Unspeakable grief and horror
|
Know them by their fruit:
|
Unspeakable grief and horror
Know them by their fruit: |
|
SUPER-IMPERIALISM: The Shameful Legacy Of Liberal Democrats
Carolyn Baker www.carolynbaker.org April 29, 2007 Inextricably tied to the super-imperialism project is the $4 trillion dollars stolen from the U.S. Treasury in the past decade. The unanswered questions regarding September 11, 2001. The USA Patriot Act. Peak Oil The privatization of water and other resources. The cesspool of corruption surrounding government contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. And the domination of U.S. money supply and fiscal policy by the Federal Reserve and other centralized financial systems. Each of these issues is beyond the scope of any president or party to thoroughly remediate. Only one thing is absolutely certain regarding super-imperialism — its collapse. Whether collapse occurs suddenly or gradually, before, during, and after, there will be many opportunities for those of us residing in the belly of the beast to create new economic and social structures. The pivotal question is: Will we be prepared to do so? Did I watch the Democratic candidates’ debate, April 26? No, I was sitting in a local movie theater watching the film “Shooter” which, in my opinion, rips the mask off the current political landscape and ventures into territory where no candidate anointed by the corporatocracy is willing to travel. “Shooter” is the real deal; presidential debates, yet another distracting soap opera. A line from that film now comes to mind, depicting the essence of super-imperialism:
“There is no Sunni or Shia
No Democrat or Republican
— Only the have’s and have-not’s.”
|
|
Without disputing any of the below, the Earth is warming Alex — Alexander Cockburn and Alex Jones
We ignore this at our children's and grandchildren's peril, and if young enough, at our peril.
And yes, carbon credits are a tool of the elite, those who have control of corporations and governments — empowering them more, giving everyone else nothing.
But the oceans are warming — Doesn't matter if we have it back-assward.
Vast areas of the planet will become uninhabitable to loved ones
We do need to find a solution. |
April 28/29, 2007 From Papal Indulgences to Carbon Credits
By Alexander Cockburn
Is Global Warming a Sin? |
I n a couple of hundred years, historians will be comparing the frenzies over our supposed human contribution to global warming to the tumults at the latter end of the tenth century as the Christian millennium approached.
Then, as now, the doomsters identified human sinfulness as the propulsive factor in the planet's rapid downward slide.
Then as now, a buoyant market throve on fear.
The Roman Catholic Church was a bank whose capital was secured by the infinite mercy of Christ, Mary and the Saints, and so the Pope could sell indulgences, like checks.
The sinners established a line of credit against bad behavior and could go on sinning.
Today a world market in "carbon credits" is in formation.
Those whose "carbon footprint" is small can sell their surplus carbon credits to others, less virtuous than themselves.
|
Carbon trafficking is powered by the elite seeking to retain control
The modern trade is as fantastical as the medieval one.
There is still zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of CO2 is making any measurable contribution to the world's present warming trend.
The greenhouse fearmongers rely entirely on unverified, crudely oversimplified computer models to finger mankind's sinful contribution.
Devoid of any sustaining scientific basis, carbon trafficking is powered by guilt, credulity, cynicism and greed, just like the old indulgences, though at least the latter produced beautiful monuments.
By the sixteenth century, long after the world had sailed safely through the end of the first millennium, Pope Leo X financed the reconstruction of St. Peter's Basilica by offering a "plenary" indulgence, guaranteed to release a soul from purgatory.
|
Now imagine two lines on a piece of graph paper.
The first rises to a crest, then slopes sharply down, then levels off and rises slowly once more.
The other has no undulations.
It rises in a smooth, slowly increasing arc.
The first, wavy line is the worldwide CO2 tonnage produced by humans burning coal, oil and natural gas.
On this graph it starts in 1928, at 1.1 gigatons (i.e. 1.1 billion metric tons).
It peaks in 1929 at 1.17 gigatons. The world, led by its mightiest power, the USA, plummets into the Great Depression, and by 1932 human CO2 production has fallen to 0.88 gigatons a year, a 30 per cent drop.
Hard times drove a tougher bargain than all the counsels of Al Gore or the jeremiads of the IPCC (Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change).
Then, in 1933 it began to climb slowly again, up to 0.9 gigatons.
These days the Carbon Dioxide level is at 380 parts per million — and rising sharply
And the other line, the one ascending so evenly?
That's the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, parts per million (ppm) by volume, moving in 1928 from just under 306, hitting 306 in 1929, to 307 in 1932 and on up.
Boom and bust, the line heads up steadily.
These days it's at 380.
There are, to be sure, seasonal variations in CO2, as measured since 1958 by the instruments on Mauna Loa, Hawai'i.
(Pre-1958 measurements are of air bubbles trapped in glacial ice.)
Summer and winter vary steadily by about 5 ppm, reflecting photosynthesis cycles.
The two lines on that graph proclaim that a whopping 30 per cent cut in man-made CO2 emissions didn't even cause a 1 ppm drop in the atmosphere's CO2.
Thus it is impossible to assert that the increase in atmospheric CO2 stems from human burning of fossil fuels. |
Check the mountain peaks, the rapidly diminishing ice streams, the Arctic regions, the Antarctic peninsula, before you gauge how little that bit warmer is.
I met Dr. Martin Hertzberg, the man who drew that graph and those conclusions, on a Nation cruise back in 2001.
He remarked that while he shared many of the Nation's editorial positions, he approved of my reservations on the issue of supposed human contributions to global warming, as outlined in columns I wrote at that time.
Hertzberg was a meteorologist for three years in the U.S. Navy, an occupation which gave him a lifelong mistrust of climate modeling.
Trained in chemistry and physics, a combustion research scientist for most of his career, he's retired now in Copper Mountain, Colorado, still consulting from time to time.
Not so long ago, Hertzberg sent me some of his recent papers on the global warming hypothesis, a construct now accepted by many progressives as infallible as Papal dogma on matters of faith or doctrine. Among them was the graph described above so devastating to the hypothesis.
As Hertzberg readily acknowledges, the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere has increased about 21 per cent in the past century.
The world has also been getting just a little bit warmer.
[Check the mountain peaks, the rapidly diminishing ice streams, the Arctic regions, the Antarctic peninsula, before you gauge how little that bit warmer is — Kewe, TheWE.biz]
The not very reliable data on the world's average temperature (which omit most of the world's oceans and remote regions, while over-representing urban areas) show about a 0.5Co increase in average temperature between 1880 and 1980, and it's still rising, more sharply in the polar regions than elsewhere.
