Tenth Anniversary of legalized “therapeutic” prostitution in San Francisco

/in , , , , , /by

Here is the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality—again—offering a 2004 California State approved certificate for what amounts to therapeutic prostitution. The “course” provides credits toward the PhD and all other sex ed degrees at the IASHS. Note the “baby massage” is included with the “erotic” training and remember the IASHS has sold child pornography to Hustler and has advocated child adult sex in publications and it is implicit in its mission statement. As you know, most of our “trained” researchers have been trained at the Kinseyan IASHS or by their graduates, on downward.

image003

For a larger view click on the image.

The World Net Daily article below includes the police view of the IASHS as establishing scientific cover for giving certificates for current open door policy to California Sexual Trafficking:

Basically, what the district attorney is saying to the pimps, the panderers and traffickers of women is, ‘Keep doing what you’re doing because we’re not going to do anything about it.'” The new law also does away with restrictions against sexually suggestive advertising and loosens restrictions on trainees. …[USING] a “culturally sensitive test to all applicants, in the applicant’s own language, to confirm basic proficiency in massage before issuing a permit.” Goodwin says the term “culturally sensitive” casts a wide net in San Francisco, pointing out that some massage schools are explicitly prostitution oriented, such as the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality’s program in “Sexological Bodywork.”

LAW OF THE LAND: Prostitution legal in San Francisco? City quietly passed measure liberalizing massage industry.

Originally posted: July 20, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern

Ten weeks before San Francisco shocked the nation by issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, the city quietly took another step in America’s cultural
revolution by liberalizing its massage permit laws to the point where some critics call it de facto legalization of prostitution.

Addressing the issue of sex workers in the massage industry, outgoing Mayor Willie Brown, with the nearly unanimous support of the Board of Supervisors, signed a new law Dec. 5 that redefines it as a public health issue rather than a matter of law enforcement.

The law went into effect July 1. By removing a requirement that applicants submit to fingerprinting and provide photo IDs, the measure opens the door to include most anyone in the massage industry, including convicted pedophiles and rapists, asserts Brian Goodwin, a massage therapist in San Rafael, Calif., near San Francisco.

Goodwin, largely through his website, has been a relatively lone voice sounding the alarm about legislation that has received scant attention in the press. “Basically, San Francisco’s new massage law is the only massage law in the world written specifically for the benefit of criminals, to help criminals to commit crimes, especially those crimes related to sex-slave trafficking, prostitution, rape, pedophilia, etc.,” Goodwin says.

After its passage, the leading public lobbyist behind an effort to decriminalize prostitution in the massage industry, David Palmer, hailed San Francisco’s “humane and compassionate” approach to the issue.

“San Francisco has not chosen to take a standard route to separate or distinguish adult entertainment from therapeutic massage,” Palmer, president of the San Francisco
Coalition of Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork, said in the July issue of the trade newsletter Massage Today. “San Francisco is a trendsetter,” he added. Palmer’s website acknowledges the ordinance comes at the end of a long process that began with the Board of Supervisors establishing a Task Force on Prostitution in March 1994. The task force’s final report, in 1996, admitted San Francisco “may not unilaterally legalize or decriminalize prostitution.”

Nevertheless, the panel urged the board to “remove authority for the licensing of massage parlors, masseuses and masseurs and escort services from the Vice Crime
Division’s jurisdiction and place it with agencies already qualified to grant other standard business licenses.”

At the time, the task force received wide media coverage and was roundly condemned in local newspaper editorials. Also, the first attempt to act on the recommendations, under the leadership of Supervisor Tom Ammiano in 1999, received attention. But passage of the recommendation Nov. 18, led by Supervisor Chris Daly, received barely a mention — one paragraph in the San Francisco Examiner in November, buried in a listing of recent board decisions, with no reference to the 1996 Task Force on Prostitution that inspired the changes. The item in the Nov. 21 Examiner reads:

In other actions: The board adopted a measure sponsored by Supervisor Chris Daly that transfers the licensing and regulating of massage parlors and massage practitioners from the Police Department to the Department of Public Health, in effect, saying that massage is more a health concern than a criminal one. [Supervisor Tony] Hall cast the lone vote in opposition.

Daly did not return a request for comment by press time, but in January, he told the Examiner the regulatory change would in no way affect the police department’s
jurisdiction in enforcing illegal activities such as human trafficking and prostitution, said to be an increasing problem. But Goodwin sees the city easing up on enforcement,
noting on June 24, San Francisco District Attorney Harris dropped all criminal charges in a prostitution sting operation, declaring, “Prostitution and regulatory violations at the clubs raise complex issues involving worker safety, exploitation of women, equity and fair notice.”

San Francisco Police Department Capt. Tim Hettrich summarized the city’s response: “Basically, what the district attorney is saying to the pimps, the panderers and traffickers of women is, ‘Keep doing what you’re doing because we’re not going to do anything about it.'”

Opening the door

How does San Francisco’s new massage law open the door to prostitution?

Under the old law, Police Code 27, applicants for a massage permit were required to undergo an identification process that included photographing and fingerprinting. That has been removed from the code, along with a section that prevented anyone convicted of prostitution from getting a permit. The latter omission was one of the main objections voiced by Hall. The new law also does away with restrictions against sexually suggestive advertising and loosens restrictions on trainees. Previously, the trainee could work only for the massage school in which he was enrolled, and the trainee permit could not be renewed beyond three months. The new law also has a trainee permit, but its only requirement is the payment of fees and registration as a student, and it can be renewed indefinitely.

For a full permit, the director of the Department of Public Health must administer a “culturally sensitive test to all applicants, in the applicant’s own language, to confirm
basic proficiency in massage before issuing a permit.” Goodwin says the term “culturally sensitive” casts a wide net in San Francisco, pointing out that some massage schools are explicitly prostitution oriented, such as the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality’s program in “Sexological Bodywork.”

The most drastic change, he says, is how violations are treated.

Under the old law, violators were misdemeanor criminals, threatened with revocation of the massage permit and up to six months in jail and a fine.

Under the new law’s Section 1928, however, violations no longer are crimes but simply treated like parking tickets, with “administrative fines.” The law may be violated as often as desired, as long as the fines are paid.

“The ramifications of this law have yet to be seen,” says Goodwin, who believes the previous law’s inclusion of identification requirements served as a deterrent to sex
traffickers who enslave women and children as prostitutes.

The old ID requirements also served to deter the San Francisco Bay Area’s 8,000 registered sex offenders from becoming massage therapists, he says.

But now, Goodwin contends, anyone can quickly acquire get a “trainee” massage permit by paying the fees and lying about identity.

RELATED STORIES: 

US reports rare case of woman-to-woman HIV transmission – Yahoo News

Study finds current US Penal Codes based on Scientific Fraud and Child Sex Crimes

HEALTH ALERT: Condoms never FDA-approved for sodomy

Hillary Clinton: Abortion Needed for Equality and Human Development?

/in , , , , , , /by

Restoring Liberty reports, “Twenty years after the Clintons failed to get countries to declare a right to abortion, Mrs. Clinton told a posh UN crowd that humanity cannot advance without reproductive rights. ‘You cannot make progress on gender equality or broader human development without safeguarding women’s reproductive health or rights,’ she declared. Clinton is adamant that reproductive health includes abortion.”

“The undisputed leader in the race for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination was the highlight of International Women’s Day at UN headquarters last Friday [March 14th], drawing thunderous applause from a well-heeled audience as she decried how women’s equality remains “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” notes the editors of Restoring Liberty.

In the below video of UN Women Executive Director Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka eerily echoes Clinton when she states “progress for women is progress for all.” Celebrating progress already made for women’s rights, women’s empowerment and gender equality, she further urged women, men, youth, and leaders of nations, communities, religion and commerce to recommit to making gender equality a global reality.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/ZVuBI6qXvcI[/youtube]

 

So why is abortion needed for gender equality and human development? We have heard similar words before from Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:

“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” – Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

Are men less fit than women? Is it necessary to abort more males than females? It is also interesting to note that Mlambo-Ngcuka is black. Margaret Sanger wrote on blacks, immigrants and indigents:

“…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”  – Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people.

Linda Gordon, in Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America,”We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

Today we read stories that there are more black abortions than births in New York City and a 73% black abortion rate in Mississippi. Some have labeled this national birth control effort “Black Genocide. ”Several years ago, when 17,000 aborted babies were found in a dumpster outside a pathology laboratory in Los, Angeles, California, some 12-15,000 were observed to be black,” noted Erma Clardy Craven (deceased) Social Worker and Civil Rights Leader.

Edwin Black, author of War Against The Weak, writes, “The global effort to help women make independent choices about their own pregnancies was dominated by one woman: Margaret Sanger… Motherhood was to most civilizations a sacred role. Sanger, however, wanted women to have a choice in that sacred role, specifically if, when and how often to become pregnant.”

Black notes, “… Sanger vigorously opposed charitable efforts to uplift the downtrodden and deprived, and argued extensively that it was better that the cold and hungry be left without help, so that the eugenically superior strains could multiply without competition from ‘the unfit.’ She repeatedly referred to the lower classes and the unfit as ‘human waste’ not worthy of assistance, and proudly quoted the extreme eugenic view that  human ‘weeds’ should be ‘exterminated.’ Moreover, for both political and genuine ideological reasons, Sanger associated closely with some of some of America’s most fanatical eugenic racists.” Sanger stated, “My criticism, therefore, is not directed at the ‘failure’ of philanthropy, but rather at its success.”

