Local and Global Community News – Activism / Protests - Animal Advocacy - Animal Rescue- Archaeology/Anthropology/Paleontology/Crypto-zoology , Corporate Assault on our Lives and Our Health, Environmental- Internet/IT - Signs of the Times – Wildlife : News Affiliate of Family Survival Protocol.com
President
Barack Obama addresses the nation from the Oval Office at the White
House in Washington, Sunday night, Dec. 6, 2016. In a rare Oval Office
address, Obama vowed the United States would overcome a terror threat
that has entered a "new phase" as he sought to reassure Americans shaken
by recent attacks in Paris and California. (Photo: Saul Loeb, AP)
In
the many strategies proposed to defeat the Islamic State (IS) by
presidential candidates, policymakers, and media pundits alike across
the American political spectrum, one common element stands out: someone
else should really do it. The United States will send in planes,
advisers, and special ops guys, but it would be best -- and this varies
depending on which pseudo-strategist you cite -- if the Arabs, Kurds,
Turks, Sunnis, and/or Shias would please step in soon and get America
off the hook.
The idea of seeing other-than-American boots on the ground, like Washington’s recently deep-sixed scheme
to create some “moderate” Syrian rebels out of whole cloth, is
attractive on paper. Let someone else fight America's wars for American
goals. Put an Arab face on the conflict, or if not that at least a
Kurdish one (since, though they may not be Arabs, they’re close enough
in an American calculus). Let the U.S. focus on its “bloodless” use of
air power and covert ops. Somebody else, Washington’s top brains
repeatedly suggest, should put their feet on the embattled, contested
ground of Syria and Iraq. Why, the U.S. might even gift them with nice,
new boots as a thank-you.
Is this, however, a realistic strategy for winning America’s war(s) in the Middle East?
The Great Champions of the Grand Strategy
Recently, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton openly called for
the U.S. to round up some Arab allies, Kurds, and Iraqi Sunnis to drive
the Islamic State’s fighters out of Iraq and Syria. On the same day
that Clinton made her proposal, Bernie Sanders called
for “destroying” the Islamic State, but suggested that it “must be done
primarily by Muslim nations.” It’s doubtful he meant Indonesia or
Malaysia.
Among the Republican contenders, Marco Rubio proposed that the U.S. “provide arms directly to Sunni tribal and Kurdish forces.” Ted Cruz threw his support behind arming the Kurds, while Donald Trump appeared to favor more violence in the region by whoever might be willing to jump in.
The Pentagon has long been in favor of arming both the Kurds and whatever Sunni tribal groups it could round up in Iraq or Syria. Variouspundits across the political spectrum say much the same.
They may all mean well, but their plans are guaranteed to fail. Here’s why, group by group.
Interior
Sally Jewell testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec.
9, 2015, before the House Natural Resources Oversight Committee hearing
on the Animas River Spill in Colorado. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) more >
By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Wednesday, December 9, 2015
Interior Secretary Sally Jewell
said Wednesday she is unaware of anyone being fired, fined or even
demoted for the Gold King Mine spill, prompting Republicans to accuse
her of taking the EPA off the hook for the toxic blowout.
“So you’re letting the EPA get off scot-free it sounds like. They are not being held accountable,” said Rep. Doug Lamborn, Colorado Republican, at the House Natural Resources Committee hearing.
Republicans took Ms. Jewell to task for the Interior Department’s
investigation into the Aug. 5 spill, saying the October report failed
to hold anyone responsible for unleashing 3 million gallons of orange,
toxic wastewater into the Animas River near Silverton, Colorado.
“You’re directly responsible for this report. The EPA
had promised this committee a thorough investigation,” said Rep. Tom
McClintock, California Republican. “We have not gotten one. What we have
gotten is a complete, deliberate whitewash.”
Speaking at a United Nations “climate” summit in Paris, Obama blamed America for alleged man-made global warming and claimed that the nation embraces its responsibility to “do something” about the alleged problem. That “something,” of course, at least in the administration's view, involves redistributing the wealth of embattled U.S. taxpayers to Third World governments and dictatorships for climate reparations, as well as shackling the American economy with draconian controls to reduce emissions of what serious scientists know as the “gas of life.” Sounding like a wannabe messiah, Obama even claimed that “we finally determined we would save our planet.” However, lawmakers in Congress and the American people have made clear that they neither believe in the increasingly discredited anthropogenic global-warming (AGW) theory nor in the alleged solutions to the supposed problem.
