Daily Archives: October 27, 2015
HAHAHAHAHHAA…SERVES THEM RIGHT!!!!!!
You can’t see the body inside his tomb, so there’s no way to know whether Karl Marx is spinning in it, but his millennial followers are incensed that they’re having to pay to worship at the shrine of modern communism’s founder.
Marx, interred at London’s Highgate Cemetery, gets plenty of reverential visitors — if, that is, they are willing to cough up the £4 fee.
Many aren’t, for obvious reasons. At the very least, though, charging visitors has opened up a ridiculously pedantic debate among Marxists as to whether the fee is acceptable within the framework of their overarching economic philosophy.
Here’s one Marxist visitor, Ben Gliniecki, speaking to The Wall Street Journal:
“Personally, I think it is disgusting,” the 24-year-old political activist said. “There are no depths of irony, or bad taste, to which capitalists won’t sink if they think they can make money out of it.”
But then here’s another Marxist, Alex Gordon, on why the fee isn’t hypocritical:
“Marx believed that labor should be rewarded, he didn’t believe that you could achieve a classless society simply by refusing to pay for things,” he said.
“He wasn’t a hippie, let’s put it like that.”
Marx bought his cemetery plot and was buried there following his death in 1883. His grave is adorned by an iconic bronze bust, along with the inscription “workers of all lands unite.”
“It’s such a bourgeois monument,” one American visitor told The Journal.
“I turned around [and saw it] and I was like ‘Oh, come on.’”
In an article titled, “Boss Tweed” and the Tammany Hall Machine, the author wrote:
Tammany represented a form of organization that wedded the Democratic Party and the Society of St. Tammany ( started in 1789 for patriotic and fraternal purposes) into an interchangeable exchange. The weave of city politics was the triangulation of the Mayor’s office, the Democratic Party and the social club organization.
In the modern edition of Tammany Hall for All, the Democrats under the Lyndon B. Johnson Administration set up the framework that provides the pathway to federal money (tax dollars) for “The Club”. That path to the money provides the draw for local public officials and business – including non-profit businesses. The structure is essentially a cell with the nucleus being the District Economic Development Corporation recognized by the Economic Development Administration.
The organization of the machine is that there are multiple counties in a district and the districts are organized into a regional association called the Idaho Association of Counties (IAC).
The Idaho Association of Counties is where the real power in the state resides. As you can see from the cell structure of “The Club”, elected officials are only one side of the triangle and their representation in “The Club” is distributed as you will see farther down. The other sides of the triangle include member businesses and member non-profits. The following is a quote from the Idaho Region IV Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) plan for 2014-2019. [Side note: if you look at their data graphs, also note the fact that the source of their data is the American Community Survey data. It’s not mandatory even though they tell you that it is. It’s self-reporting to the government so the data is automatically suspect.]
“As a member-driven, private, not-for-profit 501(c) 3 organization, RIVDA is governed by a 25-member Board of Directors comprised of local elected officials and representatives from private industry, labor, agriculture, higher education, commerce, finance, minority businesses and community organizations.”
It doesn’t matter that the quote came from the Region IV CEDS. It applies to the other five districts as well. The organizational structures are virtually the same.
Idaho Association of Counties
Economic Development Administration
Idaho – Elected County Officials
Idaho Association of Counties – Organizational Structure
Notice on the chart above in the box on the right hand side, one of the Board Members is the Chairman of the Risk Management Program ICRMP. The ICRMP is the Idaho Counties Risk Management Program. The associated members of the counties established their own casualty and risk pool. In other words, they established their own insurance company. Membership is not limited to the counties, cities and ‘special districts’ can join as well.
Associations of Associations of Associations
National Associations are lobbyists for laws, regulatory authorities, programs and federal funding.
The entire structure beginning with the collectivization of public officials across jurisdictional boundaries is a political machine that exists to serve themselves and their constituents that are the member businesses and the associated non-profits. Non-profits may have clients who have needs but first and foremost, the non-profit is a business in the services industry and the status of non-profit just relates to the accounting rules for their income. That’s it.
