You can't have a construction site open up on the White House compound without a conspiracy theory or two taking root.
Obama administration officials say that the underground construction work now under way concerns a simple a utilities upgrade. But the yawning pit opened up outside the West Wing earlier this month has prompted many overeager observers of the executive branch to speculate that the construction crew is actually laying the foundation for a bunker, the Washington Post's Christian Davenport reports.
The General Services Administration says the White House utilities upgrade project, begun in May 2009, involves routine maintenance upgrades--"replacing aging electrical, cooling, heating and fire alarm equipment," Davenport writes. But the public is skeptical of the official story--and, Davenport notes, "those who work in the White House aren't buying it, either."
"One told the New York Times that the work is 'security-related' and would ultimately create an expanded underground emergency operations center," Davenport writes.
Whatever the purpose of the project, it will soon fade into the background. Once the work is completed, a GSA spokesman explained to Davenport, "the grounds will be restored to their original state." Or, as Davenport adds: "In other words, it will be as if nothing happened."
You can see a photo gallery of the construction: Here
*****~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*****
Here's an additional article written April 4, 2011 by the Daily Mail-
Is a secret lair being built under the White House? West Wing vanishes behind a fence in $86 million ear-splitting project
The West Wing of the White House is all-but disappearing behind an $86 million building project that is going to last for years.
And a mysterious tunnel is being built, fuelling speculation that a secret underground lair is what's really under construction.
In recent weeks, an expanding and sometimes ear-splitting zone of excavation has enveloped the mansion's famous office wing.
Heavy equipment and metal-and-concrete superstructures are part of the vast construction project.
The front door and the Marine who guards it have disappeared behind a high green-and-white plywood fence. From Pennsylvania Avenue, all that's visible is a sliver of second-floor roof line.
For years to come, the front yard at 1600 Pennsylvania will remain a noisy building site, say officials in charge of the White House's 'Big Dig'.
Officials describe the job as an overdue upgrade of underground utilities. That includes water and sewer lines, electrical conduits, pipes for chilled and hot water and steam heat systems, and storm sewers. Heating, air conditioning and fire alarm systems are being replaced. Some systems are getting backups.
To build the tunnel, crews have poured in huge concrete pylons, put up retaining walls and brought in truckloads of steel beams.
The construction site has expanded from in front of the West Wing around to the side and across a parking lot to the next-door Eisenhower Executive Office Building.
The General Services Administration, which is supervising the work, has denied the tunnel is a new shelter - just an access to the utilities.
Spokesman Sahar Wali said the steel and concrete is needed 'to create enough space and a pathway for replacement of the new utilities infrastructure at the proper depth and location'.
She said the construction was not putting in place long-standing plans for underground office space or an underground driveway entrance.
Of course, there would not be much point in telling everyone about building a secret tunnel (after all, the emphasis is on secret).
West Wing officials, especially those with offices nearest the construction, have endured painful spells of drilling and banging. Holding meetings and doing routine business amid the din has become a major challenge.
Josh Earnest, a deputy in the press office, found himself doing phone interviews on President Barack Obama's State of the Union speech as a worker jackhammered concrete inches from his window. The next day, when a second jackhammer arrived, he phoned project managers to beg for a reprieve. The work was postponed.
"They have been very respectful of the fact that we still have to keep an important operation running here,' Mr Earnest said.
Visitors to the West Wing now must navigate a temporary walkway that curves behind Pebble Beach — as the zone where TV reporters do stand-ups is called — and arches over the digging before swinging out of view behind the construction fence.
Foreign leaders arriving by motorcade often have to use another entrance. Beyond the main West Wing driveway, the construction has shut down one entrance leading to the White House residence quarters that's used for deliveries of flowers, produce and other supplies.
That fencing has cost some of the most coveted offices in America their sweeping views.
Former press secretary Robert Gibbs said: 'I've threatened to go spray paint it and make it a little bit more aesthetically pleasing.'
For most of those who work in the White House complex, the noise is the worst part. In addition to the jackhammers and bulldozers, a heavy crane that drills large earthen cores is the biggest offender, shivering and clanking as it shakes off dirt after each bore. TV correspondents facing nearby cameras have to shout to be heard.
The noise won't be going away any time soon.
The West Wing dig is but the first step in a multiphase $376 million project that will eventually progress across the White House grounds — and last for a total of four years.
What lies beneath: The secret passageway, Armageddon-proof bunker (and basement bowling alley) under the President's feet
The White House already has a number of tunnels — the exact number is, of course, classified.
The most well known is the underground corridor that leads to the President's Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), a supposedly nuclear-proof bunker located six stories under the East Wing.
It was to this bunker and its adjacent Executive Briefing Room that Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice, among others, directed Government operations on September 11, 2001.
Each year Professor Chambless has his students write an essay at the first of the year on what the American Dream looks like to them.
This year, he asked the students to specifically write what they thought the federal government should do to help them realize their dream.
He took the essays from his 3 classes, approximately 180 students, and after reading through them, he was shocked at what these student believe about the role of the federal government.
He said about 10% want the government to leave them alone and allow them to control their own lives but an overwhelming 80% feel the government needs to provide for them.
Here's a list of what his students think the government should provide:
FREE TUITION AND HEALTH CARE
JOBS
MONEY FOR A HOUSE
MONEY FOR RETIREMENT
MONEY FOR ME (AFTER TAXING THE RICH PEOPLE)
(This essay was written before the OWS movement took hold.)
Here's an exerpt from one of the essays:
"As human beings, we are not really responsible for our own acts and so we need government to control those who don't care about other."
When asked where he thinks his students' "sense of entitlement" comes from, he said that "public schools are part of it." Then he was asked about an "experiment" he conducts in his classes, in which he pretends to be a "pickpocket" to show students it's "wrong" for "the government to plunder people."