But is CO2, at 380 parts per million in the atmosphere, playing a significant role in retaining the 94 per cent of solar radiation that's absorbed in the atmosphere, as against water vapor, also a powerful heat absorber, whose content in humid tropical atmosphere, can be as high as 2 per cent, the equivalent of 20,000 ppm.
As Hertzberg says, water in the form of oceans, clouds, snow, ice cover and vapor "is overwhelming in the radiative and energy balance between the earth and the sun Carbon dioxide and the greenhouse gases are, by comparison, the equivalent of a few farts in a hurricane."
And water is exactly that component of the earth's heat balance that the global warming computer models fail to account for. |
| SingaporeLightning display |
|
Remnants of knowledge would be retained with those on higher ground. A few people here, a few there. Translations of discussions with The WE |
Planet Earth has been without ice more eons than it's had ice — but not with 6 billion people on the surface
It's a notorious inconvenience for the Greenhousers that data also show carbon dioxide concentrations from the Eocene period, 20 million years before Henry Ford trundled his first model T out of the shop, 300-400 per cent higher than current concentrations.
The Greenhousers deal with other difficulties like the medieval warming period's higher-than-today's temperatures by straightforward chicanery, misrepresenting tree-ring data (themselves an unreliable guide) and claiming the warming was a local, insignificant European affair.
We're warmer now, because today's world is in the thaw following the last Ice Age.
Ice ages correlate with changes in the solar heat we receive, all due to predictable changes in the earth's elliptic orbit round the sun, and in the earth's tilt.
As Hertzberg explains, the cyclical heat effect of all of these variables was worked out in great detail between 1915 and 1940 by the Serbian physicist, Milutin Milankovitch, one of the giants of 20th-century astrophysics.
In past postglacial cycles, as now, the earth's orbit and tilt gives us more and longer summer days between the equinoxes.
|
Anyone with any sense knows carbon tax is just one more vehicle of control by those who already hold 98% of the world's wealth
Water covers 71 per cent of the surface of the planet.
As compared to the atmosphere, there's at least a hundred times more CO2 in the oceans, dissolved as carbonate.
As the postglacial thaw progresses the oceans warm up, and some of the dissolved carbon emits into the atmosphere, just like fizz in soda water taken out of the fridge.
"So the greenhouse global warming theory has it ass backwards," Hertzberg concludes.
"It is the warming of the earth that is causing the increase of carbon dioxide and not the reverse."
He has recently had vivid confirmation of that conclusion.
Several new papers show that for the last three quarter million years CO2 changes always lag global temperatures by 800 to 2,600 years.
It looks like Poseidon should go hunting for carbon credits.
Trouble is, the human carbon footprint is of zero consequence amid these huge forces and volumes, and that's not even to mention the role of the giant reactor beneath our feet: the earth's increasingly hot molten core.
[Large captions, titles and subtitles by Kewe — TheWE.biz]
|
|
Lord HanumanMonkey DeityNew Delhi, India
|
|
|
The result may surprise you: ABC and NBC has not mentioned the war at all.
CBS mentioned the war once on a Sunday night news broadcast. The network dedicated a total of three sentences to the story.
Salim Lone is a columnist for the Daily Nation in Kenya and a former spokesperson for the UN mission in Iraq.
He joins us today from London.
Welcome to Democracy Now!, Salim.
SALIM LONE: Thank you for covering Somalia, Amy. As you said, the coverage is absolutely shameless.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, first, Salim, can you describe who the fighting forces are and who's behind them?
SALIM LONE: Well, I mean, the key country there is Ethiopia.
Their occupation forces have been there, in fact, long before the actual war began.
They came in around September, October.
But at the moment, those fighting the Ethiopians and the nominal transitional central government, which is really an absolutely puppet — it’s quite hapless.
In fact, the Ethiopians don't even deal with Somalis that their fighting through the transitional government.
They go directly to the elders of the clans to try to negotiate ceasefires.
But those fighting them are obviously the Hawiye Clan fighters who dominate Mogadishu.
I mean, historically, they're the largest clan in there.
But there are also many others, not just Islamists, which is a codeword for terrorists, but there are many Somalis.
In fact, most Somalis will not abide this occupation.
I mean, this is what is most distressing about this fighting.
All fighting is terrible, but you hope in the end something good comes out of it.
But in this particular case, it is clear Somalis will not abide the Ethiopian occupation or the government they put in place there.
So it is not going to be a successful war for the Somali government, for Ethiopia and, of course, for the US, which is the orchestrator of the whole adventure this time. |
|
|
|
AMY GOODMAN: Salim Lone, you're now in London.
The British think tank Chatham House criticized the US role in the war.
The authors of the report write:
“In an uncomfortably familiar pattern, general multilateral concern to support the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Somalia has been hijacked by unilateral actors, especially Ethiopia and the United States.”
SALIM LONE: Well, you know, this is par for the course these days.
What they also should have mentioned — but it’s an excellent report, by the way.
I really enjoyed reading it, and I’m so glad they were so candid.
But one of the big issues here is not merely the unilateralism of the United States, but the inability of the international community and particularly the United Nations Security Council to try to play, if not an independent role, at least a moderating role.
It is quite astonishing that for now three months, there has been terrible violence in Somalia, and yet we have not heard anything from the security council about how this carnage must stop.
There is no interest whatsoever.
You know the death toll.
I mean, you've given all the details.
I don't want to go into it.
But let me add that women are being raped, that hospitals are being bombed.
This is clearly a huge effort to intimidate and terrorize all those who come from clans who are fighting the government.
They want to intimidate the civilians, because most of the death toll is of civilians.
So this has been going on, and there has been no call whatsoever for this to stop.
Silence given green light for Ethiopians to do terrible things they've been doing
You had Sir John Holmes there.
He's a Brit, who — I don't know him personally, so I cannot speak for him.
But clearly, he has been appointed, in fact, by the British to his crucial position as chief of humanitarian affairs.
So we are seeing the Security Council completely silent while these atrocities are going on.
We are seeing Western governments completely silent.
Nothing has come out of Washington.
Nothing has come out of London.
Death toll in Somalia greater than Lebanon
We now see, for the first time on Wednesday, the ambassador of Germany — and Germany holds the EU presidency now — the ambassador released a letter, which he had sent to Abdullah Yusuf, the president of the transitional government.
