Friday, June 10, 2011

Alabama Passes Illegal Immigration Law

Alabama Passes Law Against
Illegal Immigration

Alabama has an estimated 120,000 illegal immigrants

Alabama zipped past Arizona on Thursday with what is being called the most restrictive law in America against illegal immigration, requiring schools to find out if students are in the United States lawfully and making it a crime to knowingly give an illegal immigrant a ride.

Similar to Arizona’s law, it allows police to arrest anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant if the person is stopped for some other reason. The law also requires all businesses to check the legal status of workers using the federal system called E-Verify.

The Alabama law takes effect Sept. 1st.

Republican Gov. Robert Bentley, who signed it into law Thursday, expressed confidence it would withstand any legal challenges.

“We have a real problem with illegal immigration in this country,” he said. “I campaigned for the toughest immigration laws, and I’m proud of the Legislature for working overtime to create the strongest immigration bill in America.”

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, it is estimated that Alabama has 120,000 illegal immigrants. Many of them are believed to be working throughout the state on farms, chicken processing plants and in construction.

GOP Sen. Scott Beason, one of the legislation's sponsors, said it would help the unemployed by preventing illegal immigrants from getting jobs in the state. Alabama’s unemployment rate hit 9.3 percent in April.

“This will put thousands of Alabamians back in the work force,” Beason said.

This new law puts Alabama at the forefront of America's illegal immigration issue. Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center agreed that it is the toughest crackdown on the United States illegal immigration problem.


Enhanced by Zemanta

THE FACE OF SYRIA

CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY


Thursday, June 9, 2011

Syria's Dictator Assad's Regime of Torture

Assad's Regime of Torture

Dictator Assad reaffirms his father's legacy of death by quelling dissent with brute force







Interrogations

Ali, an Allawite, the sect from which the Assad family and much of the ruling elite hail, was captured by secret police during a small protest in Mezze, a suburb of Damascus.

In an interview with Al Jazeera, Ali said the beating began as soon as he was on the bus to prison. "You are Alawite and you don't like Bashar?" the police officer screamed at him. "Are you with the Salafis and the Muslim Brotherhood?"

The fist landed square in his face as Ali tried to explain that the protesters were not fundamentalist Salafi Muslims. Ali was taken to the notorious Air Force security branch in Bab Touma, a stone throw away from the Old City where tourists were enjoying the sights.

The interrogator had footage from the protest filmed on a phone, showing Ali chanting for freedom. "He got up and walked behind me, grabbed my hair and slammed my face into the table. He was really angry."

Ali's hands were tied behind his back while he was punched in the face repeatedly. "He told me to confess I was there, and who had organized it, and was it someone from outside Syria?"

Blindfolded, Ali was driven to another prison, where, still unable to see, he was beaten, pushed down stairs and had cigarettes stubbed out on his back. Again the interrogator wanted to know if he was allied with Islamist groups, this time Hezb ut-Tahrir.

By contrast, Abu Mohammed's interrogators appeared less certain who to blame for the uprising they were struggling to contain.

Arrested from his Damascus home in late March, the journalist was taken, along with his laptop and mobile phone, to a branch of Internal Security on Baghdad Street.

The cell was already filled with protesters rounded up that day.

"We were hundreds so it was hard for interrogators to deal with us. They are used to tens being arrested at a time, not hundreds," he said.

For the next sixteen days Abu Mohammed followed the same routine: Dragged into an interrogation room and punched in the face.

"The interrogators were simple and uneducated men, they just shouted at me and hit me if I disagreed. They didn't know what they wanted."

The journalist was asked for his email address. "He asked me what ‘Hotmail' means. I answered in a simple and direct way. The main thing I realised was to answer what they wanted to hear, not what I thought."

His father's footsteps

The uprising in Syria began with the
torture of children: 15 boys, aged between 10 and 15, from Deraa, who were beaten and had their finger nails pulled out by men working for General Atef Najeeb, a cousin of President Assad.

Two months into the most serious threat to the decades-old dictatorship, the jails in some cities are already full. As well as holding prisoners in the power station in Banias, security forces have also begun using a local sports stadium to hold hundreds of detainees, according to eyewitness accounts gathered by activists.

The release of all political prisoners has become a unifying cry among protesters across the country, who began by calling merely for reform and an end to corruption and who now demand the toppling of the president and his regime.

Like the father from whom he inherited power, President Assad has sought to crush the uprising against him with force and mass arrests.

During a campaign of repression against the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood in the 1980s under late President Hafez al-Assad, some 17,000 Syrians disappeared, according to testimony to the United Nations Human Rights Council by Radwan Ziadeh, head of the Damascus Centre for Human Rights Studies.

