using other words to admit you're 'lying'...

11/12/2017

0 Comments

 

by E.L. Christianson Jr.

Let's start at the beginning: Writing for the majority of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts argued, “For politicians, lying is a religious observance akin to attending a church or a synagogue, except that they do it seven days a week.”

Therefore, the court concluded: “any attempt to restrict or punish lying by politicians is an unconstitutional infringement on a religion they have practiced for decades.” 

Ok!  So, now we know. Sometimes it is hard to hide the truth.  Lies only go so far.  Facts are facts and, in 'the light of day' reality tends to shine through.  The hard truth about the proposed tax cuts for the wealthy has been known since the day the proposal was put forth.  But, congressional representatives and senators have lied about the effects of the proposed tax bill and the 'people' have, apparently, swallowed the lies.  A little bit of simple arithmetic reveals what happens under the guise of 'improving the tax code'.

for politicians

It appears that the American people are beginning to wake up.  What was obvious in the first place is now being seen to be obvious.  In the shadow of the truth, and not wanting to be known only as liars (especially as recent election results have shown that the public is starting to wake up), those pushing the new tax bill are trying to save themselves.  Now, they wish to explain that there was some small misunderstanding and that they were not heard correctly when they lied.

​Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell likes the word 'Misspoke' instead of the word 'lie' to describe his statements and to explain the confusion.  He says that he "misspoke" when he said that "nobody in the middle class is going to get a tax increase."  We can all easily see that 'I misspoke' sounds a whole lot better than 'I lied'.

Judd Legum of Think Progress told the truth when explaining, ​"'I misspoke' is the thing you say when you can't get away with lying anymore." 

Let's not be fooled, this was not the result of his being pricked by a guilty conscious, this was in the face of tremendously embarrassing analysis released by virtually everyone who studied the new tax bill, pointing out the truth. The truth is that the proposals disproportionately benefit high earners and corporations and raise taxes on millions of middle class families.  The analysis make the facts clear.

All things considered, Lying simply becomes unviable as an option. ​ In spite of repeated false promises by Republican lawmakers and in the face of objective analysis, McConnell conceded the truth, "I misspoke on that," McConnell told Times reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg‏.

if you lie to the government, it is a felony - but if your senator or representative in congress lies to you, it is protected speech... it is their Religious 'right' to lie to you

Well, hallelujah, we can finally credit McConnell with telling the truth.

But, as is habit, McConnell goes farther with his explanation and focuses on a lie.  He says, talking about the middle-class,  "You can't guarantee that absolutely no one sees a tax increase".

​It almost sounds reasonable... "You can't guarantee that absolutely no one sees a tax increase"... using the words 'absolutely' and 'guarantee' seems rational, seems intelligent, seems equitable, seems like a whole lot of positive things, but in truth it is a lie.  It is a lie underneath the deception.

It is a lie because he and his cohorts are the ones who are writing the law.  In that law, they have gone to extremes to 'guarantee' that the rich will get massive benefits.  They write what they want to write.  If it was their intention, they could just as easily 'guarantee' benefits for the middle-class - but, the problem is that they have (using that word) 'absolutely' no intention of benefiting the middle-class.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Republican Representative Darrell Issa said he can’t vote for the current version of the GOP tax bill. ... he doesn’t think the individual tax cuts will [stimulate the economy], and they'll hit some Americans unevenly. “They say the average person is going to get a reduction, and yet many, many people in my district are going to see a tax increase because we have wanted to give tax reductions over and above those that stimulate the economy,” said Issa, who is considered one of the most vulnerable members in next year's election. “I am concerned about making sure we don’t give away so much that isn’t economically necessary and then at the same time tell certain people that they have to pay tax increases.” Issa pointed to the elimination of the deduction on state and local taxes as an example, saying that people shouldn’t be taxed twice on the same money. One in three Californians use the deduction, the loss of which has been a sticking point for members in other high-tax states. “I don’t think paying your state income tax involuntarily is a loophole,” Issa said. “Very few people would say that state income tax is a loophole.”

Maybe it is a phase of the moon, who knows.  The truth is coming out.  Read the article by Kaili Joy Gray.  While many Republican lawmakers are at least pretending their tax scheme is supposed to benefit middle-class voters — it’s not — Rep. Chris Collins is taking a different approach.