VIDEO OF UN WOMEN’S DAY PANEL WITH HILLARY CLINTON:

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is courtesy of United States Mission Geneva. This image is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Gates and Duncan and Their Common Core “Freedom” Charade

/in , , , , , /by

In his purchased keynote at the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) (I know, huh?), billionaire-with-zero-teaching-experience Bill Gates insisted that the feds are getting the bum rap when it comes to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). As Huffington Post’s Joy Resmovits notes:

Gates went on to address critiques that the Common Core represents a national curriculum, a federal takeover or the end of innovation. He said these claims are false and distract from teaching — and that teachers can provide the most effective response to critics. [Emphasis added.]

However, Resmovits continues with details that do indeed implicate US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and his USDOE in attempting to fashion “a national curriculum, a federal takeover, and an end to innovation”:

The creation of the Common Core started in 2009, and thanks in part to nudges from the federal government via the Race to the Top competition and the application process for waivers from the No Child Left Behind Act, most states have adopted them. 

“Nudges”?? Come now, Joy.

Robert Scott: CCSS-adoption Pressure Is Real

Consider Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott’s account of of the “nudge”:

“We had just spent three to four years developing our own college and career readiness standards,” Scott said referencing the TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge & Skills) as the main reason Texas was not interested in adopting the Common Core State Standards. However, there was still tremendous pressure being applied for something that, according to Scott, he was told was voluntary and state led. 

“We said no to Common Core and they said, ‘you want Race to the Top money?’ That was $700 million. They said, ‘do it.’ Well, we still said, no thanks.” Scott recalled. The feds also asked if Texas wanted an No Child Left Behind waiver and again, the state said no.  

Scott was education commissioner until late 2012. It was his successor, current commissioner Michael Williams, who applied for a No Child Left Behind (NCLB) waiver, which Texas was granted. Both RTTT and the NCLB waivers are tied to federal accountability mandate, which means testing. Education Week reported, even though Texas took the waiver without adopting the Common Core State Standards, the state still “had to scrap its own state accountability system in favor of one that aligns with federal requirements. It also had to redo student achievement goals.” Even Politico reported that Texas made concessions, buckling and giving into political coercion. [Emphasis added.]

Texas is one of five states that did not sign on to RTTT– that is how Texas escaped CCSS. As part of RTTT, states were required to demonstrate that they were part of some “common standards”– and CCSS was the only game in town. Thus, those “45 states and the District of Columbia” supposedly “volunteering” for RTTT were required to submit this CCSS memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed by the governor and the state education superintendent as part of the RTTT application.

That is hardly Duncan/USDOE neutrality when it comes to CCSS.

But Bill is trying. And he doesn’t need truth to back his claims. He has his money– thus, he is his own truth.

Next step in this reform charade: Gotta pull Arne in line with Bill’s truth.

Hey, Arne, Follow Bill

Resmovits continues by noting that Indiana might be the first to escape CCSS:

In recent weeks, several states have made moves to hobble or scrap the Common Core entirely. Indiana has come closest, with its state Senate on Wednesday approving a bill that withdraws the state from the initiative and adopts its own set of academic standards to “maintain Indiana sovereignty” by July.

Now, I know this must just be a matter of coincidence, but it so happens that Arne told The Blaze on March 15– the day after Bill’s NBPTS speech– that Indiana is free to exit CCSS:

Education Secretary Arne Duncan told The Blaze Friday that states are completely free to discard Common Core education standards. ... 

This week, the Indiana legislature sent a bill to the desk of Gov. Mike Pence to pull out of the Common Core standards….

The Blaze asked Duncan during the White House press briefing Friday to comment on the final approval in the Indiana legislature.

“They absolutely have the right to do this,” Duncan told The Blaze. “This is a state-led effort; it always has been, always will be. And whatever Indiana decides, we want to work with them to make sure that students have a chance to be successful.” [Emphasis added.]

Duncan isn’t fooling anyone with his sudden benign attitude toward states’ altering– much less dropping– CCSS.

He has pushed this “common standards” idea since 2009; he has told newspaper editors how to report on CCSS; he has insulted parents and offered this tepid backpedaling on his insult.

Duncan wants CCSS and all of the trimmings– curricula and tests– and so does Gates.

Duncan and Gates can say that CCSS is not a federal coercion. However, one document interferes with their spin:

That pesky CCSS MOU.

The CCSS MOU; No State Freedom Here

The CCSS MOU is a contract that states entered into with USDOE as per USDOE’s requirement for vying for that $700 million of which Texas Ed Commissioner Scott spoke.

Duncan’s use of the term “state-led” is one used in the CCSS MOU to actually tell states that they are to lead:

Purpose: This document commits states to a state-led process…that will lead to the development and adoption of a common core of state standards.

So, the federal government has states sign a contract saying they will lead themselves– according to USDOE stipulation.

That’s right: The entire MOU is the federal government telling states that they will be “state led” and what that will look like, down to the details.

Duncan and Gates can cry foul all they like. This is the actual text from the CCSS MOU regarding “federal role.” It is a tourniquet of federal control, for it mandates that states “agree” to “common standards”:

Federal Role. The parties support a state-led effort and not a federal effort to develop a common core of state standards; there is, however, an appropriate federal role in supporting this state-led effort. In particular, the federal government can provide key financial support for this effort in developing a common core of state standards and in moving toward common assessments, such as through the Race to the Top Fund authorized in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Further, the federal government can incentivize this effort through a range of tiered incentives, such as providing states with greater flexibility in the use of existing federal funds, supporting a revised state accountability structure, and offering financial support for states to effectively implement the standards. Additionally, the federal government can provide additional financial support for the development of common assessments, teacher and principal professional development, and other related common core standards supports, and a research agenda that can help continually improve the common core over time. Finally, the federal government can revise and align existing federal education laws with the lessons learned from states’ international benchmarking efforts and from federal research.

And states tied to the CCSS MOU are tied to assess CCSS:

Purpose: This document commits states to a state-led process that will draw on evidence and lead to development and adoption of a common core of state standards (common core) in English language arts and mathematics for grades K-12. These standards will be aligned with college and work expectations, include rigorous content and skills, and be internationally benchmarked. The intent is that these standards will be aligned to state assessment and classroom practice. The second phase of this initiative will be the development of common assessments aligned to the core standards developed through this process. [Emphasis added.]

The bolded section above is the state agreement to the CCSS spectrum: CCSS, CCSS curricula, CCSS assessments.

Bill Gates comments on the necessity of this CCSS spectrum in his 2009 speech at the National Conference of State Legislatures–a group that he gave a $557,000 CCSS grant to in 2013. (See a video of Gates’ 2009 speech at the end of this post.)

As to the “adoption” of CCSS, the MOU is clear that CCSS must be adopted in its entirety. States can add but cannot remove CCSS. Notice that the language is carefully constructed to make it appear that this “effort” is not the coercion that it actually is:

This effort is voluntary for states, and it is fully intended that states adopting the common core may choose to include additional state standards beyond the common core. States that choose to align their standards to the common core standards agree to ensure that the common core represents at least 85 percent of the state’s standards in English language arts and mathematics. [Emphasis added.]

The only way that states are free from a CCSS tie to the federal government is to be released from the CCSS MOU.

A Challenge to Duncan

If Arne wants to go public and tell states that they are “completely free to discard Common Core,” then let him offer states a new MOU, one which clearly details this “freedom” and which declares the former CCSS MOU null and void.

The very existence of a CCSS MOU bespeaks federal coercion.

Never mind that it is ILLEGAL according to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Subpart 2, section 9527(c)(1):

(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal law, no State shall be required to have academic content or student academic achievement standards approved or certified by the Federal Government, in order to receive assistance under this Act. [Emphasis added.]

The USDOE has clearly overstepped its jurisdiction via its CCSS MOU and has been counting on no authority challenging its brazenness in doing so.

The crafters of ESEA apparently knew that there was no such thing as a “state led” federal MOU.

Bill and Arne: Who is in Whose Pocket?

Concerning Bill’s pushing the idea of no federal CCSS push: Even Arne is taking money from Bill, and Bill is clear that he seeks out those who might fulfill the goals of his foundation in order to offer them money.

Gates wants CCSS. Arne wants CCSS. But it goes a step further.

Gates purchased $1.4 million in “training and technical assistance” for USDOE.

USDOE is now indebted to Gates– and is allowing Gates to “help” it run the country.

This is truly sickening.

Arne and Bill, you are a disgrace to American democracy. Your presence in the affairs of American public education is nothing more than the stench of deceit and self-aggrandizement.

RELATED STORY: Gates is Funding U.S. Department of Education Directly

An Abduction to Saudi Arabia: Interview with Floridian Yasmeen A. Davis

/in , , , /by

We recently interviewed Professor Margaret McClain a retired faculty member of Arkansas State University in Jonesboro, Arkansas. McClain told us her story of the loss of her daughter in an illegal abduction by her Saudi ex-husband in violation of state, federal and international laws against parental abduction. Professor McClain and other American women, a father and some children testified about the trauma of loss of American children kidnapped and removed to Saudi Arabia during a  2002 hearings before the US House Representatives  Government Reform Committee chaired by former Indiana Republican Dan Burton.