Dictators and other heads of state have typically arrived at UN conferences toward the end of the show. This time, however, hoping desperately to secure a global “climate” agreement where past summits have failed, UN organizers decided Obama and other “world leaders” should show up at the start. Obama complied, spewing gargantuan amounts of CO2 and arriving in Paris to deliver various speeches hyping the AGW theory, along with illegal pledges to hand out your money. “I've come here personally, as the leader of the world's largest economy and the second-largest emitter, to say that the United States of America not only recognizes our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it,” Obama claimed at the ongoing conference, which featured some 150 dictators and heads of government and state.
Of course, Obama is not the “leader” of the “world's largest economy.” His job description is to serve as the chief executive of the federal government, to faithfully execute the laws, and to uphold and defend the Constitution. His other claims were even more ludicrous. For instance, the notion that America recognizes its alleged role in creating the alleged problem could not be more wrong. According to a Pew survey released last year, just 40 percent of Americans even believe the increasingly discredited AGW theory. And without a doubt, far less than that would agree that the nation should shackle its economy and redistribute its wealth to Third World regimes under the guise of dealing with a problem that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not even believe exists.
Obama blames America for non-existent global warming
Barack Obama speaks at U.N. climate summit.
Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
While speaking at the United Nations on Tuesday, President Obama blamed the United States for global warming, even though there has been no global warming for nearly 18 years. While the administration insists global warming is a real threat, one professor issued a paper saying there has been no global warming for 19 years.
"But there should be no question that the United States of America is stepping up to the plate," Obama said. "We recognize our role in creating this problem; we embrace our responsibility to combat it. We will do our part, and we will help developing nations do theirs. But we can only succeed in combating climate change if we are joined in this effort by every nation –- developed and developing alike. Nobody gets a pass."
Obama hyped action the United States has taken, touting moves taken against power companies in what has been described as a "war on coal." According to the president, the United States has reduced its total "carbon pollution" by more than any other nation.
Carolyn is a staff writer for Science and is the editor of the In Brief section.
..........
It’s getting hot in here. A dispute between the chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) over a climate change paper published this summer is escalating. The latest salvos include a second letter from Representative Lamar Smith (R–TX) to NOAA Administrator Kathryn Sullivan seeking internal communications and documents authored by NOAA employees and a letter from the American Meteorological Society condemning Smith’s demands and warning about its implications for all federally funded research.
The quarrel began with a paper by NOAA scientists published 5 June in Science that revised historical atmosphere and ocean temperature data records found to have been poorly calibrated. In 2013 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had noted that the temperature data seemed to suggest that global warming had slowed down beginning around 1998. But the Science paper showed that apparent slowdown in global warming vanished when the data were corrected to account for various sources of bias.
That paper immediately caught Smith’s attention, triggering multiple committee requests for data and methodologies related to the study. NOAA told the committee that the findings were already publicly available and met twice with committee staff to brief them on the results.
But that response didn’t satisfy Smith. On 13 October, he subpoenaed all of NOAA’s internal emails related to the paper, asking for the information by 27 October. In response, the committee’s Democrats wrote to Smith on 23 October, noting that the subpoena “appears to be furthering a fishing expedition” and saying that it oversteps the committee’s bounds, as the paper is a research study and not a policy decision. House Republican leadership this year had given Smith the authority to issue subpoenas without the consent of the minority party.
Did Federal Agency Commit Climate Fraud? Sure Looks Like It
10/28/2015 06:30 PM ET
Junk Science: Worried about climate fraud, Congress is investigating a federal agency for allegedly manipulating weather data to show recent global warming when there is none. So why is the agency refusing to cooperate?
First, a little background: Satellite temperature readings clearly show no warming trend for the last 18 years, 8 months and counting. None.
This fact is significant for two reasons: One, satellite temperature readings are the most comprehensive and thus the most accurate. And, two, the pause in warming since 1998 undercuts the entire global warming agenda of the environmental movement and its allies on the left who see in climate change an opportunity to impose greater government control over our lives.
Yes, we're skeptical of "climate change," at least as defined by the green extremists. Climate is always changing. No one denies that. What's at issue is how it's changing and why. The science is still unclear.