The voters are irrelevant to this political machine because the power of the machine does not derive from the voters in any direct way. The distribution of elected officials on the Board of Directors ensures that they can operate in the interest of their members without regard for citizen/taxpayer interests.
Their spendable cash comes from membership dues (paid for by the constituents of the counties) and from federal grant writing and from contributions that include Foundations. It also comes from planning projects that include federal programs such as “sustainable development” which is Agenda 21. Local elected officials may disagree with the programs but are really powerless to stop them once the political machine moves in a particular direction and they have moved in the wrong direction on too many fronts to count. They are the tail that is wagging the dog and we need to bob it.
One Bay Area Plan
Rosa Koire of The Post Sustainability Institute and Democrats Against U.N. Agenda 21 and Michael Shaw of Freedom Advocates and the Globalization of California filed a lawsuit in the California state court to stop a plan of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) to institute district level, consolidated planning and zoning for a nine county region in the Bay Area. The One Bay Area Plan is a purely fascist attempt to take unelected governing power over the lives and property of people living in the region. Below is a map of the region covered by the ABAG plan.
Notice that one of the counties is Santa Clara County. Santa Clara County is the home of Silicon Valley. You probably don’t need to be told that Silicon Valley is – the tech center of the universe – at least in the United States. The significance of pointing that out is to highlight the cell of power within the district organizational structure. It includes businesses and public officials as described above. In Idaho, the businesses don’t have much national power except for the INL, Simplot (Micron), and Hewlett-Packard but the collective economic and political power of the Associated Governments of the Bay Area (ABAG) is, comparatively speaking, like the sun to a flashlight and with the voters in Idaho and California collectively being mere fireflys.
The One Bay Area Plan put forth by ABAG does not affect Idaho directly. But the organization of ABAG as a multi-county jurisdictional region within the collective of California counties within the Western Interstate Region (WIR) within the National Association of Counties (NACO) does effect us because the lobbying they do for their counties become programs for our counties in Idaho.
The best example would be the plans for public transportation. It’s a ridiculous waste of money to even talk about it for Idaho because we don’t have the population density to even warrant consideration but that fact is irrelevant when the programming and the money coming from the federal government is one-size fits all collectivism and the economic development districts exist to the federal money to implement them.
The Technocratic Tyranny
It’s pretty safe to say that the collective power of ABAG is the source of the Technocratic Tyranny. It was the Silicon Valley tech firms along with IBM and GE that were behind the “reinvention of government” which was the corporatization of government to utilize the capabilities of technology at a national level with the participation of “public-private partners”. For the technology corporations the incentives were the obvious – profit. The fact that collectivism imposed by computer systems changes our form of government was irrelevant to the tech firms because the profits in collectivization were so great and the efficiency message was an easy sell to a mostly technically ignorant Congress.
The organizational structure of collectivization of counties into districts and districts into state-wide collectives partnered with business is the source structure of our national security vulnerability because under the World Trade Organization, foreigners could buy businesses and import their foreign workers to our shores. Effectively they were buying into our governing structure while We the People were unaware.
The following video is from forum put together by Michael Shaw and Rosa Koire bringing together some of the best minds and most dedicated activists who are working against the globalization of governing power through regionalization. While they are talking about California, everything they are saying applies to Idaho on a smaller scale. The multi-county economic development districts are regional organizations and the Idaho Association of Counties is the regional organization that encompasses our entire state.
Before It’s News)
Among the chief complaints regarding Hillary Clinton’s performance in front of the House Select Committee on Benghazi last week was a perception that she treated the serious matter of four murdered Americans far too flippantly. After laughing several times and making what some interpreted as inappropriate jokes during her testimony, the Democrat presidential candidate capped off the marathon hearing with a celebratory pose that received significant social media feedback.
Numerous critics of her behavior, including MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, believed Clinton showed too much cheerfulness considering the somber events explored during the hearing.
The image included in the above tweet has since gone on to receive even more attention after being compared to a similar pose from a former president, then caught in his own scandal. While a young Hillary Clinton worked to impeach Richard Nixon over his involvement in the Watergate affair, at least a few Twitter users noticed that she now seems to be mirroring him.