A week ago, the New York Republican shockingly admitted he does not care that the plan to make the middle class pay for handouts to billionaires and corporations is deeply unpopular with voters.  Asked to respond to the bill’s extreme unpopularity with voters, he literally responded, “Who cares?”  When it comes to his donors, however, that’s another matter.

“My donors are basically saying, ‘Get it done or don’t ever call me again,'” Collins said.  In other words, Collins is pushing for something his voters don’t want so his rich donors will keep giving him money to stay in office.

It is obvious that the Republican plot to benefit the rich has nothing to do with the majority of Americans they represent. But it’s quite a stunning admission to make out loud.

And then there's Lindsey Graham. Suddenly, he is a 'truth teller'.  He now admits that the Tax Plan is all about "keeping Financial Contributions of donors flowing"   Republicans are literally out here warning each other that their big donors will stop writing checks if they don't do their bidding."  Read the article by Jake Johnson.

Republicans in congress are trying to ram through massive tax cuts for the rich to satisfy wealthy donors.  If the party's tax push fails, "the financial contributions will stop."

David Sirota, reporter with the International Business Times, responded by noting that it is both "laudably honest for Graham to admit this" and "a repulsive glimpse of how politicans see so many public policies as private financial transactions between them and their donors."​

And, finally there are the American people.  We will have a chance to speak the truth.  We must forget whatever it was that caused us to elect these people in the first place.  We are looking the truth in the face.  The millions of us who are the essence of this nation do not count to those making the laws.  They are now on record as having said exactly that.  They are there in congress working for the wealthy elite and for nobody else.

This is reminiscent of George H. W. Bush and his famous broken promise - "Read my lips: no new taxes".  Yes, we are reading your lips and we can see that you are lying, all of you - Republicans and Democrats.  And, we know the truth, that the lying of politicians is 'protected by the constitution'.  But, we are not all that dumb and we recognize that lying is not protected at the voting booth.

We have had enough of these lying and deceiving politicians.  Let's act in the only manner open to us as citizens... let's exercise our power to vote.  Our only hope is to remove these people at the very next election, and that's the truth !!!

Let's stop listening to the lies of our political leaders.
Let's start voting for the truth !!!

talk about 'double standards'... 11/10/2017 0 Comments   by E.L. Christianson Jr. We and our European puppet partners say lots of things because it sounds good to hear ourselves saying certain things.  What we, and they say, however, has nothing to do with our policy decisions.   Libraries can be filled with our utterances about 'democracy', but in truth, democracy means absolutely nothing as related to our actions in 'real life'.  That a population was 'free' to vote and overwhelmingly made a statement at the voting booth has absolutely no relationship to the reaction of the United States government toward the results of that election. If there is any constancy, it is that we consistently reject any election results we do not like.  Venezuela is a perfect example of our current hostility toward the democratically chosen outcome.  Actually many places in South America (among other places in the world) can be shown to be similar examples of United States rejection of the democratic process. And all the while, we run around shouting at the top of our lungs about freedom and democracy and the such (and killing people). We make all sorts of claims about the ill-legitimacy of such and such election, or the illegality of such and such election, claiming 'fixed election results' and 'intimidation of voters', and on and on. We pretend these things are unrelated to Hillary's fixing the Democratic primary, or these intimidations are unrelated to removing minorities from the electorate, or these things are all unrelated to 'money' owning the entire American political process.  That only 2 parties have a prayer for success in the United States makes every election illegitimate. Spain, a member of our puppet squad in the European Union, is rejecting democracy - rejecting election results. Nobody is even questioning the legitimacy of the election results.  Regardless of what the people have overwhelmingly said they favor while holding their elections in the face of a vicious police crackdown, Spain is moving troops into position to establish control and to maintain dominance. 'There will be no independence here' and 'to hell with democracy'. It is sometimes difficult to keep track of the various circumstances around the world.  In recent memory, Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008. The European Union enthusiastically supported Kosovo’s breakaway from the Serbian republic.   That was ok because the United States was destroying what was formerly Yugoslavia. So, in trying to keep track of the score, Kosovo was an acceptable secession but Catalonia is not. Europe's leaders seem to universally support Spain, declaring that the Catalonia situation to be wholly an internal issue for Spain and that it must be solved within the bounds of the Spanish constitution.  That attitude makes the independence movement seem to be illegal and ignores whatever issues led to the succession movement in the first place. If one is paying attention, one would easily notice that the circumstances in Kiev were not determined to be an internal matter for Russia.  And in spite of 'democratically elected' leaders in Kiev, the United States and the puppet European Union felt 'obliged' to intervene in favor of Ukrainian independence.  But then, that was in Russia. An article by Ishaan Tharoor points to the truth about the situation in Spain.  “If this were Crimea, say, or friendless, penniless Greece, Angela Merkel would be in full mediation mode by now,” wrote Guardian columnist Simon Tisdall.  “But when it comes to Catalonia, Germany’s chancellor, whose [own party] is allied with Spain’s ruling party, is otherwise engaged.”   So, too, is French President Emmanuel Macron, who, in a major speech last week, energetically championed a more “integrated Europe” - a call echoed by Catalonia’s secessionists, who are fiercely pro-Brussels - yet said he supported Spain’s “constitutional unity” this week. To be fair, no Western European leader is going to speak up for separatists in another Western European country.  But the standoff between Barcelona and Madrid betrays the complex tensions boiling within Europe - a mess of cosmopolitan ideals, nationalist agendas and regional aspirations for more direct governance. In the United States, we know something about secessionists movements.  Right here at home, the federal government put down such a movement in the mid 19th century resulting in the deaths of nearly 650,000 people, and that's the truth !!!