And in a chilling parallel to the actions of his father, who responded to the Muslim Brotherhood uprising by sending tanks and ultra-loyal troops commanded by his brother to raze Hama, killing between 10,000 and 30,000 civilians, President Assad has laid siege to Deraa, Homs and Banias with tanks and troops commanded by his brother, Maher al-Assad.

Today, in two months of protests, Syrian security forces have killed an estimated 850 people.

On Wednesday, Syria dropped its bid to join the UN Human Rights Council, which has ordered a fact-finding mission to Syria to investigate human rights abuses.

After eight days in a windowless two by two meter dungeon deep underground, Ali was freed without charges. His wallet, with half the money stolen, was returned, but he was too weak to drive home so took a taxi to a friend's place, too ashamed to let his parents see.

"The worst is you don't know what will happen. You and your family have no idea what is going on," said Ali who, despite his experience, remains unbowed.

"I have seen personally the real ugly face of security, and it is much uglier than I thought. I will protest again because now I really realize what freedom means. If we give up now we will all be arrested again anyway."


Enhanced by Zemanta

UK and France seek UN action on Syrian Dictator Assad

UK and France seek UN action on Syria as thousands flee

Troops and tanks mass outside 'ghost town' after massacre amid mounting fears of slip towards Libyan-style
CIVIL WAR

 Ian Black and Nidaa Hassan

Thousands of residents have fled the northern Syrian town of Jisr al-Shughour in fear of an imminent onslaught by government troops ordered to take vengeance on one of the centres of the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad.

Anticipation of a violent response by the regime galvanised international diplomatic action, led by France and Britain at the UN, and fuelled a sense that a turning point may be approaching as disorder spreads and Syria slips closer to a Libyan-style civil war.

The local co-ordinating committees, a network of activist groups, reported that 40 tanks and 50 troop carriers were 2½ miles (4km) from Jisr al-Shughour, and soldiers were in Idleb, the provincial capital. Amateur video also showed armoured units moving into the area.

An independent activist in Damascus said that he had seen tanks leaving the capital. The forces are thought to be under the command of the president's brother, Maher, who commands the Republican Guard and other units, and is widely believed to be the man leading Syria's violent crackdown.

"We believe they may send the 4th Division to attack, as they can be relied on to be loyal," said an activist who runs a Facebook page on the protests. "The conscripts, people like me, can't be relied upon when asked to be so brutal."

Although more than 1,110 Syrians have reportedly been killed in nearly three months of unprecedented unrest, it is clear the crackdown has failed to crush the opposition – even without the sort of high-level defections suffered by Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader.

Video clips showed Jisr al-Shughour deserted, nothing moving in the streets, and the market shuttered. Residents described it as a ghost town as people streamed towards the border with Turkey, which the government in Ankara said would remain open. "We are monitoring developments in Syria with concern," said Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. "Syria should change its attitude towards civilians and should take its attitude to a more tolerant level." The Turkish news agency said about 170 Syrians had crossed the border, and some wounded had been taken to local hospitals.

The government in Damascus claims 120 troops and security personnel were killed in an ambush in Jisr al-Shughour on Sunday, but there is no independent confirmation of this, as no foreign journalists are allowed to operate in Syria.

Speculation is rife that the incident may have been a mutiny by some security forces who refused to fire on protesters, and were themselves killed by loyalists. Syrian state TV reported that "armed terrorist organisations" used government vehicles and uniforms to commit "a brutal massacre". They "filmed themselves … to manipulate the photos and videos and distort the reputation of the army," according to Syrian state TV. It showed pictures from the funerals of eight security personnel.

Syria Comment, an influential blog based in the US, said: "Syria is slipping towards civil war. The government has met with no success in quelling the revolt despite an escalating death rate and an ever more ruthless crackdown."

At the UN, European nations seeking to increase pressure on Assad's regime presented a revised resolution condemning Syria for its deadly crackdown on peaceful protesters. Britain, France, Germany and Portugal introduced the text at a closed Security Council meeting. UN diplomats said the new draft, which has strong US backing, is aimed at winning more support for the resolution in the council and avoiding a Russian veto.

"We will be on the right side of history if and when this comes to a vote," said Susan Rice, US ambassador to the UN. "If others are unable to, or unwilling to, then that will be their responsibility to bear."

Russia's UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin reiterated that Moscow would not support the resolution, on the grounds that it would not promote dialogue. But he declined to say if Russia would veto it.

"If anyone votes against that resolution or tries to veto it, that should be on their conscience," David Cameron told MPs in London.

Diplomats admit privately that they are far less able to influence Syria than Libya, and that there is no prospect of military action against the Assad regime.

In Paris the Syrian ambassador was forced to deny she had resigned in protest at attacks on civilians. Lamia Shakkour claimed she was the victim of a hoax to embarrass her country. She called the announcement "misinformation" and "identity theft".

