Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Democracy in Honduras - Update

Sphere: Related Content

Exiled Honduran President Manuel Zelaya is losing momentum in his attempt to regain credibility and position. In an interview with The Associated Press Foreign Minister Carlos Lopez clearly believes the nation’s interim government will outlast Zelaya. He said Zelaya will begin to be relevant as campaigning for elections begins and noted that even the candidate for Zelaya's own party does not support the ousted president any longer. "There will be a totally different context and once the campaigns begin, the obsession with Mr. Zelaya will start fading," Lopez said.

"The people are united and are willing to weather the five months until the elections," Lopez said. He was optimistic that other nations would recognize election results as legitimate. "Of course it will be recognized. There is no sense in talking about it not being recognized". Lopez held firm on refusing to permit Zelaya to return although Congress will debate the question of amnesty, part of a proposal by mediator President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica. Zelaya could be arrested if he returns to Honduras on charges of violating the constitution by ignoring a Supreme Court ruling concerning strict term limits. Congress voted to remove him from office unanimously. Zelaya complained that international mediation efforts to force his return have flagged. He accused the United States — Honduras' largest source of development aid and its biggest trade partner — of not being forceful enough against Micheletti, who has ignored sanctions threats and U.N. demands that Zelaya be reinstated. Interim President Micheletti has indicated he would be willing to resign in favor of a compromise but not Zelaya. U.S. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly urged Zelaya to be patient and give negotiations more time. Interview on current events HERE:

It is apparent however that time is running out on Zelaya.

This whole charade illustrates the leftist disdain for constitutional (republic) government that places limits on elected office holder’s power (i.e. consent of the governed)...
It is quickly becoming THE issue here in USA as well. The elitist's are using leftist ideology globally to further solidify their power. {Can you say Obamacare or Cap and Trade (TAX))

The Democrats have used government, for decades, to grow their party which in turn has grown government. Those who love liberty resist and awaken those lost in consumerisms coma.

Friday, July 24, 2009

Former Monsanto Executive is Food Czar

Sphere: Related Content

Jeffrey Smith posted this:

When FDA scientists were asked to weigh in on what was to become the most radical and potentially dangerous change in our food supply—the introduction of genetically modified (GM) foods; secret documents now reveal that the experts were VERY concerned. Memo after memo described toxins, new diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and hard-to-detect allergens. They were adamant that the technology carried “Serious health hazards,” and required careful, long-term research, including human studies, before any genetically modified organisms (GMOs) could be safely released into the food supply.

But the biotech industry had rigged the game so that neither science nor scientists would stand in their way. They had placed their own man in charge of FDA policy and he wasn’t going to be swayed by feeble arguments related to food safety. No, he was going to do what corporations had done for decades to get past these types of pesky concerns. He was going to lie.

Dangerous Food Safety Lies

When the FDA was constructing their GMO policy in 1991-2, their scientists were clear that gene-sliced foods were significantly different and could lead to “different risks” than conventional foods. But official policy declared the opposite, claiming that the FDA knew nothing of significant differences, and declared GMOs substantially equivalent. This fiction became the rationale for allowing GM foods on the market without any required safety studies whatsoever! The determination of whether GM foods were safe to eat was placed entirely in the hands of the companies that made them—companies like Monsanto, which told us that the PCBs, DDT, and Agent Orange were safe.

GMOs were rushed onto our plates in 1996. Over the next nine years, multiple chronic illnesses in the US nearly doubled—from 7% to 13%. Allergy-related emergency room visits doubled between 1997 and 2002 while food allergies, especially among children, skyrocketed. We also witnessed a dramatic rise in asthma, autism, obesity, diabetes, digestive disorders, and certain cancers.

In January of this year, Dr. P. M. Bhargava, one of the world’s top biologists, told me that after reviewing 600 scientific journals, he concluded that the GM foods in the US are largely responsible for the increase in many serious diseases.

In May, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine concluded that animal studies have demonstrated a causal relationship between GM foods and infertility, accelerated aging, dysfunctional insulin regulation, changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system, and immune problems such as asthma, allergies, and inflammation

In July, a report by eight international experts determined that the flimsy and superficial evaluations of GMOs by both regulators and GM companies “systematically overlook the side effects and significantly underestimate “the initial signs of diseases like cancer and diseases of the hormonal, immune, nervous and reproductive systems, among others.”