Here is his response, "Well, yes. When I went back to class the next time to meet with them, I told them I read over their essays and I read some of the comments they had made. And then I sat them on a table, and I asked everybody to pull out their wallets and their purses. And I picked one student in each class, and when their wallet was in their hand, I grabbed their wallet out forcefully and in one case, I grabbed a girl's purse, and I rifled through her purse, pulled out her wallet, pulled out all of her cash. And I said that part of my American Dream was to have a cabin in northern Minnesota someday so I could have a nice retirement, and that this money was now going to help fund that American Dream. And of course, that set in motion explanation [sic] on why using the government to plunder people to support our American Dream is fundamentally, morally wrong, constitutionally wrong, and leads to a lot of economic -- economically bad events if we let that idea gain ground."
The Orlando Sentinel, October 9, 2011 - to hear more about this article and the experiment it discusses you can listen to my radio interviews with Janine Turner and Brian Wilson.
On the first day of class this semester, I asked my students to spend 10 minutes writing a brief essay explaining their definition of the American Dream and what they expected the federal government to do to help them achieve their version of this dream.
The first part of all of their essays was pretty standard stuff. They wanted to have a good job, a home, a family and enough money to enjoy their lives for decades to come.
It was the second part of the majority of these essays (from a population of 180 students) that left me discouraged and bewildered.
When contemplating the role of Washington, D.C., in helping them achieve their goals in life, my students — most of whom were educated in America's public schools — wrote that they wanted government to "pay for my tuition," "provide me with a job," "give me money for a house," "make sure I get free health care," "pay for my retirement," "raise taxes on rich people so that I can have more money" and so forth.
One student who thought her American Dream could be best achieved with more government regulations went so far as to say, "We all know that there are many bad side effects when regulations take place, but as human beings, we are not really responsible for our own acts, and so we need government to control those who don't care about others. It makes sense that our freedom is reduced every day with the new regulations."
Recently, The Wall Street Journal reported that for the first time in our nation's history, 51 percent of Americans will not pay income taxes this year. It should also be noted that in 1983, just over 29 percent of Americans received some form of government assistance. Today the figure is 44.4 percent.
These figures are noteworthy and arguably linked to my students' concept of what the role of government should be in their lives.
After all, it makes intuitive sense that in a nation where fewer and fewer Americans are net contributors to our prosperity, the children of those who increasingly live off their fellow citizens would develop the perception that part, if not all, of the American Dream involves taking money away from a working, productive American in order to fill the financial gaps in our lives.
On the second day of class, I asked my students to pull out their purses and wallets. In each class, I approached one student, grabbed his wallet, opened it and took out all of the cash.
I then told the shocked student that part of my American Dream is to have a cabin on a lake in northern Minnesota someday so that I can enjoy my retirement in this beautiful part of the country.
My students listened to a mini-lecture on our Founding Fathers' view of our rights — especially as it pertains to the pursuit of happiness.
Many seemed to comprehend, perhaps for the first time, that all of us have every right to pursue access to high-quality health care, a good job, a home, cars, retirement and whatever else we might want to peacefully acquire, but that no one has an inherent right to use the arm of government to forcibly take the private property of another citizen in order to obtain our desires.
In effect, with every dollar we receive by force in order to gain our dream, we are diminishing, by one dollar, some other person's dream.
I hope they understood, and I hope I remembered to give those kids their money back.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UPDATE: Great News! One of Professor Chambless' students comes forward to say that he has reassessed his position and has changed his mind and realizes people should be responsible for their own American dream.
Robert Newton is one of Professor Chambless' students that originally had felt that the government should provide for American's but after listening to the Professor, he has changed his mind.
BIOGRAPHY
Jack A. Chambless is a professor of economics and professional speaker. He has taught since 1991 at Valencia College in Orlando, Florida where he served as the the Patricia Whalen Chair in Social Science in 1999 and 2004. In addition to teaching Principles of Micro and Macroeconomics he has also taught honors courses in economics, two online courses and special topics courses entitled "Applied Microeconomics" and "Oil, Economics and Terrorism."
He is a frequent contributor to The Orlando Sentinel and has had his work published in The Wall Street Journal, The University of Miami Law Review, The Public Utilities Fortnightly, Structural Movers, Orlando Magazine and many other domestic publications. His work has been cited in The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, U.S. News & World Report, Reason Magazine, The Foreign Press Review, The Atlanta Journal & Constitution, The Detroit News, The British Caledonian Press and many other foreign and domestic publications.
In addition to teaching, Professor Chambless speaks frequently around the United States on the Economics of Liberty. He has lectured at The Foundation for Economic Education in New York; The Young America's FoundationFreedom Fest in Las Vegas; The Florida Libertarian Convention, The Florida Parent Educators Association convention and Georgia State University and has appeared on national television and radio broadcasts including CNBC's Inside Opinion, FoxNews Europe and Your World with Neal Cavuto (FoxNews), The Neal Boortz Show, the BBC, National Public Radio and The Jim Hightower Show. He is also currently serving as a policy advisor for The Heartland Institute - a think tank in Chicago, Illinois.
He is the author of two economics textbooks - An Applied Approach to Microeconomics and An
Applied Approach to Macroeconomics, both published by Kendall Hunt.
Professor Chambless enjoys hiking in the Northwestern United States, Minnesota and Canada, bass fishing and photography in his spare time.
UPDATE:
Move over, Fox and MSNBC: Two Professors to Debate on Thursday
Monday, November 28, 2011
By Linda Shrieves Beaty
Who needs to watch talking heads debate politics on MSNBC or Fox News when Valencia has its own in-house political pundits?
Join Valencia students, faculty and staff on Thursday, Dec. 1, to watch “A Conversation Between Two Liberals,” a debate between Valencia professors John Scolaro and Jack Chambless. The debate will take place from 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. in the Special Events Center of Building 8 on West Campus.
Scolaro, who is a liberal by today’s standards, and Chambless, who describes himself as “a liberal in the classical sense,” rarely agree on politics. Both are avid writers and contributors to the Orlando Sentinel’s op-ed pages. “There are very, very few things that he and I have agreed upon over the years,” Chambless says.
At Thursday’s debate, Scolaro, who teaches humanities, and Chambless, who teaches economics, will tackle ideological questions of the day, including these:
Is Barack Obama’s presidency a failure?
