Monday, May 14, 2012
Unbelievable Rant on MSNBC! Reporter CRACKS & Spews TRUTH! Occupy Wall S...
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
Ron Paul Has Not Suspended His Campaign
Ron Paul Has Not Suspended His Campaign
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
Thursday, May 10, 2012
A GAY MARRIAGE
This is a "reprint" from my earlier post
A GAY MARRIAGE 04/29/2004
Dear Mr President
(and other prophets pious people and do gooders)
I am sincerely touched by your emotional speeches and even portrayed genuine desires to save the sacred institute of marriage. Of course we agree that even if not considered holy or biblical, marriage has been a sacred institute in all civilized and semi-civilized cultures. And that marriage has always been considered a contract between one man and one woman, with few exceptions. In most cultures, and our own laws have provided protections for the same. Now we have our gay population also desiring to be married as equals to the straights. The solution is simple and i hope you will agree.
We do not really need a constitutional amendment to keep gays from being married. As it is there is not much value left in a marriage. Previously the cultures, societies and religions provided for sanctions against those who would break their vows. I hope you will agree that we need to go back to the same protections. We should codify pre-marital and extra marital sex as at least a misdemeanor punishable by a six month jail sentence and a five hundred dollar fine, and adultery and fornication should be considered a felony with a minimum five thousand dollar fine and a year in jail, Thus showing our serious desire that breaking these vows is a serious offense. I know no preacher, Imam, priest or a Rabbi that will disagree. Let's be truly honest with ourselves, our faith, and the public and push this honest and fair proposal. Then we will see how many gays still want to get married. Or we may just not have to amend the constitution.
I know i can count on your full support of this honest and fair defense of the holy vows of matrimony. (M.N.R)
SINCERELY
tombstone001
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
A GAY MARRIAGE 04/29/2004
Dear Mr President
(and other prophets pious people and do gooders)
I am sincerely touched by your emotional speeches and even portrayed genuine desires to save the sacred institute of marriage. Of course we agree that even if not considered holy or biblical, marriage has been a sacred institute in all civilized and semi-civilized cultures. And that marriage has always been considered a contract between one man and one woman, with few exceptions. In most cultures, and our own laws have provided protections for the same. Now we have our gay population also desiring to be married as equals to the straights. The solution is simple and i hope you will agree.
We do not really need a constitutional amendment to keep gays from being married. As it is there is not much value left in a marriage. Previously the cultures, societies and religions provided for sanctions against those who would break their vows. I hope you will agree that we need to go back to the same protections. We should codify pre-marital and extra marital sex as at least a misdemeanor punishable by a six month jail sentence and a five hundred dollar fine, and adultery and fornication should be considered a felony with a minimum five thousand dollar fine and a year in jail, Thus showing our serious desire that breaking these vows is a serious offense. I know no preacher, Imam, priest or a Rabbi that will disagree. Let's be truly honest with ourselves, our faith, and the public and push this honest and fair proposal. Then we will see how many gays still want to get married. Or we may just not have to amend the constitution.
I know i can count on your full support of this honest and fair defense of the holy vows of matrimony. (M.N.R)
SINCERELY
tombstone001
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
Tuesday, May 08, 2012
UNDERSTANDING INFLATION
05/08/2012
UNDERSTANDING INFLATION
We know this is the new economy, but unless the laws of nature have changed or no longer apply we are doomed in the long run.
Miracle of miracles, for the past thirty years, Clinton era included, we have printed more and more money, ran up deficits, ever larger, and the government shows there is no inflation to report, a lie.
Of course if you are working class your buying power has been reduced, mostly blamed on stagnant wages, but also as your wages have gone down, you have been forced to buy more and more stuff made by the slave labor in third world countries, yes China is still a third world country, so is India, comparatively speaking, so you don't feel the pinch so bad as if you had to buy stuff made by the American worker being paid what used to be the American wages and benefits, we have accepted slavery of our brothers for short term benefit.
I don't blame you, the phenomenon is universal, survival of the fittest right, till your number is up.
But before you understand what I am saying here is a simple explanation, so " inflation" is prices going up, cost of stuff going up, and we see a lot of people worried about the prices actually going down, deflation like that in Japan, for the past twenty years or there abouts.
And may be you are right if you are in either of the inflation/deflation camps, because you see the two are right.
Like I said earlier, one reason you don't see/feel inflation is that we buy the stuff made by slaves overseas, and also that the wages in the US are also falling, another reason is that the technology and automation are keeping the "productivity" and going higher, fewer people to make more widgets.
But there is inflation and there is deflation, both of them going on right now, here in the US and all over the world actually, the reason you don't see it is because you are not a part of the real economy.
A rule of the basic economics is called "time value of money", but how about money value of time, in as much as for what you can get for the money you received for the time you spent on the job? That one is a bit harder to understand, let's say you make thirty thousand a year but now the boss wants you to work two extra days a year, you see now you have to work longer to buy the same items as you did last year, so that is in realty inflation (paid for in time worked), now how about this that your medical deductible goes up, or health insurance premiums go up higher than you pay did this year? You are not making "less money" nut you are getting less for your money. Another part of the inflation is that your house value has cone down, and your house being an investment if you trade or sell your house and get less that what you have in it, the purchasing power of it has gone down, that is inflation to you, since basically inflation only means less purchasing power.
Yet the biggest reason that there is no visible inflation in the economy despite the out of control government spending is this, that the rich are taking the money out of circulation fast as the government is spending it" and you can take that to the bank.
if this article is not yet complete please look back soon
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
UNDERSTANDING INFLATION
We know this is the new economy, but unless the laws of nature have changed or no longer apply we are doomed in the long run.
Miracle of miracles, for the past thirty years, Clinton era included, we have printed more and more money, ran up deficits, ever larger, and the government shows there is no inflation to report, a lie.
Of course if you are working class your buying power has been reduced, mostly blamed on stagnant wages, but also as your wages have gone down, you have been forced to buy more and more stuff made by the slave labor in third world countries, yes China is still a third world country, so is India, comparatively speaking, so you don't feel the pinch so bad as if you had to buy stuff made by the American worker being paid what used to be the American wages and benefits, we have accepted slavery of our brothers for short term benefit.
I don't blame you, the phenomenon is universal, survival of the fittest right, till your number is up.
But before you understand what I am saying here is a simple explanation, so " inflation" is prices going up, cost of stuff going up, and we see a lot of people worried about the prices actually going down, deflation like that in Japan, for the past twenty years or there abouts.
And may be you are right if you are in either of the inflation/deflation camps, because you see the two are right.
Like I said earlier, one reason you don't see/feel inflation is that we buy the stuff made by slaves overseas, and also that the wages in the US are also falling, another reason is that the technology and automation are keeping the "productivity" and going higher, fewer people to make more widgets.