The Fox Guarding the Chickens

If GMOs are indeed responsible for massive sickness and death, then the individual who oversaw the FDA policy that facilitated their introduction holds a uniquely infamous role in human history. That person is Michael Taylor. He had been Monsanto’s attorney before becoming policy chief at the FDA. Soon after, he became Monsanto’s Vice President and chief lobbyist. This month Michael Taylor became the senior advisor to the commissioner of the FDA. He is now America’s food safety czar.
Now That Makes Me SICK...
This may be the only time I post a Huff-Po article but given the nature of the topic it is worthy. It is also further indication of the deep erosion of support from the left for BO.
My only question is what took so long for them to "see"? Perhaps blind hatred of GW?!?


Taylor BIO:

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Honduras Talks Break Down

Sphere: Related Content

AP is reporting from Costa Rica the mediated talks to resolve disputed removal of President Zelaya have fallen apart over the issue of Zelaya's return to Honduras to finish out his term. After four days the two sides seem at an impasse. The interim government said it was not acceptable for Zelaya to return.

Costa Rican President Oscar Arias has been mediating discussions in attempts at a gaining peaceful resolution to the forced removal of President Zelaya from Honduras.
"It was not possible to reach a satisfactory agreement. The Zelaya delegation fully accepted my proposal, but not that of Mr. Roberto Micheletti," Arias said, referring to the interim president sworn in by congress after the June 28 coup.

Arias said he will spend the next three days "working much harder to see if we can reach an agreement, because what is the alternative to dialogue?" On Saturday, Arias proposed a plan that would let Zelaya serve out the final months of his term, move up elections by one month to late October, grant a general amnesty and include representatives of the main political parties in a reconciliation government.

The Micheletti government endorsed several of his proposals on Sunday — but his foreign relations secretary, Carlos Lopez, rejected the overall plan, specifically citing the issue of Zelaya's return.

"Dear mediator ... I'm very sorry, but your proposals are unacceptable," Lopez said at a news conference after the talks. Arias' compromise, he added, "interferes with Honduran internal affairs."

The interim government offered instead to create a truth commission to "let the Honduran people and the international community see all the acts that led to the current situation," according to a letter signed by Lopez. It refused to budge on its insistence that Zelaya would be arrested and prosecuted if he returns, guaranteeing only that he would be given "due process."

Lopez told CNN en Espanol that his delegation would return to the Costa Rican capital on Wednesday "to continue our conversations."
Honduras Constitution HERE:


Pray for PEACE:

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Khammenei Inc - Takes Control in Iran

Sphere: Related Content

The Guardian confirms assertions that the “Hidden Revolution” was well underway by “Khamenei Inc.” long before the current protests made headlines. In my June 22 post, citing a NY Times Op-Ed, the pieces began to fit together in such a way as to indicate Iran was being raped and pillaged by a thugocracy.
On the eve of today’s expected tenth anniversary protests commemorating the 1999 student uprising Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has taken control of the militia being used to crush the protest movement, according to a senior Iranian source.

The source, a politician with strong connections to the security apparatus, said that the leading role being played by Mojtaba Khamenei had dismayed many of the country's senior clerics, conservative politicians and Revolutionary Guard generals. But these conservatives are reluctant to challenge the Khameneis openly out of fear that any conflict would destabilise the Islamic Republic and weaken Iran in the region. Instead they will use their positions in the organs of state to make it hard for the supreme leader and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to govern.

"This game has not finished. The game has only just started," the source said, on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of his own position in Iran. He said Mojtaba had played a leading role in orchestrating Ahmadinejad's disputed election victory on 12 June and had led the backlash against protests through direct control of street militias, known as basiji.

"Mojtaba is the commander of this coup d'etat. The basiji are operating on Mojtaba's orders, but his name is always hidden in all of this. The government never mentions him," the Iranian politician said. "Everyone is angry about this. The maraji [Iran's most senior ayatollahs] and the clerics are angry, the conservatives are very angry and strongly critical of Mojtaba. This situation cannot continue with so many people on the top against it."

Ryan Mauro writes this:
The split among the religious elite is going to provide additional momentum for the protests that will emerge on July 9 and in the days thereafter, cracking the very theological foundations the regime justifies its existence upon. The Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qom, described by the New York Times as “the most important group of religious leaders in Iran,” has dismissed the election results. Following this announcement, the party of Rafsanjani, former president and current chairman of the Assembly of Experts, which chooses and dismisses the supreme leader, has officially stated its position that the elections were fraudulent.

Even when faced with this potentially fatal rebuke from religious leaders, the regime is hunkering down rather than offering any form of concession. Those that favor the general preservation of the theocratic nature of the regime but oppose Khamenei and Ahmadinejad personally for their transgressions and those that favor democratic transformation will provide a sandwiching effect from which no unpopular figurehead can survive indefinitely. Khamenei knows there is a tidal wave against him and only maximum force can keep his head barely above water. The drowning of the regime has begun — and it can only hold its breath for so long.