Do the Occupy Wall Street protesters have a good point? Are their objectives commendable or condemnable?
Should the United States become more like Europe?
Is there a bias against women in society today and, if not, why have so few women been elected to public office?
The goal, say both professors, is to engage public debate — and inspire their students, friends and faculty members to think about the larger issues facing the nation.
“My hope is that attendees will be inspired to deepen their understanding of the ‘hot issues’ of the day — on both a national and international level — and will embrace the view that being informed is an important aspect of citizenship in a democracy,” Scolaro says.
The debate will be moderated by Valencia political science professor Desmond Duncan. Seating is available for about 300 guests, but the event will also be videotaped and will be posted on Chambless’s website (www.jackchambless.com) after the event.
Rampant absentee ballot fraud is destroying democracy in Miami and across the United States. County Commissioner Rebeca Sosa has proposed that anyone caught messing with absentee ballots will go to jail for 60 days and pay a $1,000 fine. Ten of her colleagues agree on the plan, which will be voted on this month. Sosa is also urging the state legislature to charge anyone who collects absentee ballots with a felony.
Why do we need such a plan? The Miami-Dade ethics commission just concluded that three North Miami Beach residents' votes were stolen via the absentee ballot process.But more and more, absentee ballot brokers are the key to every election.
No sitting politician will reform the system, especially with the 2012 presidential election on the horizon. Absentee ballots in Miami-Dade may well elect the next president. There's a county mayoral race next year too.
Consider this: In the most recent elections in Miami and Hialeah, absentee ballots either tied or outnumbered ballots cast on Election Day.On his way to victory, Miami city Commissioner Willy Gort collected 2,228 absentee ballots, nearly double the 1,245 he received on Election Day this past November 2. His colleague, Marc Sarnoff, had almost the same number of absentee ballots (2,289) as votes cast at the polls (2,322).
In the Hialeah mayoral race's first round, absentee ballots outnumbered voters on Election Day by 2,023. In the runoff, winner Carlos Hernandez had 730 more absentee ballots than Election Day votes. His absentee ballots outpaced those of his opponent -- longtime Hialeah king Raul Martinez -- by 4,000.
The only way to get that many absentee ballots is by hiring brokers who charge candidates thousands of dollars to deliver bundles to the county elections department. The brokers are the ones responsible for dead people voting in the '80s and '90s. Now they go around strong-arming the elderly residents at assisted living facilities or fooling them with free breakfast at the local IHOP. The brokers also pay off preachers so they can set up shop inside houses of worship to sign up absentee voters.
I saw it firsthand when I ran in the recent county mayoral race. One guy, who I won't name, guaranteed he could deliver thousands of absentee ballots in North Miami and North Miami Beach for $3,000. I took a pass. It showed on Election Day. I had more early and Election Day ballots than absentee votes.
I don't believe our forefathers intended voting by absentee to be sold to the highest bidder. But that's the way it is.
12 Charged With Absentee Ballot Fraud In Georgia Election
Law enforcement officials have charged 12 people with using absentee ballots to skew an election in Georgia.
“As a result of their grand jury findings, 12 individuals were indicted in that particular matter and we will be trying that case in a court of judicial law instead of a court of public opinion,” District Attorney Joe Mulholland told the local TV station, WALB.
The charges followed a bitter November 2010 school board election in Brooks County in which the final tally was changed by an unusually large wave of absentee ballots.
During the election, 1,060 absentee votes were cast out of the 1,403 ballots mailed out to people who requested them, according to a July 2010 report by WCTV.
That’s far higher than nearby Thomas County, which had 119 absentee votes cast out of 202 requests, and Lowndes County, which had 169 absentee votes cast out of 439 requests, said WCTV’s report.
The 12 people charged are aligned with the Democratic Party.
News of the arrests followed The Daily Caller’s interview with former Alabama Democratic Rep. Artur Davis, in which he said voter identification laws are needed to counter ballot fraud in local elections.
Here is video of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie blasting President Barack Obama for his failure to lead out in getting a Debt-reduction agreement, instead choosing to be a “bystander.”
Christie said he was “angry this weekend” listening to the “spin” coming from Obama surrogates as to why Obama did not get involved in the Congressional Super Committee efforts to craft a debt agreement. Christie asked bluntly of Obama, “What the hell are we paying you for?”
Overruled: Government Invasion of your Parental Rights (Official Movie)
Parents all over America are losing their rights and don't even know it. Featuring 3 reenactments based on real cases, "Overruled" is a shocking 35-minute docudrama that exposes how the rights of parents in America are being eroded and what you can do to turn the tide. Learn more at www.ParentalRights.org
Yes, I believe that parental rights should be constitutionally protected through the proposed Parental Rights Amendment:
SECTION 1
The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a
fundamental right.
SECTION 2
Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe upon this right without
demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest
order and not otherwise served.
SECTION 3
No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to
supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.
This is a very heartwarming and inspiring story. God Bless our military and their families. We will be forever indebted to them for all of their sacrifices.
Not Photoshopped: Beam of Light Shines on Fallen Soldier’s Miracle Dog
(Kimberly Launier/ABC News)
It was an overcast day in Newport, N.H., when a simple “20/20″ shoot turned into something that made me wonder about life after death.
I was filming soldier Justin Rollin’s parents Skip and Rhonda playing with their dog Hero, whose rescue from the Iraq War zone where Justin died was nothing short of a miracle.
Sometimes when Rhonda hugged Hero she would softly pet her face and coo, “Justin, are you in there?” It was Rhonda’s gentle way of remembering their son and his last living connection to Hero. At one point, Hero wandered off and took a stroll in the backyard. All of a sudden, the clouds broke and a light began to solidify in a beam directly down on Hero — a kind of vertical halo.
As this dramatic ray of light was shining on Hero she turned to look at me, and it was all I could do to hold the camera steady and not drop it in astonishment. It was an unforgettable moment, and made me wonder if in fact Justin was in there. Then the light vanished.
I couldn’t wait to check my camera’s playback to see if it caught the stunning beam. When I saw that it did, I was so happy that I burst out dancing. It was a great moment to share with Justin’s parents. We all laughed together, and wondered if perhaps this had been a sign from Justin.