It is a very candid and a very strong letter, and that's wonderful.
However, where was Germany?
Where was the EU for all this period?
Their silence has really given the green light for the Ethiopians to do the terrible things they've been doing.
The death toll now in Somalia is greater than it was in Lebanon.
And you will recall, of course, that even then, the big powers — the US, UK, even initially the UN — did not demand a ceasefire.
But the world media was full of that story, and there were condemnations around the world for what the Israelis were doing.
But, of course, Somalis and Africans don't count as nearly much, because there has just been no international outcry at all.
It’s not just the media.
So we really have a problem there.
AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Salim Lone.
He is the former spokesperson for the UN mission in Iraq.
He’s a columnist for the Daily Nation in Kenya and is joining us right now from London.
Salim, I wanted to talk to you about the US role in all of this.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with the Ethiopian foreign minister on April 23.
At a news conference the next day, State Department spokesperson Sean McCormack said the two had discussed the presence of Ethiopian troops in Somalia.
McCormack said the troops had “no desire to stay there any longer than they are needed,” but that they didn't want to withdraw to, quote, open up a — “vacuum open up in Somalia.”
A reporter questioned him about his comments.
This is an excerpt.
REPORTER: Does it concern you at all that your little — your opening readout, your opening statements, with the exception of some of the proper names, could have applied exactly to the situation in Iraq right now? Does that bother — does that concern you at all?
SEAN McCORMACK: I'm not sure I see your point, Matt.
REPORTER: That the Ethiopians say that they don't want to stay there any longer than they're needed, but they don't want to leave a vacuum. It just sounds —
SEAN McCORMACK: Right.
REPORTER: — an awful lot like they're taking a page from the administration's thoughts on what to do in Iraq.
SEAN McCORMACK: No. I mean, they're —
REPORTER: But I guess — so my question is, are you concerned that they might be seeing the beginning or the — in fact, the middle of an Iraq-style insurgency going on, obviously not directed at US soldiers —
SEAN McCORMACK: Right. Right, right, right.
REPORTER: — but the same kind of thing. Are you concerned about that?
SEAN McCORMACK: The situations are completely separate.
They are — you know, each are sui generis, but you are in each case concerned about leaving the field to a group of violent extremists who do not have an interest in building up the institutions of a democratic state, so in that sense, in that sense, there are similarities.
I think certainly the specifics of each situation are quite different, and the histories are quite different.
And I think the level of intensity of fighting in Iraq is quite different than you're seeing in Somalia, and the scale of it is a lot smaller.
AMY GOODMAN: State Department spokesperson Sean McCormack.
REPORTER: Are you calling for a ceasefire in Somalia, or are you urging the Ethiopians to go for these insurgents with as much intensity as they could?
SEAN McCORMACK: You don't want to see any more violence in Somalia.
Everybody would like that to be the case, but there are clearly people there, individuals who are intent upon using violence in order to further a so-called political cause.
And we have seen that in other areas around the world.
And what can't be allowed to happen is for those forces to gain a foothold to develop a safe haven, from which they could possibly launch attacks against other states in the region and further.
REPORTER: So you're not calling for a ceasefire?
SEAN McCORMACK: We want to see an end to the violence.
But the real way to get an end to the violence is (a) stabilize the security situation, and (b) find a political situation that is workable for the major political factions in Somali life that have an interest in actually building a different kind of Somalia, as opposed to the one we've seen for the past few decades.
|
US FIRES ON SOMALI MARKET |
|
US attacks Somalia
US supported Ethiopian helicopter gunships fired at a market in the south of the Somali capital, Mogadishu, March 29, 2007.
Many civilians have been injured and wounded.
In a dawn operation, at least six people died in fighting which broke a ceasefire declared a week ago and was brokered by elders form the Hawiye clan — the biggest in Mogadishu — but Ethiopia denied reaching any deal.
Somalia enjoyed a six months lull in the insecurity that had dogged the country in the past 16 years, when the Union of Islamic Courts, UIC, took power last year.
But insecurity has returned to the city.
The UN estimates that 400,000 people have fled Mogadishu since February.
US backed warplanes bombed Mogadishu's airport on Monday
Somali human rights activist Ali Said Omar, 27, describes to the BBC the mood in his country's capital, Mogadishu, after Islamist fighters flee and US backed Ethiopian forces arrive:
Most of the streets are empty. Businesses are closed, as are shops and restaurants.
I saw a few groups of two or three people together chatting, and there are only a small number of cars around.
The big Muslim holiday Eid ul-Hajj is on Saturday and now this makes life even stranger as people were waiting for this celebration, looking forward to it.
People should be doing their shopping now for the holiday but the shops are closed and everyone is remaining indoors.
No-one wants to go into the streets.
Anything could happen.
Speaking to people I did pass it seems as if our city is full of tears, waiting to burst.
Most seem very worried, some terrified, waiting to know what to do.
People are very shocked because we were expecting that things would take longer.
|
|
However, three days ago, when helicopters and warplanes appeared over our city and the bombs were dropped on Mogadishu airport, we got the feeling that what is going on is an international war — the war on terror.
The fighter planes were coming from the sea and US ships from their Djibouti base are in the Indian Ocean.
People really do believe that the US is part of this mission.
Last night before the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) left they told the city that they were fleeing so that fighting would not take place in the streets, so women and children would not be harmed — they said we're doing this to save you.
Some people agree with the Courts' decision but some are angry that they have abandoned the city.
Already things in our city are chaotic again and if this continues it will be a very catastrophic situation.
If our city goes back to how it was six months ago it will be very complicated.
So much has changed.
The weapons are now back in the hands of anyone who wants one.
When the Islamist Courts took control they recruited some of the different militia groups, trained them and taught them about Islam.
But now that the Islamic Courts have gone those same militia are now trying to gain control once more.
They have not forgotten their loyalties to the warlords, they are awake again.
It is easy to get a gun, to start over... everything is possible for them.
But it is not only the previous warlords who are making their way back, it is also some of the city's businessmen — they are now back in control, they are the ones that supply the weapons.
No-one is giving much consideration to the transitional government as they are only being guided by the Ethiopians who are in turn are guided by the Americans.
If the government brings the previous warlords back then life will revert to how it was — the warlords will kill everyone to gain revenge on the people for supporting the Islamic courts.
The people will be punished.