While a few comments questioned the validity of such a comparison, plenty of others felt it was warranted. After all, this incident is hardly the first time the two divisive politicians have been compared.
Do you believe Hillary Clinton should be president? Share your thoughts in the comments section.
While Obama sides with Christian-murdering “freedom fighters.”
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center
The Orthodox Christian Church, which is reclaiming its traditional role in post-Soviet Russia, has just described its government’s fight against the Islamic State and other jihadi groups in Syria as a “holy war.”
According to Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the Church’s Public Affairs Department,
The fight with terrorism is a holy battle and today our country is perhaps the most active force in the world fighting it. The Russian Federation has made a responsible decision on the use of armed forces to defend the People of Syria from the sorrows caused by the arbitrariness of terrorists. Christians are suffering in the region with the kidnapping of clerics and the destruction of churches. Muslims are suffering no less.
This is not a pretext to justify intervention in Syria. For years, Russia’s Orthodox leaders have been voicing their concern for persecuted Christians. Back in February 2012, the Russian church described to Vladimir Putin the horrific treatment Christians are experiencing around the world, especially under Islam:
The head of External Church Relations, Metropolitan Illarion, said that every five minutes one Christian was dying for his or her faith in some part of the world, specifying that he was talking about such countries as Iraq, Egypt, Pakistan and India. The cleric asked Putin to make the protection of Christians one of the foreign policy directions in future.
“This is how it will be, have no doubt,” Putin answered.
Compare and contrast Putin’s terse response with U.S. President Obama, who denies the connection between Islamic teachings and violence; whose policies habitually empower Christian-persecuting Islamists; who prevents Christian representatives from testifying against their tormentors; and who even throws escaped Christian refugees back to the lions, while accepting tens of thousands of Muslim migrants.
Russian Patriarch Kirill once even wrote an impassioned letter to Obama, imploring him to stop empowering the murderers of Christians. That the patriarch said “I am deeply convinced that the countries which belong to the Christian civilization bear a special responsibility for the fate of Christians in the Middle East” must have only ensured that the letter ended up in the Oval Office’s trash can. After all, didn’t Obama make clear that America is “no longer a Christian nation“?
Of course, Russian concerns for Christian minorities will be cynically dismissed by the insufferable talking heads on both sides. While such dismissals once resonated with Americans, they are becoming less persuasive to those paying attention, as explained in “Putin’s Crusade—Is Russia the Last Defender of the Christian Faith?”
For those of us who grew up in America being told that the godless communist atheists in Russia were our enemies, the idea that America might give up on God and Christianity while Russia embraces religion might once have been difficult to accept. But by 2015, the everyday signs in America show a growing contempt for Christianity, under the first president whose very claims of being a Christian are questionable. The exact opposite trend is happening for Russia and its leaders—a return to Christian roots.
Indeed, growing numbers of Americans who have no special love for Russia or Orthodoxy—from billionaire capitalist Donald Trump to evangelical Christians—are being won over by Putin’s frank talk and actions.
How can they not? After one of his speeches praising the West’s Christian heritage—a thing few American politicians dare do—Putin concluded with something that must surely resonate with millions of traditional Americans: “We must protect Russia from that which has destroyed American society”—a reference to the anti-Christian liberalism and licentiousness that has run amok in the West.
Even the Rev. Franklin Graham’s response to Russia’s military intervention in Syria seems uncharacteristically positive, coming as it is from the head of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, which for decades spoke against the godless Soviets: “What Russia is doing may save the lives of Christians in the Middle East…. You understand that the Syrian government … have protected Christians, they have protected minorities from the Islamists.”
There would be tens of thousands of Christians murdered and slaughtered and on top of that, you would have hundreds of thousands of more refugees pouring into Europe. So Russia right now, I see their presence as helping to save the lives of Christians.
Incidentally, it’s an established fact that the “good rebels”—or “moderates”—are persecuting Christians no less than the Islamic State.
When asked why the Obama administration is so callous towards the plight of persecuted Christians, Graham, somewhat echoing Putin, said the American president was more invested in promoting the homosexual agenda than he is in protecting Christians:
I’m not here to bash the gays and lesbians and they certainly have rights and I understand all of that, but this administration has been more focused on that agenda than anything else. As a result, the Middle East is burning and you have more refugees moving today since World War II. It could have been prevented.