Earlier this year, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists took part in a study that found — no surprise — that the "pause" in global warming from 1998 to 2013 didn't exist.
Their change didn't come from actual temperature readings. It came from extensive data manipulation and tinkering. Instead of a pause, they found a surge.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is refusing to hand over its climate scientists' emails to Rep. Lamar Smith.
See more at http://www.newsy.com/
A
gag order was placed on Tony and Sabrina Cartee by a Randolph County
judge to prevent them from talking to media and the public about the
medical kidnapping of their children by Child Protective Services.
However, Sabrina’s parents are not under the gag order, and contacted Health Impact News reporting
that they can no longer sit back and watch the unjust destruction of
their family by Child Protective Services, and one social worker in
particular. Tommy and Winnie Crumbley, Sabrina’s parents, had a great
deal to say about what is happening in the lives of their grandchildren.
They are frightened for their well-being and want them to come back
home.
As previously reported, the Cartee children were taken by
Child Protective Services, known as DHR (Department of Human Resources)
in Alabama, when their then 5 year old son began “eloping” – the term
used when autistic children wander away from home. One of his older
brothers had already been diagnosed as autistic, and the family
suspected that he was as well. They just didn’t have a diagnosis yet.
When
their newest baby was born in September 2014, DHR seized the
breastfeeding baby from her mother’s arms just 2 days after she was
born.
The
violations of the family’s moral, legal, and Constitutional rights are
numerous and egregious, report the Crumbleys. They say that their
grandchildren should never have been taken away from their parents, and
they want to see them returned to Sabrina and Tony, “where they belong.”
The Cartee’s 17 year old daughter has also emailed us, saying:
I
want to go home, my parents have not done anything wrong and we don’t
deserve to be harrassed by Alecia [social worker] anymore!!
Children Were Supposed to Be Returned Home in August
When
the children were first taken, Tommy Crumbley reports that Alecia
McFarland, the social worker from Randolph County DHR, told his daughter
that if it was left up to Alecia, she would never let the Cartee
children come home. She gave no reason why, and the Crumbleys don’t
understand her apparent hostility toward their family.
The
Crumbleys told us that the Randolph County judge ruled in June that all
of the children were to be returned home by the time school started in
August. At the time, the 7 children were living in 4 separate places,
some with relatives and some in foster homes. Even though DHR seized all
the children at the same time (except the baby, who wasn’t yet born),
they wanted to “transition” the children home, a few at a time.
Allegedly, the social workers thought it would be “overwhelming” for all
of the children to come home at once.
The
Cartees’ newborn was taken days after birth. She just turned a year
old. She has yet to spend a single night at home. Photos courtesy
Crumbley family
Anonymous-inspired activists are taking to the streets across the globe as the Million Mask March circles the world. Hiding behind symbolic Anonymous masks, the demonstrators are protesting censorship, government corruption, and police brutality.
05 November 2015
22:30 GMT
People have started gathering at New York City's Union Square.
Activist
collective Anonymous have released details of the 2015 Million Mask
March, which will see coordinated demonstrations in cities across the
globe protesting against corruption, human rights abuses and censorship.
Following
in the footsteps of previous marches, the worldwide demonstration will
take place on November 5, coinciding with bonfire night in the UK.
This year’s message is “building a better future through collective action,” a statement from the group released on Monday reads.
The
London march in 2014 attracted over 1,000 participants who marched
through the city center wearing distinctive Guy Fawkes masks, which have
become the unofficial emblem of the movement.
Fawkes, part of a
band of persecuted English Catholics, was captured and executed by the
British state after attempting to blow up the Houses of Parliament in
1605. His image was popularized by the 2005 film adaptation of the Alan
Moore graphic novel V for Vendetta.
The
U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry held a
biotechnology hearing for the first time in 10 years last week to
discuss the future of food technology as the industry responds to
increased demand, production challenges, and consumers’ calls for a safe
and transparent food supply. But the meeting came up short on
transparency and carried on more like a Monsanto share-holders meeting
than an unbiased inquiry into the pros and cons of biotechnology where
it concerns the food supply.
Senator after senator praised
biotechnology and genetically modified foods, claiming they had ‘come a
long way’ in ten years. Pamela Bailey, president and CEO of the Grocery
Manufacturers Association said:
“The
Senate Agriculture hearing reaffirmed the broad consensus among
scientists and regulators that GMOs are safe and highlighted the real
world negative impacts a patchwork of state labeling mandates will have
on farmers, businesses and consumers. Action by Congress is urgently
needed this year to pass a national, uniform labeling standard.”
