even though you may pay an early withdrawal penalty. With this federalized plan, you are flat out of luck, should you ever have a life-changing event that would require you to have to come up with a large sum of money at once. Sorry bub, can’t have you stealing your money back from the proletarians who need what you worked hard to earn.
Social Security – it’s a lockbox full of little white slips of paper that say “IOU” on them
And I think we can all see this coming: said “lockbox” will be anything but. Just look at Social Security – it’s a lockbox full of little white slips of paper that say “IOU” on them. Originally, Social Security was intended to be set apart from the rest of the federal budget – money goes in, and it is paid out to retirees (never mind that it was all a Ponzi scheme to begin with). It wasn’t supposed to be touched for other spending. We see how well that worked out. There’s no reason to think that this new federalized “savings program,” if ever implemented, wouldn’t go the same way. Our 401(k)s (and other savings, most likely, as the program is “expanded” to “encompass more needs,” such as the need for your savings accounts with your banks, which are also largely under federal control already) will just end up providing hundreds of billions of dollars available for more big-government spending, while sparing Congress the political hit accrued from actually having to vote to raise taxes to get revenue.
By hook or by crook (mostly by crook), they are bound and determined to get their hands on our hard-earned money.
That underwear drawer is starting to look like a better and better idea all the time.
SEIU pushing for federalization of our 401(k) savings accounts
The Underwear Drawer
By Tim Dunkin Monday, March 29, 2010
I remember once when I was a wee lad, my mother was telling me about the evils of Communism. This was at a point when the Soviet Union was still extant, Ronald Reagan was our President, and everyone who had any sense knew where the lines were drawn, and which side they should be on. Because I was so young, one way that she used to explain it to me was this, “The government can just come in and take your money from you, and it doesn’t matter what you think about it.” Even at my young age, this struck me as quite unjust.
They can just take what they want from you, even though it’s yours? Even though you worked for it? In my juvenile way of thinking, I formulated what I thought would be the perfect way to keep this from happening, which would be to hide the money in a place where nobody would ever want to look for it. So I blurted out to her, “I’d hide my money in my dirty underwear drawer!”
Looking back on it – and this is one of those odd things from childhood that you sometimes recall, but are never quite sure why – I sort of laugh at the childishness of the response. Sure. Hide it in your dirty underwear drawer. Whatever kid, like that would work.
Yet, one cannot really laugh at the sentiment itself. After all, it is fundamentally unjust to use the police powers of the state to hold a gun to somebody’s head and rob them of their hard-earned wealth and savings, especially when you intend to distribute that money to people who refused to work hard themselves. And this is, when you get right down to it, what government-run health care, TARP, Porkulus, cap’n’trade, and the rest of the big government agenda are all about. Taking money away from those who earned it – those who worked and sweated and went to school and gave years of their lives to some company or to their own business and delayed gratifying their wants and desires – and giving it to those who can’t be bothered with little things like “personal responsibility” or “gainful employment.”
Marxism, Wealth redistribution
Let’s face it, this is what the Obama agenda will do. The plans that Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of their gang have for us are pure Marxism, pure wealth redistribution designed to entice ever greater numbers of Americans into dependency upon the government for their support. This, in turn, guarantees an ever-expanding pool of voters through whom “democratic socialism” can be more firmly implemented, until we finally reach a point, such as Sweden is at now, where the nation has been so thoroughly socialized that even when the “Conservative” Party has a rare opportunity to lead the nation, they dare not touch any of the “entitlements” for fear of electoral backlash. Obama and Co. are merely the “democratic” wing of the Marxist movement, using ballots bought with tax monies stolen from the productive classes to secure their power, rather than the bullets of overt revolution.
And steal from the productive classes they are doing. ObamaCare, which does not “officially” begin to operate until 2014, will begin this year to collect the massive tax increases needed to fund it. So, the productive classes get hit with a double whammy – higher taxes and the unconstitutional mandate to purchase health insurance from Obama’s cronies in the insurance industry at inflated prices (what else do you think will happen when insurance companies are guaranteed an oligopoly over a captive consumer base?) or pay a huge fine. And just wait until they get cap’n’trade pushed through, and your energy prices (and taxes) go up. And just wait until they start raising taxes to service our ever-increasing debt. And don’t forget that the Bush tax cuts expire this year, and won’t be renewed – a golden opportunity to raise taxes without voting to do so. Oh, and did I mention that Obama and the Dems have quietly rolled back all of the welfare reform that the Republicans had forced onto Clinton back in the 1990s? Get ready to pay for more lazy bums on welfare, too.
Federalization of our 401(k) savings accounts
And now it looks like the Democrat coalition is getting serious about coming after your savings, too. MoneyNews reported recently that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) – a public-sector union which provides a lot of monetary and manpower support to the advancement of the Obama agenda – is working with other left-wing groups to push for the federalization of our 401(k) savings accounts. The idea, apparently, is to roll everyone’s retirement accounts into a federally-controlled retirement program, similar in many ways to Social Security. This way, everybody who retired get their “fair share,” even though they hadn’t bothered to put anything back during all the years that they could have.