Bringing Hero Home: Soldier's Puppy Gives Hope to Grieving Family
Don't let the sweet face fool you.
The dog with a big grin and eye patches of chocolate fur may have one of the most incredible tales you'll hear this Thanksgiving. It is the stuff of legends.
Her story begins in a faraway land, but the story of the man who saved her starts in the small town of Newport, New Hampshire, where leaves burn up the sky in the colors of rubies and fire. And "Live Free or Die" is more than a saying.
Justin Rollins became a soldier when he found courage in war. He became a man when he found strength in love. And his family found its destiny when they realized faith doesn't have to end -- even when a life does.
Brittney Murray remembers the first time she saw Justin Rollins in an economics class.
"It's this gaze, and when he looks back at you, you kind of get sucked in."
It was love at first sight, but Justin was a high school senior, Brittney, a freshman.
"Mom and dad didn't like that much," Brittney said of their age difference.
Mark Levin Show: Neurosurgeon Says Death Panels Will Be A Reality With Obamacare
A neurosurgeon, vetted by Levin's staff, calls Mark and talks about what he knows about Obamacare Death Panels. From 11/22/11.
Mark Levin received a phone call Tuesday night from a brain surgeon who had just been to Washington DC, learning about the requirements the government has in place with the Obama Health Care Plan. This is a must read. The surgeon says that if you are over 70, you will get “comfort care,” and that surgery can be performed “if” the government panel deems it necessary. It also reveals that the government language used to describe patients is “units.” If you are over 70 and have a stroke, you can and will be denied surgery. The documents referred to by the caller are not public yet.
HOW THE LEFT IS GOING AFTER CORPORATIONS, CAPITALISM AND ENERGY PRODUCTION UNDER THE GUISE OF GRANTING 'EQUAL RIGHTS TO NATURE'
The left-wing organizations working on the erosion of our property rights in the United States have been actively pushing their agenda in North and South America.
If someone asked you, "What if trees could sue because their rights are being violated?" What would you have thought or said? After the initial, 'yeah right,' I imagine you would have thought this was just a silly joke.
Well, this is a reality. We are seeing our country taken over by the UN Agenda 21 that has embedded itself throughout the country under the guise of 'sustainable growth.' In fact, what it will do to your local governments is hand over controls of your rights to an unelected group of 'councils of governments' that will dictate land, water, and energy usage in your area.
Not that long ago, I thought this was just a conspiracy. Today, I realize it is a reality and am actually finding this cancer in my own back yard. Our city has signed up for this garbage. I don't know if they understand what they are doing and are blindly going along or if they are oblivious as I was and don't understand. Either way, our local Tea Party has been very active in bringing it to our local governments attention but it seems to be falling on deaf ears.
We need to make more people aware so we have more standing in front of these facilitators of the destruction of our liberties. I will be posting some information and videos about Agenda 21 and would encourage you to educate yourself and check your area to see if your local government has joined hands with this anti-American, unconstitutional, U.N. agenda.
For now, I want to focus on the issue of the left's movement to grant nature constitutional rights.
What is this movement?
To understand what they are pushing, let's look at a failed attempt to pass The 'Community Bill of Rights' in 2009 in Spokane Washington. This would have required a change to their constitution. The following is taken from an article from Yes! Magazine Nov. 4, 2009.
A Community Bill of Rights:
'In the spring of 2008, grassroots organizations, labor unions, neighborhood councils, and other groups across the city began meeting together as part of a coalition they called Envision Spokane. Over the spring and summer, they drafted a series of ideas for addressing the needs of residents, workers, neighborhoods, and the environment. These ideas formed a draft “Community Bill of Rights” for the city.
During the winter, Envision Spokane held a series of 12 Town Halls across the city to engage the community in a conversation about the proposed Bill of Rights.
Taking the community’s feedback, the board of Envision Spokane revised the Bill of Rights and, in March of 2009, began to collect signatures. Despite opposition from the Spokane City Council and a concerted effort by business interests to block the Bill of Rights from reaching the ballot, Envision Spokane collected over 5,000 signatures from voters, successfully qualifying the Community Bill of Rights for the November ballot.
The Community Bill of Rights proposed nine amendments, written to address some very real needs in Spokane, to the city's Home Rule Charter. By recognizing broad rights instead of proposing specific legislation, the amendments were written to change the fundamental structure of Spokane’s legal system so that it would prioritize the protection of the local environment, economy, neighborhoods and residents.
First. Residents have the right to a locally-based economy. Recognizes the rights of residents to protect their local economy by denying permits to big-box and chain stores.
Second. Residents have the right to affordable preventive health care. Creates a fee-for-service program for the thousands of Spokane residents who lack health insurance and currently rely on the emergency room for health care.
Third. Residents have the right to affordable housing. In response to the loss of thousands of units of affordable housing in Spokane over the past few years, the city would have been obliged, through incentives or other measures, to ensure that an adequate supply of affordable housing is available for those most in need.
Fourth. Residents have the right to affordable and renewable energy. Requires the city and local utilities to make renewable energy accessible to residents.
Fifth. The natural environment has the right to exist and flourish. Under current law, nature has no legal standing—to prove environmental damage, a person has to prove that he or she has been harmed. The Fifth Amendment would have protected the Spokane River, one of the most polluted in the nation following years of mining and toxic dumping, would have been protected under the Bill of Rights.
Sixth. Residents have the right to determine the future of their neighborhoods. Patty Norton and her neighbors—and other residents of Spokane—would have been able to enforce their decisions about what’s best for them. (The condominium complex hasn’t been built yet, but it is approved. The Sixth Amendment would have done what years of protesting haven’t been able to: allow the residents to say, “No.”)
Seventh. Workers have the right to be paid the prevailing wage and to work as apprentices on certain construction projects. As skilled labor leaves Spokane, the Bill of Rights would have protected workers’ right to competitive wages and created apprenticeship opportunities so that young people could learn a trade and stay in the city.
