US Policy of Terror: Attack Rescuers and the Grieving.

Many of us have asked why the Germans didn't stand up to Hitler. Why they allowed him to get away with the unspeakable. Well, here we are, almost 75 years later, and the elite's military industrial complex wages illegal war after illegal war, killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent civilians, based on nothing but packs of lies, in order to guarantee their massive power and profit. But what about us? The 99%.

What explains the lack of outrage and discourse regarding this insane and immoral policy? What explains the apathy? How long before the terrorism and crimes against humanity, starting with the Native Americans, and African Americans, that we've inflicted on others visits upon us?

Glenn Greenwald reports on the slaughter of grieving friends and family, and the murder of first responders.

In February, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism documented that after the U.S. kills people with drones in Pakistan, it then targets for death those who show up at the scene to rescue the survivors and retrieve the bodies, as well as those who gather to mourn the dead at funerals: “the CIA’s drone campaign in Pakistan has killed dozens of civilians who had gone to help rescue victims or were attending funerals.” As The New York Times summarized those findings: “at least 50 civilians had been killed in follow-up strikes after they rushed to help those hit by a drone-fired missile” while “the bureau counted more than 20 other civilians killed in strikes on funerals.”

This repellent practice continues. Over the last three days, the U.S. has launched three separate drone strikes in Pakistan: one on each day. As The Guardian reports, the U.S. has killed between 20 and 30 people in these strikes, the last of which, early this morning, killed between 8 and 15. It was the second strike, on Sunday, that targeted mourners gathered to grieve those killed in the first strike

At the time of the attack, suspected militants had gathered to offer condolences to the brother of a militant commander killed during another US unmanned drone attack on Saturday. The brother was one of those who died in the Sunday morning attack. The Pakistani officials said two of the dead were foreigners and the rest were Pakistani.

Note that there is no suggestion, even from the “officials” on which these media reports (as usual) rely, that the dead man was a Terrorist or even a “militant.” He was simply receiving condolences for his dead brother. But pursuant to the standards embraced by President Obama, the brother — without knowing anything about him — is inherently deemed a “combatant” and therefore a legitimate target for death solely by virtue of being a “military-age male in a strike zone.” Of course, killing family members of bombing targets is nothing new for this President: let’s recall the still-unresolved question of why Anwar Awlaki’s 16-year-old American son, Abdulrahman, was killed by a U.S. drone attack in Yemen two weeks after his father was killed.

I ask this sincerely: what kind of country targets rescuers, funeral attendees, and people gathered to mourn? If a Hollywood film featured a villainous King ordering lethal attacks on rescuers, funerals and mourners — those medically attending to or grieving his initial victims — any decent audience member would, by design, seethe with contempt for such an inhumane tyrant. But this is the standard policy and practice under President Obama and it continues through today. Recall the outrage that was sparked when WikiLeaks released its Collateral Murder video showing a U.S. Apache helicopter during the Bush era firing on unarmed rescuers, who had arrived to retrieve the initial victims who had been shot and were laying wounded on the ground. That tactic continues under President Obama, although it is now expanded to include the targeting of grieving rituals.

The War Prayer. By Mark Twain

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and sputtering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spreads of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country and invoked the God of Battles, beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpouring of fervid eloquence which moved every listener.

It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety's sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came-next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their faces alight with material dreams-visions of a stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender!-then home from the war, bronzed heros, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag or, failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation -- "God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest, Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!"

Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was that an ever--merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory -

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher's side and stood there, waiting.

With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal,"Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord our God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!"

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside -- which the startled minister did -- and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said

"I come from the Throne-bearing a message from Almighty God!" The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. "He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd and grant it if such shall be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import-that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of-except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two- one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of His Who hearth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this-keep it in mind. If you beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

"You have heard your servant's prayer-the uttered part of it. I am commissioned by God to put into words the other part of it-that part which the pastor, and also you in your hearts, fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard these words: 'Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory-must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God the Father fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle-be Thou near them! With them, in spirit, we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it-for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(After a pause)

"Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits."

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

Read more...

How to Remove Your Google Search History Before New Privacy Policy Takes Effect

On March 1st, Google will implement its new, unified privacy policy, which will affect data Google has collected on you prior to March 1st as well as data it collects on you in the future. Until now, your Google Web History (your Google searches and sites visited) was cordoned off from Google's other products. This protection was especially important because search data can reveal particularly sensitive information about you, including facts about your location, interests, age, sexual orientation, religion, health concerns, and more. If you want to keep Google from combining your Web History with the data they have gathered about you in their other products, such as YouTube or Google Plus, you may want to remove all items from your Web History and stop your Web History from being recorded in the future.

Click here to see how you can do that.

Read more...

"As if Some Evil Beast Controls Government, the Economy, and Our Lives Now"

Mark, a member of the 99'ers (those whose extended unemployment benefits expire after 99 weeks) wrote a suicide note chronicling his plight and the plight of an ever increasing number of unemployed Americans, due to no fault of their own.