But there is inflation and there is deflation, both of them going on right now, here in the US and all over the world actually, the reason you don't see it is because you are not a part of the real economy.
A rule of the basic economics is called "time value of money", but how about money value of time, in as much as for what you can get for the money you received for the time you spent on the job? That one is a bit harder to understand, let's say you make thirty thousand a year but now the boss wants you to work two extra days a year, you see now you have to work longer to buy the same items as you did last year, so that is in realty inflation (paid for in time worked), now how about this that your medical deductible goes up, or health insurance premiums go up higher than you pay did this year? You are not making "less money" nut you are getting less for your money. Another part of the inflation is that your house value has cone down, and your house being an investment if you trade or sell your house and get less that what you have in it, the purchasing power of it has gone down, that is inflation to you, since basically inflation only means less purchasing power.
Yet the biggest reason that there is no visible inflation in the economy despite the out of control government spending is this, that the rich are taking the money out of circulation fast as the government is spending it" and you can take that to the bank.
if this article is not yet complete please look back soon
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
Friday, May 04, 2012
ATHEISM?
ATHEISM?
http://www.mclaughlin.com/transcript.htm?id=892
april 7, 8 2012
Issue Two: Listen to Reason.
The Washington, D.C. National Mall recently was the site of an assemblage that named itself, quote-unquote, "Reason Rally." Twenty thousand atheists showed up to celebrate nonbelieverhood, reason. This self-described Woodstock for atheists was co-organized by David Silverman, the president of American Atheists, an organization that protects the civil rights of atheists.
Here's President Silverman urging atheists to come out of the closet.
DAVID SILVERMAN (president, American Atheists): (From videotape.) The message is that if you can come out, you can come out. And if you can't come out, at least you'll know you're not alone. And maybe sometime soon you'll be able to come out of the closet to your family.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Of the 535 members in both chambers of the U.S. Congress, currently there is one -- that's one -- declared atheist. His name is Fortney Hillman Stark Jr., aka Pete Stark. Pete is a Democrat from California who has served consecutively since 1973, 40 years. He's now in his 20th term. His district, the 13th, is Alameda County, California's Bay Area. Congressman Stark wins the election every two years with a bold mandate, if not a landslide. In the last election, 2010, he was reelected with 72 percent of the vote.
Question: The Secular Coalition for America claims that 28 atheists are in the U.S. Congress, though the coalition does not name names. Why are those atheists all still in the closet except for one, Pete Stark? I ask you, Tim.
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think that Americans realize that we don't really have the ability to hold our politicians accountable. I mean, Congress, you get these districts where you win with 73 percent. And so, for a lot of Americans, one thing that does keep them accountable is the idea that there are repercussions for your actions.
I think that a lot of people think that if you don't believe in an afterlife, if you don't believe in eternal implications for what you do, that if you could just get away with stealing and ripping people off, and as long as you don't get caught, you're fine, I don't think somebody would trust somebody who didn't believe in an afterlife with so much power over them. So I think it is an important consideration.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You think you have to a theist to believe in an afterlife?
MR. CARNEY: Yeah. I mean, I think -- yes, you do.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I don't think you do.
MR. CARNEY: You think you can believe -- who controls the keys?
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And also, don't confuse immorality and morality --
MS. CLIFT: Right.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- with atheism.
MR. CARNEY: No. And --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You can be perfectly moral --
MR. CARNEY: But it's hard to trust --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You can be obviously moral and you can be accepted as being a truly moral person and be an atheist. Correct?
MR. PAGE: Right. I think we need to talk about public perceptions. Religiosity is still a strong enough force in American politics --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you sure? Are you sure? MR. PAGE: -- that people -- if you want to talk about why we don't see more out-of-the-closet atheists in Congress, yeah, it's because you lose votes.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You think if you are an admitted atheist and you come out of the closet, you're not going to be reelected.
MR. PAGE: Well, what's important here, John, is --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Except for Pete Stark.
MR. PAGE: -- that it's coming out of the closet in recent years, I believe, because of Christopher Hitchens and various other bestselling authors writing about it very boldly. People say, oh, you don't necessarily break into flames if you announce that you're an atheist. And so especially some young people, it's become chic to say you're an atheist, whether they're really sincere about it or not.
MS. CLIFT: My late husband was an atheist. My late husband was an atheist.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And publicly so -- publicly so.
MS. CLIFT: Well, publicly.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Tom told me he was an atheist.
MS. CLIFT: Yes, but --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And it was in a -- it was a group like this.
MS. CLIFT: Yes, but he didn't like his mother to know, who lived in Cleveland and played the organ in the Catholic church every morning. (Laughs.) So there are some people that you feel more comfortable. I think there's a false assumption that if you go to church and you profess a religion that somehow you get a pass when it comes to morals and ethics, when, in fact, you can go to a website called HappyAtheistForum.com and they are saying that atheists need to change their image.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Mm-hmm. (Acknowledging.)
MS. CLIFT: And they are seen as sort of this gloomy bunch, when, in fact, they believe you should build a hospital instead of a church and you should help people in the here and now --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are they politicized --
MS. CLIFT: -- as opposed to praying to some hereafter.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Isn't that a public -- political group? MS. CLIFT: No, they're not political. But I've been to -- I went to a number of events with Tom, humanist events. There were a lot of former clergy in their numbers.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Really?
MR. BUCHANAN: John --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: OK, the believers.
ARIS, A-R-I-S, stands for the American Religious Identification Survey -- ARIS. It works with a sample of more than 54,000 American adults.
ARIS says traditional religions in the U.S. have lost a sizable number of members, 1990 to 2008.
So here's a snapshot of where our religious bodies stand as a percent of the U.S. total adult population. Methodists comprise 5 percent of the U.S. adult population; Lutherans, 3.8 percent; Presbyterian, 2.1; Episcopalian, Anglican, 1.1 percent. In the Catholic Church, immigrants sustain membership, but the U.S. church still fell to 25.1 percent of the population. The survey also found that those with no stated religious preference grew from 8.2 percent in 1990 to 15 percent in 2008.
By the way, many Catholic Hispanic immigrants joined the U.S. Catholic population, but the Catholic population nevertheless dropped 1.1 percent, despite the Hispanic influx. Do you want to speak to that?
MR. PAGE: Well, you're seeing not just Hispanics but Africans, many immigrants are populating our churches now at a faster rate than the old-school families whose younger folks are drifting away from organized religion. This is giving the church new life in America, I think, and it's affecting --
MR. BUCHANAN: John --
MR. PAGE: -- a lot of our perceptions of the (future ?) America.
MR. BUCHANAN: John, the immigrants -- if it weren't for immigrants, the Catholic Church would have lost one fourth of its membership in the last half century. Catholics are 25 percent of the population, John, but only one fourth of them attend church regularly. One in every 10 Americans is a lapsed Catholic.