One mother and a daughter from Miami, Florida, Mrs. Miriam Hernandez -Davis and her then 16 year old daughter Dria Hernandez Davis told the Congressional committee about the unusual circumstances of her abduction by her father and mother’s ex-husband. The family resorted to using their own resources to rescue Dria after the US government did little to assist in that effort. Professor McClain, who was part of that 2002 House Government Reform panel of hearing witnesses, contacted the daughter’s mother.

Through that contact we were able to interview a beautiful and poised young woman, who now goes by the name of Yasmeen Alexandria Davis. She is now in her late twenties, pursuing a graduate degree in social work while employed at a nonprofit agency in South Florida. She still suffers PTSD effects from the experience. The most troubling aspect is the continued harassment by her Saudi father, who employs US lawyers and ex-FBI agents, to check in with her and ask if she would testify against him in case he returned to the US or cause trouble if her Saudi father if he brought his children, by a subsequent marriage, to visit Disneyland. There is an outstanding warrant for his arrest if he were to step foot in the US. Among the areas of inquiry in our interview with Ms. Davis are:

  • Her mother’s divorce and traditional custody/visitation rights when she divorced her Saudi ex-husband when Yasmeen was two years of age.
  • Her Saudi father’s continued derogation of her background, religion and education.
  • Her mother’s plea with the Florida family court judge to have her ex-Saudi husband surrender his passport during their summer visits to prevent him from taking her  daughter into a country where she might never be able to return without his permission.
  • Her trauma at age 11, after her Saudi Father abducted and removed her against her will to Saudi Arabia during a summer vacation, and refused to allow her to see or speak with her mother.
  • Her protests of the new unwanted circumstances at her father’s residence in Saudi Arabia and her demands to be returned home.
  • The physical abuse she suffered at the hands of her father for refusing to convert to Islam.
  • The several years of deprivation in education while in Saudi Arabia.
  • The social ostracism and isolation she experienced in her father’s household.
  • The failure of the US Embassy to provide assistance to return her, an American citizen and minor, home.
  • How her family had to resort to their own means to rescue her.
  • How she suffered PTSD from the experience and still has lingering effects.
  • What her experience was like testifying as a 16 year old before the House Government Reform Committee in 2002.
  • How her Saudi father continues to keep tabs and harass her with calls and letters from US lawyers and visits from a former FBI agent he has retained.
  • What changes she believes should be undertaken here in the US to protect American children from kidnapping by fundamentalist Muslim fathers.

Watch this Vimeo video interview of Ms. Yasmeen Alexandria Davis by NER Senior Editor Jerry Gordon

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

From Lockerbie to 9/11: Iran is Let Off the Hook

/in , , , , , /by

A documentary that aired 11 March 2014 on the Al-Jazeera America channel presented compelling new evidence that Iran and the Syrian-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Counsel (PFLP-GC) directed and carried out the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 that crashed into Lockerbie, Scotland on 23 December 1988. “Lockerbie: What Really Happened?” presented formerly classified documents and never-before revealed accounts from two of the investigators in the case—American attorney Jessica De Grazia and her Scottish colleague, George Thompson—both of whom were part of the defense team for Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan security official eventually convicted of planting the bomb.

Aware that Al-Jazeera America has its own agenda and that this story may just fit rather neatly into it this time, the evidence presented by credible sources nevertheless makes this documentary worth serious consideration. Other, especially U.S., media have tended rather consistently to pass over evidence of the Iranian regime’s long record of support for terrorism (both Shi’ite and Sunni), even when that support has involved American citizen deaths, as in the two cases presented here. This Al-Jazeera documentary diverges from that typical media coverage of Iran and so earns our attention.

In the documentary, De Grazia and Thompson discuss classified U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) cables they obtained and shared with Al-Jazeera, but never had the chance to present in court. Specifically, they document a March 1988 meeting in Malta among representatives of Hizballah, Iran, Libya, PFLP-GC, and Syria. According to a protected source who attended the gathering, this apparently disparate group found common cause in hatred for Israel and the U.S., and met to discuss general cooperation in targeting Americans and Israelis. The Iranians were willing to direct terror operations, but wanted both the fig leaf of deniability that proxies could provide as well as the demonstrated explosives expertise for which both Hizballah and PFLP-GC were known. Syria long has allowed PFLP-GC to keep its headquarters in Damascus.

The collaborative arrangement that began with that meeting in Malta received its first operational assignment shortly after the USS Vincennes mistakenly shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in the Persian Gulf on 3 July 1988, with the loss of all 290 on board. Although the U.S. insisted the tragedy was due to misidentification of the Iranian plane and ultimately paid more than $100 million in compensation, a high-level Iranian defector reported that the Iranian regime nevertheless decided to seek revenge in kind, and quickly, by shooting down a similar U.S. civilian aircraft with a like number of passengers on board.

Abolghassem Mesbahi ran operations for the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) in Europe before he defected to Germany in the early 1990s. His testimony about Lockerbie is especially credible because he also has testified in other cases involving Iranian complicity in terror attacks, including the Paris assassination of former Iranian Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar in 1991, the 1992 Mykonos Cafe assassination of Kurdish leaders in Berlin, and the 1994 bombing of the Jewish cultural center in Buenos Aires. Mesbahi was one of three Iranian defector witnesses in the Havlish, et al. v. bin Laden, et al. legal case, in which Judge George Daniels of the Southern District of New York Federal District Court ruled in December 2011 that Iran and Hizballah “materially and directly supported al Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks and are legally responsible for damages to hundreds of family members of 9/11 victims who are plaintiffs in the case.” (The author was an expert witness for the Havlish legal team and co-authored one of the affidavits, which is cited herein.)

Mesbahi’s original 1996-97 Lockerbie testimony (as well as his more recent contribution to this newer documentary) is further bolstered by striking parallels in his later recorded testimony in the Havlish case. As described to the Havlish legal team, the Iranian regime’s efforts to galvanize pan-Islamic unity to attack U.S. and Israeli interests did not begin with the 1988 meeting in Malta, but rather a couple of years earlier, in the mid-1980s, during the depths of the Iran-Iraq war. It was then that the plan known among Iranian intelligence circles as “Shaitan Dar Atash” (“Satan in the Flames” or “Satan in Hell,” meaning America, known as the “Great Satan,” in the flames). Because it was acknowledged that Iran lacked the military power to confront the U.S. directly, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and MOIS were tasked with devising asymmetric means to destroy America. According to Mesbahi, the IRGC and MOIS discussed ways of attacking the U.S. critical infrastructure (electric, fuel, water distribution, etc.) and using civilian aircraft as “bombs inside U.S. cities” such as New York and Washington, D.C. The ultimate intent was to bring down the U.S. economy.

Efforts to unify the Islamic world across Shi’ite-Sunni sectarian lines redoubled after Iran’s revolutionary leader, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, died in 1989. In the early 1990s, when Usama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri were living under the protection of Sudan’s pan-Islamic Muslim Brotherhood leadership, President Omar al-Bashir and Hassan al-Turabi, his sometime political ally, organized a gathering of jihadist forces from across the Islamic world. The various Palestinian factions, including the PFLP-GC, plus Hizballah and the Iranian leadership all attended. It was in Khartoum that then-Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani offered bin Laden the explosive expertise of Imad Mughniyeh, his top Hizballah terror operative. That is the partnership, which endures to this day, that led eventually to the attacks of September 11, 2001.

In the wake of the July 1988 shoot-down of Iran Air flight 655, Iranian planners turned to PFLP-GC operatives who had made a name for themselves with several prior airliner attacks. According to De Grazia and Thompson, the DIA documents identify four PFLP-GC members who were involved in the Lockerbie plot: Ahmed Jibril, the PFLP-GC leader who possibly masterminded the attack; Hafez Dalkomoni, who led the German-based PFLP-GC cell suspected of involvement; Marwan Khreesat, a Jordanian master bomb-maker who may have made the bomb used on Pan Am Flight 103; and Abu Talb, the Egyptian-born leader of PFLP-GC’s Swedish cell, who is suspected of having couriered the Lockerbie bomb. German security forces were monitoring the Dalkomoni cell and arrested both him and Khreesat in October 1988, but a bomb found in Dalkomoni’s car was an exact match for the one that later brought down the Pan Am airplane. Both bombs were covered in Toblerone chocolate candy wrappers and concealed inside a Toshiba cassette player. Other bombs were discovered in Dalkomoni’s apartment, but the Germans recovered only a total of four out of five of the bombs they knew existed. The fifth exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 23rd.

By the following summer of 1989, the British and Scottish investigators were ready to issue arrest warrants for fifteen PFLP-GC members they had identified as connected with the attack. According to investigators De Grazia and Thompson, the case was for all intents and purposes solved; all involved with it (including American, British, German, and Scottish intelligence and security representatives) were in agreement that the PFLP-GC had carried out the attack on orders from the Iranian regime.

And then, sometime in mid-1989, according to former CIA operative Robert Baer, President George H.W. Bush made a phone call to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and asked her to back off the case against PFLP-GC. In the Al-Jazeera America film, Baer claims that the U.S. government made an executive decision that the role played by the PFLP-GC (and by extension, its sponsors in Damascus and Tehran) would be quietly submerged and instead, the Libyans would be made the sole scapegoats. After that, the Lockerbie prosecution went after Megrahi and the Libyans, eventually convicting Megrahi, who spent eight years in a Scottish prison before being released on humanitarian grounds, dying in 2012 of cancer.