To the unemployed, sick, disabled and poor:

Hello,

I'm unemployed over two years now, a 99er without any benefits for three months. I followed Unemployed Friends almost from its start, never posted until now, but am grateful for my time with you all. I did as asked with calls and e-mails, etc. I've a confession to make to you all. I'm a criminal.

I've obeyed the 10 commandments and all laws except: I'm unemployed and that's now a crime, I'm poor and that's a crime, I'm worthless surplus population and that's a crime, I'm a main street American Citizen born and raised in the USA and that's now a crime, and I'm euthanizing myself as I write this note -- so arrest my corpse. This isn't a call for help, the deed is done, it's not what I wanted. Death is my best available option. It's not just that my bank account is $4, that I've not eaten in a week, not because hunger pangs are agonizing (I'm a wimp), not because I live in physical and mental anguish, not because the landlady is banging on the door non-stop and I face eviction, not that Congress and President have sent a strong message they no longer help the unemployed. It's because I'm a law abiding though worthless, long-term unemployed older man who is surplus population. Had I used my college education to rip people off and steal from the elderly, poor, disabled and main street Americans I would be wearing different shoes now -- a petty king. Hard work, honesty, loving kindness, charity and mercy, and becoming unemployed and destitute unable to pay your bills are all considered foolishness and high crimes in America now. Whereas stealing and lying and cheating and being greedy to excess and destroying the fabric of America is rewarded and protected -- even making such people petty king and petty queens among us.

Since the end of 2008, when corporate America began enjoying the resumption of growth, profits have swelled from an annualized pace of $995 billion to the current $1.66 trillion as of the end of September 2010. Over the same period, the number of non-farm jobs counted by the Labor Department has slipped from 13.4 million to 13 million -- there is no recovery for the unemployed and main street. We taxpayers have handed trillions of dollars to the same bank and insurance industry that started our economic disaster with its reckless gambling. We bailed out General Motors. We distributed tax cuts to businesses that were supposed to use this lubrication to expand and hire. For our dollars, we have been rewarded with starvation, homelessness and a plague of fear -- a testament to post-national capitalism.

Twelve years ago, I lost the last of my family. Ten years ago, I lost the love of my life, couldn't even visit him in the hospital because gays have no rights. I fought through and grieved and went on as best I could. Seven years ago, I was diagnosed with Diabetes and Stage 2 high blood pressure with various complications including kidney problems, mild heart failure, Diabetic Retinopathy. These conditions are debilitating and painful. I am on over eight prescribed medications, which is very difficult without insurance and income. But I struggled on and my primary caregiver was very pleased with my effort overtime with my A1C at seven. Still these physical disabilities have progressively worsened, and I have had a harder and harder time functioning in basic ways. All the while, I give thanks to God because I know there are many more worse off than me -- and I tried to help by giving money to charities and smiling at people who looked down and sharing what little I had.

I am college educated and worked 35 years in management, receiving written references and praise from every boss for whom I worked. Yet, after thousands of resumes, applications, e-mails, phone calls, and drop ins, I've failed to get a job even at McDonalds. I've discovered there are three strikes against me -- most 99ers will understand. Strike one -- businesses are not hiring long-term unemployed -- in fact many job ads now underline "the unemployed need not apply." Strike two -- I am almost 60 years old. Employers prefer hiring younger workers who demand less and are better pack mules. Strike three -- for every job opening I've applied, there are over 300 applicants according to each business who allow a follow up call. With the U3 unemployment holding steady at 9.6percent and U6 at 17 percent for the past 18 months, the chances of me or any 99er landing a job is less than winning the Mega Million Jackpot. On top of that, even the most conservative economists admit unemployment will not start to fall before 2012 and most predict up to seven years of this crap.

I believe the Congress and President have no intention of really aiding the unemployed -- due to various political reasons and their total removal from the suffering of most Americans, their cold-hearted, self-serving natures. Had they really wanted to help us, they could have used unspent stimulus monies or cut foolish costs like the failed wars or foreign aid, and farm subsidies. The unspent stimulus money alone cold have taken care of ALL unemployed persons for five years or until the unemployment rate reached 7 percent if Congress and the President really wanted to help us -- and not string us all along with a meager safety net that fails every few months. In any case, if I were to survive homelessness (would be like winning the mega-millions) and with those three strikes against me, in seven more years, I'll be near 70 with the new retirement age at 70 -- now who will hire an old homeless guy out of work for nine years with just a few years until retirement?

So, here I am. Long term unemployed, older man, with chronic health problems, now totally broke, hungry, facing eviction. My landlady should really be an advocate for the unemployed -- she bangs on my door demanding I take action. A phone call and a "please" are not enough for her -- she is angry. She is right to be angry with me, I am unemployed -- as apparently everyone is now angry with us unemployed.