As this life and death struggle for the soul of Iran plays out in the streets, the battle for power continues in Qum. I pray the players listen with their hearts and resist any manipulation. The dream of a caliphate is not a national dream, rather it’s a fading dream of ideologues. You can not force anyone to believe something, humans must choose to believe. That is God given volition.

The Wise choose to use it in pursuit of truth.

Iran prays "Stand by Me"

Tehran Updates:

Twitter Updates:

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

California Will Kill Obamanomics

Sphere: Related Content

The “script” that is playing out in California is merely a shadow of what transpires daily in DC - “District of Corruptiom” where we see two different political parties headed in the same direction. The only difference is the speed; as they both daily offer expensive government programs for every perceived need.

After years of playing this charade called “pass the buck” power thirsty politicans, instead of paying for what we truly need, now are reaping the proverbial whirlwind. We're trapped in the cellar

California politicians have wallowed in an orgy of spending but they are a poor imitation of the porkers based in Washington. Yes California’s deficit this year is over $26 billion and IOU’s are being printed (3 Billion in July). These numbers pale in comparison however to the federal deficit which will be nearly 70 times larger.

Obama's administration is the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of the U.S., he has no shame, and seems willing to cast aside any semblance of reason altogether to reach his political goals. This scenario has "right" minded Democrats in DC nervous because they know BO is betting the house on Healthcare. If his plan passes, then they likely end up paying for it with federal slips of paper worth less than California’s. The volume of publicity emanating from the California debacle almost assures a resounding defeat of socialized medicine. What makes anyone think we can continue to issue printed IOU’s as promise of payment for more “Dirty Paper”!?!?!

This deepening economic cri$i$ is all about Power not money as our currency is now worth less than the paper it's printed on.

Tis an Obamanightmare...

Another brick in the wall along The Road to Serfdom...

The Moscow Summit-More of the Same

Sphere: Related Content

The U.S.-Russian Summit Turns Routine

By George Friedman
courtesy of Stratfor

The Moscow summit between U.S. President Barack Obama, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has ended. As is almost always the case, the atmospherics were good, with the proper things said on all sides and statements and gestures of deep sincerity made. And as with all summits, those atmospherics are like the air: insubstantial and ultimately invisible. While there were indications of substantial movement, you would have needed a microscope to see them.

An agreement was reached on what an agreement on nuclear arms reduction might look like, but we do not regard this as a strategic matter. The number of strategic warheads and delivery vehicles is a Cold War issue that concerned the security of each side’s nuclear deterrent. We do not mean to argue that removing a thousand or so nuclear weapons is unimportant, but instead that no one is deterring anyone these days, and the risk of accidental launch is as large or as small whether there are 500 or 5,000 launchers or warheads. Either way, nuclear arms’ strategic significance remains unchanged. The summit perhaps has created a process that could lead to some degree of confidence. It is not lack of confidence dividing the two countries, however, but rather divisions on fundamental geopolitical issues that don’t intersect with the missile question.

The Fundamental Issues

There are dozens of contentious issues between the United States and Russia, but in our mind three issues are fundamental.

First, there is the question of whether Poland will become a base from which the United States can contain Russian power, or from the Russian point of view, threaten the former Soviet Union. The ballistic missile defense (BMD) system that the United States has slated for Poland does not directly affect that issue, though it symbolizes it. It represents the U.S. use of Polish territory for strategic purposes, and it is something the Russians oppose not so much for the system’s direct or specific threat — which is minimal — but for what it symbolizes about the Americans’ status in Poland. The Russians hoped to get Obama to follow the policy at the summit that he alluded to during his campaign for the U.S. presidency: namely, removing the BMD program from Poland to reduce tensions with Russia.

Second, there is the question of Iran. This is a strategic matter for the United States, perhaps even more pressing since the recent Iranian election. The United States badly needs to isolate Iran effectively, something impossible without Russian cooperation. Moscow has refused to join Washington on this issue, in part because it is so important to the United States. Given its importance to the Americans, the Russians see Iran as a lever with which they can try to control U.S. actions elsewhere. The Americans do not want to see Russian support, and particularly arms sales, to Iran. Given that, the Russians don’t want to close off the possibility of supporting Iran. The United States wanted to see some Russian commitments on Iran at the summit.

And third, there is the question of U.S. relations with former Soviet countries other than Russia, and the expressed U.S. desire to see NATO expand to include Ukraine and Georgia. The Russians insist that any such expansion threatens Russian national security and understandings with previous U.S. administrations. The United States insists that no such understandings exist, that NATO expansion doesn’t threaten Russia, and that the expansion will continue. The Russians were hoping the Americans would back off on this issue at the summit.