A woman identifying herself as the ambassador announced her resignation by phone on the TV news channel France 24 on Tuesday. "I can no longer continue to support the cycle of extreme violence against unarmed civilians," she said. "I recognise the legitimacy of the people's demands for more democracy and freedom."

France 24 said it had called a phone number on which it had spoken to Shakkour previously. After the broadcast Reuters said it had received an email that came via the Syrian embassy website in Paris, confirming the resignation. But this step was immediately denied by news agencies in Syria.

Shakkour appeared on another French television station, BFM TV, to deny she had resigned. France 24 said it did not rule out a "manipulation or a provocation" and promised to investigate the alleged hoax.



Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Overcoming Fear

panicImage via Wikipedia
HOW TO OVERCOME FEAR

Fear is a disease that destroys our self confidence, belief, and personality. It arises from deception and hate. It is true that we fear what we hate and hate what we fear. If not properly checked, fear can develop to the point of totally destroying our life. One of the results of fear is low self esteem. What are best ways to fight this monster disease?

Fear is a problem of the mind, and the best solution lies within rather than outside.
Learn to view things in their true, actual, and factual state; this is the process of simply understanding and accepting the truth. Remember, the biblical saying, “Seek the truth in and it shall set you free”. When you have armed yourself with the truth, nothing can deceive you. Truth is a universally accepted knowledge and knowledge is power that leads one to self confidence.

Practice makes perfect; practice more of those things that make you fear, at the end you will discover that it was only a deception created and allowed to develop by you. In addition, learn to draw strength from your past successes. “Yes you can”. Build up your confidence and improve on it daily.

Be positive in everything. Positive thinking pilots a positive action and positive thinking attracts help, courage, and wisdom. Avoid doubts, and excuses. Act right and have it in mind that nothing can harm you unless you give way for it. Surround yourself with creative energy. And remember that, you are a child of the Almighty and he is always watching you.

Note, the best form of protection is prevention, avoid activities that will bring harm to you. Fears are negative and of the dark, so learn how to develop love and affection for others. Love is light and positive, and where there is light there can never be darkness.

Enhanced by Zemanta

No Freedom of Choice

There Is No Freedom of Choice in America

by Don Cooper
by Don CooperRecently by Don Cooper: The Broken Logic of Statism

We have no freedom of choice in America; it's an illusion. The federal and state governments regulate every single market in this country which means that everything any American thinks he is freely choosing is something that in fact has been approved by the state for American consumption and Americans may only choose from that list. Choosing something not on the approved list is considered criminal and can result in one losing their freedoms altogether. That's not freedom of choice, that's state control of people's lives. If the last two sentences were said in the context of a communist regime, no one would hesitate to nod acceptingly, but when uttered in the context of the U.S. government, they are considered to be conspiratorial and paranoid, but are true just the same.

How many people have been arrested and imprisoned for selling goods and services that are not approved by the federal government? Our prisons are full of such people who have harmed no one socially, economically or physically but whose freedom has been taken away by the state for giving people real choice. If one were to see such a scene in a movie about communist Russia, no doubt Americans would cringe and utter something about the abusive nature of communism. When it happens in the U.S. then Americans assume the person in question must have deserved it otherwise why would he be in prison.

A lot of people don't realize that during communism in countries like Romania, they held presidential elections as well every so many years and the people were told that they could choose the president. Thing was: all the candidates belonged to the communist party so there would always be a communist president and communism would persist. In order for someone from the communist party not to be elected, a second party would somehow have to get on the ballot and in 1990 this finally happened.

The sad, disappointing and frustrating thing is that we have the same situation here in America but the pixy-dust-sniffing majority in this country doesn't realize it. Last presidential election I voted for the candidate of my choice, Ron Paul, and the state of Georgia threw my vote away because Ron Paul was not an official state-approved candidate. He had not done what the state decided he would need to do to be on the ballot so therefore he was not considered an official candidate and was not on the ballot. If you chose to vote for him as a write-in, then they simply did not count your vote.

How is having only two major parties who are always on the ballot and an election system designed by the state to keep those two parties in power and which makes it almost financially and logistically impossible for other parties to get on the ballot so much different from the communist system of having only one party on the ballot and an election system that makes it financially and logistically impossible for other parties? There's no freedom of choice in selecting our government. We as Americans are constantly voting for the lesser of two evils and seem to be content to do so.

Well how about in the market place then? Surely we must have freedom of choice in the market place. Look at all the choices we have to choose from. Unfortunately, this is a big negative as well. Just because there are a hundred different types of food or drugs, for example, from which to choose, in reality you can only choose from the ones that the state has approved for you.

The FDA is a federal agency with an annual budget in 2010 of $3.2 billion and is planning on hiring another 1,200 new employees to help construct the list of state-approved food and drugs (see, the government can create new jobs).