It is difficult to know why U.S. leadership decided to protect the PFLP-GC and Iranian regime, when all the investigative work had been done and all the evidence pointed strongly at their responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing. Gathering tensions with Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein over his Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programs and the perceived need for Syrian support and, at a minimum, a pledge of non-interference from Iran may have been part of it. In the final analysis, though, Iran still has not been held to account: not for the murder of 270 people, mostly Americans headed home for Christmas, over Lockerbie, Scotland, and not for the nearly 3,000 killed on 11 September 2001. It is time that Iran is brought to account for its crimes against humanity.

RELATED STORIES:

Former El Al security chief: Iran likely involved in Malaysia plane disappearance

BREAKING NEWS: Pro-Russian rioters kill and maim Ukrainians in Donetsk

/in , , , /by

A mob of pro-Russian protesters savagely attacked a pro-Ukrainian rally with clubs, metal rods, rocks, tear gas, and smoke bombs, killing a 22-year-old local man and seriously injuring scores of others Thursday in Lenin Square in Donetsk, an industrial city in eastern Ukraine.

According to witnesses, the pro-Ukrainian rally consisted mostly of local men and women, some with children, who came there after work to support the territorial integrity of Ukraine against Russia’s attempts to split the country. This angered a pro-Russian rally nearby, which held Russian flags and demanded that the coal-mining region be separated from Ukraine and joined with Russia.

At some point rocks, eggs, and smoke grenades started flying from the pro-Russian side towards a line of people who chanted Ukrainian slogans while holding a long banner with the colors of the Ukrainian flag.

Donetsk riot

As the rally ended, a large crowd of angry Russian nationalists surrounded their opponents, hurling ethnic insults, and preventing them from leaving. The confrontation quickly became violent.

A slideshow on this Ukrainian news site has the pictures. A 25-minute YouTube video, posted the same day by a local citizen reporter, shows uninterrupted footage of the most violent stage of the riot, helping to reconstruct the events.

As the police succeeded in letting most of the pro-Ukrainian side leave the square, they themselves got surrounded by an angry mob, with about twenty bloodied people huddled together next to a police bus inside a protective circle of policemen. The law enforcement, represented by both local and military police, was outnumbered; an officer was heard calling for reinforcement.

Donetsk riot

The crowd chanted “Russia! Russia!” while also screaming threats, insults, and ethnic slurs. They also chanted “On your knees,” demanding that the Ukrainian patriots kneel before their tormentors, who waved Russian flags.

As rocks, bottles, and smoke bombs continued to fly, the police managed to get the battered men into the bus, but the attackers slashed the tires and broke the windows, throwing more rocks and smoke bombs inside the bus, spraying pepper spray and forcing the people out into the street.

Donetsk riot

As the pro-Ukrainian demonstrators climbed out of the bus windows back into the street, the crowd broke the police barrier and began to beat up the unarmed men with fists and clubs, leaving several of them lying on the pavement, covered in blood, all the while calling their victims “fascists” and “faggots.” A few who tried to escape by breaking through the crowd were surrounded and beaten.

Donetsk riot

The chant “On your knees!” continued as the surrounded and beaten people, many of them unable to stand, crouched on the ground, which the mob finally perceived as compliance with their demand to kneel. Having carried the wounded away, the police were finally able to escort the remaining few to safety.

Donetsk riot

The video ends with the camera pointing downwards, as one of the pro-Russian attackers demands that the cameraman stop shooting because the footage may wind up in the “wrong” hands. During the time of this writing this video added half a million views on YouTube, with many comments in both Russian and broken English cheering the beating of Ukrainians and blaming America for the violence.

UPDATE: The New York Times posted its report with a similar account of the events and the same references, seven hours after mine in PJ Media. For once it’s good to see truthful reporting from the “newspaper of record.” They embedded a shorter video by the Vice News reporter Robert King, which shows the entire event unfold in brief segments, with English subtitles.

In another video, which shows an injured man being taken to an ambulance, gloating voices refer to him as a “Bandera” (a slur against Ukrainian nationalists) and an intruder from Maidan who got what he deserved for taking American money. This and other comments in the videos, as well as multiple pro-Russian comments on various YouTube threads, reveal a paranoid, hateful mind-set, which boils down to the following presumptions:

(a) The Ukrainian revolution was the result of a vast Western-Zionist conspiracy against Russia; (b) all pro-Ukrainian demonstrators are violent Nazis, fascists, and traitors who have been paid with dollars by their American, European, and Zionist masters; and (c) the demonstrators are all intruders from Western Ukraine, the land of hateful worshipers of the “Nazi collaborator” Stepan Bandera.

Such absurd beliefs are the result of a massive campaign of lies, distortions, provocations, and propaganda that the Putin government has been disseminating through all available media channels, both inside Russia and in the Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine, aiming to discredit and demonize the recent popular uprising against the corrupt pro-Russian government of Victor Yanukovich. Among the various reasons to suppress the Ukrainian revolution, probably the most important one was the Kremlin’s fear that it may soon spread from Maidan to Red Square.

Below is a pro-Russian sign opposing Ukrainian “fascism.” The blue and yellow Ukrainian flag never had the Nazi eagle as a symbol, but that didn’t stop the brainwashed activist from drawing it over the Ukrainian flag and then equating it with the Nazi flag.

Donetsk riot

After the Maidan uprising finally succeeded on February 22, the propaganda only intensified, with an added focus on stirring separatist sentiments and paranoia in the Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine, with the apparent goal of breaking the country apart in order to destabilize, demoralize, and subdue the new Ukrainian government – or, better yet, to absorb the breakaway regions into Russia.

A pro-Russian rioter in Donetsk burns a blue-and-yellow ribbon with Ukrainian symbols. He himself is wearing a yellow-and-black St. Georgy ribbon, which symbolizes Russia’s military pride and commemorates the Soviet victory over the Nazi Germany. Russians wearing these ribbons in Ukraine imagine they are fighting “Nazism,” which in their minds gives them a moral license to act like Nazi thugs.

Donetsk riot

The same propaganda, in a more subtle and less anti-Semitic, less gay-bashing form, has found its way to the West — first through the usual hard-left and “anti-war” channels, as well as a hired army of trolls posting anti-Ukrainian and pro-Russian comments on the Internet and social media; then through more established news media and talk radio.

An important part in this propaganda has always been played by RT, or Russia Today — the second most-watched foreign news channel in the U.S. after BBC World News and the number one foreign station in five major U.S. urban areas, boasting on its Wikipedia page about being “very popular among younger American people, U.S. college students, and in U.S. inner city neighborhoods.”

Reporting on the riot in Donetsk, for example, RT predictably blamed the violence on the pro-Ukrainian side, who allegedly provoked the Russian nationalists “by shouting far-right slogans ‘Glory to Ukraine’ and ‘Glory to heroes,’ loudly demanding the respect of Ukrainian territorial sovereignty.” In that statement alone, preemptively disseminating the “correct” narrative, the RT editors revealed the unmasked voice of pervasive Russian chauvinism: how dare Ukrainians be patriotic and stand up for Ukraine while in their own country?

The important part of the story is that both the attackers and the attacked spoke Russian, which is the native tongue for the majority of people in eastern parts of Ukraine. Similarly, many speakers in Kiev’s Maidan and a large number of anti-government protesters also spoke Russian and carried Russian-language signs. Admittedly, the majority of Russian speakers in Ukraine think of themselves as Ukrainians, and favor independence from Russia and the territorial integrity of their country.

Why would one group of Ukrainians attack another group of Ukrainians for espousing allegiance to their common country?

To be sure, this isn’t a conflict between Ukrainians and Russians, or between the Ukrainian-speaking and the Russian-speaking citizens of Ukraine, no matter how much the Kremlin desires to turn it into one. It is a conflict of two mindsets, two ideologies, and two allegiances. One side is nostalgic for the old Soviet era with its imperial, autocratic , and collectivist mode of existence. The other side desires freedom, individual rights, and the dignity of living outside of Russia’s shadow.

In addition, according to local sources in Donetsk, there was evidence that at least some of the attackers, who shouted at the local Ukrainians to “go home,” themselves had been intruders from the neighboring Russia. It is hardly a coincidence that during pro-Russian actions in Donetsk all local hotels were occupied by young visitors from Russia, while the separatists posing as Ukrainian citizens weren’t familiar with the name of the local governor.

Pro-Russian demonstrators, earlier that day in Donetsk, getting ready to attack the pro-Ukrainian “fascists.”

Donetsk riot

This wasn’t their first riot, either. On March 1, a 7,000-strong pro-Russian separatist rally in the same Lenin Square in Donetsk marched on the office of the regional government, took down the Ukrainian flag on its spire and raised the flag of Russia instead.

Earlier they demanded that the Donetsk region split from Ukraine and join Russia, declared the new Ukrainian government illegitimate, refused to obey the newly appointed local governor, and elected a local populist leader, Pavel Gubarev, as “the people’s governor.”

Gubarev then declared that the local law enforcement and military units must obey his orders and compared himself to the Venezuelan Marxist dictator Hugo Chavez, as well as such autocratic leaders as Belarus president Lukashenko, Russian president Putin, and Kazakhstan president Nazarbayev, adding that the future belongs to the Eurasian Union, which is based on the authoritarian model of government.

Russian and communist flags together in Lenin Square, Donetsk. Communists strongly support pro-Russian separatism, willing to split Ukraine and join Russia.