You mentioned Methodists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians; used to be the dominant force in America. They're 12 percent of it. Protestants, who were 99 percent of the country, are now at 50 percent and falling.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Yeah.
MR. BUCHANAN: Atheists are about 16 percent. MS. CLIFT: People are shopping around.
MR. BUCHANAN: It's a change --
MS. CLIFT: People are shopping around everywhere.
MR. BUCHANAN: Sure.
MS. CLIFT: They're changing religions. They're looking for choice. It's like at Starbucks.
(Cross talk.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let Tim in.
MS. CLIFT: There are all these different varieties.
MR. CARNEY: I think you'll see the Catholic numbers turn around, because you go to mass -- go to St. Mary's, where Pat goes; go to St. Bernadette's or St. John's, where I go, and you see a lot of families, like mine, with three, four, five, six, seven, eight kids.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Exit --
MR. CARNEY: So --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Exit question: When will America have --
MS. CLIFT: You're in the minority.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- its first out-of-the-closet atheist president? Kindly give me the year. Pat Buchanan, quickly.
MR. BUCHANAN: It would be after 2050, after mid-century.
MS. CLIFT: After the demographics change. And I think religious identification --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: When is that?
MS. CLIFT: -- is not going to be --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: When is that?
MS. CLIFT: Well, after 2050. I'll go for 2080. I won't be around to be accountable, so --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Oh. You're -- (inaudible) -- yourself.
MR. CARNEY: By 2080, everybody will be named Carney, Cuccinelli or Mohammed, so I don't think -- it'll have to happen before the growing Catholic bubble takes over the population. MR. PAGE: 2074. I'm not sure if that's a presidential election year, but sometime around there. But one thing -- you know, church attendance is going up among the more educated folks. This is an interesting demographic.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The answer is 90 years from now, the turn of the century.
http://tombstone001.blogspot.com/2006/07/life-2003.html
04/2003
LIFE 2003
I wish they will stop whining once and for all, about the liberal media and its whiners. First the media in the US has been rooting for a war for months. Of course if a war happens, it will be a ratings bonanza for the net work TV. With the Dan Rather and his ilk getting free trips to the Mid East and expanded news budgets. Why else would the talking heads be talking up our military prowess every night, how our bombs are now smarter, (may be even more so than some of our commentators, cause the bombs seem to find their mark).
Have you heard about the Saddam's torture chambers? How about the torture chambers in Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kuwait, Jordan and Israel? Have you heard about the democracy we shall bring to Iraq, and the pigs will fly and the above mentioned regimes will just walk away from their power, the oil billions and the whore houses? And we thought the messiah has yet to arrive. Actually the whores in power there are already clamping down on their populace worse than they ever did.
With his declaration of war on terrorism, Mr. Bush actually delegetimized the aspirations of millions of Muslims, from Palestine to the Philippines. Thus probably increasing the chances of terrorism around the world more than ever before.
It is not news that the one fifth of the population of this world that calls itself Muslim actually lacks basic human rights because of their own leadership that is made of liars, thieves and whore mongers that steal their monies and leave their countries poor. And now they are again selling out their own to save their asses. And it is also no secret that the poverty and the ignorance and lack of human rights are the basic root cause of terrorism, not Islam.
As far as he media are concerned, the right can no longer whine about the liberal media. Now that we have a conservative Geraldo Rivera, Bill O'Rilley, (the living proof that Yale is not the only place for idiots to get an Ivy League degree). A most sincere Jerry Springer of the right, Rush Limbaugh, (an out of work comedian). And a conservative Donohue, Sean Hanitty. Even the MTV jack ass is being countered by the right's own Mike Savage, you too can be stupid and on TV at the same time.
In the "no spin zone" if you are for trying to save untold number of innocent lives, you are labeled to be for Saddam. And the guy, who lost election to a dead man in his home state, has no axe to grind against the wild and woolly left. And while they try to protect us from the untold EVIL, we are busy fornicating, and having too much fun making babies, (of the Mexican and Black, and Asian and the Muslim kind).
In this new world disorder, (the war between the Saddam and the Bushies), the Bible and the Koran are being quoted and misquoted liberally. The mullahs from their minbers and the preachers from their pulpits are again forecasting the end times, and the Armageddon and the rapture, selling heavens to the believers. Forget it; it has been the end of times for the last six thousand years.
And poor me, I am probably the only person living, that has family in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kurdistan ( Iraq), U.K., Canada and the United States, and a few friends even in Germany. And you could not pay me off, like some other ex soldier, to change my mind and favor a war. Not even the one between the good and the evil.
The idea of a hell is common to all three monotheistic religions of the East, Islam, Christianity and Judaism. The basic concept is that if you live an immoral and sinful life (I have no idea what that means), then you will go to hell, (A place of great fires where one will burn for ever!).
Now, if nothing else will work, the idea of burning in a fire for ever (a very long time), should keep one on the "straight and narrow."
It is also a common tenet of these religions, that if you do good deeds you will go to "paradise"
(Once again please make up your own mind what paradise is). Secondly, that only a few are ever good enough to be able to go to paradise, at least on their own.
All my life, I have lived mostly among the Christians and the Muslims, and a few Jews and others. And yet I have never heard anyone say, or heard of anyone one says that they KNOW they will go to hell when they are dead. Even Hitler did not seem to be consumed by this fear when he decided to take his own life, Timothy McVeigh did not ask for a delay in his execution for the fear of these great fires. Far as I know, Osama bin Laden is not too worried about per chance arriving at the same locale. Seems like, no one ever thinks that they will go to a real hell to be over cooked, so the idea seems to have lost its flavor.
I think many of our world leaders today have more faith in the mercy of their God, than they have a fear of His wrath.
Does any one really know their book?
According to the testaments, when God wanted to destroy the world, he did not ask Noah to burn down his village or the crops, or to throw rocks at the people, God told Noah to make a boat and escape when the floods came.
When a Pharaoh boasted of being able to grant life or impose death, God sent a gnat in his nostril to cause his death.
When God became angry at the people of the Sodom and Gomorrah, he did not ask Lot to destroy
The towns, he told Lot to escape, with his family, and then He brought His wrath upon the people for their transgressions.
How many times have we seen people, who think they are guided by the God to do his dirty work?
Be wrong and cause more suffering. Think about the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, the KKK, the lynching.
Does God really talk to the people? Let’s see. How do you tell a prophet from a heretic? Most of the people that claimed to be the messengers of God have been accused of being the opposite. Was Rasputin being guided by the Holy Spirit? How about John Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church? Or Jim Jones, or Timothy McVeigh, or even Osama Bin Laden. They all claimed to have a divine connection.