This plan is, of course, just another wealth redistribution program. As Ross Eisenbrey, a union wonk cited by the article, notes, “The failure is broad and deep. It’s not just a few people falling through the cracks: most of us already are in the ravine. Three in 10 have only a 401(k) or similar savings plan, and the rest of us are totally out of luck.” Hence, the obvious answer is to take from that 30%, and redistribute it to the other 70%. Because, as we all know, the only reason that 30% had savings in their 401(k)s is because of “luck.” It had nothing to do with, you know, “hard work,” or “foresight,” or “financial wisdom.” It’s all about luck. They had it, “the rest of us” didn’t, and that’s just unfair and needs to be rectified by theft and the threat of government violence. That’s what is in the works when you decide to federalize something had by 30%, and roll it all together into a program that will be accessed by 100% when they retire.
Oh, and guess what, once your money goes in, it stays in. Benefits can only be accessed when you retire. Until then, it’s in a government “lockbox” that you can’t touch. At least with current private plans, you can get your money if you need it, even though you may pay an early withdrawal penalty. With this federalized plan, you are flat out of luck, should you ever have a life-changing event that would require you to have to come up with a large sum of money at once. Sorry bub, can’t have you stealing your money back from the proletarians who need what you worked hard to earn.
Social Security – it’s a lockbox full of little white slips of paper that say “IOU” on them
And I think we can all see this coming: said “lockbox” will be anything but. Just look at Social Security – it’s a lockbox full of little white slips of paper that say “IOU” on them. Originally, Social Security was intended to be set apart from the rest of the federal budget – money goes in, and it is paid out to retirees (never mind that it was all a Ponzi scheme to begin with). It wasn’t supposed to be touched for other spending. We see how well that worked out. There’s no reason to think that this new federalized “savings program,” if ever implemented, wouldn’t go the same way. Our 401(k)s (and other savings, most likely, as the program is “expanded” to “encompass more needs,” such as the need for your savings accounts with your banks, which are also largely under federal control already) will just end up providing hundreds of billions of dollars available for more big-government spending, while sparing Congress the political hit accrued from actually having to vote to raise taxes to get revenue.
By hook or by crook (mostly by crook), they are bound and determined to get their hands on our hard-earned money.
That underwear drawer is starting to look like a better and better idea all the time.
IPCC/CRU Self-Deception Through Groupthink
Rationalizing poor decisions, Having an illusion of invulnerability, Maintaining an illusion of unanimity
IPCC/CRU Self-Deception Through Groupthink
By Dr. Tim Ball Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Few understand the extent of corrupted science produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Data was altered, or completely ignored and research deliberately directed to prove their claim that humans were causing global warming.
IPCC/CRU Self-Deception Through Groupthink
By Dr. Tim Ball Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Few understand the extent of corrupted science produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Data was altered, or completely ignored and research deliberately directed to prove their claim that humans were causing global warming.
Haiti Post-Quake - Devastation, Depravation, Exploitation & Oppression
Haiti Post-Quake - Devastation, Depravation,
Exploitation & Oppression
By Stephen Lendman
3-29-10
Two and half months post-quake, the major media mostly ignore Haiti, the calamitous conditions on the ground, and the growing desperation of millions forced to largely endure on their own - out of sight, mind, the concern of world leaders, and UN, USAID and other aid organizations diverting most of the $700 million + donated to contractors and profiteering NGOs.
A March 11 New York Times editorial titled, "Haiti, Two Months Later," tried to have it both ways, citing relief effort failures, yet praising the US, UN, foreign countries, and aid organizations for:
"dispatch(ing) tents, tarps, food, water, medicine and doctors as they should. They have done a lot of good, particularly the United States, which rushed supplies, a troop force....and a hospital ship. Many lives were saved."
Unmentioned was the thousands of US combat troops obstructing aid, getting none to the most impoverished neighborhoods, and amounts to emergency shelters have been woefully inadequate, making calamitous conditions worse.
A March 25 Times editorial titled, "Haiti's Misery," in fact, admitted it, stating:
"The emergency in Haiti isn't over. It's getting worse, as the outside world's attention fades away....(Yet) Misery rages like a fever in the hundreds of camps sheltering hundreds of thousands of....people left homeless....The dreaded rains have swamped tents and ragged stick-and-tarp huts. They have turned walkways into mud lakes (exacerbating the problem of) cooking food, washing clothes, staying clean and avoiding disease."
It's the plight of around 1.3 million with no shelter, proper sanitation, clean water, enough food, or medical care. On March 4, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention raised concerns about a potential deadly malaria outbreak, besides numerous other diseases now spreading. On March 5, Partners in Health (PIH) called conditions on the ground "shameful....shocking, inhumane and rapidly deteriorating."
Daily they worsen, placing millions of Haitians in grave peril of calamitous depravation, deadly diseases, greater pain and suffering, and potential mass deaths because imperial plans for Haiti are to plunder it for profit and control, not help desperately needy people, many of whom will suffer, then die.
Haiti is open for business. What was no longer exists. Reconstruction will be profit-driven, replacing former neighborhoods with gentrified ones, corporate ventures, and other upscale projects - poor Haitians being dispossessed, exploited, neglected, abandoned, and oppressed if they resist, especially if they interfere with planned plundering of Haiti's oil and other resources.
On March 24, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton visited Port-au-Prince with Rene Preval, feigned concern, and participated in staged refugee camp photo-ops. Haitians reacted angrily, especially at Bush for ousting President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004, exiling him to South Africa, and preventing his return, now more than ever when he's needed.