Donetsk riot

A speaker at a Maidan rally in Kiev later described these events, suggesting that the only way for the Ukrainian patriots to stop such Russian intruders from going to Ukrainian cities, inciting separatism, and tearing down Ukrainian flags with impunity was to start shooting them so they begin to respect another country’s sovereignty.

A video of that speech soon went viral in Russia. Taken without context, a claim that Ukrainian protesters now want to start shooting Russians stirred a wave of indignation among Russian nationalists. It is easy to imagine that part of this indignation translated in today’s beatings of local pro-Ukrainian demonstrators in Donetsk, whom the pro-Russian attackers imagined to be “murderous intruders” in the service of “Western imperialism.”

So far, however, the only people killed and maimed were those on the Ukrainian side. In the meantime, anti-Ukrainian propaganda and the incitement of ethnic hatred by the Kremlin continues unabated at home and in many languages abroad, creating preconditions for more military incursions to “protect” ethnic Russians from “Ukrainian violence.”

In a predictable development, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that the new Kiev government is unable to control the situation in Ukraine and, therefore, Moscow reserves the right to protect its “fellow citizens” on the Ukrainian territory.

A pro-Russian rioter waves Russian flag in the Ukrainian city of Donetsk.

Donetsk riot

Study finds current US Penal Codes based on Scientific Fraud and Child Sex Crimes

/in , , , , , , /by

“As legal, social, and educational decisions turn on public trust in scientific honesty, scientific fraud and misconduct can and do result in fatal consequences. Law thus holds the scientist accountable for knowingly injecting false data into the societal stream of consciousness, even where no discernible harm results,” states a new study titled “Reliance on Kinsey’s ‘Scientific’ Child Sex Atrocities and the Effects of His Crime and Fraud on Past and Current Law and Public Policy” by Judith Gelernter Reisman, Ph.D., visiting Professor of Law, Liberty University School of Law, Mathew D. Staver, Esq., Shawn D. Akers, Esq., Stephen M. Crampton, Esq., Richard L. Mast, Esq. and Daniel J. Schmid, Esq.

The study notes:

Alfred C. Kinsey has been likened by supporters to a “scientific” Prometheus – bringing the equivalent of fire from the gods to enlighten mankind. Singlehandedly creating a sexology movement, his Kinsey Institute is the foundation of the Model Penal Code and all modern jurisprudence relating to sex and morality. But unlike Prometheus, Kinsey was fanned by his own base desires. Kinsey set loose fraudulent sexual fires upon the world that matched his own sexual psychopathologies and created a conflagration of human passions, released from the bonds of traditional jurisprudence and morality. His statistical lies were translated into laws that destroyed extant common law protections for women, children, and the family. His acolytes built upon his frauds a medical-psychological-educational-legal complex that is destroying our children and our society. If we are to halt our moral annihilation, all legal doctrines based on his crimes and fraud must be exposed like the Tuskegee Experiment and overturned. The dysfunctional laws underlying the education, media, entertainment, and other aspects of society that stand on Kinsey’s criminal frauds and child atrocities must be reversed.

[…]

Kinsey’s adult population sample was aberrant. He directed and colluded in the sexual torture of up to 2,035 infants and children. Moreover the Kinsey team for Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953) engaged in criminal, sexual atrocities against from 317 (minimum) to 2,035 little boys, the youngest 2 months of age, covered up by the scientific establishment from 1948 to today. Scientific fraud and misconduct always poisons the stream of knowledge…

“The Judiciary has cited, condoned, and collaborated with Kinsey’s sex science frauds and child sex atrocities for over seventy years. Judicial endorsement of Kinsey’s bad sex “data” has contaminated every core value of society. Kinsey’s sexual psychopathologies have been and are now used daily in workshops, seminars, films, textbooks, and conferences to train the teachers who train millions of school children. In his 2013 law journal article, retired Australian Chief Justice Michael Kirby thanked Kinsey for bringing Kirby “out,” thus aiding in his judicial rulings. The ‘Out’ Hon. Michael Kirby AC CMG hyped Kinsey’s pioneering study in the Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies,” write Reisman et. al.

This study is a must read for all citizens, lawyers, judges and legislators at every level. Current penal codes are based upon false science and the abhorrent abuse of children by Alfred Kinsey. Laws must have a moral basis and officers of the court must hold accountable those who produce, promote and practice false science.

To download the full PDF version of the “Reliance” study click here.

To understand the impact of Kinsey on public policy read a February, 2014 Daily Mail investigation which discovered that British Labour’s deputy leader Harriet Harman, her husband, home affairs spokesman Jack Dromey, and former health secretary Patricia Hewitt were all leading officials in the National Council for Civil Liberties. The Mail found:

  • Miss Hewitt described PIE [Paedophile Information Exchange] in glowing terms as ‘a campaigning/counselling group for adults attracted to children’;
  • The NCCL lobbied Parliament for the age of sexual consent to be cut to ten – if the child consented and ‘understood the nature of the act’.
  • It called for incest to be legalised in what one MP dubbed a ‘Lolita’s charter’;
  • The NCCL claimed research shows young paedophile victims are often ‘consenting or even the initiators of the sexual acts involved’;
  • It filed a submission to Parliament claiming that ‘childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult, result in no identifiable damage’.
  • Miss Harman, as NCCL legal officer, tried to water down child pornography laws.
  • NCCL lawyers acted for a PIE member who was quizzed by police over appalling behaviour.

The Mail has repeatedly sent detailed questions to Miss Harman, Miss Hewitt and Mr Dromey about their links to PIE and whether they now regret supporting such a vile group. Neither Miss Hewitt nor Mr Dromey replied.

There is an effort in America by B4U-ACT to categorize pedophiles and pederasts as “minor attracted persons”. This movement is not unlike the normalization of homosexual marriages and introduction of the homosexual lifestyle into public schools via the national anti-bullying campaign. The idea is to make deviant sexual behaviors permissible by calling these sexual acts a “civil right”.

The B4u-ACT website states:

B4U-ACT assembled a list of over 30 credentialed practitioners in Maryland who agreed to its Principles and Perspectives of Practice, and who were willing to provide caring and inviting services to clients who are sexually attracted to minors. Lay volunteers were sought who would be trained to operate a hotline for the purpose of referring minor-attracted individuals to these professionals.

Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) reported:

On Wednesday, August 17, [2011] child advocates Matt Barber, Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action, and Dr. Judith Reisman, a visiting law professor at Liberty University School of Law, attended a Baltimore, MD conference hosted by the pedophile group B4U-ACT. Around 50 individuals were in attendance including a number of admitted pedophiles – or “Minor-Attracted Persons” as they prefer to be identified (MAP “sexual orientation”) – as well as several supportive mental health professionals. World renowned “sexologist,” Dr. Fred Berlin of Johns Hopkins University gave the keynote address, saying: “I want to completely support the goal of B4U-ACT.”

RELATED STORIES:

Columns by Dr. Judith Reisman

HEALTH ALERT: Condoms never FDA-approved for sodomy

UK Headline — “Lord Justice wanted age of consent to 4 yr old”

Son of Topsy and Tim children’s author Jean Adamson was leading member of Paedophile Information Exchange

The truth about Labour’s apologists for paedophilia: Police probe child sex campaign group linked to three top party officials in wake of Savile scandal

Revealed: How Jimmy Savile abused up to 1,000 victims on BBC premises

EDITORS NOTE: The feature image is of the California Penal Code, the codification of criminal law and procedure in the U.S. state of California. Photographed by user Cool Caesar at the English Wikipedia at a public library in Mountain View, California on July 5, 2006. The use of this image is under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2.

Florida legislation giving school districts control of which textbooks to use a bait-and-switch

/in , , , , , /by

Arek Sarkissian, writer for The Florida Current writes:

“A pair of bills that would place sole responsibility of textbook choices on local school districts made headway this week despite concern from lawmakers.

SB 864, by Sen. Alan Hays R-Umatilla, and HB 921, by Rep. Matt Gaetz, R- Fort Walton Beach, would maximize control of textbook choices on a local district review committee.

“This bill gives the citizens of the community very, very active role in the selection and oversight in the material that their children are being taught with,” Hays said during a Tuesday Senate Education Committee meeting, where 864 passed with a vote of 8-1.

Sen. Dwight Bullard, D-Cutler Bay, cast the only opposing vote.

On Wednesday [March 12th] , the House K-12 Subcommittee voted 8-5 in favor on party line.

Common Core opponents will not be fooled by this bait and switch!

Despite its lofty sounds, SB 864 and HB 921 are end around bills designed to make the public believe they oppose Federal intrusion and Common Core standards (see below). If all the textbooks we have to choose from are aligned to Common Core, and the students’ tests will be based on Common Core, and schools and teachers will be graded on their students’ tests, there is still no choice for school districts but Common Core aligned curriculum, most of which is produced by Pearson PLC and the College Board.

I just participated in two full days of the textbook selection committee for Lee County Schools and ALL the choices are severely flawed so long as we have Common Core Standards by any name you call them.

Senate President Don Gaetz and Speaker Will Weatherford told us in person that these are the bills they support and they will not allow SB 1316 and HB 25 to be heard in Committee. Rep. Debbie Mayfield’s bill, HB 25, is the only one that actually will stop Common Core, and they know it.

Don Gaetz and Will Weatherford, Commissioner Pam Stewart, Senator Legg, Senator Fresen, Senator Alan Hays, Chair of the State Board of Education, Gary Chartrand, and others should recuse themselves from this as they directly stand to gain or have entangling alliances with those who stand to gain money and power from Common Core’s adoption.