The
senate hearing was scheduled shortly after the US House of
Representatives passed the “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of
2015,” otherwise known as the DARK Act (Deny Americans the Right to Know) by a vote of 275-150.
Last
week I arrived back home to Iraqi Kurdistan, exhausted but proud of a
small but real triumph over the Islamic State. Three women and two
toddlers came back with me—five human beings just rescued from
enslavement by ISIL. For over a year, they were abused, raped and traded
fighter to fighter because of one reason: our Yazid religion. I am
determined to save every last one of the more than 2,000 Yazidi women
and girls still waiting to be freed.
They thought they were
abandoned. Their ISIL captors told them that no one wanted them, in
their shame and defilement, and that no one was looking for them. But I
insist on reaching out to them through pleas on Arabic radio and TV. I
give them my phone number, and tell them that we love them and we want
them back. Some brave women hear these messages and contact us, and a
rescue mission commences. I answer the phone every time, determined to
do all that I can, but it is little, and it is not enough. I know there
will always be another call, another Yazidi who is terrified and broken
and in need of hope, as the world looks the other way.
One of the
women, clutching her 2-year-old child, was so distraught. The child kept
asking for her 7-year-old sister, who had been taken away from her
mother and enrolled in a religious institution where she would be forced
to convert to Islam. Her mother had had no choice but to escape without
her, and she told me she feared the girl would be raped at the hands of
the militants. We have evidence of the militants raping our girls as
young as age 8.
For that brief time in August 2014, the United
States launched airstrikes to halt the advance of ISIL after its troops
took over a third of Iraq, saving the Yazidi people from total massacre
by ISIL troops. But since then, we’ve been abandoned and forgotten by
Washington and the rest of the international community. For every story
of a girl who has been rescued, there’s another one about a girl who is
still in captivity, where she is starved, raped, beaten and sold—often
to “fellow” Iraqis. And 500,000 Yazidis, a full 90 percent of the
indigenous Yazidi population, are in displaced persons’ camps, living in
abject misery and isolation with less than minimal sustenance. We
languish in these camps, live without income, and without food, medicine
or even shelter durable enough to keep the rain out. As long as ISIL
remains intent on wiping my people off the map; and as long as the Iraqi
and Kurdish Regional governments continue to see Yazidis as less than
second-class citizens, unworthy of significant aid and attention, these
horrors will continue.
Barbara
Stone was only able to get out of jail when she agreed to stop
blogging. Patty Reid is on the lam. Cary-Andrew Crittenden may be facing
further jail time for his efforts to inform others about problems in
the Santa Clara County legal system. And Ginny Johnson is under a gag
order which nearly eventuated in a close encounter with a jail cell.
All
these individuals are experiencing, up close and personal, the limits
of free speech when that speech inconveniences someone more powerful
than they. Twenty, thirty years ago none of these individuals would have
faced the grave legal problems they now confront. But thirty years ago,
the legal system in the US was not yet in free fall.
The
devolution of the US legal system is evidenced in the existence of a
dual legal system, wherein there abides two parallel—and often
contradictory—systems of law. One system is the written code—the
Constitutional and statutory mandates. The other system is what a judge
does in his courtroom. And increasingly, judges are acting like
monarchs, unaccountable to anyone.
This
is well expressed when First Amendment (freedom of speech) issues
collide with governmental imperatives. Prior restraint, that is the
imposition of gags or inhibitions on speech not yet spoken, is illegal
in the US, according to the written code. Increasingly, however, judges
are issuing orders which amount to prior restraint when an individual’s
speech becomes politically inconvenient.
A previous article discussed the plight of Barbara Stone, whose mother is under a guardianship in Dade County, Florida.
Upon visiting her mother in the home in which the guardian had placed
Helen Stone, Barbara was shocked to find her mother emaciated and on a
feeding tube. Barbara then allegedly took her mother to lunch.
She
was subsequently arrested and charged with “custody interference,” and
up until recently was confined to house arrest, an electronic tracking
bracelet ensuring her compliance.