Two warlords escaped with the help of the Americans when the Islamists took over. Since 9/11 everything has changed... America used to be a dream for us.
But here the Ethiopians are hated more.
You see — this is Somalia not Ethiopia.
You do not have a right to come to another country and destroy civilians and say you are doing it to protect your own country.
People are comparing Ethiopia's action to what America has done in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Ethiopia is saying that Somalis are a threat to our security.
People here are very angry with Ethiopia and then secondly with America. But not with Britain. Although the UK is very
alike to the US, the understanding here is quite different, people here do not have animosity to the people of the UK.
Although they were the colonisers and they were the ones that first gave away the Ogaden to Ethiopia, when you go back into history the UK has been welcoming to many of our people since the 1980s.
If they allow the warlords to return and stay then there will be nothing left but to flee.
That would be the only choice. |
|
|
AMY GOODMAN: Salim Lone, columnist for the Daily Nation in Kenya, your response?
SALIM LONE:
Well, I mean, I’m very interested in the Iraq analogy, and it is really multiple, apart from what was already said there.
The contrasts are striking, as well.
But let me add to the analogy, actually, that May 1 is approaching.
That was the day when on the — right after the war, President Bush said that his mission had been accomplished.
We have the same statement coming out of the prime minister of Somalia yesterday, that the mission has been accomplished and the insurgents have been wiped out.
But let's look at the other contrasts, which are very fascinating.
In Iraq, the world body, the Security Council, for the first time in many years since the Soviet Union collapsed, stood up to the United States and refused, despite enormous pressure, to authorize a UN war in Iraq.
In Somalia's case, it is precisely the opposite.
Lawlessness of this particular war is astounding
To begin with, the lawlessness of this particular war is astounding.
I mean, this is the most lawless war of our generation.
You know, all aggressive wars are illegal.
But in this particular one, there have been violations of the Charter and gross violations of international human rights, but these are commonplace.
But, in addition, there have been very concrete violations by the United States, to begin with, of two Security Council resolutions.
The first one was the arms embargo imposed on Somalia, which the United States has been routinely flaunting for many years now.
But then the US decided that that resolution was no longer useful, and they pushed through an appalling resolution in December, which basically gave the green light to Ethiopia to invade.
They pushed through a resolution which said that the situation in Somalia was a threat to international peace and security, at a time when every independent report indicated, and Chatham House’s report on Wednesday also indicated, that the Islamic Courts Union had brought a high level of peace and stability that Somalia had not enjoyed in sixteen years.
|
So here was the UN Security Council going along with the American demand to pass a blatantly falsified UN resolution. And that resolution actually was a violation.
It contravened the UN Charter.
You know, the UN Charter is like the American Constitution.
Legislators pass laws, but they have to be in conformity with the Constitution.
In this particular case, the Charter is the UN’s constitution, and the Security Council cannot — it's not allowed to really pass laws or rules that violate the Charter.
And yet, who is going to correct them?
AMY GOODMAN: Salim Lone, on April 8, the New York Times reported that the Bush administration recently allowed Ethiopia to complete a secret arms purchase from North Korea, in violation of international sanctions.
The US allowed the arms delivery to go through in January, shortly after Ethiopia invaded Somalia, from North Korea. Salim?
SALIM LONE: Well, I mean, this just, you know, shows the lawlessness, the complete lack of pretense, even, to try to honor these resolutions.
The big powers decide what resolutions are passed.
But now what we see is the big powers then decide, are we actually going to honor the resolution that we just passed?
I mean, I want to give you an incredible example of how the Security Council has become a plaything almost.
There was a time when Security Council resolutions had gravitas.
For example, everybody knew Resolution 242, asking Israel to vacate the Occupied Territories in exchange for peace.
But now, it’s a plaything.
And I want to give the example of the bombings in Spain in the year 2004.
Just before the Spanish election, there was this terrible atrocity, as you know.
About 200 people, Spaniards, were killed in the terrorist attacks on the trains.
Because it was on the eve of the election, the Aznar government, afraid that if it was known that this attack was by terrorists, might lose the election, got the US to support a Security Council resolution which condemned the Basque separatists for the attack.
And the Security Council went along with that.
I mean, a day later, it became clear that it was a total lie.
So the Security Council resolutions really have no meaning now, because they can be passed and violated at will, especially by the United States.
|
|
AMY GOODMAN: Salim Lone, the Dow Jones newswire has recently reported that the US-backed Somali prime minister wants to pass a new oil law to encourage foreign oil companies to return to Somalia.
Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron Corporation once had exploration contracts in Somalia, but the companies left the country in 1991. How significant is this in the US involvement in Somalia today?
SALIM LONE: Well, you know, as you’ve discussed before, Somalia itself and the region, the Horn of Africa, is newly oil-rich.
Kenya has some oil.
Oil is the key to domination for the United States — global domination, I mean.
But it is going about, you know, the wrong way to get that oil.
The US is also worried that its welcome in the Middle East is diminishing, and they need to make sure — both they want to encircle the Middle East with the oil field, and they want to make sure they have Somalia and other countries handy for the oil.
But this — you know, the prime minister’s attempt to lure Western oil companies is on a par with his crying wolf about al-Qaeda at every turn.
Every time you interview a Somalia official, the first thing you hear is al-Qaeda and terrorists.
They’re using that.
No one believes it.
No one believes it at all, because all independent reports say the contrary.
But they are using that to try to develop support.
And, you know, this is why it is so important.
Europe has now been coming into the forefront with its concern.
It had this report about major human rights violations had occurred a month ago in Mogadishu.
And the Europeans are afraid that they might be complicit in those, because they were supporting the warring — the groups that were committing those atrocities.
Germany, as I said, released that letter on Wednesday.
Even the American ambassador has written to Abdullah Yusuf, the president.
I mean, they are really writing letters to the Somali president.
They will not raise this issue in the Security Council.
They will not raise this issue in Washington or London.
They want to keep this as a small African issue.
|
|
And it is so important for all of us to put pressure on the governments in Europe, in particular, and on Africa, too.
I mean, Africa is weak.
It cannot really take strong stands.
In my own country, Kenya, we have played a terrible role in these extraordinary renditions and Guantanamo Bay that are going on.
But, of course, one leading opposition, the candidate in Kenya, said that the US has promised to support the government in the elections at the end of this year in exchange for the terrible things it has been doing.