The data mining bills are similarly flawed, unfortunately.

There is only one simple answer for those who support our kids, the Constitution and freedom. The Governor can and should take his pen and cancel the contract, and take his phone and call Obama and Arnie Duncan and tell them what to do with their Common Core in no uncertain terms as the RPOF, RNC and RWF have recommended.

If he does not, the enormous rift caused by HIS inaction will likely result in election disaster.

HEALTH ALERT: Condoms never FDA-approved for sodomy

/in , , , , /by

“I envision a class action suit against those pushing prophylactics.” – Dr. Judith Reisman

EDITORS NOTE: Tom Hampson, chief investigator, Liberty Center for Child Protection, contributed to this column.

image004

AIDS Healthcare Foundation celebrates International Condom Day in 28 countries worldwide

A class action lawsuit by AIDS victims and their loved ones would rock the world – a suit based on the fact that condom pushers have for years dispensed false, deceptive claims about how the product protects – or fails to protect – the health of sex participants. The reality is that everyday condoms are manufactured and approved for natural, vaginal sex, not anal “sex” – they are not effectively designed to protect from disease those people who engage in sodomy.

Such a lawsuit should target the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Planned Parenthood and a myriad of teachers and school systems, too many to count, that have taught that anal “sex” (traditionally termed “sodomy” or “buggery” under British-based legal codes) as not so different than natural coitus.

The result of a class action suit should be the requirement of a label, a la cigarette packs, that states: “This condom has never been approved by the FDA for penile/anal intercourse.”

Due to the lies that have told, people who practiced sodomy are under the tragically mistaken notion that a condom is effective protection from disease. Those who have believed this lie and have contracted AIDS or an STD (and the loved ones of those who’ve lost their lives) have a cause of legal action.

Take the Hawaii public schools, for instance. Republican Bob McDermott, a member of the Hawaii House of Representatives, cited a “federally funded sex education program currently in use in 12 of the state’s public schools … created by the University of Hawaii and Planned Parenthood … [that] defines the anus a ‘genital.’”

“Genitals are sexual reproductive organs,” McDermott told EAGnews, “and the a– isn’t that.”

According to a report McDermott authored, the curriculum, dubbed “The Pono Choices,” defines the term “oral sex” to include “mouth on genitalia,” with the anus included among “genitalia.”

McDermott points out that the curriculum states: “Both vaginal sex with a condom and anal sex with a condom are rated as low risk activities.”

The school program, more aptly named “Porno Choices,” diverges wildly from what the U.S. Food and Drug Administration studies have found regarding penile-rectal anal “sex.” In fact, the FDA, even after looking at AIDS studies for roughly 40 years, has NEVER – that is never, not ever – approved a condom for use in oral/anal or penile-rectal anal “sex.”

Aids_healthcare_foundation_-_DC_Capital_Pride_parade_-_2013-06-08_(8991910461)

AIDS Healthcare Foundation – DC Capital Pride parade – 2013-06-08. Photo courtesy of Tim Evanson from Washington, D.C.

McDermott notes: “The Federal Drug Administration warns Americans, on its website, that anal sex is ‘simply too dangerous to practice.’” Pono Choices has received nearly $1 million in federal funding from the Department of Health and Human Services.

Advertisements for experimental anal condoms affirm that standard condoms were never tested or approved by the FDA. The ad reads:

“The standard rolled latex condoms have never been ‘tested or FDA approved for anal use.’”

To reach the market, the Origami Anal Condom must be reviewed by the World Health Organization, the C-Mark (EU) and the FDA to meet safety standards. After clinical trials this year to evaluate its performance and safety, it is expected to reach the market in late 2015, pending regulatory approvals.

The “CDC National AIDS Hotline Training Bulletin” dated April 27, 1995, contained the following from Consumer Reports magazine:

“Some condom boxes specifically indicate they are designed for vaginal sex only. Are they not effective for anal sex? Which condoms should be used for anal sex?

“For the most part, FDA has only evaluated data on condoms tested in vaginal sex. There have been several published studies and surveys which indicate condom breakage and slippage rates may be higher during anal sex. However, these studies are only retrospective. Whatever the breakage rate, it may be reduced by use of a water-based or silicone- based lubricant.”

“Whatever the breakage rate”?! The Hawaii public schools’ recommendation of a prophylactic for activity for which it is not designed, without warning children that it is unreliable for protection, is shocking.

Even the CDC fact sheet does not warn that the condom is unapproved as safe for anal “sex,” but groups the activity with vaginal and oral sex.

Planned Parenthood implicitly and explicitly has promoted anal “sex” to children and adults for years.

“If you choose to have vaginal or anal intercourse, use condoms every time. They can reduce the risk of HPV. They are not as effective against HPV as they are against other infections such as chlamydia and HIV. But they greatly reduce the risk of HPV infection. …”

Parents in Hawaii should well remember those responsible for giving their children false information about protection from STDs and AIDS. If their children acquire deadly diseases as a result of this propaganda and the deliberate withholding of key information, not only should Hawaiian school districts be sued, but everyone in the Hawaiian schools who had a hand in disseminating this false information.

RELATED STORY: US reports rare case of woman-to-woman HIV transmission – Yahoo News

EDITORS NOTE: To see all of Dr. Reisman’s books on sexual fraud at the WND Superstore. Dr. Reisman is a former principal investigator for the U.S. Department of Justice, Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention study of child sexual abuse and crimes suborned by “soft” pornography, and author of several books, the newest of which is “Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America.” More is available at my website.

Bill Gates Tries to Rally Teacher Support for His Beloved Common Core

/in , , , /by

One would think that if teachers supported the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), then teachers would take the initiative to rally around said CCSS.

Not so. It seems that we need Bill Gates to tell us that we need CCSS. He did so today (Friday, March 14, 2014), in Washington, DC:

Bill Gates is rallying teachers to support an embattled cause, the Common Core State Standards.

Got that? Teachers support CCSS to such a degree that they need Bill to tell them to do so.

It seems that Gates has once again bought himself an audience; he offered his CCSS-indulging speech to the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) at its Teaching and Learning conference.

Why is Gates, a non-teacher, offering his non-expertise to an audience of nationally-certified teachers?

Consolation prize for millions donated.

Gates has paid NBPTS $5 million in the form of two grants, one in 2010, and one in 2013:

Date: May 2010 
Purpose: to score Measures of Effective Teaching videos, enhance the Take One materials and processes and design, and assess the efficacy of those materials as a whole-school approach to improving teacher effectiveness 
Amount: $1,195,639 

Date: July 2013 
Purpose: to support revision of the National Board certification process 
Amount: $3,743,337  

Gates is not a teacher and has never been a teacher, yet he feels he is qualified to make untested judgments about a set of inflexible, corporate- and federal-endorsed “standards” that currently have legislative bodies nationwide in upheaval.

The sadder indictment comes against NBPTS, who allowed Gates this opportunity to showcase his ignorance.

My sincere thanks to education organizations that have not taken Gates money. Thank you for not selling your conference speaking opportunities to well-funded emptiness.

Gates is a billionaire, so he can buy this NBPTS platform in order to push the CCSS that he has spent the last several years purchasing.

And why do we need CCSS, according to Gates?

As Joy Resmovits of Huffington Post  writes,

[Gates] charged that the controversy around the Core “comes from people who want to stop the standards, which would send us back to what we had before.“ [Emphasis added.]

Where “were we before,” Bill?

I’ll tell you where I was– you know, since I’m a teacher and you are not. I was allowed to use standards as flexible guidelines, to adjust them to serve my students– based upon my professional judgment.

That’s where I “was,” Bill. And that is where I must now defend remaining.

Standards are secondary to students. Students (and teachers) should not be forced to fit the mold of inflexible standards.

Forcing students and teachers to contort themselves to suit a set of rigid standards is not “academic rigor.” It is academic abuse.

Going back “to what I had” is a welcome idea, for what I “had” did not preclude my individual expertise as a professional capable of making sound judgments in regard to my own students.

But Bill has his own ideas.

Keep in mind that this is the same very rich guy who has been playing with American education for years as though its his own personal toy and who, without thought for the thousands of lives he has disturbed, is able to casually toss out in a September 2013 Harvard University interview,

“It would be great if our education stuff worked, but that we won’t know for probably a decade.”

According to Resmovits, Gates continues his March 14 speech:

Gates argued that America’s education system currently does not prepare students adequately for college, because it’s not asking enough of them. So the transition to the new standards is hard because it has to be, he said, and asked teachers to explain the standards to local families.

First off, “not preparing students for college” presumes that the school exerts overriding control over students and should guarantee that all are processed for the Gates-determined “college ideal.”

Certainly preparation “for college” presumes college completion.

After all, isn’t “college completion” the ultimate mark of “a system’s adequately preparing students for college”?

I find it an incredible irony that Gates himself is a college dropout, and that some spreadsheet could include his name on a list of “failure to complete.”

In his narrow logic, Gates insists that the “problem” is to “ask more of students,” and that this can be accomplished via CCSS.

In Gates’ skewed estimation, CCSS is magic. It will solve the Gates-perceived education problems– unless it doesn’t– and this we “probably won’t know for a decade.”

But we “know” now because Gates says so:

Consistency of the Common Core across states, Gates argued, is a key ingredient in its potential success. Under older standards, he said, a student from Kentucky didn’t have to know the quadratic formula, but a neighbor in Tennessee did. 