Now I've heard the argument a thousand times: sure the FDA is a government agency and it's not perfect but without an agency like the FDA there would be harmful foods and drugs on the market that people would voluntarily choose to purchase and people could be maimed, sickened and even die. We need the FDA. Regulating food and drugs is too big a job, only the federal government has the resources to do it. Thank God for the FDA!

This argument assumes a couple of things. First, that the FDA has found the gold at the end of rainbow so the government already has the financial resources necessary to pay for their activities and so that money doesn't have to come from the people. Secondly, that the FDA is in fact not staffed with people from the same social pool that says the federal government already has the necessary resources to regulate food and drugs but rather with wizards that posses special magical powers that the rest of us don't and can somehow determine the goodness of foods and drugs for human consumption. It assumes the FDA doesn't even need humans to determine the human effects of foods and drugs. They can simply dip a piece of litmus paper into a sample and if it turns red then it is not state approved.

Of course this is not the case. The FDA has only the resources that they take from the private sector in the way of taxes, debt, inflation and manpower. Furthermore, it conducts clinical trials on humans who volunteer to participate. Basically, that means that the FDA gets volunteers to try new foods and drugs and then they sit back and watch what happens. If the volunteers have bad side effects, like their heads turn purple, their hair falls out, they are maimed, sickened or die, then the FDA disseminates this information to the public and the food or drug is not approved for sale in the U.S. and so people have no choice: they cannot buy it even if they wanted to.


Compare this to a new food or drug appearing in the market place and people voluntarily choosing to buy it and consume it. If people have adverse side effects to the new good then this information will be disseminated naturally by the market and people will choose to stop buying it.

A famous example of this was the Tylenol poisoning case of 1982 in which someone went into stores in the Chicago area and laced extra strength Tylenol capsules with potassium-cyanide. The first death occurred on September 29, 1982. Within 6 days, and completely of its own accord, Johnson & Johnson had recalled all its bottles of extra strength Tylenol with a retail market value of some $100 million. By November of the same year, Johnson & Johnson had already re-engineered its pill bottle packaging — a new triple-sealed package — and within a year Tylenol was once again a major competitor in the market place.

What was the FDA doing during this time? Sitting on its hands trying to figure out who to blame and seeing what kind of new packaging Johnson & Johnson came up with so they could copy it and modify their food and drug packaging regulations accordingly and take the credit for keeping Americans safe. As with any government agency, the FDA didn't want this crisis to go to waste so they also used it to expand their budget and payroll. After all, with the new regulations they would need more people and money to enforce them.

In the end the FDA cannot do anymore than the market can do in identifying harmful foods and drugs. In fact, historical evidence shows that the market does a better, faster and more efficient job of identifying these things than the FDA. The FDA is always one step behind the markets. Reacting and taking the credit at a cost of $3.2 billion to the tax payer and limiting real freedom of choice in America.


January 23, 2010

Don Cooper [send him mail] is a Florida native, Navy veteran, economist, and editor of the daily non-partisan column Qaoss.com.

Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com.



Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, June 3, 2011

Truths About our Inherited Debt

Deficit and debt increases 2001-2008Image via Wikipedia
10 Inconvenient Truths About our Debt Ceiling

by Avenging Angel


Bolstered by new polls and fresh off their vote to bar an increase in the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, House Republicans swaggered into the White House for the latest negotiation to end their economic hostage taking. One, Rep. Jeff Landry of Louisiana, refused to attend and be "lectured to by a president whose failed policies have put our children and grandchildren in a huge burden of debt."

Sadly for Rep. Landry, the nation's mounting debt is largely attributable to wars, a recession and tax policies President Obama inherited from his predecessor. Worse still, the Ryan 2012 budget proposal backed by almost every Republican in both houses of Congress would not only drain another $4 trillion in tax revenue from the Treasury, but fail all of the spending and balanced budget targets they themselves propose. Nevertheless, Republicans who voted seven times to double the debt ceiling under George W. Bush would risk the national economic suicide they admit would come to pass if their demands are not met.

Here, then, are 10 Inconvenient Truths About the Debt Ceiling:


(Click a link to jump to the data and details for each.)

1. Republican Leaders Agree U.S. Default Would Be a "Financial Disaster"

2. Ronald Reagan Tripled the National Debt

3. George W. Bush Doubled the National Debt

4. Republicans Voted Seven Times to Raise Debt Ceiling for President Bush

5. Federal Taxes Are Now at a 60 Year Low

6. Bush Tax Cuts Didn't Pay for Themselves or Spur "Job Creators"

7. Ryan Budget Delivers Another Tax Cut Windfall for Wealthy

8. Ryan Budget Will Require Raising Debt Ceiling - Repeatedly

9. Tax Cuts Drive the Next Decade of Debt

10. $3 Trillion Tab for Unfunded Wars Remains Unpaid






Enhanced by Zemanta