Eighth. Workers have the right to employer neutrality when unionizing, and the right to constitutional protections within the workplace. Workers would have been free from interference by employers when seeking to form a labor union, as well as from having to attend “captive audience” meetings.
Ninth. Residents, workers, neighborhoods, neighborhood councils, and the city of Spokane shall have the right to enforce the Community Bill of Rights. For the first time, residents would have the legal authority to enforce their own decisions.
While Spokane is the largest city to attempt these legal changes, and the first whose adoption would have meant a change to a city constitution, other communities have already succeeded in securing similar rights. Towns in Maine, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, and Virginia have passed ordinances recognizing the rights of nature, prohibiting corporate mining and water extraction, and stripping corporations of constitutional protections and the right to contribute to political campaigns.'
The board of directors of Envision Spokane recognizes that fundamental change doesn’t come easily or quickly, and will be meeting in the next few weeks to discuss how to continue the work that they’ve started. Other communities are now reaching out to learn from Spokane about how they might do something similar.
EXCUSE ME? WHAT DOES A CORPORATIONS CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OR CONTRIBUTING TO A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN HAVE TO DO WITH THIS? OBVIOUSLY, THE AGENDA IS NOT PROTECTING ANYTHING AT ALL. IT'S ALL ABOUT TRYING TO DESTROY CORPORATIONS AND CAPITALISM. IT'S ALSO ABOUT DESTROYING OUR ENERGY PRODUCTION.
*****~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*****
Now fast forward to today. Chalk one up as a win for this insane movement to grant nature rights that would surpass human rights.
This is a real and present danger to our property and personal liberties that we need to be aware of in order to understand it when it comes to our area.
It may be masked as "community bill of rights" or sustainability or even saving our planet, but it will really be an attack on our liberties.
This movement is ultimately an attack on corporations and capitalism. The parties behind this are well-known Communists, Marxists and Socialists...or better known as Progressives. Recently there were elections in our area that had to do with water conservation....it did not pass because we knew it was not TRULY for the betterment of our city...it was more of a power grab that we were able to thwart...for now.
BOLIVIA AND ECUADOR GRANT EQUAL RIGHTS TO NATURE: IS 'WILD LAW' A CLIMATE SOLUTION?
Published: Monday 21 November 2011 “Bolivians hope that this will give their country the power to hold mining companies accountable and force them to adhere to stricter environmental standards.”
The concept of “a wild law,” which grants equal rights to nature, is based on the idea that humans do not have an explicit right to destroy our natural environment. Under wild law, natural ecosystems’ rights supersede the interests of any one species (including humans). Obviously, this idea can be incredibly controversial. Even in Bolivia, where they’ve amended their constitution to give nature equal rights to people, they are still working out the details.
Bolivia amended its constitution after pressure from its large indigenous population who places the environment and the earth deity, Pachamama, at the center of all life. But what this means in practical terms, such as how to address the serious environmental problems caused by mining for raw materials in the Andean nation, is yet to be determined. Bolivians hope that this will give their country the power to hold mining companies accountable and force them to adhere to stricter environmental standards.
Research by glaciologist Edson Ramirez of San Andres University in the capital city, La Paz, suggests temperatures have been rising steadily for 60 years and started to accelerate in 1979. They are now on course to rise a further 3.5-4C over the next 100 years. This would turn much of Bolivia into a desert.
Most glaciers below 5,000m are expected to disappear completely within 20 years, leaving Bolivia with a much smaller ice cap. Scientists say this will lead to a crisis in farming and water shortages in cities such as La Paz and El Alto.
Ecuador, which has a large indigenous population, has also amended its constitution to grant rights to nature. But like in Bolivia, the law has not stopped oil companies from destroying their natural landscape.
Even though these laws are mostly abstract, their existence helps elevate a debate about the relationship between people and nature. Bolivia’s Foreign Minister, David Choquehuanca, puts it well:
“Our grandparents taught us that we belong to a big family of plants and animals. We believe that everything in the planet forms part of a big family. We indigenous people can contribute to solving the energy, climate, food and financial crises with our values.”
It’s hard to imagine such laws adopted en masse today — particularly in the U.S. But the concept has gained traction. In recent years, numerous conferences have been held on how to apply wild law to climate change mitigation efforts.
To hear more about the concept, watch the video below featuring Cormac Cullinan, an environmental lawyer and leading wild law intellectual, who recently addressed the World People’s Summit on Climate Change in Bolivia.
Wild Law - Cormac Cullinan speaks at the World People's Summit on Climate Change (Bolivia)
Environmental lawyer, Cormac Cullinan speaks at the World People's Summit on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in Cochabamba, Bolivia. The only way we can continue to live on this planet, Cullinan suggests, is by re-educating ourselves about our natural environment.
Bolivia is set to pass the world's first laws granting all nature equal rights to humans. The Law of Mother Earth, now agreed on by politicians and grassroots social groups, redefines the country's rich mineral deposits as "blessings" and is expected to lead to radical new conservation and social measures to reduce pollution and control industry.
Read the full story here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/10/bolivia-enshrines-natural-w...
*****~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*****
Well, take a look behind the curtain and you will find the ususal suspects involved in this eco terrorist scam.
Former Obama Czar Van Jones Behind UN Push to Grant Mother Nature Same Rights as Humans…
Van Jones, the Obama administration's controversial former "green jobs czar," has found a new calling: helping to push for a new, global architecture of environmental law that would give Mother Nature the same rights status as humans.
The new movement is almost certain to be showcased at a U.N.-sponsored global summit on “sustainable development” to take place in Rio de Janeiro in May 2012, when similar issues of “global environmental governance” are a major focus of attention.
Jones is taking up the challenge as one of the newest board members of an obscure San Francisco New Age-style organization known as the Pachamama Alliance, which has been creating a global movement to make human rights for Mother Nature an international reality — complete with enforceable laws — by 2014. The Rio summit will create an important midpoint for that campaign.
Jones joined the alliance's board last December, shortly after the organization announced creation of the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature to carry the concept around the world—and install it not only in international law but in the statutes of communities and municipalities across the U.S.