The
problem was that Barbara would not shut up. She filed a number of
lawsuits against guardianship court Judge Michael Genden and also
against guardian Jacqueline Hertz and her attorney, Roy Lustig, as well
as criminal court judge Victoria Brennan and Governor Rick Scott. She
also launched a blog with the purpose of exposing the parties involved
in what she termed the continuing abuse of her mother. Tiring of her
complaints, Judge Genden charged her with criminal contempt for failing
to show up at a court hearing and Barbara went into lock-up.
This
past week, Stone, who is licensed to practice law in the state of New
York, secured her release from jail at a significant price. She has
agreed to stop blogging and also, significantly, to not file further
papers in her mother’s case without a lawyer. In other words, the price
of her freedom was prior restraint.
Digital
rights groups warn that TPP "will criminalize our online activities,
censor the Web, and cost everyday users money." (Photo: Getty)
The "disastrous" pro-corporate trade deal finalized
Monday could kill the Internet as we know it, campaigners are warning,
as they vow to keep up the fight against the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement between the U.S. and 11 Pacific Rim nations.
"Internet users around the world should be very concerned about this ultra-secret pact," said
OpenMedia's digital rights specialist Meghan Sali. "What we’re talking
about here is global Internet censorship. It will criminalize our online
activities, censor the Web, and cost everyday users money. This deal
would never pass with the whole world watching—that’s why they’ve
negotiated it in total secrecy."
"The TPP will
criminalize our online activities, censor the Web, and cost everyday
users money. This deal would never pass with the whole world
watching—that’s why they’ve negotiated it in total secrecy." —Meghan
Sali, Open Media
TPP opponents have claimed
that under the agreement, "Internet Service Providers could be required
to 'police' user activity (i.e. police YOU), take down Internet
content, and cut people off from Internet access for common
user-generated content."
Among the deal's provisions are rules that could criminalize file-sharing, whistleblowing, and breaking digital locks,
even for legitimate purposes. Of course, because the contents of the
pact have been negotiated largely in secret, the exact implications of
the TPP on user rights is yet to be seen.
However, Electronic
Frontier Foundation's (EFF) Maira Sutton wrote on Monday, "We have no
reason to believe that the TPP has improved much at all from the last leaked version released in August, and we won't know until the U.S. Trade Representative releases the text. So as long as it contains a retroactive 20-year copyright term extension, bans on circumventing DRM, massively disproportionate punishments for copyright infringement, and rules that criminalize investigative journalists and whistleblowers, we have to do everything we can to stop this agreement from getting signed, ratified, and put into force."
Furthermore,
"The fact that close to 800 million Internet users' rights to free
expression, privacy, and access to knowledge online hinged upon the
outcome of squabbles over trade rules on cars and milk is precisely why
digital policy consideration[s] do not belong in trade agreements,"
Sutton added, referring to the auto and dairy tariff provisions that reportedly held up the talks.
"The
fact that close to 800 million Internet users' rights to free
expression, privacy, and access to knowledge online hinged upon the
outcome of squabbles over trade rules on cars and milk is precisely why
digital policy consideration[s] do not belong in trade agreements."
—Maira Sutton, EFF
With a major protest against the TPP and other secret trade deals planned for November
in Washington, D.C., EFF is crowdsourcing slogans related to how the
TPP threatens digital rights and freedoms around the world.
"Successive
leaks of the TPP have demonstrated that unless you are a big business
sector, the [U.S. Trade Representative, or USTR] simply doesn't care
what you have to say," wrote EFF's Jeremy Malcolm.
"Enough's enough," reads the group's call-to-action.
"The time for whitepapers and presentations is past. The USTR has
failed us, so now it's time for the public to rise up and take their
message about the TPP's threats to user rights to Congress, which has
the ultimate authority to approve or reject the deal for the United
States."
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
The U.S. national debt grows at a rate of 45.486 dollar per second!
20,517,497,500,000
10/05/15 6:28pm CDT
$ 65.903
Debt per citizen
$ 113.353
Debt per taxpayer
Year
x billion U.S dollar
2004
7.379
2005
7.933
2006
8.507
2007
9.008
2008
10.025
2009
11.910
2010
13.562
2011
14.781
2012
16.059
2013
16.732
2014
17.810
For Real Time National Debt Numbers Visit The US Debt Clock
..........