Protestors outside the national palace burned tires and an American flag, shouting: "Return Aristide! Down with Preval! Down with Bush! The Miami Herald described the Champ de Mars refugee camp visit saying:
"Quake survivors screamed at the three leaders, shouting details of the losses they suffered....Others took a moment to criticize their own president's leadership. 'President Preval has never come to see us before,' screamed Myrlande Saint-Louis, who lives in the Place Mosolee camp the presidents visited. 'Now because Bush is here he comes. Now he wants to see us!' "
The trip served two purposes:
-- to increase interest for a March 31 New York international investment conference expected to approve an $11.5 billion package to solidify corporate control of the country, and
-- for Preval to resolve land issues obstructing quake survivor relocations from areas wanted for commercial redevelopment, so Haitians have to go, willingly or by force.
Haitians are on their own, women and children most vulnerable, according to Amnesty International (AI). A March 25 report said:
"Sexual violence is widely present in the camps where some of Haiti's most vulnerable live. It was already a major concern (pre-quake) but the situation in which displaced people are living exposes women and girls to even greater risks."
Most victims AI interviewed were minors. "One eight-year-old girl was raped when alone in her tent at night. (A) 15-year-old was raped when she went out of the camp to urinate....There are no shelters in the country where victims of sexual violence can be protected and have access to services."
From March 4 - 25, AI assessed conditions in quake struck areas, in particular, human rights abuses affecting women and children. It reported mass displacement, makeshift camps on "every plot of empty land, public or private, and in every space, square and football pitch." Even a golf course and secondary roads were used.
Within the camps, security is non-existant, except for scattered ad hoc efforts, leaving women and girls most vulnerable as well as everyone to theft or assaults that might cost them their lives.
AI visited camps with no emergency shelter, food, sanitation, water or medical care, saying:
"Living conditions in these camps are dire and the majority of inhabitants are deeply frustrated with the Haitian authorities and international agencies" showing no concern for their condition.
The Latin American Solidarity Coalition's (LASC) Assessment on the Ground Pre-Quake
LASC (lasolidarity.org) "is an association of national and local US-based grassroots Latin American and Caribbean solidarity groups (for) a truly progressive Latin America solidarity movement....in support of the people of Latin America struggling for justice and a better future for their countries free of economic, military and cultural imperialism."
From December 28, 2009 - January 7, 2010 (five days before the quake), its 11-member delegation visited Haiti to investigate UN Blue Helmet (MINUSTAH) human rights abuses. On returning, it published a report titled, "Haiti: An Oppressed State," its highlights reviewed below.
LASC met with over 70 individuals and organization representatives in Port-au-Prince and two of its most impoverished neighborhoods, Cite Soleil and Bel Air. It also spent two days in Jacmel visiting sustainable development projects.
Testimonies from MINUSTAH-inflicted violence victims were gotten, including people whose family members were murdered. Virtually everyone:
-- demanded Aristide's return;
-- called MINUSTAH a repressive, criminal force;
-- said international aid hasn't reached the poor, but instead has been diverted to predatory NGOs, prison building, or stolen by corrupt politicians; and
-- believed economic development is exploitive, not providing a living wage, or benefitting poor Haitians productively.
The story is long, painful and familiar. "For over 200 years (and 300 before that), the US, France, and Western Europe (actively) ble(d) and exploit(ed) Haitians and prevent(ed) the only nation born of a slave revolt from becoming successful." It endured "military invasions, economic embargoes, gunboat blockades, trade barriers, diplomatic quarantines, subsidized armed subversions, US-armed black dictators, and finally, two US-supported coups against" its only beloved leader since liberation, twice democratically elected overwhelmingly, now exiled, and kept from returning.
Repeatedly people said:
"We want Preval to send President Aristide a passport. If Obama wants that to happen it will, because Preval takes his orders from the powerful nations." Representing hope, Aristide "values social justice and would be an inspiration to the grassroots majority. When he was president, there were more jobs, healthcare and education for our children." No longer since 2004 or Preval's 2006 election.
"They don't hear our demands for better education, healthcare, better roads, and an end to malnutrition. Where does the international aid go? We don't see it. Preval is weak and corrupt. We want him to listen to us. We want the return of Aristide, and Preval should change and not exclude Lavalas."
Preval was complicit in the 2004 coup, then allied with the Washington-installed interim Latortue government to prevent Aristide's return after a more people-oriented 1996 - 2001 first term.
Post-quake, he's been pathetic, inept, and indifferent to his peoples' plight - largely invisible, out of sight, silent, and on the sidelines when he's most needed. Public anger toward him is palpable. For one Haitian, he's "the devil and we don't want him" any more. His prospects for a third term are likely nil - he himself saying in a radio interview, "I don't do politics, okey?" Former opposition figure, Evans Paul, accused him of "single-handedly show(ing) the Haitian people that he cannot lead them."
MINUSTAH, the Problem, Not the Solution
It was established on June 1, 2004 for an initial six month renewable period to "promote interaction with the Haitian authorities as partners," operating under the following mandate:
-- "in support of the Transitional Government, to ensure a secure and stable environment within which the constitutional and political process in Haiti can take place;
-- to assist with the restoration and maintenance of the rule of law, public safety and public order....;
-- to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence; and
-- to promote and protect human rights, particularly of women and children among other responsibilities."
In fact, for the first time in UN history, a Blue Helmet force supported a coup d'etat regime, allied with imperial forces, prevented a democratically leader from returning, and systematically committed human rights abuses, including, persecutions, violence, rape, and cold-blooded murder.