He resigned from the administration in September 2009 after making public apologies for some of his past actions, including the signing of a 2004 petition that questioned whether the Bush administration had deliberately allowed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to happen, and his previous affiliation with a self-described communist organization, the Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM).
The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature “is working to build a movement of millions of educated and inspired individuals, with thousands of successful cases of enforceable Rights of Nature legislation having been enacted at local and national levels, by the end of 2014,” according to the Pachamama website.
The group also is running a parallel media campaign, called "Four Years. Go.," to build enthusiasm for the same rapid environmental change, using “personal communication, social media and a rich web presence to inspire a movement of people who recognize the urgency, and the opportunity, of this time and stand for using the next four years, through 2014, to literally change the course of history.”
Organizing and advocating just such a radical “green” restructuring of the U.S. economy is the skill set that brought Jones to the Obama White House staff as a “green jobs czar” in the first place.
Jones has continued to advocate those ideas since leaving the administration, as a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a think tank closely associated with financier George Soros, and at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson Center for International Affairs.
Now, his green community organizing skills apparently are going global, along with the Pachamama Alliance’s rights-for-nature campaign. Telephone calls and emails to Jones, his assistant and the institutions where he now works as a fellow, as well as to the San Francisco offices of the Pachamama Alliance, had not been returned before this article was published.
The movement that Jones has joined shares its goals with some of the more radical governments represented at the United Nations, notably Ecuador and Bolivia, both nations with substantial territories in the Amazon Basin, and both with close ties to the socialist government of Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez.
Bolivia last week sponsored an “interactive dialogue” on “Harmony With Nature” at the United Nations that included promotion of the same notion of a Universal Declaration of Human Rights for Mother Nature. By no coincidence, the U.N. debate was scheduled immediately prior to this year’s April 22 Earth Day celebrations—renamed “Mother Earth Day,” at the United Nations.
This year, the global celebrations also start an unofficial countdown to the U.N.-sponsored global summit in Rio de Janeiro next year.
The summit, known in U.N. shorthand as Rio + 20, is intended as a 20th anniversary successor to the famous Earth Summit of 1992, which gave enormous stimulus and legitimacy to the global environmental movement. This time, its aim is to produce new efforts at “global environmental governance,” meaning a strengthened international regulatory framework for environmental issues, and to provide new momentum for a global “green economy.”
Next year’s summit may also offer the “Rights of Nature” movement a chance to unveil at least a draft version of such a universal declaration, a prospect welcomed by the Bolivian sponsors of the April 20 debate at the U.N.
“Rio + 20 is a good opportunity to have that step forward,” said Pablo Salon, Bolivia’s ambassador to the U.N. “It would be like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
Salon sees such a declaration as the kickoff to a longer-term campaign to create legislative reinforcing the new Nature rights, and he noted in an interview with Fox News that the Bolivian government asserts it is the first country to give the rights of nature equal status with human rights in its legal system. Bolivian President Evo Morales has frequently said that “the central enemy of Mother Earth is capitalism.”
Salon also told Fox News that his country is working with an offshoot of the Pachamama Alliance, known as the Pachamama Foundation, on its nature rights campaign, but emphasized that the Pachamama group is “one of many networks” Bolivia is working with on the issue.
Among other things, the Pachamama Alliance claims that through the Pachamama Foundation—a “sister organization” it created in 1997 among native peoples of the Amazon Basin -- it was instrumental in helping to install the same “fundamental rights for nature” it espouses into the constitution of Ecuador in 2008.
The environmental movement, with its army of professional advocates, lawyers, grassroots campaigners, and dedicated funders, has been around for decades. Yet nearly every biological indicator shows a planet in crisis—and poised to unravel faster as climate change disrupts already-shaky ecosystem functions.
Mari Margil, associate director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) believes it's time for different tactics. The nonprofit agency used to work within the body of existing environmental law—helping impacted residents file lawsuits or appeal corporate permits—to protect communities from environmental damage. But a series of blocked efforts, often made worse by the very agencies meant to protect the environment, convinced the group that more fundamental changes were necessary.
"Our system of environmental laws and regulations don't actually protect the environment," says CLEDF's Mari Margil. "At best, they merely slow the rate of its destruction ... We weren't helping anyone protect anything."
The organization has since changed its goals, working with citizens from all over North and South America to literally rewrite local laws in ways that allow people to speak up for their communities, watersheds, forests, and air.
According to Margil, anemic environmental laws spring from the fact that nature has no constitutional rights. CLEDF has taken a local approach to reversing this structural blind spot, drafting ordinances for townships from New England to Pennsylvania to Washington State that:
Give communities legal authority to say "No" to unwanted corporate activities;
Recognize the rights of nature;
Strip corporations of their constitutional rights.
In one landmark victory, the town of Barnstead, New Hampshire, voted 135 to 1 to ban the privatization of their freshwater by encroaching corporate interests—the first community in the nation to do so. Other towns have followed, stripping corporations of the rights of personhood and recognizing the rights of communities to self-govern. In 2008, with legal advice from CELDF, Ecuador recognized the right of nature to exist and persist in its national constitution.
PART 1
PART2
PART 3
This video was produced by Bioneers, a nonprofit organization that provides a forum and hub for social and scientific innovators.
Let's see....when did they remove Panetta as head of the CIA and put Gen Petraeus in charge of the CIA?????? 'Defense Secretary Robert Gates will retire on June 30 with Panetta taking over in July. Gates told senior staff that he recommended Panetta as his replacement six months ago.' So Panetta knew he was leaving the end of June and the leader of Hezbollah announces in June they have rooted out at least two CIA spies?
Does anyone think it is a LITTLE FRIGGIN' coincidental that right before he is about to leave, they announce they rooted out at least 2 CIA spies? I swear guys, I think they were outed by Panetta and he got out just in time and would leave General Patreus to clean up this disaster!
What do you think? It was announced April 27th and Panetta was to officially leave July 1st.
CIA Spy Ranks Reportedly Busted in Iran, Lebanon
Published November 21, 2011
| Associated Press
The CIA's operations in Lebanon have been badly damaged after Hezbollah identified and captured a number of U.S. spies recently, current and former U.S. officials told The Associated Press. The intelligence debacle is particularly troubling because the CIA saw it coming.