Or is it that some people suffer from delusions, or at least self -hypnosis and start to believe in their nasty motives as to have been divinely inspired. How do you differentiate between a Tim McVeigh and a David Koresh and Ted Bundy and a Charles Manson?
Or do you believe that a mass murder of the innocent in the name of a God is justified, be it in Tel Aviv, or The West Bank, or Baghdad.
Or may be you should go back to your God and tell him to do his own dirty work.
(M.N.R.)
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
http://www.mclaughlin.com/transcript.htm?id=892
april 7, 8 2012
Issue Two: Listen to Reason.
The Washington, D.C. National Mall recently was the site of an assemblage that named itself, quote-unquote, "Reason Rally." Twenty thousand atheists showed up to celebrate nonbelieverhood, reason. This self-described Woodstock for atheists was co-organized by David Silverman, the president of American Atheists, an organization that protects the civil rights of atheists.
Here's President Silverman urging atheists to come out of the closet.
DAVID SILVERMAN (president, American Atheists): (From videotape.) The message is that if you can come out, you can come out. And if you can't come out, at least you'll know you're not alone. And maybe sometime soon you'll be able to come out of the closet to your family.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Of the 535 members in both chambers of the U.S. Congress, currently there is one -- that's one -- declared atheist. His name is Fortney Hillman Stark Jr., aka Pete Stark. Pete is a Democrat from California who has served consecutively since 1973, 40 years. He's now in his 20th term. His district, the 13th, is Alameda County, California's Bay Area. Congressman Stark wins the election every two years with a bold mandate, if not a landslide. In the last election, 2010, he was reelected with 72 percent of the vote.
Question: The Secular Coalition for America claims that 28 atheists are in the U.S. Congress, though the coalition does not name names. Why are those atheists all still in the closet except for one, Pete Stark? I ask you, Tim.
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think that Americans realize that we don't really have the ability to hold our politicians accountable. I mean, Congress, you get these districts where you win with 73 percent. And so, for a lot of Americans, one thing that does keep them accountable is the idea that there are repercussions for your actions.
I think that a lot of people think that if you don't believe in an afterlife, if you don't believe in eternal implications for what you do, that if you could just get away with stealing and ripping people off, and as long as you don't get caught, you're fine, I don't think somebody would trust somebody who didn't believe in an afterlife with so much power over them. So I think it is an important consideration.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You think you have to a theist to believe in an afterlife?
MR. CARNEY: Yeah. I mean, I think -- yes, you do.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I don't think you do.
MR. CARNEY: You think you can believe -- who controls the keys?
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And also, don't confuse immorality and morality --
MS. CLIFT: Right.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- with atheism.
MR. CARNEY: No. And --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You can be perfectly moral --
MR. CARNEY: But it's hard to trust --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You can be obviously moral and you can be accepted as being a truly moral person and be an atheist. Correct?
MR. PAGE: Right. I think we need to talk about public perceptions. Religiosity is still a strong enough force in American politics --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you sure? Are you sure? MR. PAGE: -- that people -- if you want to talk about why we don't see more out-of-the-closet atheists in Congress, yeah, it's because you lose votes.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You think if you are an admitted atheist and you come out of the closet, you're not going to be reelected.
MR. PAGE: Well, what's important here, John, is --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Except for Pete Stark.
MR. PAGE: -- that it's coming out of the closet in recent years, I believe, because of Christopher Hitchens and various other bestselling authors writing about it very boldly. People say, oh, you don't necessarily break into flames if you announce that you're an atheist. And so especially some young people, it's become chic to say you're an atheist, whether they're really sincere about it or not.
MS. CLIFT: My late husband was an atheist. My late husband was an atheist.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And publicly so -- publicly so.
MS. CLIFT: Well, publicly.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Tom told me he was an atheist.
MS. CLIFT: Yes, but --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And it was in a -- it was a group like this.
MS. CLIFT: Yes, but he didn't like his mother to know, who lived in Cleveland and played the organ in the Catholic church every morning. (Laughs.) So there are some people that you feel more comfortable. I think there's a false assumption that if you go to church and you profess a religion that somehow you get a pass when it comes to morals and ethics, when, in fact, you can go to a website called HappyAtheistForum.com and they are saying that atheists need to change their image.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Mm-hmm. (Acknowledging.)
MS. CLIFT: And they are seen as sort of this gloomy bunch, when, in fact, they believe you should build a hospital instead of a church and you should help people in the here and now --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are they politicized --
MS. CLIFT: -- as opposed to praying to some hereafter.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Isn't that a public -- political group? MS. CLIFT: No, they're not political. But I've been to -- I went to a number of events with Tom, humanist events. There were a lot of former clergy in their numbers.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Really?
MR. BUCHANAN: John --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: OK, the believers.
ARIS, A-R-I-S, stands for the American Religious Identification Survey -- ARIS. It works with a sample of more than 54,000 American adults.
ARIS says traditional religions in the U.S. have lost a sizable number of members, 1990 to 2008.
So here's a snapshot of where our religious bodies stand as a percent of the U.S. total adult population. Methodists comprise 5 percent of the U.S. adult population; Lutherans, 3.8 percent; Presbyterian, 2.1; Episcopalian, Anglican, 1.1 percent. In the Catholic Church, immigrants sustain membership, but the U.S. church still fell to 25.1 percent of the population. The survey also found that those with no stated religious preference grew from 8.2 percent in 1990 to 15 percent in 2008.
By the way, many Catholic Hispanic immigrants joined the U.S. Catholic population, but the Catholic population nevertheless dropped 1.1 percent, despite the Hispanic influx. Do you want to speak to that?
MR. PAGE: Well, you're seeing not just Hispanics but Africans, many immigrants are populating our churches now at a faster rate than the old-school families whose younger folks are drifting away from organized religion. This is giving the church new life in America, I think, and it's affecting --
MR. BUCHANAN: John --
MR. PAGE: -- a lot of our perceptions of the (future ?) America.
MR. BUCHANAN: John, the immigrants -- if it weren't for immigrants, the Catholic Church would have lost one fourth of its membership in the last half century. Catholics are 25 percent of the population, John, but only one fourth of them attend church regularly. One in every 10 Americans is a lapsed Catholic.
You mentioned Methodists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians; used to be the dominant force in America. They're 12 percent of it. Protestants, who were 99 percent of the country, are now at 50 percent and falling.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Yeah.
MR. BUCHANAN: Atheists are about 16 percent. MS. CLIFT: People are shopping around.
MR. BUCHANAN: It's a change --
MS. CLIFT: People are shopping around everywhere.
MR. BUCHANAN: Sure.
MS. CLIFT: They're changing religions. They're looking for choice. It's like at Starbucks.
(Cross talk.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let Tim in.
MS. CLIFT: There are all these different varieties.