Haiti Liberte journalist Yves Pierre Louis said:
"Since 2004, the only human rights violations are by the UN. In Cite Soleil, they break into houses and kill people. They shot into a protest by students. At Jean Juste's funeral, the UN shot a mourner. People from the Central Plateau were demonstrating for electricity and the UN killed two of them. They commit rape and sexual abuse. They steal peasants' goats....They are protecting the elites by terrorizing the population."
Another Cite Soleil resident said "Now that there are no bandits, the UN are the bandits. If they search you and find jewelry, they steal it. They make women take off their clothes to humiliate them."
Other accounts accused UN forces of shooting up a market, killing and wounding people there, Nigerian soldiers beating a man so severely he nearly died, and no investigations conducted of these or other incidents when demanded.
The case of human rights activist Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine is shocking and disturbing. After announcing his 2007 Senate candidacy and participating in sit-ins denouncing UN human rights violations, he was disappeared without a trace.
Lavalas organizer Rene Civil said "The occupation is killing and humiliating the people. At any time it could explode into a revolt. MINUSTAH has incited the people to be violent. They live and eat well while we are hungry, homeless, and without schools....If not for the UN guns, Haiti would already have its freedom."
Haiti's Dysfunctional Judicial System
LASC investigated four areas:
(1) Lack of Legal Recourse
Victims of MINUSTAH violence are pressured to drop charges. Street vendors in Haiti's informal sector report attacks that are ruining them financially, the police doing nothing to intervene or investigate. When suits are filed, the court system disadvantages the poor, including by transferring venues to distant locations, making it hard and costly for plaintiffs.
(2) Legal Limbo
Although Haitian law requires prisoner court hearings within 48 hours of arrest, delays of three months or longer are common, and according to Amnesty International, fewer than 20% of many thousands of prisoners ever get to trial, leaving innocent victims languishing under horrific confinement for years.
(3) Prison Conditions
Unconscionable describes them because of mistreatment, extreme overcrowding, prisoners forced to sleep in shifts, inadequate poor food, unsafe water, poor sanitation, little or no medical care, and no remediation efforts for change.
(4) Activist Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine
His prominence was his undoing, LASC speculating that his abductors don't intend to release him. Perhaps he's dead, and efforts to learn the truth have been stonewalled.
Haitian Elections
The most recent April 19, 2009 one to fill 12 open Senate seats was a sham after Haiti's Provisional Election Council (CEP) disqualified Fanmi Lavalas (FL) candidates on procedural grounds. Mass outrage showed up in pre-election polls with only 5% of eligible voters saying they'd participate.
Imagine holding a national election and virtually no one showed up. Because of clear election rigging, FL leaders urged a national boycott. They complied, discrediting the results. LASC testimonies called it a continuation of the 2004 coup, the people given no choice except hand-picked candidates they opposed.
Predatory NGOs
Haiti is called "the Republic of NGOs" for good reason, with over 10,000 in country, according to World Bank estimates, the highest per capital presence worldwide in all sectors of activity and society, many with sizable budgets and very much operating for profit.
LASC repeatedly heard complaints that they "reinforce systems of oppression and exclusion rather than ameliorate the economic and political conditions that lead to poverty and inequality."
Common criticisms were that aid rarely goes for people needs or to grassroots activists who can best use it. In communities like Cite Soleil, residents get nothing - no schools, hospitals, just police stations. Organizations like Save the Children, Catholic Relief Services, World Vision, and many others exploit people they claim to serve, especially after disasters like wars, floods, famine, and earthquakes.
A peasant group complained that CARE International dumped cheap rice in the country that destroyed local agriculture, and ultimately Haiti's ability to feed itself. International aid agencies divert funds for high salaries, luxury living, other business ventures, and according to Rene Civil, to co-opt social movement leaders, leaving little for poor Haitians.
After the quake, NGOs scrambled for their share of donations, over $700 million and rising, a bonanza ripe for plunder, so they're lining up for their share, with plenty more expected to come.
The Economy
Pre-quake, Haiti was heavily dependent on foreign interests, especially American, at the expense of worker rights, a fair wage, even a job with mass unemployment or underemployed for the Hemisphere's poorest nation, 80% of its population so deeply impoverished that malnutrition is rampant.
The result is a vulnerable population, most on small, subsistence farms, others easily exploited in corporate-run sweatshops, the kinds Bush and Clinton want more of as well as sweeping privatizations, tourism ventures, port development, free trade zones, and deregulatory freedom creating worker hell. Besides unmentioned resource development, the benefits solely for business, not people.
Haitian oligarchs control local agriculture and industry. Cheap imports, privatizations, poor infrastructure, slave wages, too few jobs, and management co-opted unions control Haiti, exploiting people deprived of their rights.
Conditions in Haiti's sweatshops are instructive. They're inhumane workplaces where employees work for starvation wages, few or no benefits, in unsafe, unfavorable, harsh, and/or hazardous environments with no ability to organize for redress.
In a 1990s report (still relevant now), the National Labor Committee (NLC) explained the dark, "pernicious...US corporate presence in Haiti: that many of the companies profiting from the abuse and exploitation of Haitian workers are among the largest and most successful US corporations: Disney, Wal-Mart, Kmart, JC Penney, Sears, Hanes/Sara Lee and Kellwood," among the many.
NLC asked why can't manufacturers and retailers pay a living wage? Why won't they give independent human rights monitors access to their contractors' plants? Why do they extract the most work for starvation wages? Why is the air heavy with dust and lint with no ventilation to speak of? Why are factories hot, dimly lit and crowded? Why do workers have sad, tired faces?