hypocrites unite...

11/10/2017

0 Comments

 

the wannabe cowboy & and wannabe senator displays his belief system... as a 'professed' Christian, his life's activities emulate those of Jesus who, in the mind of Moore, must have preached about the benefits of sexual predatory behavior as well as weapons training...

by E.L. Chistianson Jr.

It is interesting to witness the scrambling of 'Christians' attempting to defend Roy Moore.

A mess in Alabama. Some Republicans are calling on Senate candidate Roy Moore of Alabama to quit after a Washington Post report about allegations he molested a 14-year-old girl when he was 32—if the charges are true. Moore, 70, a former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, called the accusation “completely false.” The seat once held by Jeff Sessions had been viewed as a safe Republican seat. Republicans have a two-seat majority in the Senate.

The ballots for the Dec. 12 special election are already printed, and many absentee voters have already submitted theirs. Republicans were scrambling to figure out whether Sen. Luther Strange, who now holds the seat, could run as a write-in candidate against Democrat Doug Jones.

The statute of limitations for prosecuting Moore has long passed. The age of legal consent in Alabama is 16. Under the law in Alabama in 1979 and today, a person who is at least 19 years old who has sexual contact with someone older than 12 and younger than 15 has committed sexual abuse in the second degree. Sexual contact is defined as touching of sexual or intimate parts. The crime is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail.

In Alabama, State Auditor Jim Zeigler referred to the story of Jesus to defend Roy Moore. ​“Mary was a teenager, and Joseph was an adult carpenter,” Zeigler said. “They became the parents of Jesus. There’s just nothing immoral or illegal here. Maybe just a little bit unusual.”

Political allies of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) spent millions to try to stop Moore in the primary while Trump’s former chief strategist, Stephen Bannon, rallied support for Moore.  “This is what happens when you let reckless, incompetent idiots like Steve Bannon go out and recruit candidates who have absolutely no business running for U.S. Senate,” said former McConnell aide Josh Holmes.

The Washington Post ​published a story of a woman who said that Moore, initiated a sexual encounter with her in 1979, when she was 14.  Apparently, he approached her outside of the court where her parents were separating.  Moore was single, in his early 30s, had never been married - and was dating teenage girls.

The woman said that the sexual events happened twice at Moore's house.  He told her how pretty she was and kissed her.  Subsequently, Moore took off her shirt and pants and removed his clothes and touched her with her underwear still on.  He maneuvered her hand to touch him on top of his underwear.

Three other women have come forward to accuse Moore of chasing after them when they were teenagers.  History would indicate that there are 'others'.  Some, for a variety of reasons, will chose to remain out of sight.