AMY GOODMAN: Salim Lone, I want to ask you quickly, as you talk about Guantanamo, this secret prison in Ethiopia — not clear how many people are being held there, if this is one of the black sites, one of the prisons that are not very well known about in the world that the US is involved with.
But we do know that Amir Mohamed Meshal is there.
He is a New Jersey young man from Tinton Falls.
Jonathan Landay of the McClatchy Newspapers reported April 24th, Ethiopia has changed its mind and decided for the time being not to free the American Muslim who was captured trying to flee war-torn Somalia and was held without charge in Kenya and Ethiopia for more than four months.
Can you talk about this secret prison?
SALIM LONE: Yes, yes, yes.
You know, I mean, this whole enterprise — the kidnappings on Kenyan streets, the grabbing refugees coming across the border — has a “Made in America” stamp on it, because you’ve seen it all happen before.
And these secret prisons, the US denies any responsibility in this whole operation.
And yet, we know that CIA and FBI officials are in those prisons interviewing the inmates.
We also know, by the way, that many of the people who have disappeared are not in those secret prisons.
Where are those people?
Have they be killed?
Are they being tortured somewhere else?
This is, you know, utter lawlessness.
And we must try to get the Europeans, in particular — I keep appealing to the Europeans, because I know — I speak to many European ambassadors in Kenya — I know that they're privately very concerned about what is going on.
And we must get them to do more.
It is fine to indicate there are war crimes to be committed.
It's fine to say this must stop, and hospitals shouldn’t be bombed, and you can’t keep relief away from suffering people.
But they must go beyond that.
They must take an initiative, or talk privately to the United States and say, “Look, this is a lost cause. We are only creating suffering, and we're creating problems for ourselves, because there will be blowback on this. There will be animosities and angers, which will affect Europe, America, Africa, everywhere.”
|
|
AMY GOODMAN: Finally, Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary-General’s call for a coalition of the willing to go into Somalia?
You’re a former UN official.
SALIM LONE: You know, it is so disgraceful.
For him to try to get the Security Council — that's what he proposes, the Security Council, in case there is no peace in Somalia in the meeting in June, in mid-June, to discuss it in the Security Council — for him to propose that the UN should now go in to do what the US and Ethiopia have been unable to do, which is basically to impose a client regime on Somalia, it's just absolutely disgraceful.
I mean, I read that report to the Security Council, and it is hard to believe that Mr. Ban Ki-moon is the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
It is so blatantly and comprehensively one-sided.
There is not a word about the fact that the Ethiopians are there without any international legitimacy.
They're occupiers.
They violated the UN Charter.
They were not in any danger of being attacked, and they invaded.
So this notion must also — this notion that a coalition of the willing must be formed — as you know, that was how the first Gulf War was fought.
And if this coalition comes into place, which I hope will not, it will merely internationalize the crisis and make things even worse.
But I hope the Europeans, in particular, and the Africans who are on the Security Council will not allow that to happen. |
|
Published on Thursday, April 26, 2007 by Working For Change
When Journalism Became Transcription and Reporting Disappeared
by David Sirota
Bill Moyers’ PBS special last night on the media’s complicity in pushing America to war was so powerfully upsetting that I am forced to resort to using mid-1990s NBA metaphors to describe it, if only because describing it without a metaphoric buffer is just too depressing.
This production was the documentary equivalent of Tom Chambers famously jumping over a screaming Mark Jackson and hammering down one of the greatest, most in-your-face slam dunks in history.
To call the media’s complicity in the Iraq War a conspiracy is an insult to conspiracies, because it wasn’t hidden - as Moyers shows, it was all out there for everyone to see.
The problem was, Beltway reporters didn’t want to see it.
No one wanted to get into an argument with the president
As New York Times White House correspondent Elisabeth Bumiller famously admitted, in the lead up to war most self-respecting Washington journalists who wanted to stay on the White House Christmas card list refused to ask tough questions because “no one wanted to get into an argument with the president.”
What’s really disturbing, however, is not even what this documentary says about the past - but what it says about the state of journalism today.
| |||||
In interview after interview after interview, we hear top journalists and opinionmakers declare that they believe journalism is no longer about basic, hard-scrabble reporting or getting scoops.
As the Washington Post’s Walter Pincus says, most reporters today actually try to avoid getting scroops because they “worry about sort of getting out ahead of something” and - gasp! - making their friends inside Official Washington mad at them.
So rather than, say, do the real work of reporting news, journalism has become a profession that is almost entirely about PR, transcription and packaging Establishment spin for news copy.
This is why, for example, many of the highest-profile political “journalists” like Joe Klein and David Broder never bother to actually report anything anymore - but instead spend most of their time pontificating on horse race polls and campaign gossip, expecting us to believe that’s real “news.”
I’m a blue-collar guy from Buffalo - Russert multi-million-dollar journalist
This kind of attitude, as Moyers shows, goes straight to the top.
Take, for instance, NBC’s Tim Russert - the Washington Bureau Chief of NBC NEWS.
I stress the word “news” because, remember, “news” is supposed to be reported in the trenches, not transcribed in a television studio.
Russert loves to brag about coming from Buffalo (often ending his shows with some irritating quip about the Buffalo Bills) because he believes it gives him some sort of working-class cred and more importantly distracts viewer attention from the fact that he is a longtime Washington insider and multi-million-dollar journalist.
And at one point, he brags to Moyers that “I’m a blue-collar guy from Buffalo - I know who my sources are [and] I work ‘em very hard.”
But then when Moyers asks him why he gave Vice President Cheney such a free pass to come on Meet the Press and spew blatant lies about Iraq’s WMD - lies that news organizations like Knight Ridder were exposing but people like Russert were ignoring - we get this gem from Russert:
“There were concerns expressed by other government officials. And to this day, I wish my phone had rung, or I had access to them.” |
Would have been available to any reporter who called
Moyers quickly noted that at least some reporters “didn’t wait for the phone to ring,” and that CBS’s Bob Simon said that sources debunking the WMD case “would have been available to any reporter who called.”
And that makes Russert’s entire sob story fall apart like a house of cards.
Russert wants us to believe that he’s just “a blue-collar guy from Buffalo” who works sources very hard.
Yet, apparently, “working sources very hard” means not even picking up the phone to make a call, but instead sitting in a comfortable Washington office waiting for people to call him, and in the meantime giving Cheney as much airtime as he wanted to spew lies.