Two hundred and eleven and social services cannot help single men. Food banks and other charities are unable to help any more folks -- they are overwhelmed with the poor in this nation. So I have the "freedom" to be homeless and destitute and "pursue happiness" in garbage cans and then die -- yay for America huh? It's the end of November and cold. A diabetic homeless older person will experience amputations in the winter months. So I will be raiding garbage cans for food, as my body literally falls apart, a foot here, a finger there. I have experienced and even worked with pain from my diseases -- hardship I can face. I just cannot muster the courage to slowly die in agony and humiliation in the gutter.

I have no family, I have no friends. For the past two years, I've had nobody to talk with as people who knew me react to the "unemployed" label as if it were leprosy and contagious. I am not a bad person, in fact people really like me. But everyone seems to be on a tight budget these days and living in incredible fear. It is hopeless since we all are hearing more and more that we unemployed are to blame for unemployment, that we are just lazy, that we are no good, that we are sinners, that we are druggies, yet we are the victims who suffer and are punished while the robber baron banksters and tycoons become senators, congress, presidents and petty kings. So the only option left for me is merciful self euthanasia.

It is with a heavy heart that I have set my death in motion, but what I am facing is not living. So off I go, I have made peace with God and placed my burden on Jesus and He forgives me. This nation has become evil to the core, with cold-hearted politicians and tycoons squeezing what little Main Street Americans have left. It is not the America into which I was born -- the land of the free and the home of the brave with kind folks who help neighbors -- it is now land of the Tycoon-haves and the rest of us have-nots who march into hopelessness and despair.

Every unemployed person I have met over these past two years have been saintly. Sharing what little they have, and being charitable -- being kind and patient and supportive. Isn't it amazing that we Americans who suffer so much, have not taken to the streets in violence, riots or gotten out the guillotines and marched on tycoons and Washington in revolt as would happen in most other nations? But rather we plead with deaf politicians to please help us. We don't demand huge sums -- just 300 bucks a week, barely enough to cover housing for most. Most of all we say, please help us get a job, please allow us dignity.

I can't help but juxtapose our plight to the tycoons and politicians. They are never satisfied with their enormous wealth, and always want more millions no matter whom it hurts. They STEAL from pension funds, banks, the people and government, and little Wall Street investors. Then rather than face punishment, they become petty kings in this world. They are disloyal to America, unpatriotic, and serve their own foreign UN-American greedy causes and demand more and more and more. I feel that this is not the nation into which I was born. I was born in America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. America, where people give as much as they receive. America, where all people work for the common good, and try to leave a better and more prosperous nation for the next generation. America, where people help their neighbors and show charity and mercy. This new America is alien to me -- it is an America of greed and corruption and avarice and mean spirited selfishness and hatred of the common good -- it is an America of savage beasts roaring and tearing at the weak, and bullying the humble and peacemakers and poor and those without means to defend themselves. I am not welcome here anymore. I don't belong here anymore. It's as if some evil beast controls government, the economy, and our lives now.

I must go now, my home is someplace else. Goodbye and God bless you all. God bless the unemployed and poor and elderly and disabled. God bless America and the American people except the tycoons and politicians -- may God retain the sins of tycoons and politicians and phony preachers and send them to the Devil.

Mark

Links:

Nine Pictures of the Extreme Income/Wealth Gap

Many people don’t understand our country’s problem of concentration of income and wealth because they don’t see it. People just don't understand how much wealth there is at the top now. The wealth at the top is so extreme that it is beyond most people’s ability to comprehend.

If people understood just how concentrated wealth has become in our country and the effect is has on our politics, our democracy and our people, they would demand our politicians do something about it.

How Much Is A Billion?

Some Wall Street types (and others) make over a billion dollars a year – each year. How much is a billion dollars? How can you visualize an amount of money so high? Here is one way to think about it: The median income in the US is around $50,000, meaning half of us make less and half of us make more. If you make $50,000 a year, and don’t spend a single penny of it, it will take you 20,000 years to save a billion dollars. . . . (Please come back and read the rest of this after you have recovered.)

Read more...

What Kind of Message is the Debate on DADT Sending?

Historic votes don't assure end to 'don't ask, don't tell'?

Really? Even when, overwhelmingly, public opinion is pro-DADT repeal, but the Joint Chiefs chairman, Admiral Mike Mullen, is urging caution and delay.  He says that he is concerned about the potential impact of the repeal of the discriminatory policy  that is DADT, because he's afraid the repeal will interfere with  "military's readiness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention". Mullen is sorry that the vote went through before the Pentagon completed its policy review, the Pentagon's survey of troops and their families, which will supposedly demonstrate how to gradually pace the implementation of the repeal. What does that even mean?  

“So since they know DADT is almost certainly on the way out, the real question for senior military leaders is to negotiate the best terms for its repeal. And what they want to protect more than anything else, as ADM Mullen’s comments indicate, is their ability to retain control over military personnel policies generally. If they fight a repeal that happens anyway, the loss of control would reverberate over the long term. But if they hold off implementing a repeal that is coming no matter what until they can say that they completed a study that endorses repeal, they can put themselves on the “winning” side. It’s a neat political sleight-of-hand that is a well-worn tool among Washington insiders — those who control policy implementation in a given area can position themselves to be the champions of a policy change that they know is coming rather than fighting it and being seen as defeated.”