Hezbollah's longtime leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, boasted on television in June that he had rooted out at least two CIA spies who had infiltrated the ranks of Hezbollah, which the U.S. considers a terrorist group closely allied with Iran. Though the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon officially denied the accusation, current and former officials concede that it happened and the damage has spread even further.
In recent months, CIA officials have secretly been scrambling to protect their remaining spies -- foreign assets or agents working for the agency -- before Hezbollah can find them.
To be sure, some deaths are to be expected in shadowy spy wars. It's an extremely risky business and people get killed. But the damage to the agency's spy network in Lebanon has been greater than usual, several former and current U.S. officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about security matters.
The Lebanon crisis is the latest mishap involving CIA counterintelligence, the undermining or manipulating of the enemy's ability to gather information. Former CIA officials have said that once-essential skill has been eroded as the agency shifted from outmaneuvering rival spy agencies to fighting terrorists. In the rush for immediate results, former officers say, tradecraft has suffered.
The most recent high-profile example was the suicide bomber who posed as an informant and killed seven CIA employees and wounded six others in Khost, Afghanistan in December 2009.
Last year, then-CIA director Leon Panetta said the agency had to maintain "a greater awareness of counterintelligence." But eight months later, Nasrallah let the world know he had bested the CIA, demonstrating that the agency still struggles with this critical aspect of spying and sending a message to those who would betray Hezbollah.
The CIA was well aware the spies were vulnerable in Lebanon. CIA officials were warned, including the chief of the unit that supervises Hezbollah operations from CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., and the head of counterintelligence. It remains unclear whether anyone has been or will be held accountable in the wake of this counterintelligence disaster or whether the incident will affect the CIA's ability to recruit assets in Lebanon.
In response to AP's questions about what happened in Lebanon, a U.S. official said Hezbollah is recognized as a complicated enemy responsible for killing more Americans than any other terrorist group before September 2001. The agency does not underestimate the organization, the official said.
The CIA's toughest adversaries, like Hezbollah and Iran, have for years been improving their ability to hunt spies, relying on patience and guile to exploit counterintelligence holes.
In 2007, for instance, when Ali-Reza Asgari, a brigadier general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps of Iran, disappeared in Turkey, it was assumed that he was either killed or defected. In response, the Iranian government began a painstaking review of foreign travel by its citizens, particularly to places like Turkey where Iranians don't need a visa and could meet with foreign intelligence services.
It didn't take long, a Western intelligence official told the AP, before the U.S., Britain and Israel began losing contact with some of their Iranian spies.
The State Department last year described Hezbollah as "the most technically capable terrorist group in the world," and the Defense Department estimates it receives between $100 million and $200 million per year in funding from Iran.
Backed by Iran, Hezbollah has built a professional counterintelligence apparatus that Nasrallah -- whom the U.S. government designated an international terrorist a decade ago -- proudly describes as the "spy combat unit." U.S. intelligence officials believe the unit, which is considered formidable and ruthless, went operational in about 2004.
Using the latest commercial software, Nasrallah's spy-hunters unit began methodically searching for spies in Hezbollah's midst. To find them, U.S. officials said, Hezbollah examined cellphone data looking for anomalies. The analysis identified cellphones that, for instance, were used rarely or always from specific locations and only for a short period of time. Then it came down to old-fashioned, shoe-leather detective work: Who in that area had information that might be worth selling to the enemy?
The effort took years but eventually Hezbollah, and later the Lebanese government, began making arrests. By one estimate, 100 Israeli assets were apprehended as the news made headlines across the region in 2009. Some of those suspected Israeli spies worked for telecommunications companies and served in the military.
Back at CIA headquarters, the arrests alarmed senior officials. The agency prepared a study on its own vulnerabilities, U.S. officials said, and the results proved to be prescient.
The analysis concluded that the CIA was susceptible to the same analysis that had compromised the Israelis, the officials said.
CIA managers were instructed to be extra careful about handling sources in Lebanon. A U.S. official said recommendations were issued to counter the potential problem.
But it's unclear what preventive measures were taken by the Hezbollah unit chief or the officer in charge of the Beirut station. Former officials say the Hezbollah unit chief is no stranger to the necessity of counterintelligence and knew the risks. The unit chief has worked overseas in hostile environments like Afghanistan and played an important role in the capture of a top terrorist while stationed in the Persian Gulf region after the attacks of 9/11.
"We've lost a lot of people in Beirut over the years, so everyone should know the drill," said a former Middle East case officer familiar with the situation.
But whatever actions the CIA took, they were not enough. Like the Israelis, bad tradecraft doomed these CIA assets and the agency ultimately failed to protect them, an official said. In some instances, CIA officers fell into predictable patterns when meeting their sources, the official said.
This allowed Hezbollah to identify assets and case officers and unravel at least part of the CIA's spy network in Lebanon. There was also a reluctance to share cases and some files were put in "restricted handling." The designation severely limits the number of people who know the identity of the source but also reduces the number of experts who could spot problems that might lead to their discovery, officials said.
Nasrallah's televised announcement in June was followed by finger-pointing among departments inside the CIA as the spy agency tried figure out what went wrong and contain the damage.
The fate of these CIA assets is unknown. Hezbollah treats spies differently, said Matthew Levitt, a counterterrorism and intelligence expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Studies who's writing a book about the terrorist organization
"It all depends on who these guys were and what they have to say," Levitt said. "Hezbollah has disappeared people before. Others they have kept around."
Who's responsible for the mess in Lebanon? It's not clear. The chief of Hezbollah operations at CIA headquarters continues to run the unit that also focuses on Iranians and Palestinians. The CIA's top counterintelligence officer, who was one of the most senior women in the clandestine service, recently retired after approximately five years in the job. She is credited with some important cases, including the recent arrests of Russian spies who had been living in the U.S. for years.
Officials said the woman was succeeded by a more experienced operations officer. That officer has held important posts in Moscow, Southeast Asia, Europe and the Balkans, important frontlines of the agency's spy wars with foreign intelligence services and terrorist organizations.