MR. CARNEY: I think you'll see the Catholic numbers turn around, because you go to mass -- go to St. Mary's, where Pat goes; go to St. Bernadette's or St. John's, where I go, and you see a lot of families, like mine, with three, four, five, six, seven, eight kids.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Exit --
MR. CARNEY: So --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Exit question: When will America have --
MS. CLIFT: You're in the minority.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- its first out-of-the-closet atheist president? Kindly give me the year. Pat Buchanan, quickly.
MR. BUCHANAN: It would be after 2050, after mid-century.
MS. CLIFT: After the demographics change. And I think religious identification --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: When is that?
MS. CLIFT: -- is not going to be --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: When is that?
MS. CLIFT: Well, after 2050. I'll go for 2080. I won't be around to be accountable, so --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Oh. You're -- (inaudible) -- yourself.
MR. CARNEY: By 2080, everybody will be named Carney, Cuccinelli or Mohammed, so I don't think -- it'll have to happen before the growing Catholic bubble takes over the population. MR. PAGE: 2074. I'm not sure if that's a presidential election year, but sometime around there. But one thing -- you know, church attendance is going up among the more educated folks. This is an interesting demographic.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The answer is 90 years from now, the turn of the century.
http://tombstone001.blogspot.com/2006/07/life-2003.html
04/2003
LIFE 2003
I wish they will stop whining once and for all, about the liberal media and its whiners. First the media in the US has been rooting for a war for months. Of course if a war happens, it will be a ratings bonanza for the net work TV. With the Dan Rather and his ilk getting free trips to the Mid East and expanded news budgets. Why else would the talking heads be talking up our military prowess every night, how our bombs are now smarter, (may be even more so than some of our commentators, cause the bombs seem to find their mark).
Have you heard about the Saddam's torture chambers? How about the torture chambers in Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kuwait, Jordan and Israel? Have you heard about the democracy we shall bring to Iraq, and the pigs will fly and the above mentioned regimes will just walk away from their power, the oil billions and the whore houses? And we thought the messiah has yet to arrive. Actually the whores in power there are already clamping down on their populace worse than they ever did.
With his declaration of war on terrorism, Mr. Bush actually delegetimized the aspirations of millions of Muslims, from Palestine to the Philippines. Thus probably increasing the chances of terrorism around the world more than ever before.
It is not news that the one fifth of the population of this world that calls itself Muslim actually lacks basic human rights because of their own leadership that is made of liars, thieves and whore mongers that steal their monies and leave their countries poor. And now they are again selling out their own to save their asses. And it is also no secret that the poverty and the ignorance and lack of human rights are the basic root cause of terrorism, not Islam.
As far as he media are concerned, the right can no longer whine about the liberal media. Now that we have a conservative Geraldo Rivera, Bill O'Rilley, (the living proof that Yale is not the only place for idiots to get an Ivy League degree). A most sincere Jerry Springer of the right, Rush Limbaugh, (an out of work comedian). And a conservative Donohue, Sean Hanitty. Even the MTV jack ass is being countered by the right's own Mike Savage, you too can be stupid and on TV at the same time.
In the "no spin zone" if you are for trying to save untold number of innocent lives, you are labeled to be for Saddam. And the guy, who lost election to a dead man in his home state, has no axe to grind against the wild and woolly left. And while they try to protect us from the untold EVIL, we are busy fornicating, and having too much fun making babies, (of the Mexican and Black, and Asian and the Muslim kind).
In this new world disorder, (the war between the Saddam and the Bushies), the Bible and the Koran are being quoted and misquoted liberally. The mullahs from their minbers and the preachers from their pulpits are again forecasting the end times, and the Armageddon and the rapture, selling heavens to the believers. Forget it; it has been the end of times for the last six thousand years.
And poor me, I am probably the only person living, that has family in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kurdistan ( Iraq), U.K., Canada and the United States, and a few friends even in Germany. And you could not pay me off, like some other ex soldier, to change my mind and favor a war. Not even the one between the good and the evil.
The idea of a hell is common to all three monotheistic religions of the East, Islam, Christianity and Judaism. The basic concept is that if you live an immoral and sinful life (I have no idea what that means), then you will go to hell, (A place of great fires where one will burn for ever!).
Now, if nothing else will work, the idea of burning in a fire for ever (a very long time), should keep one on the "straight and narrow."
It is also a common tenet of these religions, that if you do good deeds you will go to "paradise"
(Once again please make up your own mind what paradise is). Secondly, that only a few are ever good enough to be able to go to paradise, at least on their own.
All my life, I have lived mostly among the Christians and the Muslims, and a few Jews and others. And yet I have never heard anyone say, or heard of anyone one says that they KNOW they will go to hell when they are dead. Even Hitler did not seem to be consumed by this fear when he decided to take his own life, Timothy McVeigh did not ask for a delay in his execution for the fear of these great fires. Far as I know, Osama bin Laden is not too worried about per chance arriving at the same locale. Seems like, no one ever thinks that they will go to a real hell to be over cooked, so the idea seems to have lost its flavor.
I think many of our world leaders today have more faith in the mercy of their God, than they have a fear of His wrath.
Does any one really know their book?
According to the testaments, when God wanted to destroy the world, he did not ask Noah to burn down his village or the crops, or to throw rocks at the people, God told Noah to make a boat and escape when the floods came.
When a Pharaoh boasted of being able to grant life or impose death, God sent a gnat in his nostril to cause his death.
When God became angry at the people of the Sodom and Gomorrah, he did not ask Lot to destroy
The towns, he told Lot to escape, with his family, and then He brought His wrath upon the people for their transgressions.
How many times have we seen people, who think they are guided by the God to do his dirty work?
Be wrong and cause more suffering. Think about the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, the KKK, the lynching.
Does God really talk to the people? Let’s see. How do you tell a prophet from a heretic? Most of the people that claimed to be the messengers of God have been accused of being the opposite. Was Rasputin being guided by the Holy Spirit? How about John Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church? Or Jim Jones, or Timothy McVeigh, or even Osama Bin Laden. They all claimed to have a divine connection.
Or is it that some people suffer from delusions, or at least self -hypnosis and start to believe in their nasty motives as to have been divinely inspired. How do you differentiate between a Tim McVeigh and a David Koresh and Ted Bundy and a Charles Manson?
Or do you believe that a mass murder of the innocent in the name of a God is justified, be it in Tel Aviv, or The West Bank, or Baghdad.
Or may be you should go back to your God and tell him to do his own dirty work.
(M.N.R.)
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
Thursday, May 03, 2012
THE ART OF SELFISHNESS
05/04/2012
THE ART OF SELFISHNESS
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
THE ART OF SELFISHNESS
According
to philosopher Robert Nozick, when the government takes even a dollar
from Bill Gates, a billionaire, and gives it to a poor person, it is
like forcing Gates to work for the poor person. Is Nozick right to think
that redistributive taxation is like forced labor? Should there be no
redistributive taxation whatsoever?