Why are they forced to work seven days a week (with no overtime pay) to accommodate company order schedules? Why must they work 70 hours a week during the year's hottest season under stifling hot conditions? Why are they treated more like slaves than human beings? Why is none of this reported publicly so consumers can decide whether or not to support these practices by buying or boycotting sweatshop products?
Haitians Explain MINUSTAH violence
An unnamed man said a neighborhood youth disappeared. Many were killed. There's shooting every day. People can't conduct their daily activities safely. They're threatened by MINUSTAH. They enter the area, shoot in the air or randomly at people, terrifying everyone.
Azy Jean Delanio mentioned an August 8, 2005 incident. He was visiting another home when UN soldiers "started shooting and people were just going crazy everywhere so I didn't want to just run because I could get face to face with them and it would be worse for me."
Outside, a soldier pushed him down and shot him in the neck. His partner wanted to get him to a hospital. At first, she couldn't when beaten. Finally, he was treated, asked a lawyer for help, but nothing happened. Since the incident, the bullet is still in his body. He can't walk, care for himself, or afford surgery to correct the problem. He's like many others, victimized by a brutal occupier.
Bernard Maudler discussed a June 22, 2009 incident involving UN forces. They shot him in the legs and feet. He still can't move his toe. He has iron in his leg to fix the bone. He needs medical help to remove it because it's painful. But it's too close to his spine for Doctors Without Borders. They don't have the proper equipment. The bullet entered his stomach causing him cramps.
Jean-Baptist Ristil explained a July 6, 2005 incident. He was sleeping, heard shooting, and went outside to check. Jordanian and Brazilian soldiers were in the street. They had tanks, an MPV, and a helicopter overhead. He heard screams. They were shooting everywhere. He saw a man struck. His mouth was paralyzed. Others were hit. Dead bodies were on the street.
"The same day an old guy was shot and before they killed him, (UN soldiers) put like doo doo fecal from a goat on bread and told him to eat it, and then they killed him."
It was a reprisal raid. MINUSTAH later blamed gangs for the incident.
Marie Therese Gazie discussed a July 6, 2005 incident from 3AM until 12:30 PM. Gangs had nothing to do with it. A "cannon bullet" hit the side of her house and smashed it. Her husband inside was killed. She's now a single mother on her own with three children. She can't afford to send them to school, pay rent, or feed them properly.
Lenene Morice described a December 22, 2006 incident. There was a lot of shooting in the neighborhood. Everyone was screaming. She was by herself, went outside, and was shot in the stomach. With help, she was taken to the hospital, was in pain, spent a month there, couldn't get food down, and thought she wouldn't survive. She was told if she got pregnant again she'd die because of the bullet's location.
Edline Pierre Louis discussed a July 6, 2006 incident. She was sleeping when struck with a bullet in her stomach. At the time, she was seven months pregnant. The baby was prematurely delivered but died. She was the only one hurt. Her other children were screaming but not hit.
Pierre Jean Bernard described a July 6, 2005 incident when MINUSTAH shot and killed his brother. He wasn't a bandit, had no gun, and never owned one. He was a domestic worker, played casino in the streets, but wasn't involved with gangs. Soldiers claimed they were after bandits, but only hurt civilians going about their activities peacefully.
His brother had four children. They can't go to school or have the basics for daily life. They're victims like their father.
Lumane Etienne discussed a June 7, 2007 incident. Two of her children were going to visit a cousin, were shot in the street and killed. Five others survive, but life is very hard for her with everything going on in Haiti.
Cine Mirlande spoke about two incidents - on October 5 and 15, 2008. On October 5, UN soldiers killed her father. Then on October 15, they killed her eight-year-old son en route to school. The pretext again was going after bandits.
The above incidents describe daily life for poor Haitians, especially in the most impoverished areas. US and MINUSTAH forces are in charge along with repressive Haitian police as brutal as UN paramilitaries. From one day to the next, Haitians aren't sure they'll survive, now more than ever post-quake.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://prognewshour.progressiveradionetwork.org/
http://lendmennews.progressiveradionetwork.org/
Exploitation & Oppression
By Stephen Lendman
3-29-10
Two and half months post-quake, the major media mostly ignore Haiti, the calamitous conditions on the ground, and the growing desperation of millions forced to largely endure on their own - out of sight, mind, the concern of world leaders, and UN, USAID and other aid organizations diverting most of the $700 million + donated to contractors and profiteering NGOs.
A March 11 New York Times editorial titled, "Haiti, Two Months Later," tried to have it both ways, citing relief effort failures, yet praising the US, UN, foreign countries, and aid organizations for:
"dispatch(ing) tents, tarps, food, water, medicine and doctors as they should. They have done a lot of good, particularly the United States, which rushed supplies, a troop force....and a hospital ship. Many lives were saved."
Unmentioned was the thousands of US combat troops obstructing aid, getting none to the most impoverished neighborhoods, and amounts to emergency shelters have been woefully inadequate, making calamitous conditions worse.
A March 25 Times editorial titled, "Haiti's Misery," in fact, admitted it, stating:
"The emergency in Haiti isn't over. It's getting worse, as the outside world's attention fades away....(Yet) Misery rages like a fever in the hundreds of camps sheltering hundreds of thousands of....people left homeless....The dreaded rains have swamped tents and ragged stick-and-tarp huts. They have turned walkways into mud lakes (exacerbating the problem of) cooking food, washing clothes, staying clean and avoiding disease."