“DADT will probably be repealed, but implementation will probably be delayed until the military makes a climactic endorsement of the policy change that’s coming anyway. The modern military is politically savvy enough to make itself the winner of the turf war in the process.” -- Jason Arvak

Why, all of a sudden, is there is an abundance of concern for the opinion and/or feelings of the military's rank and file?  Were surveys completed on how the rank and file feel about compensation policy, consecutive tours of duty without any additional support, soldiers on food stamps, Blackwater, etc?   

Anyway, the  "don't ask don't tell" compromise seems to think that the military's rank and file  are so fragile that the admission of the true sexuality of a colleague, who is equally willing to put his or her  life on the line for this country, will send them spiraling over the edge. If that's true, how can they expect these"fragile" men and women to risk  life and limb, as they endeavor to endure live combat?  Nevertheless, the president, the defense secretary and the Joint Chiefs of Staff must certify that the repeal will not affect the military’s ability to fight.



The focus of this debate in the media has accentuated all the "negative" aspects or repealing DADT, when in fact, very few, if any negative aspects exist.  Tune in and you will hear about the poor timing, "implementation problems" (gradual pace), and undermining "military cohesion" just to name a few.  And even though the repeal is non-controversial at this point, with recent polls showing as much as 75% of the public in favor, the corporate media has turned the repeal of DADT into a political football, making the repeal far from a done deal as "two hurdles remain before the demise of "don't ask, don't tell" can be assured".  McCain being one, and

Since it became law in 1993 under Bill Clinton, DADT has forced lesbian, gay and bisexual service members to stay in the closet or face discharge.  To date, 13,500 members of the armed forces were discharged under this law, according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, SLDN, an advocacy organization, while tens of thousands of current service members are forced to hide in the closet.

At  a time when the military and U.S. intelligence agencies did not have enough Arabic linguists - their skills indispensable - the military  fired at least fifty-eight Arabic translators placing the anti-gay position over national security, exponentially adding to the hidden cost of this onerous law.    How many terrorist messages went untranslated because an arabic or farsi or urdu translator was not OMG! heterosexual?

Recently, Dan Choi, the most visible gay spokesperson in favor of the repeal, and a West Point graduate and officer in the Army National Guard who is fluent in Arabic with a degree in environmental engineering, and who returned recently from Iraq, received notice that the military is about to fire him. Why? Because he came out of the closet as a gay man on national television.

Other nations that have lifted similar bans involving gays — including such close allies as Australia, Britain, Canada and Israel — report no harm to military effectiveness. As many as 66,000 gay men and women may be serving in the U.S. military, about 2.2 percent of all personnel, including 13,000 on active duty, according to a study by the Williams Institute of the University of California at Los Angeles School of Law.

But the homophobic GOP prepared to refuse an up or down vote in the Senate on a bill that funds the troops during two wars because Americans will eventually be able to serve in the Armed Forces, without hiding their sexual orientation. Unsurprisingly, in Fox’s nine segments that mentioned Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell following Obama’s announcement, not a single gay source was featured.

What kind of justice forces homosexuals, who serve our country, in the military, hide who they are, as they make the ultimate sacrifice?

Links:
Repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Would Honor Gay Veterans

"Except that it wasn't. At a ceremony to recognize our completion of basic training, the base commander gave a speech in which he said, "If you're homosexual, you have no business being here." As much as anything, it was the tone in which it was said, as if to say, "If you're hiding, we will find you."

I was shaken by the commander's statement. It was as if he had said it directly to me. Though I went on to complete my technical school training and was subsequently assigned to an Air Force base in West Texas, the damage had been done. I became overwhelmed by doubt and depression, fearing that if my secret were found out, only the worst of fates -- court-martial, for example -- awaited me.

My military service ended some three months later after I approached my supervisor about a discharge. I didn't tell him I was gay, just that I thought I was incompatible with military service. A compassionate man, he was sorry to me go, but worked with me to get me discharged. Less than eight months after I had enlisted, I was heading back to Denver as a civilian once more."

Palm Center - "Blueprints for sound public policy." The Palm Center is a think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Since 1998, the Center has been a leader in commissioning and disseminating research in the areas of gender, sexuality, and the military. For more information visit

Myths and Falsehoods of Don't Ask Don't Tell

Media reports are legitimizing the fear tactics of anti-gay obstructionists with uncritical reporting about gay troop disruptions.