· · Share
- Robert James likes this.
Sam Goodman yes and what does the amount taken have to do if it is theft or not? If someone pulls a gun on you is it any less theft if they take $10 or $10,000?13 hours ago · ·
1
Peter Dang yes taxation IS slavery. taking $1 from bill gates to give to a poor person is akin to taking $1 from a poor person and giving that to another poor person. the difference is only a matter of degree but the principles are the same
Alan Jimenez taxation is not slavery, and Nozick was no economist. Adam Smith talked about the necessity of taxation, and progressive taxation at that. The free market economist Joseph Schumpeter also talked about the necessity of taxation.
All this 'no taxation' rhetoric makes no sense because one cannot have a society with private property without a state. You can't have your cake and eat it too.13 hours ago · · 4- Peter Dang "taxation is not slavery, and Nozick was no economist. "
One need not be an economist to recognise that theft is wrong. Slavery occurs when a person or group of people extracts 100% of the fruits of someone else's labour. At what point does is it thus not slavery? 99%? 98%?
"Adam Smith talked about the necessity of taxation, and progressive taxation at that. "
You are not arguing that taxation is not theft here, only that "theft is necessary so says some 18th century thinker
"The free market economist Joseph Schumpeter also talked about the necessity of taxation."
I would assert then that Joseph-whatshisname is no advocate for freemarket capitalism for one who is a freemarket capitalist would believe that markets are better for people than the state
"All this 'no taxation' rhetoric makes no sense because one cannot have a society with private property without a state. "
This is where your argument gets really retarded. Law, property and civillisation predates the state. There is no doubt about that. What you are arguing here is that we need a property violating institution to create and defend property rights - an insoluble contradiction13 hours ago · · 1 - Peter Dang Honestly alan all you've done is avoided the crux of this discussion. You asserted that "taxation is not slavery" and left the point at that. Kindly demonstrate that force is not needed to extract taxation so I can prove you wrong
Paul Conway My favourite thing about this quote is that Bill Gates has said countless times that he wants his taxes to be higher.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16714480 
- Peter Dang then Mr Gates should send a cheque to
Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782
instead of forcing everyone else to submit to his world views - Paul Conway I think the major issue with Libertarians is they think that a person or group of people can be totally free and the idea that a person or people succeed of fail totally on their own merit.
Had Bill Gates been born 5 years earlier or 5 years later he would not be a Billionaire. Had he been born in another country or State he would not be a Billionaire.
Gates by chance sat in a class room in America, the only class room in the world to have Internet connection. This was not just one of the defining moments of his life but in world history.
The class room paid for by the tax payer and a Internet paid for by the tax payer.
Gates succeeded because he lived in a society which aided him. He knows this. - Peter Dang "I think the major issue with Libertarians is they think that a person or group of people can be totally free and the idea that a person or people succeed of fail totally on their own merit."
Not exactly. What libertarians believe is that initiating violence is wrong.
"The class room paid for by the tax payer and a Internet paid for by the tax payer. Gates succeeded because he lived in a society which aided him. He knows this. "
What you are arguing is invalid. You beliefs have no core principle. You are making an argument from effect. By your logic, I will argue that Einstenian physics is bad and detrimental to society because it led to the creation of the atomic bomb.
You've also completely missed out on Henry Hazlitt's lessons (i.e. is book Economics in One Lesson). Government by the virtue of their existence cannot create wealth, only divert or distribute it. 
Chris Port There is no mathematical correlation between effort or talent and wealth (unless you are claiming that teachers and nurses are idle parasites while Warholian celebrities and incompetent, economy-crashing psychopaths are the backbone of human civilization - in which case you are probably either mad or evil). By the same logic, neither is there any correlation between wealth and fairness. Law and order are coercive by definition. There is no taxation in the jungle. Tax is the price we pay for not living in a Conradian hell. If you acquire a fortune by exploiting a public infrastructure funded by others, and pay half of that fortune to a security firm (the state) to protect the other half, you are doing well. If rich people want to withdraw from society and set up their private little mini-states like James Bond villains, some would welcome this. It would make it easier to kill them and seize their wealth without fear of retribution. Redistribution by tax is generally preferable to redistribution by revolution.
Mohammed N. Razavi 1, all money is fake, it has no intrinsic value.
2. All money starts with government that invents it, rich do not create money or jobs.
Most economists only try to prove what they Believe, it is a theory not science.
Most people talking about economics here have no clue what they are talking about.
Most of what you have in markets today was created by government, computer, the internet, the GPS etc.
World wide economic boom has been created by, government borrowing and spending, and rich finding ways to take some of that money.
No one ever says they will not TAKE the money from the poor because the government stole it from the rich.
I can teach you more but you can look through my blog.5 hours ago via mobile ·
1, all money is fake, it has no intrinsic value.
2. All money starts with government that invents it, rich do not create money or jobs.
Most economists only try to prove what they Believe, it is a theory not science.
Most people talking about economics here have no clue what they are talking about.
Most of what you have in markets today was created by government, computer, the internet, the GPS etc.
World wide economic boom has been created by, government borrowing and spending, and rich finding ways to take some of that money.
No one ever says they will not TAKE the money from the poor because the government stole it from the rich.
I can teach you more but you can look through my blog.
5 hours ago via mobile · 2. All money starts with government that invents it, rich do not create money or jobs.
Most economists only try to prove what they Believe, it is a theory not science.
Most people talking about economics here have no clue what they are talking about.
Most of what you have in markets today was created by government, computer, the internet, the GPS etc.
World wide economic boom has been created by, government borrowing and spending, and rich finding ways to take some of that money.
No one ever says they will not TAKE the money from the poor because the government stole it from the rich.
I can teach you more but you can look through my blog.
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
S. 1959 (110th): Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
110th Congress, 2007–2009. Text as of Aug 02, 2007 (Introduced).
Status & Summary
| PDF
| Source: GPO
S 1959 IS
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 1959
To establish the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism, and for other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. COLEMAN) introduced the following
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs
A BILL
To establish the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism, and for other purposes.
August 2, 2007
Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. COLEMAN) introduced the following
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
- This Act may be cited as the `Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.
- (a) In General- Title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002
(6 U.S.C. 361 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`Subtitle J--Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism
`SEC. 899A. DEFINITIONS.
- `In this subtitle:
- `(1) COMMISSION- The term
`Commission' means the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism established under section 899C.
`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.
`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.
`SEC. 899B. FINDINGS.
- `The Congress finds the following:
- `(1) The development
and implementation of methods and processes that can be used to prevent
violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based
violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic
terrorism.
`(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security.
`(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.
`(4) While the United States must continue its vigilant efforts to combat international terrorism, it must also strengthen efforts to combat the threat posed by homegrown terrorists based and operating within the United States.