Topic: Cliff Kincaid has startling information that he and Trevor Loudon have uncovered revealing that Obama's CIA Director and Sec. Of Defense designate Leon Panetta has a long history of association with communists agents and revolutionary regimes.
President Barack Obama plans to name CIA Director Leon Panetta as the next secretary of defense and move Gen. David Petraeus, now running the war in Afghanistan, into the CIA chief's job in a major shuffle of the U.S. national security leadership, senior administration officials and other sources said Wednesday.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates will retire on June 30 with Panetta taking over in July. Gates told senior staff that he recommended Panetta as his replacement six months ago.
Gates described his plans ahead of a White House announcement, expected Thursday, that Panetta would be the president's choice to replace Gates.
Petraeus' move to the CIA is not expected until early fall, after he wraps up his term as Afghan commander over the summer, officials said.
The four-star general also agreed to retire from the military before taking the position, in a meeting with President Barack Obama to discuss the move in mid-March, administration officials said.
The CIA would probably be led by a deputy over the summer.
All sources spoke on condition of anonymity because the changes hadn't been announced by the president.
The officials said Obama would name Lt. Gen. John Allen to replace Petraeus as Afghanistan commander, and diplomat Ryan Crocker to be the next U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan. With the turnover slated for September, that gives the administration several months to get Petraeus, Allen and Crocker confirmed by the Senate for their new positions.
Allen, now the deputy commander of U.S. Central Command in Florida, is due in Washington on Wednesday, and sources in Afghanistan said Petraeus was also headed to Washington.
U.S. military and civilian defense leaders call 2011 the make-or-break year for turning around the war and laying the path for a gradual U.S. exit by 2015. The main obstacles are the uncertain leadership and weak government of Hamid Karzai, the open question of whether the Taliban can be integrated into Afghan political life and the continued safe harbor Pakistan provides for militants attacking U.S. and NATO forces over the border in Afghanistan.
A U.S. official who confirmed Panetta's move to the Pentagon said the White House chose him because of his long experience in Washington, including working as a congressman with budgets at the intelligence agency, as well as his time as CIA director. The official said Panetta had traveled more than 200,000 miles to more than 40 CIA stations and bases and more than 30 countries, including Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Panetta's experience as a former director of the White House Office of Management and Budget will be helpful as the military faces efforts to cut defense spending, said John Nagl, president of the Center for a New American Security, and a member of the Defense Policy Board.
Nagl said Panetta brings "an understanding of the budget process that's probably unmatched, plus complete currency on both wars," in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Gates has come up with $400 billion in prospective cuts to the defense budget over the next 10 years, and Obama has asked him to come up with $400 billion more, Nagl said, a task that will now fall to Panetta, if he is confirmed for the job.
Petraeus, who took over as Afghanistan war commander last June, had been expected to leave that post before the end of this year. His name had been floated for weeks as a possible replacement for Panetta. Current and former administration officials noted that Petraeus would bring a customer's eye to the job as one of the key people to use and understand CIA and military intelligence during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Petraeus contends that military advances, especially in the traditional Taliban stronghold areas of southern Afghanistan, have blunted the Taliban-led insurgency and given the edge to the U.S. and its NATO partners. A planned transition to Afghan security control begins this year, and the U.S. wants to start withdrawing some of its approximately 100,000 forces in July.
Sending Crocker to Afghanistan would briefly reunite him with the outgoing Petraeus, recreating the diplomatic and military team credited with rescuing the flagging American mission in Iraq. Crocker would replace Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, a former Army general whose two-year tenure has been marred by cool relationships with major players in the Afghanistan war, including the White House, U.S. military leaders and Afghan President Karzai, administration and other sources said.
The nearly wholesale changes at the top of Obama's Afghanistan military and diplomatic lineup will leave fewer military and civilian leaders who have Obama's ear and who also have Afghanistan experience. Allen, the choice to become Afghanistan war commander, has never served there.
Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will leave his post in September after four years dominated by the ebb of the war in Iraq and the escalation of the one in Afghanistan. The top candidate to replace Mullen is Marine Gen. James Cartwright, who also has never served in Afghanistan.
This is an excellent documentary exposing the infiltration of Communists in America and the plan to destroy our country from within. I would HIGHLY recommend your purchasing a copy for yourself and buying as many copies as you can to hand out to others...
Our country is at a tipping point and many Americans are starting to wake up. The 2012 election is going to determine if we have any hope of restoring this great country to it's founding principles. If we don't do everything we can to inform the majority, I am afraid we will be doomed to losing this country to the evil that has been quietly pushing it's immoral, anti-God, anti-family, anti-American agenda. Those in power right now are deliberately destroying our country and our ability to be self sufficient. What we are seeing is pure evil. Are you going to be silent or are you going to stand up and be heard?
"When Idaho Legislator Curtis Bowers wrote a "letter to the editor" about the drastic changes in America's culture, it became the feature story on the evening news, people protested at the Capitol, and for weeks the local newspapers were filled with responses. He realized then... he'd hit on something. Ask almost anyone and you'll hear, "Communism is dead! The Berlin Wall came down." Thought the word communism isn't used anymore, this film will show the ideas behind it are alive and well. Join Bowers for a fascinating look at the people and groups that have successfully targeted America's morality and freedom in their effort to grind America down. It's a well documented AGENDA."
In the documentary, they touch on Communism's 45 Goals To Destroy America. On Jan. 10, 1963, Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. of Florida read a list of 45 Communist goals into the Congressional Record. The list was derived from researcher Cleon Skousen’s book “The Naked Communist.” These principles are well worth revisiting today in order to gain insights into the thinking and strategies of much of our so-called liberal elite: COMMUNISM'S 45 GOALS TO DESTROY AMERICA
"This blog or any content... on my facebook site may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit. This blog does not always agree with certain personal views of the published authors, but I will overlook such views many times in order to gain knowledge from the more important subject matter of the article/op-ed."
It was the second part of the majority of these essays (from a population of 180 students) that left me discouraged and bewildered.