But Aaron Belkin, Director of the Palm Center, says this is a “false debate” taken up too readily by even mainstream journalists. “There is zero evidence that the transition will be difficult,” he said. “In fact, research across the board shows that implementation of openly gay service is a non-event and that the only thing that could make it bumpy is the suggestion by leaders that there’s cause for alarm.” Belkin pointed to research by the Government Accountability Office, the RAND Corporation, and the Palm Center showing that just two variables are relevant in ensuring a smooth transition: signals of confidence by leadership and a clear, single standard of behavior that applies to everyone. He also said that, unlike ending racial segregation, lifting "don't ask, don't tell" does not require massive change, such as the movement of personnel or newly integrating units, since gays are already integrated into units throughout the force, and polls show that many of them already serve openly.

Read more...

Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell Years Away

Last March, Dan Choi, an Arabic speaker, infantry officer, and Iraq combat veteran, of over ten years, told Rachel Maddow, "By saying three words to you today -- 'I am gay' -- those three words are a violation of Title 10 of the U.S. Code. . . . Basically, they want us to lie about our identity." For disclosing that he was gay on the Rachel Maddow Show, he became the first military Arabic translator discharged under DADT during the Obama presidency.

Choi, who spent the first ten years pretending to be someone he wasn't said he didn't "realize how painful and how toxic and how deadly Don't Ask, Don't Tell is until I had a love relationship and I was forced to lie about that."

Nearly 11,000 men and women who refused to comply with "don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) policy, including those who experience "third party outings," where a service member is kicked out after being reported by others to be gay, were dropped from duty since 1993. Amongst those 11,000 men and women fired -- despite the fact that we're at war with Arab countries, amidst a shortage of Arabic translators -- many were gay Arabic linguists.

According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll, three-quarters of Americans say that they support openly gay people serving in the military. The 75% figure is far above the 44% of Americans who said so in May 1993. Even former Vice President Dick Cheney thinks it’s time for DADT to go, but despite popular support, and the call for the end of DADT by the military's top officials, a complete repeal of DADT is probably years away.

"I wonder if they're going to poll the loved ones of gay soldiers and ask them how does it feel to not exist. How does it feel to be lied about?" "How does it feel when you're partner goes over seas [and] you can not kiss him or her on the tarmac. How does it feel if your soldier dies [and] you won't be notified? I hope they take that into consideration because those families are all American families." -- Dan Choi

However, just last week, one week after Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, called for an end to the 16-year-old "don't ask, don't tell" policy, Choi was called back to active army duty.

Read more...

Shutting Down the Pain Gate Before it Shuts You Down

Dr. Rollin Gallagher, Director of the Center for Pain Medicine, Research and Policy and clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania and Director of Pain Medicine at the Philadelphia VA Medical Center currently studies the treatment of pain in injured troops on the battlefield.
Pain management is no different on the battlefield today than it was during the Civil War…an injection of Morphine which provides short-term relief but does not do anything to prevent the pain from continuing long-term.

This new method of pain management Dr. Rollin Gallagher is studying not only stops the pain but it also prevents neural pathways of pain to be created, therefore addressing the chronic permanent pain many times associated with injury. This method works by placing a catheter right next to the nerves that transmit the pain information from the area of injury to the brain -- the soldier pushes a button that continuously dribbles medicine right on that nerve to paralyze the specific nerve connected to the place of injury. This new method of pain management prevents the pain signal from getting into the spinal cord where it makes those changes in the neural pathways leading to chronic severe nerve pain.

How pain works?

When injured, a signal immediately goes from the injured tissue into the nerves to your spinal cord and then it is relayed through a set of relay stations in your spinal cord to two parts of your brain, one part of the brains says it’s in my left arm and it’s bad or not so bad and the other part of the brain says this hurts and I hate it...the suffering part.

Then the brain sends a message back down to the spinal cord or the descending control mechanism that say this is really important or this is not so important.

Then you have a reaction around the tissue involved in the injury and have inflammatory cells getting activated and the inflammatory process.

Then either healing begins, if the area is stabilized or if it’s a disease process or a disease process that interferes with healing or continue to do something to activate the injury then healing won’t begin. The longer the pain goes untreated such as the actual stimulus doesn’t heal up properly then your going to have changes in the mechanics of the muscles involved in the area of injury that will continue to send signals from the periphery.

More importantly you may have changes in the spinal cord and brain that then permanently activate the pain causing Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome, where just moving, blowing on the area actually activates the pain system. In addition, from not using the area the person gets bone absorption, contractures (a shortening or distortion of muscular or connective tissue due to spasm, scar, or paralysis of the antagonist of the contracting muscle) and other problems that create new neural pathways of pain.

Studies are suggesting that early exposure (babies or children) to pain that is not controlled actually enables an overgrowth of the pain neuron system in the spinal cord so there may be people who are more reactive to the same level of stimulus based on what happened to them earlier on in life.

Read more...

Color of Wealth Gap is Now a Canyon.

For every $1 the median white family owns, the median Latino family owns .12 cents, and the median black family, only one dime (Federal Reserve's triennial Survey of Consumer Finances completed in 2007). This is an alarming acceleration in the growth of the racial wealth divide – the large gap between the value of the assets that are controlled by people of different races - in the last 30-years, especially in the last ten.