It's the plight of around 1.3 million with no shelter, proper sanitation, clean water, enough food, or medical care. On March 4, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention raised concerns about a potential deadly malaria outbreak, besides numerous other diseases now spreading. On March 5, Partners in Health (PIH) called conditions on the ground "shameful....shocking, inhumane and rapidly deteriorating."
Daily they worsen, placing millions of Haitians in grave peril of calamitous depravation, deadly diseases, greater pain and suffering, and potential mass deaths because imperial plans for Haiti are to plunder it for profit and control, not help desperately needy people, many of whom will suffer, then die.
Haiti is open for business. What was no longer exists. Reconstruction will be profit-driven, replacing former neighborhoods with gentrified ones, corporate ventures, and other upscale projects - poor Haitians being dispossessed, exploited, neglected, abandoned, and oppressed if they resist, especially if they interfere with planned plundering of Haiti's oil and other resources.
On March 24, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton visited Port-au-Prince with Rene Preval, feigned concern, and participated in staged refugee camp photo-ops. Haitians reacted angrily, especially at Bush for ousting President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004, exiling him to South Africa, and preventing his return, now more than ever when he's needed.
Protestors outside the national palace burned tires and an American flag, shouting: "Return Aristide! Down with Preval! Down with Bush! The Miami Herald described the Champ de Mars refugee camp visit saying:
"Quake survivors screamed at the three leaders, shouting details of the losses they suffered....Others took a moment to criticize their own president's leadership. 'President Preval has never come to see us before,' screamed Myrlande Saint-Louis, who lives in the Place Mosolee camp the presidents visited. 'Now because Bush is here he comes. Now he wants to see us!' "
The trip served two purposes:
-- to increase interest for a March 31 New York international investment conference expected to approve an $11.5 billion package to solidify corporate control of the country, and
-- for Preval to resolve land issues obstructing quake survivor relocations from areas wanted for commercial redevelopment, so Haitians have to go, willingly or by force.
Haitians are on their own, women and children most vulnerable, according to Amnesty International (AI). A March 25 report said:
"Sexual violence is widely present in the camps where some of Haiti's most vulnerable live. It was already a major concern (pre-quake) but the situation in which displaced people are living exposes women and girls to even greater risks."
Most victims AI interviewed were minors. "One eight-year-old girl was raped when alone in her tent at night. (A) 15-year-old was raped when she went out of the camp to urinate....There are no shelters in the country where victims of sexual violence can be protected and have access to services."
From March 4 - 25, AI assessed conditions in quake struck areas, in particular, human rights abuses affecting women and children. It reported mass displacement, makeshift camps on "every plot of empty land, public or private, and in every space, square and football pitch." Even a golf course and secondary roads were used.
Within the camps, security is non-existant, except for scattered ad hoc efforts, leaving women and girls most vulnerable as well as everyone to theft or assaults that might cost them their lives.
AI visited camps with no emergency shelter, food, sanitation, water or medical care, saying:
"Living conditions in these camps are dire and the majority of inhabitants are deeply frustrated with the Haitian authorities and international agencies" showing no concern for their condition.
The Latin American Solidarity Coalition's (LASC) Assessment on the Ground Pre-Quake
LASC (lasolidarity.org) "is an association of national and local US-based grassroots Latin American and Caribbean solidarity groups (for) a truly progressive Latin America solidarity movement....in support of the people of Latin America struggling for justice and a better future for their countries free of economic, military and cultural imperialism."
From December 28, 2009 - January 7, 2010 (five days before the quake), its 11-member delegation visited Haiti to investigate UN Blue Helmet (MINUSTAH) human rights abuses. On returning, it published a report titled, "Haiti: An Oppressed State," its highlights reviewed below.
LASC met with over 70 individuals and organization representatives in Port-au-Prince and two of its most impoverished neighborhoods, Cite Soleil and Bel Air. It also spent two days in Jacmel visiting sustainable development projects.
Testimonies from MINUSTAH-inflicted violence victims were gotten, including people whose family members were murdered. Virtually everyone:
-- demanded Aristide's return;
-- called MINUSTAH a repressive, criminal force;
-- said international aid hasn't reached the poor, but instead has been diverted to predatory NGOs, prison building, or stolen by corrupt politicians; and
-- believed economic development is exploitive, not providing a living wage, or benefitting poor Haitians productively.
The story is long, painful and familiar. "For over 200 years (and 300 before that), the US, France, and Western Europe (actively) ble(d) and exploit(ed) Haitians and prevent(ed) the only nation born of a slave revolt from becoming successful." It endured "military invasions, economic embargoes, gunboat blockades, trade barriers, diplomatic quarantines, subsidized armed subversions, US-armed black dictators, and finally, two US-supported coups against" its only beloved leader since liberation, twice democratically elected overwhelmingly, now exiled, and kept from returning.
Repeatedly people said:
"We want Preval to send President Aristide a passport. If Obama wants that to happen it will, because Preval takes his orders from the powerful nations." Representing hope, Aristide "values social justice and would be an inspiration to the grassroots majority. When he was president, there were more jobs, healthcare and education for our children." No longer since 2004 or Preval's 2006 election.
"They don't hear our demands for better education, healthcare, better roads, and an end to malnutrition. Where does the international aid go? We don't see it. Preval is weak and corrupt. We want him to listen to us. We want the return of Aristide, and Preval should change and not exclude Lavalas."