What made you present yourself as a Middle East expert
Then there is the interchange with The New Republic’s Peter Beinart, who since cheerleading for the war and berating war critics, has been rewarded with a Time Magazine column and a post as a foreign policy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Moyers asks Beinart “what made you present yourself as a Middle East expert” in the lead up to war?
Beinart admits that despite his preening around as an expert, he’d never actually been to Iraq, but nonetheless insists that he is “a political journalist.”
So Moyers naturally asks that as a “political journalist” what kind of reporting did he do to make sure his prewar cheerleading was substantively sound.
Here’s Beinart’s answer:
“Well, I was doing mostly, for a large part it was reading, reading the statements and the things that people said.
I was not a beat reporter.
I was editing a magazine and writing a column.
So I was not doing a lot of primary reporting. But what I was doing was a lot of reading of other people’s reporting and reading of what officials were saying.”
|
Not picking up the phone or doing primary research is actually being rewarded
So here we have one of the Iraq War’s leading cheerleaders actually telling us that his entire method of backing up his case was all about amplifying official Washington through brazen transcription.
He actually sits there and tells Moyers that as a self-described “political journalist” his primary method of reporting on the issues he presented himself as an expert on was by not reporting at all.
This is what journalism has become today - and the worst part of it is that people who follow this Russert-Beinart method of sitting in comfortable Washington offices not picking up the phone or doing primary research is actually being rewarded as we speak.
Moyers, channeling a fantastic piece by Jebediah Reed in Radar Magazine, notes that most of the people who regurgitated the Washington Establishment’s debunked case for war have actually been rewarded with even more prominent positions in the media.
And while these desperate-for-attention media icons like Bill Kristol and Tom Friedman are happy to throw themselves in front of cameras for almost any opportunity to promote themselves, they categorically refused to talk to Moyers for his PBS special.
I went to journalism school because I thought journalism was about sifting through the B.S. in order to challenge power and hold the Establishment accountable.
Bill Moyers and the folks I’ve worked with at McClatchy Newspapers who Moyers highlights show that that long tradition still exists.
But the fact that they are such rare exceptions to the rule also show that the incentive system in journalism today is to reward not the people who challenge power, but the people who worship it.
And though Tim Russert and Peter Beinart and Bill Kristol and Tom Friedman can kick back in Washington with their six figure salaries and tell themselves that they are really Important People, what we have seen is that they are part of a new journalistic culture that is threatening to destroy what once was a truly noble profession and undermine our democracy. |
|
|
|
|
The US has gone from moderate insanity to full-blown insanity in what? — less than ten years.
This is what happens when you hand your power over to the police.
You become a — Police State |
|
April 25, 2007 US Police State
By SHARON SMITH
The Rights of Children in the United States |
T he U.S. is the only United Nations member-state except Somalia that has neglected to ratify the UN's 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In February 2001, George W. Bush explicitly objected to its "human rights-based approach" — which, among other things, prohibits prosecuting and incarcerating children as adults because their minds are too immature to form "criminal intent."
Indeed, the U.S. stands alone in its rush to sentence children to a lifetime in prison without the possibility of parole, and is home to more than 99 percent of youths serving this sentence worldwide.
According to a joint 2005 study by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, the U.S. had 9,400 prisoners serving life prison terms for crimes committed before the age of 18, of which 2,225 were serving life without parole.
Of those, 16 percent were between 13 and 15 years old at the time they committed the crimes for which they were convicted.
More than 100,000 children are currently incarcerated in local detention and state correctional institutions across the country.
"Zero tolerance" advocates would have us believe that the number has skyrocketed because our nation is overrun with teenage predators committing an unprecedented number of heinous crimes.
But statistics belie this explanation.
The murder conviction rate for youths fell from 2,234 in 1990 to 1,006 in 2000, a drop of almost 55 percent.
Yet during that same period, the percentage of children receiving sentences of life without parole more than tripled, from 2.9 to 9 percent.
|
U.S. Terror State —
Oftentimes, the children's two wrists are small enough to fit into a single handcuff
Over the last decade, scores of young children have been handcuffed, arrested, shoved into patrol cars, fingerprinted, jailed and convicted of crimes stemming from incidents as trivial as:
Temper tantrums in kindergarten.
Schoolyard fights.
Setting off a fire alarm
— which once would have warranted a trip to the principal's office at worst.
Now a six-year-old's temper tantrum can bring felony charges.
Oftentimes, the children's two wrists are small enough to fit into a single handcuff.
When kindergartner Desre'e Watson of Avon Park, Florida threw a temper tantrum in school last month, she was arrested and charged with battery on a school official (a felony), disruption of a school function and resisting a law enforcement officer (both misdemeanors).
Watson's arrest is not at all unusual in Florida. Back in December 2000, the St. Petersburg Times reported:
"Nowadays, children as young as 6 or 7 are carted off in handcuffs, locked up and saddled with permanent criminal records.
More than 4,500 kids 11 and under were charged with crimes in Florida during the fiscal year that ended in June."
|
The Times continued, "Kids as young as 7 spend the night in detention centers.
Kids as young as 10 are sent away for a year or more.
And in a very few cases, children enter the justice system at even younger ages, such as a 5-year-old St. Petersburg boy charged this year with burglary; and incredibly, a preschool arson suspect who went through a pretrial diversion program in South Florida at age 3."
Stark difference among arrests of children by race — one that gets sharper as the children get younger
In December 2001, after arresting a 10-year-old autistic fourth grader who disrupted a special education class, the Okaloosa, Florida Sheriff's Department's Rick Hord defended his actions, arguing:
"There's no question but that we had all the elements of a felony crime present."
Not all children are treated equally.
Race and class loom large.
As the Times noted:
"There is a stark difference among arrests of children by race — one that gets sharper as the children get younger."
The young targets of "zero tolerance" arrests nationwide are overwhelmingly Black, Latino and Native American.
In 2000, according to the Suffolk University Law School Juvenile Justice Center (JJC), African-American children — who made up just 15 percent of the U.S. juvenile population — were 46 percent of those incarcerated and 52 percent of those whose cases ended up in adult criminal court.
Black children are imprisoned at five times the rate of whites, while Latino and Native American children are placed in correctional institutions at two and a half times that of whites. |
Detention of youth increased by 40 percent
Fifteen year-old Shaquanda Cotton was released from a Texas prison on March 31st after serving one year of a possible seven-year sentence for shoving a teacher's aide at her school.