How can this be, when, more than ever before, African Americans and Latinos are taking part in the educational process, therefore earning more than they ever earned in the past?

Part of the answer lies in our tendency to confuse wealth and earnings income. Wealth goes beyond education and earnings, and is the broader measure of prosperity, or the total value of all material possessions and resources owned by an individual or group. Wealth or asset growth require time and opportunity, and gradually build through inter-generational inheritances and transfers.

Whereas, many white families have had the opportunity to build wealth through past generations, African Americans and Latinos, if educated and earning a decent salary, are not only put in a position of making up for the legacy of wealth stripping that defined their past, they find themselves in a place of providing for the future, as well.

In the past, slavery, forced relocation and the confiscating of tribal lands served to expand the wealth of some groups while suppressing the growth of wealth in other groups. Today, in much the same way, government policies are set in place, or removed, in order to continue and grow the wealth divide.

Over the last ten years, the reversal and erosion of progressive fiscal policies originally designed to include the working poor amongst the middle class, combined with tax code, created to encourage asset building for the affluent, have transformed the racial wealth gap into a racial wealth canyon.

Today, the two-day Color of Wealth Policy Summit kicks off in Washington DC. The economists and policy experts will discuss ways to close the racial wealth gap.

Sources:

Barbara Robles author of The Color of Wealth: The Story Behind the U.S. Racial Wealth Divide, and one of the people attending the summit, along with minority businessman Earl Stafford who "paid $1 million for more than 300 rooms and an array of amenities to create opportunities for less-fortunate guests to take part in the inauguration of Barack Obama" joined NPR's Tell Me More.

The Wealth Gap gets Wider

Links:

Redlining in Philadelphia in 1934

Wealth Building Links

Read more...

Legal Tender: Is it Legal, Lawful, Constitutional? Part 2.

The same way most of us worship God, all of us - atheists and agnostics included - worship money, as money is the "god" at the center of the religion we all subscribe, monetary theism. We have little choice but to go along, because as blood is to the human body, money is to the institution - from familial to political to religious to legal to educational and of course, monetary - it functions as the lifeblood of society, without which, life would be unbearable.

Like religion, money unifies, divides, starts wars, provides peace, involves ritual and most important of all, requires us to have faith. In fact, there is no more unquestioned form of faith in America, than the trust we place in the value of our established monetary system. The last couple of months have shown us just how dependent our economy is on our continued reverence. While it's true our current economy, headquartered at the Federal Reserve, does indeed require our loyalty, it does not necessarily mean that loyalty is deserved.

So, what's wrong with the way our government has chosen to create and distribute money? Nothing. What's wrong, is allowing private unaccountable banks create and distribute money for private profit at the expense of we, the people.

Sure, everything is made to make it look as if the central bank operates in the public interest but the Federal Reserve is a private corporation, chartered in total secrecy by an act of Congress, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 on December 23, 1913.

The Federal Reserve is not federal. There is no reserve. And it’s not even a bank.
Those in the know, central bankers and the like, who benefit from our monetary system, purposefully obfuscate the mechanics of money supply (fractional reserve banking) so that we the people will not figure out that the creation of money is designed to perpetually rip us off by consistently transferring the wealth back to the banks.

The more complicated the economy and money creation process appears, the more we will avoid trying to figure it out, hence, just as we do with religion, we end up putting our absolute faith in this unseen entity, that works by a method that we don't fully understand. Faith is not the problem here, the issue is our knowledge of what we put our faith in.

God is mysterious and beyond human comprehension, however enough evidence exists that has convinced 75% of our nation to place our faith in His existence, and still we are constantly searching for clues to how He works. The irony is, that unlike God who we believe created us, we, human beings, create money. It's not all that mysterious and well within our grasp, nevertheless, humans who prosper so from having complete control of our money supply have a vested interest in convincing us that this institution is "sacred" and far beyond our understanding.

To truly understand the way our world works, the first thing we have to do is understand money.

Years ago, the Federal Reserve, produced a document entitled Modern Money Mechanics. This publication detailed and described the basic process of money creation in a fractional reserve banking system.

Our government decides it needs $10 billion, so the treasury prints up $10 billion of treasury bonds and places a call to the federal reserve (FR). The FR then prints up $10 billion in notes and buys the government bonds and the exchange is made. Only, in reality nothing is printed up, it is all done electronically.

Once this exchange is complete, the government than takes the $10 billion in FR notes, and deposits it into a bank account, and this deposit officially makes the FR notes, legal tender or money and adds $10 billion to the US money supply.

But wait, there's more...that was just the beginning. Government bonds are by design, instruments of debt because the government is actually promising to pay back that money to the FR. In other words, the money was created out of debt.

Based on fractional reserve banking, that $10 billion deposit instantly becomes part of the banks reserves, just as all deposits do, however only the prescribed reserve requirement needs to be present and accounted, normally 10% of the deposit. In this case, $1 billion is held as the required reserve, while the other $9 billion is considered an excessive reserve, and can be used as the basis for new loans.