Since our worlds collided on that fated day in 2008 when the
American dream became even more elusive for the majority of us there
has been some time to reflect on our mistakes. Some of us have learned
from what we have lived and experienced. Others, however, are still
stuck in the partisan la la land of Rabid Conservatism or Rabid
Liberalism. Each side pulling for its own without taking pause to
understand the long-range consequences of their actions.
Politicians
will do what politicians do best, protect their pockets and those
who keep them full. What excuse do the common folk (non-corporate or
lobbyist) have? You vote Republican or Democrat because they hold the
best future for our country? Or do you vote because it is all you
know and you cannot fathom the fact that both sides of the aisle
serve the same master? It has gone way beyond the scope of
political party or leanings. It is time to put those patriotic
gestures, slogans and mindsets to actual use by truly putting
your country first. We must put a stop to the criminal
Washington/Corporate agenda that is killing us.
Until we truly
and seriously address the criminals who are selling our Nation
and our children's future to the highest bidder we are doomed.
Are you ready to face the truth or will you just sit back and
blame another while you do nothing to change the problem?
The
only answer to the putrefaction that is taking place all across
this nation is in the hands of the people. Many laughed at the
Occupy movement. Some vilified those who wanted to make a
difference and voice their displeasure with the status quo. How
many of you have done anything to make a change? How many of you
have cared enough to even consider what role you may have to play?
Truly,
I do not see a way out of this unless people stop seeing right or
left and start seeing stars and stripes. This nation depends on it's People,
not its politicians. Why have we become so complacent that we are
no longer willing to fight the good fight for our freedom and
our way of life? When did this nation become the home of the
lazy and the weak? It is time the strong and the brave stood up,
if there are any left.
What will it take to make
you see that politics is a trap? An illusion to make us believe we
have a choice when in reality we have none. They have both
evolved to serve the same masters and fulfill the same agenda. An
agenda that serves neither you nor me. When will you wake up
from your blue and red slumber to see that we have all been
lied to ?
When do we take America back as a People not a political party?
The
time is growing short people! Unless you open your eyes and
understand what is truly at stake. You will never live in America
the Land of the Free and the Brave again. We will simply exist
in a land run by petty politics and corrupt corporations willing to
do whatever it takes to maximize their bottom line. Even if it means
exploiting our children's lives and futures.
Just
in case you still don't have a clue what I am talking about.
Here is a very short list of examples of the Corporate Assault on
Our Lives And Our Health that our politicians have allowed to take
place for a price.
GMO's in our food supply
Digestive disorders, Obesity,Endocrine disorders on the rise
Glyphosate in our foods, our water and our breast milk
Kidney and Liver damage on the rise
Fracking chemicals in the water supply
Cancers on the rise
Fluoride in the water supply
Vaccines causing deadly reactions in children and adults
Autism on the rise
Heavy metals in our food supply
Alzheimer's on the rise
Deadly chemicals being pawned off as sugar substitutes from saccharine to splenda
all have been found to cause cancer in animal studies. The
biggest culprit and most dangerous thus far being Aspartame.
Life saving drugs monopolized by Big Pharma to bloat prices beyond most people's reach. Daraprim being the latest going from $13.50 per pill to $750.00. Basically condemning those who cannot afford them to die.
There are so many more examples you just need to open your eyes and want to see the truth
When
we get our story wrong, we get our future wrong. Much like the
Trans-Pacific Partnership "trade deal", everything we are told about
capitalism and our economy is a pack of lies. Time for a new story,
says preeminent scholar and critic of corporate globalization, David
Korten, the best-selling author of When Corporations Rule the World and
The Great Turning. David has a brand new book, Change the Story, Change
the Future - a Living Economy for a Living Earth. He is the co-founder
and board chair of YES! Magazine, co-chair of the New Economy Working
Group, founder and president of the Living Economies Forum (formerly the
People-Centered Development Forum), a member of the Club of Rome, and a
former board member of the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies
(BALLE) and associate of the International Forum on Globalization.
This Earth Day address was recorded April 22, 2015 at Seattle University Pigott Auditorium.