The list of immoral, unethical and illegal pursuits on Roy Moore's resume would seem to disqualify him from most things other than a jail term.  However the community of 'fake Christians' seems enthralled by his 'pretend Christian beliefs' and is making all manner of excuses for his un-Christ-like behavior... "Mary and Joseph", indeed.

We really cannot afford to have a person of this character voting on our laws in the United States Senate, and that's the truth !!!

Americans have become 'unhinged'... 11/9/2017 0 Comments   by E.L. Christianson Jr. Using words and language to communicate is a difficult task.  How to accurately state a premise?  Unhinged relates to some form of mental derangement.  To describe such a situation on a national level is complicated.  How would a whole nation fall into that type of category?  "Unhinged". For one thing, the popular media is a major influence on everything that is thought and believed in the United States.  And, the media pounds certain concepts into those subject to their influence at every moment of every day.  It is not only the 'news', but is all of the other 'fodder' in between the 'news broadcasts' the reinforce the message delivered through the 'news'.  And if there is anything the 'news' has delivered in the last decade or so, it is the message that, above all else, Americans need to be fearful of terrorism. And, in addition to the overall concept of 'fear of terrorism', the specifics of what to fear have been defined in include some things and to exclude other things.  Mass killings of Americans on American soil is terrifying, but not necessarily 'terrorism', according to the message of the media.  According to the propaganda put forth by the national institutions, as reported by the media, the mass killing of Americans must be done by foreigners who are believers of Islam in order to properly be called 'terrorism'.  If the mass killing of Americans on American soil is done by white males of American, Christian decent, it cannot be called 'terrorism'.  Call it something else, call it anything else but do not call it 'terrorism'. Terrorism is violence against peacetime targets intended to create fear and typically has some purpose beyond violence and fear.  We can't agree among ourselves as to whether or not "terrorism" is a war crime​. The history of terrorism, as a term, began with the French Revolution in the late 1700's and came into common usage in this country during the Lebanese Civil War in 1983 when truck bombs struck against United States and French 'peacekeepers', killing 241 Americans.  The term is now on every American's tongue since the attacks on the World Trade Center. As stated, just killing a lot of people in an episode of mass murder doesn't qualify as terrorism.  ​The Gun Violence Archive notes that in the United States there have been almost 300 mass shootings with three months still to go in 2017.  But, according to the propaganda, we are not to fear mass murder events - it is 'terrorism' specifically that we must fear. Terrorists attacks are what 'those from over there' (Muslims) do to us and it is awful.  Mass murder is what we do to ourselves with our own weapons and it is 'ok' - not to be feared.  In fact, we constantly tell ourselves, we should have more weapons available to us so we can protect ourselves against mass murder at our own hands.  We love our 2nd amendment and we love to recite the deceptive lyric, "a good guy with a gun" is the best answer to "a bad guy with a gun". Wow! That sounds good... bang, bang, bang... and here are some more dead. It is clear to anyone who pays attention, that the 'war against terrorism' is a special kind of thing.  It has no specific location which allows the United States to go anywhere in the world in the 'fight against terrorism'.  There is no specific enemy which allows the United States to declare anyone an enemy combatant in the 'war against terrorism.  Those 'strikes against the United States' by the 'terrorists' are so ill defined that after the dead on our side are counted, we wait for our government to verify whether or not this was a 'terrorist attack'.   The enemy - the 'terrorists' have a never ending supply of members even without having a country from which to recruit.  It is the United States that is the most effective recruiter for our 'terrorist enemy'.  Every time we attack peaceful civilians around the world as we institute 'regime change' and otherwise  spread freedom, we recruit for the terrorists organization.  The family members and friends of those we slaughtered rush out to join those organizations.  Our violence against peaceful civilians doesn't seem to terrorize as much as it forms feeling of revenge and hatred against us.  The terrorists organization doesn't have to to much.  Those we recruit are indoctrinated and are ready to lay down their lives against us. Twenty-six people were killed during a shooting at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.  19 people were hospitalized.  As not carried out by believers of Islam, it is not a terrorist attack.  