`(5) Understanding the motivational factors that lead to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence is a vital step toward eradicating these threats in the United States.
`(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the incorporation of State and local solutions.
`(7) Individuals prone to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence span all races, ethnicities, and religious beliefs, and individuals should not be targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion.
`(8) Any measure taken to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism in the United States should not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.
`(9) Certain governments, including the Government of the United Kingdom, the Government of Canada, and the Government of Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations.
`SEC. 899C. NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE PREVENTION OF VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE.
- `(a) Establishment- There is established within the legislative
branch of the Government the National Commission on the Prevention of
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism.
`(b) Purpose- The purposes of the Commission are the following:
- `(1)
Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization,
homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United
States, including United States connections to non-United States persons
and networks, violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and
ideologically based violence in prison, individual or `lone wolf'
violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based
violence, and other faces of the phenomena of violent radicalization,
homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence that the
Commission considers important.
`(2) The Commission shall, in cooperation with the Department, the Department of State, and other Federal departments and agencies, as appropriate, conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in their respective nations.
`(3) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of--
- `(A) the Center of Excellence established or designated under section 899D, and other academic work, as appropriate;
`(B) Federal, State, local, or tribal government studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence; and
`(C) foreign government studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence.
- `(1)
2 members shall be appointed by the President from among officers or
employees of the executive branch and private citizens of the United
States;
`(2) 2 members shall be appointed by the majority leader of the Senate;
`(3) 1 member shall be appointed by the minority leader of the Senate;
`(4) 2 members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
`(5) 1 member shall be appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives;
`(6) 1 member shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives;
`(7) 1 member shall be appointed by the ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives;
`(8) 1 member shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and
`(9) 1 member shall be appointed by the ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate.
`(e) Qualifications-
- `(1)
IN GENERAL- Individuals shall be selected for appointment to the
Commission solely on the basis of their professional qualifications,
achievements, public stature, experience, and expertise in relevant
fields, including behavioral science, constitutional law, corrections,
counterterrorism, cultural anthropology, education, information
technology, intelligence, juvenile justice, local law enforcement,
organized crime, Islam and other world religions, sociology, or
terrorism.
`(2) LIMITATION- Not more than 6 members of the Commission shall be from the same political party.
`(g) Quorum and Meetings- The Commission shall meet and begin the operations of the Commission not later than 30 days after the date on which all members have been appointed or, if such meeting cannot be mutually agreed upon, on a date designated by the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Each subsequent meeting shall occur upon the call of the Chair or a majority of its members. A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number may hold meetings.
`(h) Powers of Commission-
- `(1) IN GENERAL-
- `(A)
HEARINGS AND EVIDENCE- The Commission or, on the authority of the
Commission, any subcommittee or member thereof, may, for the purpose of
carrying out this section, hold hearings and sit and act at such times
and places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, and administer
such oaths as the Commission considers advisable to carry out its
duties.
`(B) CONTRACTING- The Commission may, to such extent and in such amounts as are provided in appropriation Acts, enter into contracts to enable the Commission to discharge its duties under this section.
- `(A)
IN GENERAL- The Commission may secure directly from any executive
department, bureau, agency, board, commission, office, independent
establishment, or instrumentality of the Government, information
(including classified information), suggestions, estimates, and
statistics for the purposes of this section. The head of each such
department, bureau, agency, board, commission, office, independent
establishment, or instrumentality shall, to the extent authorized by
law, furnish such information, suggestions, estimates, and statistics
directly to the Commission, upon request made by the Chair of the
Commission, by the chair of any subcommittee created by a majority of
the Commission, or by any member designated by a majority of the
Commission.
`(B) RECEIPT, HANDLING, STORAGE, AND DISSEMINATION- Information shall only be received, handled, stored, and disseminated by members of the Commission and its staff consistent with all applicable statutes, regulations, and Executive orders.
- `(1)
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION- The Administrator of General Services
shall provide to the Commission on a reimbursable basis administrative
support and other services for the performance of the Commission's
functions.
`(2) OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES- In addition to the assistance required under paragraph (1), a Federal department or agency may provide to the Commission such services, funds, facilities, and staff as they may determine advisable and as may be authorized by law.
`(k) Nonapplicability of Federal Advisory Committee Act- The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the Commission.
`(l) Public Meetings-
- `(1) IN GENERAL- The Commission shall hold public hearings and meetings to the extent appropriate.
`(2) PROTECTION OF INFORMATION- Any public hearings of the Commission shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the protection of information provided to or developed for or by the Commission as required by any applicable statute, regulation, or Executive order.
- `(1)
APPOINTMENT AND COMPENSATION- The Chair of the Commission, in
consultation with the Vice Chair and in accordance with rules adopted by
the Commission, may appoint and fix the compensation of a staff
director and such other personnel as may be necessary to enable the
Commission to carry out its functions, without regard to the provisions
of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the
competitive service, and without regard to the provisions of chapter 51
and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title relating to
classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that no rate of
pay fixed under this subsection may exceed the maximum rate of pay for
GS-15 under the General Schedule.
`(2) STAFF EXPERTISE- Individuals shall be selected for appointment as staff of the Commission on the basis of their expertise in one or more of the fields described in subsection (e)(1).
`(3) PERSONNEL AS FEDERAL EMPLOYEES-
- `(A)
IN GENERAL- The executive director and any employee of the Commission
shall be employees under section 2105 of title 5, United States Code,
for purposes of chapters 63, 81, 83, 84, 85, 87, 89, and 90 of that
title.
`(B) MEMBERS OF COMMISSION- Subparagraph (A) shall not be construed to apply to members of the Commission.
`(5) CONSULTANT SERVICES- The Commission may procure the services of experts and consultants in accordance with section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, at rates not to exceed the daily rate paid a person occupying a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United States Code.
`(6) EMPHASIS ON SECURITY CLEARANCES- The Commission shall make it a priority to hire as employees and retain as contractors and detailees individuals otherwise authorized by this section who have active security clearances.
- `(1)
COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS- Each member of the Commission who is not an
employee of the Government shall be compensated at a rate not to exceed
the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay in effect for a
position at level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of
title 5, United States Code, for each day during which that member is
engaged in the actual performance of the duties of the Commission.
`(2) TRAVEL EXPENSES- While away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Commission, members of the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Commission.
`(3) TREATMENT OF SERVICE FOR PURPOSES OF RETIREMENT BENEFITS- A member of the Commission who is an annuitant otherwise covered by section 8344 or 8468 of title 5, United States Code, by reason of membership on the Commission shall not be subject to the provisions of such section with respect to membership on the Commission.