In reality, it’s not Russian claims of waging a holy war to save Christians from the sword of jihad that deserves to be cynically dismissed, but rather every claim the Obama administration makes to justify its support for the opposition in Syria (most of which is not even Syrian).
There are no “moderate rebels,” only committed jihadis eager to install Islamic law, which is the antithesis of everything the West once held precious. If the “evil dictator” Assad kills people in the context of war, the “rebels” torture, maim, enslave, rape, behead, and crucify people solely because they are Christian.
How does that make them preferable to Assad?
Moreover, based on established precedent—look to Iraq and Libya, the other countries U.S. leadership helped “liberate”—the outcome of ousting the secular strongman of Syria will be more atrocities, more Christian persecution, more rapes and enslavement, and more bombed churches and destroyed antiquities, despite John Kerry’s absurd assurances of a “pluralistic” Syria once Assad is gone. It will also mean more terrorism for the West.
Once again, then, the U.S. finds itself on the side of Islamic terrorists, who always reserve their best for America. The Saudis—the head of the Jihadi Snake which U.S. presidents are wont to kiss and bow to—are already screaming bloody murder and calling for an increased jihad in Syria in response to Russia’s holy war.
Will Obama and the MSM comply, including through an increased propaganda campaign? Top Islamic clerics like Yusuf al-Qaradawi—who once slipped on live television by calling on the Obama administration to wage “jihad for Allah” against Assad—seem to think so. Already the U.S. “welcomes” the new cruel joke that Saudi Arabia, one of the absolute worst human rights violators, will head a U.N. human rights panel.
At day’s end and all Realpolitik aside, there is no denying reality: what the United States and its Western allies have wrought in the Middle East—culminating with the rise of a bloodthirsty caliphate and the worst atrocities of the 21st century—is as unholy as Russia’s resolve to fight it is holy.
REPOSTED FROM CONSERVATIVETRIBUNE.COM
When a county in Georgia started indoctrinating their students in the Islamic faith, they figured that parents would just let it slide under the banner of multiculturalism. They figured wrong.
Now, hundreds of Walton County parents are set to address the school board’s Oct. 10 meeting, looking to get equal time for Christianity and Judaism and to fix some of the misleading information in the curriculum.
the misleading information in the curriculum.
Especially controversial is a worksheet given to students where Allah is referred to as the “same god worshipped by Jews & Christians.” According to WSB-TV, this is one of the worksheets given to Walton County students:
“My daughter had to learn the Shiad, and the five pillars of Islam, which is what you learn to convert, but they never once learned anything about the Ten Commandments or anything about God,” said Michelle King, a Walton County parent.
“Allah is not the same god in my opinion because I don’t worship Allah on Sunday mornings; Allah is just the Arabic word for god,” resident Steven Alsup told WSB-FM.
And for parent Bill Greene, the issue was one of the county usurping one of the traditional functions of the family — the passing on of faith.
“I believe my children are my responsibility and I believe I need to be the one teaching them what we believe instead of the school,” Greene said.
If parents opt their children out of the course, they’ll receive a lower grade. That’s what happened to Ryan Breece’s child.
“We need to see the assignments and we need to be able to opt out without any grade negativity on our children,” Breece said. He started a Facebook group dedicated to criticism of the Islam curriculum, which has over 1,500 members.
Speaking to reporters, Georgia Department of Education spokesman Matt Cardoza seemed to intimate that Walton County’s Islam curriculum was not what the state had intended for the course.
“This element is not an evaluation of any religion, nor is it a course in the belief system of any religion,” Cardoza said. “It is important that students understand the differences between each of these religions to help them understand the tensions that exist in the region.”
However, he added that “when teachers teach ‘beyond’ the recommended paragraph above, this is a teacher or local decision, and not one that is encouraged by the Department of Education or required by the Georgia Performance Standards.”
And, by the turnout the county is likely to see at the October board meeting, it’s not one that’s encouraged by parents, either.