Actually, carried out in the 'house of the Lord', it demonstrates what 'Christians' are capable of doing.   Trained by the United States military, and armed by the 2nd amendment, our national belief systems offer condolences to families of victims and looks to mental health issues as the cause.  But, neither this event or any of the similar series of events should cause us any real concern because this is not a 'terrorist attack'.  There are lots of people who are 'terrorized' but this is not a 'terrorists' attack because it is an American killing Americans.  Nothing to fear in this scenario. As the article below indicates, almost the last thing on Earth an American citizen truly needs to fear is losing their life through 'terrorism'.  But our policy is to push 'fear', to make Americans 'fearful' and to fight the 'war on terrorism' to the death... fear, Fear and More Fear !!! Our government says to not worry about mass murder at home.  Our fears need to be reserved for real 'terrorism' and the 'war no terror'.   Of course, this is a war that we cannot possibly ever win, but that doesn't matter - the purpose is being fulfilled.  It will keep the money flowing into our military budget, forever. Actually, if we would stop and think for a moment, we'd realize that the stupid policies of our government are more dangerous to Americans than is 'terrorism', and that's the truth !!! ​The Terrorism Statistics Every American Needs to Hear from Global Research by Washington's Blog Calm Down … You Are Much More Likely to Be Killed By Boring, Mundane Things than Terrorism McClatchy reported in 2010: There were just 25 U.S. noncombatant fatalities from terrorism worldwide. (The US government definition of terrorism excludes attacks on U.S. military personnel). While we don’t have the figures at hand, undoubtedly more American citizens died overseas from traffic accidents or intestinal illnesses than from terrorism. The March, 2011, Harper‘s Index noted: Number of American civilians who died worldwide in terrorist attacks last year: 8 — Minimum number who died after being struck by lightning: 29. Indeed, the leading cause of deaths for Americans traveling abroad is not terrorism, or murder … or even crime of any type.  It’s car crashes. In fact: With the exception of the Philippines, more Americans died from road crashes in all of the 160 countries surveyed than from homicides. The U.S. Department of State reports that only 17 U.S. citizens were killed worldwide as a result of terrorism in 2011. That figure includes deaths in Afghanistan, Iraq and all other theaters of war. In contrast, the American agency which tracks health-related issues – the U.S. Centers for Disease Control – rounds up the most prevalent causes of death in the United States: Comparing the CDC numbers to terrorism deaths means (keep in mind that – from here to the end of the piece – we are consistently and substantially understating the risk of other causes of death as compared to terrorism, because we are comparing deaths from various causes within the United States against deaths from terrorism worldwide): – You are 35,079 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack – You are 33,842 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack Wikipedia notes that obesity is a a contributing factor in 100,000–400,000 deaths in the United States per year. That makes obesity 5,882 to times 23,528 more likely to kill you than a terrorist. The annual number of deaths in the U.S. due to avoidable medical errors is as high as 100,000. Indeed, one of the world’s leading medical journals – Lancet – reported in 2011: A November, 2010, document from the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services reported that, when in hospital, one in seven beneficiaries of Medicare (the government-sponsored health-care programme for those aged 65 years and older) have complications from medical errors, which contribute to about 180 000 deaths of patients per year. That’s just Medicare beneficiaries, not the entire American public. Scientific American noted in 2009: Preventable medical mistakes and infections are responsible for about 200,000 deaths in the U.S. each year, according to an investigation by the Hearst media corporation. And a new study published in the Journal of Patient Safety says the numbers may be up to 440,000 each year. But let’s use the lower – 100,000 – figure. That still means that you are 5,882 times more likely to die from medical error than terrorism. The CDC says that some 80,000 deaths each year are attributable to excessive alcohol use. So you’re 4,706 times more likely to drink yourself to death than die from terrorism. Wikipedia notes that there were 32,367 automobile accidents in 2011, which means that you are 1,904 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack. As CNN reporter Fareed Zakaria wrote last year: “Since 9/11, foreign-inspired terrorism has claimed about two dozen lives in the United States. (Meanwhile, more than 100,000 have been killed in gun homicides