One might assume that the $9 billion in excessive reserve is literally coming out of the existing $10 billion deposit. Not true. The $9 billion is created out of thin air, once again, ON TOP of the existing $10 billion deposit. Magically, our money supply expands.

From Modern Money Mechanics:

"Of course the banks do not really pay out loans for the money, they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional money would be created. What they do when they make loans is to accept promissory notes (loan contracts) in exchange for credits (money) to the borrowers transaction accounts."

This process then repeats over and over again. Let's say someone walks into this bank and borrows $9 billion and then takes that money and deposits it into their own bank account. The bank would hold 10% of the $9 billion deposit, the other 90% or $8.1 billion is now available as newly created money for more loans. And then that $8.1 billion can be loaned out and redeposited creating an additional $7.2 billion to $6.5 billion… etc…

For every deposit that ever occurs in the banking system, about nine times that amount can be created out of thin air.

So, what is giving this newly created money value? The already existing money supply. That's right, every time new money is created, it steals value from the existing money supply. Why? Because the money supply is being increased irrespective to demand for goods and services. This throws supply and demand way off so prices rise which in turn diminishes the purchasing power of each individual dollar. This is called inflation and this is why inflation is called a hidden tax on the population and why the fractional reserve system of monetary expansion is inherently inflationary as it debases the currency. This can be seen when we see that one dollar in 1913 requires $21.60 today to match value. That is a 96% devaluation since the Federal Reserve came into existence.

In this system, the only way money can come in to existence is from loans. Therefore, if everyone in the country were able to pay off all debts including the government, there would not be one dollar in circulation, hence we have the double-enrichment, debt-based currency system, which predominates throughout most of the western world.

Next up: The real scam: Interest.

"The modern banking system manufacturers money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand ever created. Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits". -- Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England,1928-41

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." -- Henry Ford

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."---Thomas Jefferson

Read more...

How Your Tax Dollars Are Spent

Do you wonder what your tax dollars buy? As the deadline for filing federal income taxes rolls around again this year, you may well wonder where those hard-earned bucks you've forked over to Uncle Sam actually go. The answer might surprise you.

This year the federal government expects a haul of about $2.7 trillion -- give or take a couple hundred billion or so, depending on the economy, corporate profits and Wall Street and of course, how honest everyone filing a return is.

The Biggest Chunk is Already Spent

In theory, at least, the White House and Congress work together -- or battle it out -- to decide how to divvy up every dollar paid to the federal government. In fact, most of it is already as good as spent.

About 70 percent of the annual budget pays for commitments already incurred -- everything from Social Security benefits to interest on the national debt. Neither President Bush nor Congress has much say over that.

The Social Safety Net

The biggest single chunk of that so-called nondiscretionary spending -- more than 20 percent of the total budget -- is used to pay Social Security benefits to existing retirees.

Another 15 percent pays the tab for Medicare health benefits. An additional 7 percent goes for Medicaid, 3 percent for veterans benefits and 1.3 percent for supplemental security income used to assist the aged, disabled and blind.

All types of aid to the needy -- Medicaid, housing subsidies, aid to poor families with children (welfare, which accounts for about 1 percent of the budget), food stamps, school lunches and so on, plus unemployment benefits -- account for about 16 percent of the budget.

In fact, all government payments to individuals amount to about 58 percent of the budget. That's twice the share of the budget such payments claimed 40 years ago. And the percentage continues to climb -- giving those pushing reform of such entitlement programs a powerful argument.

The National Debt

Interest on the debt claims about 10 percent of the budget. When President Bush took office, the national debt was $5.6 trillion, but deficits have pushed that number closer to $9 trillion today.

Where's the red ink coming from? Depends on who you ask: Democrats blame Bush's tax cuts and wasted defense spending. Republicans say that's not so, claiming that Bush's tax cuts boosted the economy and increased revenue. They blame increased deficits on wasteful social programs and spending necessary to fight the war on terrorism.

The Military's Slice of the Pie

The military gets the biggest piece of what's left -- the 30 percent of the budget called discretionary spending because it's the part of the budget that Congress and the White House can control from year to year.

About two-thirds of this spending (20 percent of the total budget) pays for the tanks, jets, ships, missiles, rifles and other paraphernalia of defense, not to mention the salaries of our country's soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. In the next fiscal year, which begins on Oct. 1, this will amount to nearly $600 billion, possibly more if costs in Iraq and Afghanistan climb higher than expected.

Some big-ticket Defense Department projects, such as purchase of new combat fighter jets, Navy shipbuilding and space weapons research, may be trimmed in light of the war costs. But that would barely dent the Pentagon's share of the overall budget, especially with more funds sure to be added to support medical and other needs of Iraq war veterans.

You might think a fifth of the federal government's total spending is a lot to put into defense. But in comparison to some earlier periods in our country's history, it's actually a smaller share. During President Ronald Reagan's defense buildup, the military claimed 26 percent of the budget. And at the height of the Vietnam War in 1968, 46 cents of every tax dollar Americans paid was for defense.