Cotton claimed the aide shoved her first, after she attempted to enter the school before the official start time to receive a prescription drug to treat her attention deficit hyperactivity disorder from the school nurse.
Three months before Cotton's conviction for the shoving incident, the same judge sentenced a 14-year-old white girl to probation after burning down her family home.
These racial disparities are not limited to Southern states.
The JJC reported in 2003:
"As juvenile crime in Massachusetts has decreased eight years in a row, the rate at which judges are ordering detention of youth increased by 40 percent the proportion of minority youth in total detention admissions has increased annually from 2001, for both boys (from 57 percent to 60 percent in 2003) and girls (from 49 percent to 54 percent). |
| TokyoJapan |
|
Sudan — Darfur Pictures and arial views of destruction |
She will never have trust in the police after what they did to her
In April 2005, 11-year-old Maribel Cuevas was involved in a neighborhood squabble and returned a rock that a group of boys threw at her outside her Fresno, California home — hitting 8-year-old Elijah Vang in the forehead.
Although Vang's parents pressed no charges, police arrested the 11-year old and took her to a juvenile detention center for felony assault — holding her for five days before she was released on the condition that she wear an electronic ankle bracelet to monitor her location.
"If this was a middle-class or upper-class neighborhood it would have been a very different outcome," Rev. Floyd Harris Jr. told reporters after leading a 100- person vigil to support Maribel.
"Police don't have the same respect for people of color in this town."
Martin Cuevas, Maribel's father, commented, "She will never have trust in the police after what they did to her."
And with good reason.
|
They took my mama because I was on TV
Parents who fight back against racial injustice often become targets for local police.
Last month, 7-year-old Gerard Mungo, Jr. was arrested in East Baltimore for sitting on a motorized dirt bike in front of his home, with the engine off.
Dirt bikes are illegal in Baltimore. But, As Baltimore Sun columnist Gregory Kane commented:
"There's a Sun article from August, 2002 that says police were stopping commuters who were riding motorized scooters — banned along with dirt bikes in 2000 — and impounding the vehicles.
That's stopping and impounding, not arresting the riders.
The arrest was reserved for the 7-year-old black kid from a poor East Baltimore neighborhood."
Gerard was handcuffed to a bench at the police station for two hours while his bike — which his parents gave him just days earlier for his seventh birthday — was confiscated.
Less than two weeks later, Gerard's mom, Lakisa Dinkins, was arrested under dubious circumstances.
Gerard told reporters as he waited for her release, "They took my mama because I was on TV."
The boy is too young to understand that his mother was targeted for defending his rights.
She had the audacity to ask for the arresting officer's supervisor to approve of the arrest (he did).
And just hours before her own arrest, 100 activists had staged a protest against the boy's arrest outside her home.
That same afternoon, police broke down the door of Dinkins' sister's home, allegedly searching for "a drug suspect."
No drugs were found, but police nevertheless gathered all 11 family members into the living room for further interrogation.
Apparently, one of the officers recognized Gerard's mother.
She heard him tell his supervisor 'I have the woman whose 7-year-old was arrested for sitting on the bike,'" she said.
"Then they arrested me."
Dinkins was not charged with a crime.
Such tactics are designed to intimate activists, yet they seem to have had the opposite effect in this case.
"If they want war, they'll have war," Marvin "Doc" Cheatham, president of the Baltimore Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, told reporters as he waited for Dinkins' release from jail.
"If this is our Rosa Parks incident, what it takes to wake people up, then so be it." |
|
|
|
Don't get lost in the race issue above — not that it isn't real.This is about your disempowerment as people in the US — and police empowerment and Institution empowermentThis is about utter insanity — reaching down to the nation's 'caring' of its children.Kewe |
|
As Alex Jones remarked many times on his show when talking to Jerome R. Corsi the reporter of this story —
"You cannot make this stuff up, folks"
Between the age of 10 and 17 when committed these poor ones
When they most need help
When they most need love — real love — the most basic of needs — non-sexual love
— molesters can continue to molest them until their 21st birthdays
"Would have to demonstrate boys subjected to sexual abuse — felt physical pain" Turned away by the U.S. Department of Justice Turned away by the state, by everyone... The response from you: "None of the victims claim to have felt physical pain during the course of the sexual assults" Boys —from the age of ten. This is real abuse — real abuse of your nations most needy children and it's not just in Texas It's systemic throughout your country How sick and insane do you have to demonstrate you are? Does anyone in America care? |
Embattled AG now accused in teen
Attorney General Gonzales among officials who allegedly ignored abuse of minor boys
March 25, 2007
sex scandal 'cover-up' By Jerome R. Corsi |
|
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, both already under siege for other matters, are now being accused of failing to prosecute officers of the Texas Youth Commission after a Texas Ranger investigation documented that guards and administrators were sexually abusing the institution's teenage boy inmates.
Among the charges in the Texas Ranger report were that administrators would rouse boys from their sleep for the purpose of conducting all-night sex parties.
Retained job despite pornography on state computers
Ray Brookins, one of the officials named in the report, was a Texas prison guard before being hired at the youth commission school.
As a prison guard, Brookins had a history of disciplinary and petty criminal records dating back 21 years.
He retained his job despite charges of using pornography on the job, including viewing nude photos of men and women on state computers.
Systematically abusing youth inmates
The Texas Youth Comission controversy traces back to a criminal investigation conducted in 2005 by Texas Ranger Brian Burzynski.
The investigation revealed key employees at the West Texas State School in Pyote, Texas, were systematically abusing youth inmates in their custody.
Burzynski presented his findings to the attorney general in Texas, to the U.S. Attorney Sutton, and to the Department of Justice civil rights division.
Received no interest in prosecuting — Karl Rove orchestrating role
From all three, Burzynski received no interest in prosecuting the alleged sexual offenses.
"This case demonstrates that a partisan political agenda, with Karl Rove in an orchestrating role, has penetrated the Justice Department and subverted fair-minded administration of the law," Matt Angle, director of the Lone Star Project, told WND.
It's just the latest controversy for Sutton, Gonzales and the Bush administration's direction of the Justice Department.
Earlier, Sutton's decisions to prosecute two Border Patrol agents and Deputy Sheriff Gil Hernandez were criticized as having been influenced by the intervention of the Mexican government.
Gonzales is under heavy congressional pressure in the controversy over the recent forced resignations of eight U.S. attorneys.
At issue is whether the Bush administration is directing the Justice Department to pursue politically motivated prosecutions at the expense of fair or even-handed law enforcement.