and more than 400,000 in motor-vehicle accidents.) “ President Obama agreed. According to a 2011 CDC report, poisoning from prescription drugs is even more likely to kill you than a car crash. Indeed, the CDC stated in 2011 that – in the majority of states – your prescription meds are more likely to kill you than any other source of injury. So your meds are thousands of times more likely to kill you than Al Qaeda. The number of deaths by suicide has also surpassed car crashes, and many connect the increase in suicides to the downturn in the economy. Around 35,000 Americans kill themselves each year (and more American soldiers die by suicide than combat; the number of veterans committing suicide is astronomical and under-reported). So you’re 2,059 times more likely to kill yourself than die at the hand of a terrorist. The CDC notes that there were 7,638 deaths from HIV and 45 from syphilis, so you’re 452 times more likely to die from risky sexual behavior than terrorism. The National Safety Council reports that more than 6,000 Americans die a year from falls … most of them involve people falling off their roof or ladder trying to clean their gutters, put up Christmas lights and the like. That means that you’re 353 times more likely to fall to your death doing something idiotic than die in a terrorist attack. The agency in charge of workplace safety – the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration – reports that 4,609 workers were killed on the job in 2011 within the U.S. homeland. In other words, you are 271 times more likely to die from a workplace accident than terrorism. The CDC notes that 3,177 people died of “nutritional deficiencies” in 2011, which means you are 187 times more likely to starve to death in America than be killed by terrorism. Scientific American notes: You might have toxoplasmosis, an infection caused by the microscopic parasite Toxoplasma gondii, which the CDC estimates has infected about 22.5 percent of Americans older than 12 years old. Toxoplasmosis is a brain-parasite. The CDC reports that more than 375 Americans die annually due to toxoplasmosis. In addition, 3 Americans died in 2011 after being exposed to a brain-eating amoeba. So you’re about 22 times more likely to die from a brain-eating zombie parasite than a terrorist. There were at least 155 Americans killed by police officers in the United States in 2011. [we know that is an extremely low count?]  That means that you were more than 9 times more likely to be killed by a law enforcement officer than by a terrorist. The 2011 Report on Terrorism from the National Counter Terrorism Center notes that Americans are just as likely to be “crushed to death by their televisions or furniture each year” as they are to be killed by terrorists. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control show that Americans are 110 times more likely to die from contaminated food than terrorism. And see this and this. The Jewish Daily Forward noted last year that – even including the people killed in the Boston bombing – you are more likely to be killed by a toddler than a terrorist. And see these statistics from CNN. Reason notes: [The risk of being killed by terrorism] compares annual risk of dying in a car accident of 1 in 19,000; drowning in a bathtub at 1 in 800,000; dying in a building fire at 1 in 99,000; or being struck by lightning at 1 in 5,500,000. In other words, in the last five years you were four times more likely to be struck by lightning than killed by a terrorist. The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) has just published, Background Report: 9/11, Ten Years Later [PDF]. The report notes, excluding the 9/11 atrocities, that fewer than 500 people died in the U.S. from terrorist attacks between 1970 and 2010. Scientific American reported in 2011: John Mueller, a political scientist at Ohio State University, and Mark Stewart, a civil engineer and authority on risk assessment at University of Newcastle in Australia … contended, “a great deal of money appears to have been misspent and would have been far more productive—saved far more lives—if it had been expended in other ways.” Mueller and Stewart noted that, in general, government regulators around the world view fatality risks—say, from nuclear power, industrial toxins or commercial aviation—above one person per million per year as “acceptable.” Between 1970 and 2007 Mueller and Stewart asserted in a separate paper published last year in Foreign Affairs that a total of 3,292 Americans (not counting those in war zones) were killed by terrorists resulting in an annual risk of one in 3.5 million. Americans were more likely to die in an accident involving a bathtub (one in 950,000), a home appliance (one in 1.5 million), a deer (one in two million) or on a commercial airliner (one in 2.9 million). The global mortality rate of death by terrorism is even lower. Worldwide, terrorism killed 13,971 people between 1975 and 2003, an annual rate of one in 12.5 million. Since 9/11 acts of terrorism carried out by Muslim militants