I love the reference to “old standards.” Even the pro-privatizing Fordham Institute did not rate CCSS as better than many states’ “old standards.” However, like Gates, Fordham pushes CCSS.

If “consistency” were necessary for educational success, then every elite private school would conform to CCSS. However, these schools are above being asked. No one expects the elite to bow to CCSS. On the contrary, CCSS is for the masses.

Mass production of pseudo-education.

Sci-fi “sameness.”

The bottom line is that no proponent of CCSS has any solid proof of its efficacy, Gates and his billions included. Yet despite having no “consistent” (rigid) educational standards across its 50 states, the United States somehow became a world power and has managed to produce scores of inventions now taken for granted and often considered indispensable to everyday functioning.

Bill, I realize that CCSS is your current “educational cause” and that you are used to having your way via your purchasing power. However, you’re going to lose this one.

The pushback from bottom-up defies both your billions and the weight of your overpriced will.

Perhaps you ought to take up reforming the so-called reformers. Hold them accountable to document the successes they so loudly declare. Hold them accountable for the damage their capricious decisions cause.

Now there’s an arena ripe for some standards.

RELATED STORIES: 

Bill Gates loves Common Core for your kids, BUT NOT HIS

Gates is Funding U.S. Department of Education Directly

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Kees de Vos. This photo is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

Climate Truth versus US Government Climate Policy

/in , , , , , , /by

There are two absolutes that need to be considered when talking about the Earth’s climate.

The first absolute is that science, by definition, can never be settled. If you ever hear anyone, including scientists, say that a scientific theory, such as manmade global warming, is settled, then you know he or she is not telling you the truth.

Scientific theories are just that, theories, which must over time be tested using scientific methods, repeatedly tested again and proven using facts – not emotion.

The simple fact is that the Earth’s climate is impacted primarily by our star – the Sun. Solar activity has been theorized and proven over time to be the best predictor of changes in our climate.

Leaders, in academia, the public and private sectors, must therefore look at proven climate science models when making short and long term policy decisions. Currently, policy makers are using the wrong (CO2 Theory) model rather than a proven (e.g. Relational Cycle Theory) model to predict future climates.

A failure to use the proven model (best science) could lead to bad policy and social disruption, wasted resources, and worst case, possibly international discord, if not conflict.

The second absolute is man cannot control the weather. This is common sense. If anyone tells you that man can control the weather (climate) by changing his behaviors you should at the very least be skeptical, or better, just walk away.

Fact: The Earth’s atmosphere is made up of 0.039% parts of carbon dioxide (CO2). The proponents of bad science (CO2 Theory) say that by reducing CO2 emissions, man can control (change) the Earth’s climate.

The fact is that there were times when there was significantly more CO2 in our atmosphere than today and yet the temperature was colder. CO2 emissions come primarily from water evaporation due to the Sun shining brightly on our vast oceans and seas.

Natural global processes cannot be changed and will produce exponentially more CO2 than mankind can ever emit from any of his activities or the use of Earth’s abundant resources, such as oil and natural gas.

It is prophetic that on Monday, March 10th, 2014, about 28 US Senators stayed up all night discussing climate change on the floor of the US Senate. The question is: Did they discuss and promote good climate science or bad climate science, and therefore good climate policy or bad climate policy? The answer is sadly no.

Dr. Lawrence W. Reed, President of the Foundation for Economic Education, wrote, “Sound policy requires that we consider long-run effects and all people, not simply short-run effects and a few people.”

Time will tell whether we have taken the ‘sound climate policy’ approach and headed down the road to redemption for all of mankind, or else decided to take the road to perdition.

RELATED VIDEO: Joe Miller reports, “Several hundred global warming activists converged on Washington, D.C. earlier this month, protesting the Keystone Pipeline and urging radical solutions to limit carbon emissions. Of course, those radical solutions did not include limiting their own personal carbon emissions. At least one honest interviewee, who flew from Colorado to the nation’s capital, admitted that he would not give up air travel, no matter how polluting. But some attendees were more committed to the cause, even signing petitions to lower the sun’s temperature.” Watch it all here:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/5w4VdgE9aEk[/youtube]

FLORIDA ACTION ALERT: Support SB 386 – American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) bill

/in , , , , , /by

This is the first in a series of important alerts we will be sending to you in the days and weeks to come! Senator Alan Hays recently introduced SB 386, the Florida Senate’s American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) bill.

SB 386 is common-sense legislation that protects Floridians’ individual, fundamental constitutional rights from foreign laws or legal doctrines where the application of those laws/doctrines would violate those constitutional rights. No particular foreign law is singled out. The proposal applies to them all. It’s that simple.

The ACT! For America national staff have made the passage of this bill a top legislative priority. At this stage, it is up to the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee whether SB 386 progresses to the floor of the Senate. We need to be sure that the members of the Committee understand the strong level of support across Florida for this bill!

Can we count on you to help us with this today?

Contact by you, a constituent, will be the best chance to see that this important bill passes in the Senate Judiciary Committee and ultimately becomes law. It just takes a moment of your time, but when your actions are joined together with the actions of thousands of other voters in Florida, it makes quite a roar.

Can we count on you to help us with the simple, but very important, Action Item noted below?

Important and Time Sensitive Action Item

Today, we need you to call and email all members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (and pass this request on to everyone you know!). You can email each Senator by following the link to his or her legislative web site below:

Sen. Tom Lee:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S24
(850) 487-5024

Senator Darren Soto:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S14
(850) 487-5014

Senator Rob Bradley

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S7
(850) 487-5007

Senator Andy Gardiner

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S13
(850) 487-5013

Senator Arthenia L. Joyner

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S19
(850) 487-5019

Senator Jack Latvala

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S20
(850) 487-5020

Senator Garrett Richter

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S23
(850) 487-5023

Senator Jeremy Ring

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S29
(850) 487-5029

Senator John Thrasher

https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/S6
(850) 487-5006

Please respectfully relay the following sentiments in your own words in a phone call and e-mail:

Dear Senator,

I urge you to support SB 386, the Florida Senate’s American Laws for American Courts bill. This important piece of legislation was introduced by Senator Alan Hays and has already passed in Tennessee, Louisiana, Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama and North Carolina.

Further, I ask that you do what you can to move this bill through the legislative process and to the Senate floor for a vote.

SB386 is tremendously important to all Florida citizens, as it protects their constitutional rights from the incursion of foreign laws and foreign legal doctrines, if those laws infringe upon their state or federal fundamental constitutional rights.

No individual foreign law is singled out.

We must maintain the authority of the Florida and U.S. Constitutions.

As a resident of Florida and as a voter, this bill is of the utmost importance to me!

Thank you again for your leadership on this vital matter.

Sincerely,

(Your name and city)

Thank you for your help in seeing this bill passed in Florida, so that your state can join the others that now have ALAC laws on the books!

REMEMBER, YOUR VOICE COUNTS! IF EACH OF US DOES JUST A LITTLE, TOGETHER WE CAN ACCOMPLISH A LOT!

New Study: President Obama a “member of the Flat Earth Society” on Climate Change

/in , , , , , , /by

Who are the real deniers of global climate change? A new report sheds light on the science and facts about global climate change. After reading the report I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that it is President Obama and his administration who truly are members of the “Flat Earth Society.”

The March 10, 2014 Edition (1-2014) of the Global Climate Status Report (GCSR) is now available and is a must read. Go to Space and Science Research Corporation (SSRC) website to obtain a copy. In this the fifth edition, the US government climate policy is discussed in detail. John Casey in the forward to the GCSR states:

This edition of the GCSR comes at a unique time in view of yet another record setting cold winter in the Northern Hemisphere and additional confirmation from measured climate parameters of the ongoing transition from the past naturally caused globally warm period to the new cold climate epoch.

Regardless of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, we continue to see US governmental policy based on the now thoroughly discredited greenhouse gas theory and the insignificant role mankind’s industrial CO2 plays in the atmosphere. In what can only be classified as a nationwide fit of cognitive dissonance, many of our leaders, including the President and Secretary of State and members of the media have resorted to reinforcing the now disproved myth of man made global warming with outlandish claims and outright lies about the state of the Earth’s climate and where it is going. In an obvious, well known move to discredit those who rely on facts not the politics of climate change, these same leaders have taken to personal attacks and name calling like labeling those who reject the PC version of climate science as “members of the Flat Earth Society,” and “deniers,” attempting to classify these climate truth seekers like those who dispute the reality of the Holocaust.

Casey notes, “This GCSR research summary of potentially historic impact is included. This research, includes fellow researchers, Dr. Dong Choi, Dr. Fumio Tsunoda, and Dr. Leo Maslov. This summary outlines the existence of remarkably strong links between solar activity and earthquakes which are further tied to the coming cold climate epoch. A final paper will be posted at the SSRC website at a later date.”

This GCSR reviews each of the twenty four climate parameters monitored at the SSRC to determine global climate status. These climate indicators are then used to create a long range climate prediction through the 2040’s. The GCSR is the only authoritative, quarterly, non-governmental global climate report published in the United States. Using solar activity forcing models for climate prediction, the SSRC has amassed one of the best records for climate prediction accuracy in the United States.

If you wish to know what is really happening with the climate and not the politically correct version, please go to the SSRC website and download a copy of the Global Climate Status Report.