Preval was complicit in the 2004 coup, then allied with the Washington-installed interim Latortue government to prevent Aristide's return after a more people-oriented 1996 - 2001 first term.
Post-quake, he's been pathetic, inept, and indifferent to his peoples' plight - largely invisible, out of sight, silent, and on the sidelines when he's most needed. Public anger toward him is palpable. For one Haitian, he's "the devil and we don't want him" any more. His prospects for a third term are likely nil - he himself saying in a radio interview, "I don't do politics, okey?" Former opposition figure, Evans Paul, accused him of "single-handedly show(ing) the Haitian people that he cannot lead them."
MINUSTAH, the Problem, Not the Solution
It was established on June 1, 2004 for an initial six month renewable period to "promote interaction with the Haitian authorities as partners," operating under the following mandate:
-- "in support of the Transitional Government, to ensure a secure and stable environment within which the constitutional and political process in Haiti can take place;
-- to assist with the restoration and maintenance of the rule of law, public safety and public order....;
-- to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence; and
-- to promote and protect human rights, particularly of women and children among other responsibilities."
In fact, for the first time in UN history, a Blue Helmet force supported a coup d'etat regime, allied with imperial forces, prevented a democratically leader from returning, and systematically committed human rights abuses, including, persecutions, violence, rape, and cold-blooded murder.
Haiti Liberte journalist Yves Pierre Louis said:
"Since 2004, the only human rights violations are by the UN. In Cite Soleil, they break into houses and kill people. They shot into a protest by students. At Jean Juste's funeral, the UN shot a mourner. People from the Central Plateau were demonstrating for electricity and the UN killed two of them. They commit rape and sexual abuse. They steal peasants' goats....They are protecting the elites by terrorizing the population."
Another Cite Soleil resident said "Now that there are no bandits, the UN are the bandits. If they search you and find jewelry, they steal it. They make women take off their clothes to humiliate them."
Other accounts accused UN forces of shooting up a market, killing and wounding people there, Nigerian soldiers beating a man so severely he nearly died, and no investigations conducted of these or other incidents when demanded.
The case of human rights activist Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine is shocking and disturbing. After announcing his 2007 Senate candidacy and participating in sit-ins denouncing UN human rights violations, he was disappeared without a trace.
Lavalas organizer Rene Civil said "The occupation is killing and humiliating the people. At any time it could explode into a revolt. MINUSTAH has incited the people to be violent. They live and eat well while we are hungry, homeless, and without schools....If not for the UN guns, Haiti would already have its freedom."
Haiti's Dysfunctional Judicial System
LASC investigated four areas:
(1) Lack of Legal Recourse
Victims of MINUSTAH violence are pressured to drop charges. Street vendors in Haiti's informal sector report attacks that are ruining them financially, the police doing nothing to intervene or investigate. When suits are filed, the court system disadvantages the poor, including by transferring venues to distant locations, making it hard and costly for plaintiffs.
(2) Legal Limbo
Although Haitian law requires prisoner court hearings within 48 hours of arrest, delays of three months or longer are common, and according to Amnesty International, fewer than 20% of many thousands of prisoners ever get to trial, leaving innocent victims languishing under horrific confinement for years.
(3) Prison Conditions
Unconscionable describes them because of mistreatment, extreme overcrowding, prisoners forced to sleep in shifts, inadequate poor food, unsafe water, poor sanitation, little or no medical care, and no remediation efforts for change.
(4) Activist Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine
His prominence was his undoing, LASC speculating that his abductors don't intend to release him. Perhaps he's dead, and efforts to learn the truth have been stonewalled.
Haitian Elections
The most recent April 19, 2009 one to fill 12 open Senate seats was a sham after Haiti's Provisional Election Council (CEP) disqualified Fanmi Lavalas (FL) candidates on procedural grounds. Mass outrage showed up in pre-election polls with only 5% of eligible voters saying they'd participate.
Imagine holding a national election and virtually no one showed up. Because of clear election rigging, FL leaders urged a national boycott. They complied, discrediting the results. LASC testimonies called it a continuation of the 2004 coup, the people given no choice except hand-picked candidates they opposed.
Predatory NGOs
Haiti is called "the Republic of NGOs" for good reason, with over 10,000 in country, according to World Bank estimates, the highest per capital presence worldwide in all sectors of activity and society, many with sizable budgets and very much operating for profit.
LASC repeatedly heard complaints that they "reinforce systems of oppression and exclusion rather than ameliorate the economic and political conditions that lead to poverty and inequality."
Common criticisms were that aid rarely goes for people needs or to grassroots activists who can best use it. In communities like Cite Soleil, residents get nothing - no schools, hospitals, just police stations. Organizations like Save the Children, Catholic Relief Services, World Vision, and many others exploit people they claim to serve, especially after disasters like wars, floods, famine, and earthquakes.
A peasant group complained that CARE International dumped cheap rice in the country that destroyed local agriculture, and ultimately Haiti's ability to feed itself. International aid agencies divert funds for high salaries, luxury living, other business ventures, and according to Rene Civil, to co-opt social movement leaders, leaving little for poor Haitians.
After the quake, NGOs scrambled for their share of donations, over $700 million and rising, a bonanza ripe for plunder, so they're lining up for their share, with plenty more expected to come.
The Economy
Pre-quake, Haiti was heavily dependent on foreign interests, especially American, at the expense of worker rights, a fair wage, even a job with mass unemployment or underemployed for the Hemisphere's poorest nation, 80% of its population so deeply impoverished that malnutrition is rampant.