outside of war zones have killed about 300 people per year worldwide. This tally includes attacks not only by al Qaeda but also by “imitators, enthusiasts, look-alikes and wannabes,” according to Mueller and Stewart. Defenders of U.S. counterterrorism efforts might argue that they have kept casualties low by thwarting attacks. But invvestigations by the FBI and other law enforcement agencies suggest that 9/11 may have been an outlier—an aberration—rather than a harbinger of future attacks. Muslim terrorists are for the most part “short on know-how, prone to make mistakes, poor at planning” and small in number, Mueller and Stewart stated. Although still potentially dangerous, terrorists hardly represent an “existential” threat on a par with those posed by Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. In fact, Mueller and Stewart suggested in Homeland Security Affairs, U.S. counterterrorism procedures may indirectly imperil more lives than they preserve: “Increased delays and added costs at U.S. airports due to new security procedures provide incentive for many short-haul passengers to drive to their destination rather than flying, and, since driving is far riskier than air travel, the extra automobile traffic generated has been estimated to result in 500 or more extra road fatalities per year.” ​ The funds that the U.S. spends on counterterrorism should perhaps be diverted to other more significant perils, such as industrial accidents (one in 53,000), violent crime (one in 22,000), automobile accidents (one in 8,000) and cancer (one in 540). “Overall,” Mueller and Stewart wrote, “vastly more lives could have been saved if counterterrorism funds had instead been spent on combating hazards that present unacceptable risks.” In an e-mail to me, Mueller elaborated: “The key question, never asked of course, is what would the likelihood be if the added security measures had not been put in place? And, if the chances without the security measures might have been, say, one in 2.5 million per year, were the trillions of dollars in investment (including overseas policing which may have played a major role) worth that gain in security—to move from being unbelievably safe to being unbelievably unbelievably safe? Given that al Qaeda and al Qaeda types have managed to kill some 200 to 400 people throughout the entire world each year outside of war zones since 9/11—including in areas that are far less secure than the U.S.—there is no reason to anticipate that the measures have deterred, foiled or protected against massive casualties in the United States. If the domestic (we leave out overseas) enhanced security measures put into place after 9/11 have saved 100 lives per year in the United States, they would have done so at a cost of $1 billion per saved life. That same money, if invested in a measure that saves lives at a cost of $1 million each—like passive restraints for buses and trucks—would have saved 1,000 times more lives.” Mueller and Stewart’s analysis is conservative, because it excludes the most lethal and expensive U.S. responses to 9/11. Al Qaeda’s attacks also provoked the U.S. into invading and occupying two countries, at an estimated cost of several trillion dollars. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have resulted in the deaths of more than 6,000 Americans so far—more than twice as many as were killed on September 11, 2001—as well as tens of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans. *** In 2007 New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said that people are more likely to be killed by lightning than terrorism. “You can’t sit there and worry about everything,” Bloomberg exclaimed. “Get a life. Actually, according to Mueller and Stewart, Americans’ annual risk of dying from lightning, at one in seven million is only half the risk from terrorism. Indeed, the Senior Research Scientist for the Space Science Institute (Alan W. Harris) estimates that the odds of being killed by a terrorist attack is about the same as being hit by an asteroid (and see this). Terrorism pushes our emotional buttons. And politicians and the media tend to blow the risk of terrorism out of proportion. But as the figures above show, terrorism is a very unlikely cause of death. Indeed, our spending on anti-terrorism measures is way out of whack … especially because most of the money has been wasted. And see this article, and this 3-minute video by professor Mueller: Indeed, mission creep in the name of countering terrorism actually makes us more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Note: The U.S. is supporting the most extreme and violent types of Muslims. Indeed, the U.S. has waived the prohibitions of arming terrorist groups in order to topple the Syrian government … even though the head of the Syrian rebels has called for Al Qaeda to carry out new attacks on America. Indeed – as counter-intuitive as it may sound- stupid government policy may be more dangerous than terrorism. The original source of this article is Washington's Blog and Global Research