Of the remaining discretionary spending, the Department of Homeland Security claims about 1.5 percent of the budget, or $43 billion. Foreign aid spending, though it raises the ire of many taxpayers, accounts for just half of one percent and is likely to be reduced by Congress even further.

And Everything Else

The last 8.5 percent of Uncle Sam's budget pays for everything else: Transportation -- federal highways and bridges, support for Amtrak, funds to help states with other roads, bridges, railroads, airports and so on.

Science and medical research. Food and drug safety. Guarding the environment. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Export promotion. Import protections. Space exploration. Air traffic controllers. The FBI, the Drug Enforcement Agency and the rest of the Justice Department. Federal education funding.

And an alphabet soup of federal agencies tasked with helping to keep Americans safe, healthy and, sad to say, honest -- from the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) to the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) to the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission).

And when all is said and done, the $2.7-trillion tax revenues aren't enough to pay all of Uncle Sam's bills. This year, the federal government will spend about $200 billion more than it will take in.

Next year, the deficit will run about $300 billion. Coincidentally, that's just about the same amount that the government figures it's being stiffed by individuals and companies who don't pay all the taxes they owe, either by intent or by error.

Read more...

Can the Death Penalty Ever Be Justified as Public Policy?

In evaluating whether Maryland's criminal death penalty should be replaced with life without parole, one must be guided by the answers to two basic questions:

· Is the death penalty a just punishment for murder?

· Is the death penalty an effective deterrent to murder?

Most of us would point to the execution of John Thanos, here in our state, as an example of a "just" application of the death penalty. Thanos murdered three teenagers, at random, by shooting them point-blank. He expressed no remorse, even declaring in court that he wished he could bring his innocent victims back to life to kill them again. In the end, he demanded to be executed and was. Most Marylanders felt, basically, that "hanging was too good" for John Thanos.

Did this one relatively humane execution balance out a violent murder -- much less three violent murders? Can any execution really be said to "even the ledger" for the taking of another's unique life?

Contrast that with the case of Kirk Bloodsworth, also in Maryland, who was convicted and sentenced to death for rape and murder in 1985. Eight years later, DNA evidence proved his innocence and he was released. In Illinois, 12 people have been executed since 1977. But over that same time, 18 death-row inmates have been released after evidence proved they were innocent.

These examples prompt a deeper question. Notwithstanding the executions of the rightly convicted, can the death penalty ever be justified as public policy when it inherently necessitates the occasional taking of wrongly convicted, innocent life? In Maryland, since 1978, we have executed five people and set one convicted man free when his innocence was discovered. Are any of us willing to sacrifice a member of our own family -- wrongly convicted, sentenced and executed -- in order to secure the execution of five rightly convicted murders? And even if we were, could that public policy be called "just"? I do not believe it can.

But what about the deterrent value of the death penalty? Does the use of the death penalty -- while rarely, if ever, "just" -- save more innocent lives than it takes? The evidence indicates that it does not.

In 2005, the murder rate was 46 percent higher in states that had the death penalty than in states without it -- although they had been about the same in 1990. And while the murder rate has gone down across the board since 1990, it declined by 56 percent in states without the death penalty but only 38 percent in states that have it. It would appear that the death penalty is not a deterrent, but possibly an accelerant, to murder.

And what of the tremendous cost of pursuing capital punishment? In 2002, Judge Dale Cathell of the Maryland Court of Appeals wrote that, according to his research, processing and imprisoning a death penalty defendant "costs $400,000 over and above . . . a prisoner serving a life sentence." Given that 56 people have been sentenced to death in Maryland since 1978, our state has spent about $22.4 million more than the cost of life imprisonment. That's nearly $4.5 million "extra" for each of the five executions carried out. And so long as every American is presumed innocent until proven guilty, the cost of due process will not go down.

If, however, we were to replace the death penalty with life without parole, that $22.4 million could pay for 500 additional police officers or provide drug treatment for 10,000 of our addicted neighbors. Unlike the death penalty, these are investments that save lives and prevent violent crime. If we knew we could spare a member of our family from becoming a victim of violent crime by making this policy change, would we do it?

And if the death penalty as applied is inherently unjust and lacks a deterrent value, we are left to ask whether the value to society of partial retribution outweighs the cost of maintaining capital punishment. While I am mindful of and sensitive to the closure (and in some cases the comfort) that the death penalty brings to the unfathomable pain of families that have lost loved ones to violent crime, I believe that it does not.

Human dignity is the concept that leads brave individuals to sacrifice their lives for the lives of strangers. Human dignity is the universal truth that is the basis of ethics. Human dignity is the fundamental belief on which the laws of this state and this republic are founded. And absent a deterrent value, the damage done to the concept of human dignity by our conscious communal use of the death penalty is greater than the benefit of even a justly drawn retribution.

Read more...