`(4) VACANCIES- A vacancy on the Commission shall not affect its powers and shall be filled in the manner in which the original appointment was made. The appointment of the replacement member shall be made not later than 60 days after the date on which the vacancy occurs.
`(p) Reports-
- `(1) FINAL REPORT-
- `(A)
IN GENERAL- Not later than 18 months after the date on which the
Commission first meets, the Commission shall submit to the President and
Congress a final report including--
- `(i) its findings and conclusions;
`(ii) legislative recommendations for--
- `(I)
immediate and long-term countermeasures to violent radicalization,
homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence; and
`(II) measures that can be taken to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence from developing and spreading within the United States; and
- `(A) by not later than 6 months after the date on which the Commission first meets, a first interim report on--
- `(i) its findings and conclusions and legislative recommendations for the purposes described in paragraph (1)(A); and
`(ii) its recommendations on the feasibility of a grant program established and administered by the Secretary for the purpose of preventing, disrupting, and mitigating the effects of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence and, if such a program is feasible, recommendations on how grant funds should be used and administered; and
`(4) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY- The Commission shall release a public version of each report required under this subsection.
`(r) Termination of Commission- The Commission shall terminate 30 days after the date on which the Commission submits its final report under subsection (p).
`SEC. 899D. CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR THE STUDY OF VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES.
- `(a) Establishment-
- `(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary
shall establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for
the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the
United States (in this section referred to as the `Center') using
merit-review processes and procedures and other limitations established
for designating university-based centers for homeland security under
section 308(b)(2)(B). The Center shall assist homeland security
officials of Federal, State, local, and tribal governments through
training, education, and research in preventing violent radicalization
and homegrown terrorism in the United States.
`(2) USE OF EXISTING CENTERS- In carrying out this section, the Secretary may create a new Center designed exclusively for the purpose described in subsection (b) or identify and expand a university-based center for homeland security of the Department in existence on the date of enactment of this subtitle by designating a working group within that center to achieve the purpose described in subsection (b).
`(c) Activities- In carrying out this section, the Center shall--
- `(1)
contribute to the establishment of training, written materials,
information, analytical assistance and professional resources to aid in
combating violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism;
`(2) use theories, methods and data from the social and behavioral sciences to better understand the origins, dynamics, and social and psychological aspects of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism;
`(3) conduct research on the motivational factors that lead to violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism; and
`(4) coordinate with other academic institutions studying the effects of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism, where appropriate.
`SEC. 899E. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.
- `(a) In General- In carrying out this subtitle, the Secretary
shall ensure that the efforts of the Department to prevent ideologically
based violence and homegrown terrorism as described in this subtitle do
not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, and civil
liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.
`(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the commitment of the Department to racial neutrality.
`(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department shall develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not result in a disproportionate impact, without a rational basis, on any particular race, ethnicity, or religion and include the results of its audit in its annual report to Congress required under section 705.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 899 the following:
`Subtitle J--Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism
- `Sec. 899A. Definitions.
`Sec. 899B. Findings.
`Sec. 899C. National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Ideologically Based Violence.
`Sec. 899D. Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States.
`Sec. 899E. Protecting civil rights and civil liberties while preventing ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism.'.
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
BANNED VIDEO - RON PAUL Vs. the NEW WORLD ORDER '08
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
US Treasurys Are ‘Junk’, Dollar Headed for Collapse: Schiff
Published:
Tuesday, 1 May 2012 | 11:07 PM ET
Text Size 
By: Jean Chua
Writer, CNBC.com
Writer, CNBC.com
The
greenback and the U.S. bond market are headed for a collapse as the
Federal Reserve loses the ability to service the nation’s debt with
“artificially low” interest rates, Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific
Capital told CNBC on Wednesday.
 |
The Federal Reserve headquarters in Washington, DC.
|
The Fed
![[cnbc explains]](http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/Sections/News_And_Analysis/_News/_CNBC_EXPLAINS/_IMAGES/CNBC_explains_icon1.gif)
has been keeping rates on benchmark 10-year Treasurys low by
purchasing bonds via quantitative easing (QE), and this will ultimately
be the U.S. economy’s “undoing”, Schiff said.
has been keeping rates on benchmark 10-year Treasurys low by
purchasing bonds via quantitative easing (QE), and this will ultimately
be the U.S. economy’s “undoing”, Schiff said.
“Unfortunately,
we are going to get more QE than Rocky movies, because the only thing
keeping this phony economy going is this QE. And the minute you take it
away, it’s going to collapse,” he said.
Schiff’s comments come after two Fed officials warned on Tuesday that the U.S. could be heading for a "fiscal cliff"
at the end of the year if mandated tax increases and spending cuts are
implemented. On the same day, fund manager Bill Gross, who runs the
world’s biggest bond fund, told CNBC that the U.S. will face a downgrade
of its ‘AAA’ debt rating if it did not fix its fiscal situation.
“It’s not just $15 trillion in terms of current debt,” Gross said on CNBC’s “Street Signs”. “It’s probably 3 to 4 times that in terms of Medicare, Medicaid, of Social Security, in terms of the present value.”
“So unless the U.S. begins to make some inroads, and that's called the structural deficit
that the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) and the IMF (International
Monetary Fund) basically identified as perhaps 6 to 7 to 8 percent,
greater than any country other than Japan and the U.K. Until we address
that structural deficit, then yes, we're headed to double-A territory,”
he said.
Euro Pacific’s Schiff predicts weakness in the U.S. dollar, which will put pressure on commodity prices and fuel inflation
. This will in turn force the Fed to raise interest rates, he added.
. This will in turn force the Fed to raise interest rates, he added.
“The
Fed will not do it; the Fed knows the only thing propping up our phony
economy is zero percent interest rates and quantitative easing. And I
think when the market figures this out, it’s going to put even more
pressure on the dollar,” he said.
Schiff is a well-known bear who predicted in 2008 that the dollar will collapse amid hyperinflation
. That did not happen, and the dollar strengthened against most major currencies by the end of 2009.
. That did not happen, and the dollar strengthened against most major currencies by the end of 2009.
Andrew
Economos, Managing Director and Head of Sovereign and Institutional
Strategy at JPMorgan Asset Management said what the Fed is trying to do
is “buy time” by keeping credit cheap and encouraging banks to lend.
“Look,
I am not an apologist for the Fed but at the end of the day, (Fed
Chairman Ben) Bernanke is doing the only thing that he can do, which is
buying time,” Economos said on CNBC’s “The Call”.
“And
I think that buys us time to rectify those structural problems the
bears are harping about. It allows corporates and households to continue
to de-leverage and de-risk their own personal balance sheets.”
LIFE IS A GAME OF CONNECT THE DOTS, IF YOU DON'T CONNECT ALL THE DOTS OR DON'T CONNECT THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER YOU NEVER GET THE PICTURE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)