The result is a vulnerable population, most on small, subsistence farms, others easily exploited in corporate-run sweatshops, the kinds Bush and Clinton want more of as well as sweeping privatizations, tourism ventures, port development, free trade zones, and deregulatory freedom creating worker hell. Besides unmentioned resource development, the benefits solely for business, not people.
Haitian oligarchs control local agriculture and industry. Cheap imports, privatizations, poor infrastructure, slave wages, too few jobs, and management co-opted unions control Haiti, exploiting people deprived of their rights.
Conditions in Haiti's sweatshops are instructive. They're inhumane workplaces where employees work for starvation wages, few or no benefits, in unsafe, unfavorable, harsh, and/or hazardous environments with no ability to organize for redress.
In a 1990s report (still relevant now), the National Labor Committee (NLC) explained the dark, "pernicious...US corporate presence in Haiti: that many of the companies profiting from the abuse and exploitation of Haitian workers are among the largest and most successful US corporations: Disney, Wal-Mart, Kmart, JC Penney, Sears, Hanes/Sara Lee and Kellwood," among the many.
NLC asked why can't manufacturers and retailers pay a living wage? Why won't they give independent human rights monitors access to their contractors' plants? Why do they extract the most work for starvation wages? Why is the air heavy with dust and lint with no ventilation to speak of? Why are factories hot, dimly lit and crowded? Why do workers have sad, tired faces?
Why are they forced to work seven days a week (with no overtime pay) to accommodate company order schedules? Why must they work 70 hours a week during the year's hottest season under stifling hot conditions? Why are they treated more like slaves than human beings? Why is none of this reported publicly so consumers can decide whether or not to support these practices by buying or boycotting sweatshop products?
Haitians Explain MINUSTAH violence
An unnamed man said a neighborhood youth disappeared. Many were killed. There's shooting every day. People can't conduct their daily activities safely. They're threatened by MINUSTAH. They enter the area, shoot in the air or randomly at people, terrifying everyone.
Azy Jean Delanio mentioned an August 8, 2005 incident. He was visiting another home when UN soldiers "started shooting and people were just going crazy everywhere so I didn't want to just run because I could get face to face with them and it would be worse for me."
Outside, a soldier pushed him down and shot him in the neck. His partner wanted to get him to a hospital. At first, she couldn't when beaten. Finally, he was treated, asked a lawyer for help, but nothing happened. Since the incident, the bullet is still in his body. He can't walk, care for himself, or afford surgery to correct the problem. He's like many others, victimized by a brutal occupier.
Bernard Maudler discussed a June 22, 2009 incident involving UN forces. They shot him in the legs and feet. He still can't move his toe. He has iron in his leg to fix the bone. He needs medical help to remove it because it's painful. But it's too close to his spine for Doctors Without Borders. They don't have the proper equipment. The bullet entered his stomach causing him cramps.
Jean-Baptist Ristil explained a July 6, 2005 incident. He was sleeping, heard shooting, and went outside to check. Jordanian and Brazilian soldiers were in the street. They had tanks, an MPV, and a helicopter overhead. He heard screams. They were shooting everywhere. He saw a man struck. His mouth was paralyzed. Others were hit. Dead bodies were on the street.
"The same day an old guy was shot and before they killed him, (UN soldiers) put like doo doo fecal from a goat on bread and told him to eat it, and then they killed him."
It was a reprisal raid. MINUSTAH later blamed gangs for the incident.
Marie Therese Gazie discussed a July 6, 2005 incident from 3AM until 12:30 PM. Gangs had nothing to do with it. A "cannon bullet" hit the side of her house and smashed it. Her husband inside was killed. She's now a single mother on her own with three children. She can't afford to send them to school, pay rent, or feed them properly.
Lenene Morice described a December 22, 2006 incident. There was a lot of shooting in the neighborhood. Everyone was screaming. She was by herself, went outside, and was shot in the stomach. With help, she was taken to the hospital, was in pain, spent a month there, couldn't get food down, and thought she wouldn't survive. She was told if she got pregnant again she'd die because of the bullet's location.
Edline Pierre Louis discussed a July 6, 2006 incident. She was sleeping when struck with a bullet in her stomach. At the time, she was seven months pregnant. The baby was prematurely delivered but died. She was the only one hurt. Her other children were screaming but not hit.
Pierre Jean Bernard described a July 6, 2005 incident when MINUSTAH shot and killed his brother. He wasn't a bandit, had no gun, and never owned one. He was a domestic worker, played casino in the streets, but wasn't involved with gangs. Soldiers claimed they were after bandits, but only hurt civilians going about their activities peacefully.
His brother had four children. They can't go to school or have the basics for daily life. They're victims like their father.
Lumane Etienne discussed a June 7, 2007 incident. Two of her children were going to visit a cousin, were shot in the street and killed. Five others survive, but life is very hard for her with everything going on in Haiti.
Cine Mirlande spoke about two incidents - on October 5 and 15, 2008. On October 5, UN soldiers killed her father. Then on October 15, they killed her eight-year-old son en route to school. The pretext again was going after bandits.
The above incidents describe daily life for poor Haitians, especially in the most impoverished areas. US and MINUSTAH forces are in charge along with repressive Haitian police as brutal as UN paramilitaries. From one day to the next, Haitians aren't sure they'll survive, now more than ever post-quake.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://prognewshour.progressiveradionetwork.org/
http://lendmennews.progressiveradionetwork.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)