— felt physical pain In the Texas Youth Commission scandal, Texas Ranger official Burzynski received a July 28, 2005, letter from Bill Baumann, assistant U.S. attorney in Sutton's office, declining prosecution on the argument that under 18 U.S.C. Section 242, the government would have to demonstrate that the boys subjected to sexual abuse sustained "bodily injury." Baumann wrote that, "As you know, our interviews of the victims revealed that none sustained 'bodily injury.'" Baumann's letter continued, adding a definition of the phrase "bodily injury," as follows: "Federal courts have interpreted this phrase to include physical pain. None of the victims have claimed to have felt physical pain during the course of the sexual assaults which they described." Must demonstrate perpetrator — knowingly caused victim to engage in sexual act Baumann's letter further suggested that insufficient evidence existed to prove the offenders in the Texas Youth Commission case had used force in their alleged acts of pedophilia:
"A felony charge under 18 U.S.C. Section 242 can also be predicated on the commission of 'aggravated sexual abuse' or the attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse.
The offense of aggravated sexual abuse is proven with evidence that the perpetrator knowingly caused his victim to engage in a sexual act (which can include contact between the mouth and penis) by using force against the victim or by threatening or placing the victim in fear that the victim (or any other person) will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury or kidnapping.
I do not believe that sufficient evidence exists to support a charge that either Brookins or Hernandez used force to cause victims to engage in a sexual act."
No action because young imprisoned boys — even enjoyed the acts Baumann's letter went so far as to suggest that the victims may have willingly participated in, or even enjoyed, the acts of pedophilia involved:
"As you know, consent is frequently an issue in sexual assault cases.
Although none of the victims admit that they consented to the sexual contact, none resisted or voiced any objection to the conduct.
Several of the victims suggested that they were simply 'getting off' on the school administrator."
Rejected charges administrators at the Texas Youth Commission — lengthened sentences of boys 'reluctant to participate' Baumann's letter also rejected Burzynski's charges that the administrators at the Texas Youth Commission facility in West Texas had used their position of authority to force the inmates to participate in the sexual acts or that the administrators had lengthened the sentences of the boys to retain willing participants or punish those reluctant to participate. Essential to show the victim — was in fact victimized Baumann wrote:
"In order for the government to be successful in a criminal prosecution, it would be essential for us to show that the victim was in fact victimized.
Most of the victims were aware of the power that the school principal and assistant superintendent held over them, but none were able to describe retaliative acts committed by either the principal or assistant superintendent.
Although it is apparent that many students were retained at West Texas State School long after their initial release date, it would be difficult to prove that either Mr. Brookins or Mr. Hernandez prevented their release."
On Sept. 27, 2005, the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division declined prosecution in a letter written to Lemuel Harrison, the Texas Youth Commission superintendent at the West Texas State School.
In that letter, Justice Department section chief Albert Moskowitz wrote that "evidence does not establish a prosecutable violation of the federal criminal civil rights statutes."
When the word came from Washington — that's when Baumann wrote letter declining prosecution Angle maintains the decision not to prosecute was purely political. "The U.S. attorney's office in Texas actually prepared indictments in this case," Angle told WND.
"But when the word came from Washington, that's when Baumann wrote his letter declining prosecution.
Sutton's office dropped the matter on the desk of the local district attorney, but nobody from Sutton's office said 'if you can’t go on this case, we'll help you out.'"
WND asked Angle to explain how politics drove the decisions not to prosecute.
Describe systematic and widespread abuse of juveniles — yet they determine that the evidence is not sufficient to warrant federal prosecution "If you read the letters from Sutton's office or from DOJ, it's really amazing what abuse they describe and then downplay as not being serious," Angle explained.
"They describe systematic and widespread abuse of juveniles who were held in these facilities by the people who were administering these facilities, and they acknowledge this fully, yet they determine that the evidence is not sufficient to warrant federal prosecution."
Angle explained to WND that he found both letters shocking.
"The letters justify not pursuing these cases because, number one, there is no evidence that any of these juveniles felt physical pain while they were being assaulted, and the letters use the word 'assaulted,'" he said.
"And then also, they rejected prosecution because none of these juveniles stated in the investigations that they resisted and objected, which of course the facts of the report show to be the case.
This case developed right in the middle of Governor Perry's 2006 re-election campaign.
While Texas is a Republican state, and the Republicans expected to win, still at that time, Governor Perry was facing an election challenge from Carole Strayhorn, a third party candidate who was also a former Republican comptroller in Texas."
He continued:
"I would speculate that the political powers in Texas and Washington in the Republican Party were not interested in this sex scandal coming to light. Sutton and Gonzales let their political responsibilities outstrip their legal responsibilities, and as a result you had children who were in danger of sexual abuse and were left in that danger."
Angle says that while the U.S. Justice Department and Texas attorney general's office were not prosecuting in this case, they were actively pursuing minor voter fraud issues with only a handful of allegations to go on.
On March 2, 2007, Governor Rick Perry appointed Jay Kimbrough, his former staff chief and homeland security director, to serve as "special master" to lead an investigation into the Texas Youth Commission sex abuse scandal.
Shortly thereafter, the commission stopped a hiring practice that had allowed convicted felons to work as administrators in the system.
The practice had involved a requirement that prior criminal records be destroyed for employees hired by the commission.
On March 17, 2007, the entire Texas Youth Commission governing board resigned.
The Texas Youth Commission is the state's juvenile corrections agency, charged "with the care, custody, rehabilitation, and reestablishment in society of Texas' most chronically delinquent or serious juvenile offenders."
Between the age of 10 and 17 when committed — molesters can continue until 21st birthdays Inmates are felony-level offenders between the age of 10 and 17 when they are committed. The commission can maintain jurisdiction over offenders until their 21st birthdays. The Lone Star Project is organized as a political research and policy analysis project of the Lone Star Fund, a federal political action committee organized in Texas.  © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. |
No staff approached him, and he was not allowed to attend school or receive programming, counseling, or medication Youth Institutions, Camp and Paramilitary Abuse USA Youth Institutions abuse |
Alex Jones Terrorstorm America — from freedom to fascism |
The Dark Side Initiates — Click here Dark path initiates depend on the denial The five-percent manipulator class is composed of those on the dark path |
|
Unspeakable grief and horror
...and the circus of deception killing continues... | |||
|
| Kewe Archives | TheWE.biz | The Poles |