the Paradise Papers 11/8/2017 0 Comments   BIG U.S. POLITICAL DONORS PLAY THE OFFSHORE GAME A leak of offshore records provides a glimpse into the unethical and immoral financial maneuvers of Republican and Democratic contributors - graphic art credit International Consortium of Investigative Journalists -icij.org  by E.L. Christianson Jr. There are several things to understand about this 'scandal'.  What is being revealed are 'secrets' about people and corporations who 'cheat & steal' from the people of the country in which they reside (live, exist, do business, etc.).  Officially, the 'paradise' part is a descriptive name for what is commonly and usually referred to as a tax haven.  In the minds of those avoiding payment of their fair share of taxes, it is a 'paradise' or tax paradise. All of the names being listed are the names of crooks.  The law firm directing the action claims (as one would expect) that everything they do is legal.  They claim that there is no evidence of illegal activity.  They say that it is their business to advise their clients of legitimate and legal procedures for conducting honest business transactions. What must be understood is that the 'laws' are passed by the crooks themselves - the representatives of the millionaire class operating in government positions and creating a 'legal' framework for the rich to become richer.  The 'theft' is 'legal' because laws were passed making it 'legal' for the millionaire class to 'go off-shore' with their 'investments' and to cheat the tax system of their home countries.  It is illegal to sell cigarettes on the street corner of New York City, for example, but 'legal' to hide billions of dollars from the 'tax collector'. Among those who have provided the information to the public is the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, and an International Consortium of Investigative Journalists involving a couple of hundred investigative journalists in nearly 100 countries who collaborate on issues of international criminal activity. The consortium of journalists shared the database of information on a platform created specifically for this type of project which facilitated the investigative work by journalists around the world.   Bernie Sanders told the truth, saying, "The Paradise Papers shows how these billionaires and multinational corporations get richer by hiding their wealth and profits to avoid paying their fair share of taxes." The leak of 13.4 million confidential electronic documents gives one an idea of the scale of the 'completely legal' offshore universe of tax cheaters.  It shows the huge number of participants (over 120,000 people and companies) who, following the 'legal' advice of lawyers and accountants, shielded 10 trillion dollars from being taxed.  It involves both the 'rich' and the 'famous'.  It gives details of their use of 'shell' corporations used to reduce and/or eliminate the legitimate tax burden that should be paid - in a fair world. But, here we are in a world run by the criminal class. According to the papers, Facebook, Apple, Uber, Nike, Walmart, Allianz, Siemens, McDonald's, and Yahoo! are among the corporations that own offshore companies and have hidden trillions of dollars in taxable income and avoided billions of dollars of tax by using offshore companies. The papers reveal offshore interests and activities of more than 120 politicians and world leaders, including Queen Elizabeth II, and includes 13 advisers, donors and 'team' members of Donald Trump's administration, as well as of many of the world’s most powerful people and companies. There are also details from 19 corporate registries maintained by governments in secrecy jurisdictions – Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, the Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, the Cook Islands, Dominica, Grenada, Labuan, Lebanon, Malta, the Marshall Islands, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent, Samoa, Trinidad and Tobago, and Vanuatu. see icij.org for more information There is a lot of history being revealed.  'They' have been stealing from us for a long time... the papers cover the period from 1950 to 2016. As an aside, and not to divert attention away from the immoral and un-ethical cheating on taxes, the Paradise Papers offer insight on the fake 'Russia-gate' episode.  The documents revealed that Russian state organizations with ties to Putin pursued between 2009 and 2011 large investments in Facebook and Twitter via an intermediary—Russian-American entrepreneur Yuri Milner, who befriended Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and was a business associate of Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law. When the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists published its first major revelations on financial secrecy in 2013, the public saw the way the financial system really works – and who it serves. The revelation prompted public outrage, provoked public discussions and helped build momentum behind a push for a more fair and more transparent society.  Each revelation offers more examples of inequality and injustice and points out systemic failure on a gigantic scale. As always, it is the poor, the vulnerable and the disadvantaged who suffer the consequences.   Ultimately, regardless of other factors, it is they who are being stolen from in these 'legal' but unscrupulous and unethical tax schemes. It is interesting to note that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange revealed the same type of 'truth' and has been declared a criminal by the United States which has forced him into 'hiding'. This isn't really 'news' because there is nothing 'new' about the wealthy using every trick possible to take advantage of everyone else.  And, as more and more information about the leak of data becomes known, the cry that 'nothing was illegal' will be shouted out to all of the world.  We ordinary citizens can sit and marvel at the dishonesty, chicanery and theft involved in the 'legal' cheating on taxes while we continue to pay our fair share of taxes.  Or, we can change our corrupt system.  We can remove the crooks who create laws that allow us to be swindled by the wealthy.  We can force real democracy into our political reality. If we want to see circumstances improved, we can make it happen.  But, we know, deep in our collective hearts, that the two political parties that hold our country in the grip of their power will not make the necessary changes.  If it is to happen, we have to find a way to do it for ourselves, and that's the truth !!!