Community
Rights educator Paul Cienfuegos explains how "We The People" are
exercising the authority to govern ourselves and dismantle corporate
rule. When small farmers in rural Pennsylvania wanted to say "no" to a
corporate factory farm coming into their community, they learned they
couldn't, because it would violate the corporation's "rights" and state
pre-emption laws. So they did something technically illegal - their town
passed an innovative ordinance banning corporate factory farming. It
worked! The corporation left town. Pittsburgh upshifted the approach:
Rather than define what we don't want, define what we DO want. Their
"Right to Water" stopped natural gas fracking in the city. Ordinances
like this have been passed in over 150 communities in 9 states. Tune in
to learn how this works. Episode 258. [paulcienfuegos.com, celdf.org,
YouTube channel "Community Rights TV" and communityrightspdx.org]
Peak Moment TV exists because of viewers like you. Subscribe to news and donate at http://www.peakmoment.tv, right side. Thanks for being in the Peak Moment community.
Have
we forgotten about the national debt? Congressional Republican leaders
and the Obama administration have begun private talks about a new
two-year spending plan that would keep the government operating beyond
the 2016 election but would do little to address more fundamental
structural problems, including entitlement and health care spending for
an aging population.
Even before Congress completed work on a
short-term spending measure to avert a government shutdown at least
until early December, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY),
outgoing House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and President Obama held
preliminary talks on a possible multi-year budget agreement to increase
spending for both defense and domestic programs by lifting fiscal 2016
discretionary spending caps imposed by the 2011 Budget Control Act. Related: New CBO Director Renews Warning on Long-Term Debt
The
agreement would be similar in scope to a two-year mini-budget agreement
that was struck by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
following a 16-day government shutdown in late 2013 that temporarily put
an end to inter-party budget warfare. That agreement allowed for $45
billion more in spending above the caps in 2014 and $20 billion more in
2015, as well as $20 billion of deficit reduction.
USS
Ronald Reagan and its embarked air wing, Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 5,
provide a combat-ready force that protects and defends the collective
maritime interests of the U.S. and its allies and partners in the
Indo-Asia-Pacific region. (Photo: U.S. Navy Specialist 2nd Class Paolo
Bayas)
The
Russians are bombing CIA-backed rebels in Syria and continuing to hold
parts of Ukraine. ISIS continues to spread in the Middle East and
inspire attacks around the world. Iran is receiving hundreds of billions
in sanctions relief, some of which will likely go to destabilizing the
Middle East. China is building illegal islands in the South China Sea.
Hundreds of thousands of refugees are streaming across Europe. The
Taliban is on the rise in Afghanistan. And our national secrets are
being vacuumed up by Chinese hackers.
At the same time, our national defense budget is being slashed.
Since 2011, the defense budget has been cut by 15 percent
in real terms. If you include the war budget, which has been going down
as we reduce troops in Afghanistan, the national defense has been cut
25 percent in four years.
As a result of these budget cuts, the
U.S. military is smaller than it was on 9/11 and in many cases the
smallest it has been in recent history.
The
world is a mess, our military is being slashed, and now President Obama
is going to veto a bipartisan bill that would increase the national
defense budget by 6 percent in real terms.
The House of
Representatives just passed the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (NDAA), and it is headed to the Senate. This is a
bipartisan bill that has been signed into law every year for 53 straight
years, but Obama plans to veto it for one simple reason: it doesn’t
increase non-defense spending. The president believes that defense and
non-defense spending should be increased, and, according to the White
House, “he will not fix defense without fixing non-defense spending.”
John Boehner Admits Republicans are Willing to Put U.S. at Risk to Play Partisan Politics
February 16, 2015 By Allen Clifton
Republicans
are anything if not predictable. The moment they gained power back in
the Senate it was obvious that they were going to use that power to play
petty partisan politics. The truth is, controlling Congress means very
little as long as the person in the White House has veto power.
So
no matter what sort of propaganda Republicans spew about the nonsense
they’re going to undoubtedly shove through Congress, it’s still on them
to send the president legislation that they know he will sign, otherwise
they’re essentially just wasting time.
The
president is the one person who’s voted into office on a national scale,
meaning that they’re the one individual who truly “represents the
majority of the people.” So no matter what anyone in Congress says, it’s
beholden upon them to make sure whatever bills they’re sending to the
president’s desk actually have a chance at being signed. It’s extremely
rare for both the House and Senate to have the two-thirds majority
needed to override a presidential veto.
All
that being said, as many already know the Department of Homeland
Security is set to run out of funding fairly soon. Normally this
wouldn’t be a huge deal; all it would take is for Congress to pass a
bill funding the department, which would almost certainly be signed by
President Obama.