RELATED COLUMN: Alex Sink Rides Global Warming Alarmism to Surprise Congressional Defeat in FL-13

RELATED VIDEO: Barack Obama’s Weekly Address – “Confronting the Growing Threat of Climate Change” from June 29, 2013.

ABOUT THE EDITORS OF THE GCSR:

Editor of GCSR – Mr. John L. Casey, SSRC Founder and President. Mr. Casey is a former White House space program advisor, NASA Headquarters consultant, who served as an engineer on the space shuttle program with a major aerospace contractor. While doing climate research in early 2007, he independently discovered cycles of the Sun that drive climate change. He then became the first climate researcher to notify the White House, Congress and the mainstream media of the onset of the next climate change to a long cold era caused by a “solar hibernation.” Mr. Casey has since been conducting a nationwide campaign to inform the American people and its leaders of the need to prepare for this next climate era. He is one of America’s most successful climate prediction experts and is the author of the internationally acclaimed climate science book, “Cold Sun.” See at www.coldsun.net. In 2012, at the request of leading seismologists from around the world, he took on the added role of Chairman/CEO of the International Earthquake and Volcano Prediction Center (IEVPC). See at www.ievpc.org. In March 2013, he was named “America’s best climate prediction expert” by Watchdogwire.com.

Co-Editor – Dr. Ole Humlum, Supporting Researcher to the SSRC. He is also a Professor of Physical Geography at the University of Oslo in Norway. A practicing glaciologist and geomorphologist, he is an expert in glacial and climate behavior for northern Europe, and the seas and oceans of the northeast Atlantic Ocean. He has spent many years in the field study of the glacial history of Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands, Denmark, the island of Svalbard and of Norway/Sweden. He is the founder of the widely respected global climate web site Climate4you.com.

The Space and Science Research Corporation, (SSRC), headquartered in Orlando, Florida conducts important research into the causes and effects of climate change, based on the Sun being the primary driver of climate change. The SSRC is the leading climate research organization in the US advocating national and global preparedness for the coming cold climate era. The SSRC is a small, privately funded, climate research organization relying on the advice of many climate experts and its staff of Supporting Researchers for their contributed research, analysis, and peer review of SSRC products. The SSRC has one of the most successful climate prediction track records in the US for any climate research organization. See more about the SSRC at www.spaceandscience.net.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image taken on December 18th, 2009 is of President Barack Obama briefing European leaders, including British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, European Union Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, and Danish Prime Minister Lars L. Rasmussen, following a multilateral meeting at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. In the background, behind French and US presidents, Frenchs ministers, Jean-Louis Borloo and Chantal Jouanno.

Senators4Sale: Cheap, Very Cheap

/in , , , , , /by

The US Senate used to pride itself as “…the world’s greatest deliberative body.” Those days are gone. The US Senate is now controlled by a Senator from Nevada named Harry Reid, who puts on an allnight talkathon for money. Reid recently attacked millions of Americans, deprived of health care plans they had been assured of keeping (PERIOD!), as liars. Now Reid has turned the Senate floor over to a majority of its Democrats for an overnight exercise in global warming fantasy, March 10-11.

Let’s be clear. This was not a debate on the Nation’s business. These Senate Democrats can’t be bothered to fulfill their Constitutional duty of passing a budget. The Senate hasn’t passed a budget for several years, and there will be none this year. There is no legislation planned to address climate change, though several senators insisted it is the most important issue facing the country.

This was not a reasoned debate by informed advocates of differing opinions on a matter of national importance. In a Gallup poll released 11 March, global warming or climate change ranked 14th of 15 issues considered. Small wonder, after the Winter of 2013-2014, which will undoubtedly make Florida one the most desirable states in the Union. Although we are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas, we are 60% below normal reserve levels [Fox News, Cavuto]. We may start next Winter behind the power curve.

This was not a debate on legislation to address a national problem of extreme weather, caused by “climate change”. 2013 was an all-time record low for tornadoes. There were two Atlantic hurricanes in 2013, neither of which threatened landfall. Tropical storms are at record lows around the world (according to Professor Ryan Maue of Florida State.) We are at a record number of years between landfall of major hurricanes (cat 3-4-5). Wildfires and drought were at a very low level.

The IPCC issued a report in 2012 on extreme weather, denying any link between these phenomena and climate change. But Senate Majority Leader Reid says:

“Every day that goes by, every week that goes, every month that goes by, every year that goes by … there’s more evidence of the dangers of climate change,”

Reid said Tuesday afternoon, in response to a question from the Weekly Standard, “The more climate changes, the more extreme the weather gets, and we’ve seen that in spades.”

Why is the US Senate conducting an overnight talkathon on a non-problem, when Democrats control the agenda? Answer: money for Democrat senators who cursed the American people with ObamaCare. They need campaign money offered by a climate change fanatic named Tom Steyer. The hedge fund billionaire has promised $100 million in campaign funding for any Democrat who opposes the Keystone XL pipeline. Even Dana Milbank, a liberal commentator of the Washington Post, is disgusted.

204px-Bill_Nelson,_official_NASA_photo

“Look back at the planet from the window of a spacecraft.”—Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL)

Does Florida have an entry in the Senators4Sale? Yes indeed, the last Senator to speak was Bill Nelson:

The senators saved the best for last. Florida has the most to lose, the fastest, of all the United States. Bill Nelson showed a map with a frightening area of the Atlantic and Gulf coastlines in red, submerged.

Nelson spoke of seeing the silt-laden river mouths of Madagascar and a storm in the Indian Ocean from 203 miles up. He presented shocking predictions with reason and calm, though he freaked out his audience. Nelson said 28 million people could be underwater by the end of the century. Recreation, baseball spring training, and the sunsets seen from the country’s southernmost eastern beach would be things of the past, pauperizing a $67 billion tourism industry. Miami, currently linking up with the Netherlands for technical help.

Senator Nelson, a Mission Specialist in 1986, serves on the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. One would think he’s well-informed on science and the most controversial topic in science today, climate change. One would expect that he knows sea level is rising at a rate of eight inches per century, as it has for the last 80 centuries. Instead he predicts 28 million Floridians to be underwater by 2100. Nelson is almost as big a liar as Harry Reid, a high bar.

Ironically, just last week, a group of retired NASA scientists and engineers called “The Right Climate Stuff” put out their independent report on the “threat” of climate change. These are the men who put Neil Armstrong on the moon, and Bill Nelson into space.

So, what did they say? “The planet is not in danger of catastrophic man made global warming. Even if we burn all the world’s recoverable fossil fuels it will still only result in a temperature rise of less than 1.2 per cent.”

And why did they say it? “It’s an embarrassment to those of us who put NASA’s name on the map to have people like James Hansen Bill Nelson popping off about global warming,” says the project’s leader Hal Doiron [text edit by RCS].

Bill Nelson is not just a disgrace to the Senate – like thirty of his fellow Senators – he’s a disgrace to the science that made him “the right stuff.”

RELATED COLUMN: Alex Sink Rides Global Warming Alarmism to Surprise Congressional Defeat in FL-13

Obama suggests people cancel cable and cell phones to afford Obamacare

/in , , , /by

According to President Obama, low-income families may have trouble affording Obamacare premiums because they simply do not know how to spend their own money. Last week, during a town hall meeting for Spanish language media where Obama was promoting enrollment, a viewer challenged the economics of it for low-income Americans now forced to buy health insurance, according to Hot Air.

The president responded that “if you looked at their cable bill, their telephone, their cell phone bill… it may turn out that, it’s just they haven’t prioritized health care.” He added that if a family member gets sick, the father “will wish he had paid that $300 a month.

Not that the father has any choice in the matter, considering the government is forcing him to buy it.

No Sir, it just means they haven’t prioritized spending on the health care you’re shoving down their throats. The hypocrisy never ceases to amaze. While the “era of austerity is supposedly over,” it’s clearly over for the federal government only.

Once again, President Obama finds someone else to blame for the failures of his own policy — which is so unappealing he keeps delaying it piece be piece. Ironically, cell phones are okay if they’re given away “free” at the expense of the hard-working American taxpayer, but not if you want to buy one yourself.

Daniel Garza, Executive Director of The LIBRE Initiative said of Obama’s remarks, “If the president actually believes that a family earning less than $40,000 per year can afford nearly $4,000 in health insurance premiums, then he truly does not understand middle-income families. Americans do not need the President to tell them how to budget their households. People are already cutting back on things like cable television and cell phones, just to compensate for an awful economy. This president promised he would deliver on affordable health care. Instead, premiums are up, out-of-pocket expenses are up, and overall cost of living is up. The president simply doesn’t get it. And his condescending attitude adds insult to injury.”

Once upon a time, families had the choice of using Healthcare Savings Accounts (HSAs) to spend pre-tax money on routine care and smaller emergencies, while using so-called catastrophic insurance to deal with serious illness requiring hospitalizations. But as part of Obamacare, HSAs are now taxed as well. So much for freedom of choice.

Perhaps we should take away Obama’s cell phone (and pen, while we’re at it) so the politicized executive orders will stop.

Obama is trying to convince Americans that the unaffordability of the Affordable Care Act isn’t his fault. It’s the fault of the states (run by those rascally Republicans) that won’t expand Medicaid. And it’s the fault of those selfish, irresponsible folks who’d rather have cable and cell phones.

If you like your iPhone, you can’t keep it. Period.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/ijQIJAK0NFA[/youtube]

 

RELATED COLUMN: Delaying Obamacare’s Individual Mandate Due to ‘Hardship’ — Caused by Obamacare

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.