Of some importance, but not as fundamental as the previous issues, was the question of whether Russia will allow U.S. arms shipments to Afghanistan through Russian territory. This issue became important last winter when Taliban attacks on U.S. supply routes through Pakistan intensified, putting the viability of those routes in question. In recent months the Russians have accepted the transit of nonlethal materiel through Russia, but not arms.

Even before the summit, the Russians made a concession on this point, giving the United States the right to transit military equipment via Russian airspace. This was a significant policy change designed to demonstrate Russia’s flexibility. At the same time, the step is not as significant as it appeared. The move cost the Russians little under the circumstances, and is easily revoked. And while the United States might use the route, the route is always subject to Russian pressure, meaning the United States is not going to allow a strategic dependence to develop. Moreover, the U.S. need is not as apparent now as it was a few months ago. And finally, a Talibanized Afghanistan is not in the Russian interest. That Russia did not grant the U.S. request last February merely reveals how bad U.S.-Russian relations were at the time. Conversely, the Russian concession on the issue signals that U.S.-Russian relations have improved. The concession was all the more significant in that it came after Obama praised Medvedev for his openness and criticized Putin as having one foot in the Cold War, clearly an attempt to play the two Russian leaders off each other.

What the Summit Produced

Much more significantly, the United States did not agree to withdraw the BMD system from Poland at the summit. Washington did not say that removal is impossible, but instead delayed that discussion until at least September, when U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will visit Moscow. A joint review of all of the world’s missile capabilities was established at the summit, and this joint review will consider Iranian — and North Korean — missiles. The Polish BMD system will be addressed in that context. In other words, Washington did not concede on the point, but it did not close off discussions. The Russians accordingly did not get what they wanted on the missiles at the summit; they got even less of what they wanted in the broader strategic sense of a neutralized Poland.

The Russians in turn made no visible concessions on Iran. Apart from studying the Iranians’ missile systems, the Russians made no pledge to join in sanctions on Iran, nor did they join in any criticism of the current crackdown in Iran. The United States had once offered to trade Polish BMDs for Russian cooperation on Iran, an idea rejected by the Russians since the BMD system in Poland wasn’t worth the leverage Moscow has with Iran. Certainly without the Polish BMD withdrawal, there was going to be no movement on Iran.

NATO expansion is where some U.S. concession might have emerged. In his speech on Tuesday, Obama said, “State sovereignty must be a cornerstone of international order. Just as all states should have the right to choose their leaders, states must have the right to borders that are secure, and to their own foreign policies. That is why this principle must apply to all nations – including Georgia and Ukraine. America will never impose a security arrangement on another country. For either country to become a member of NATO, a majority of its people must choose to; they must undertake reforms; and they must be able to contribute to the alliance’s mission. And let me be clear: NATO seeks collaboration with Russia, not confrontation.”

On the surface, this reiterated the old U.S. position, which was that NATO expansion was between NATO and individual nations of the former Soviet Union, and did not — and should not — concern Moscow. The terms of expanding, reforming and contributing to NATO remained the same. But immediately after the Obama-Putin meeting, Russian sources began claiming that an understanding on NATO expansion was reached, and that the Americans conceded the point. We see some evidence for this in the speech — the U.S. public position almost never has included mention of public support or reforms.

In many ways, however, this is splitting hairs. The French and Germans have long insisted that any NATO expansion should be limited to countries with strong public support for expansion, and which meet certain military thresholds that Georgia and Ukraine clearly do not meet (and could not meet even with a decade of hard work). Since NATO expansion requires unanimous support from all members, Russia was more interested in having the United States freeze its relations with other former Soviet states at their current level. Russian sources indicate that they did indeed get reassurances of such a freeze, but it takes an eager imagination to glean that from Obama’s public statement.

Therefore, we come away with the sense that the summit changed little, but that it certainly didn’t cause any deterioration, which could have happened. Having a summit that causes no damage is an achievement in itself.


Monday, July 6, 2009

Democracy Draws a Line in Honduras

Sphere: Related Content

[Getty Image]
Violent clashes erupted Sunday between Honduran troops and the supporters of ousted President Manuel Zelaya as the military began moving trucks into position to prevent a plane carrying Zelaya from landing. Police reported 2 deaths.

Following the attempted landing by Zelaya; Honduran interim President Roberto Micheltti accused Nicaragua of massing troops on their mutual border. Micheletti also urged President Daniel Ortega to respect Honduran sovereignty.

The Interim Government reported it had contacted the OAS to express it’s willingness for discussions following their earlier suspension from the group.

Curfews have been imposed at night and media blackouts have been reported as Honduras, one of Latin America’s poorest countries, struggles to deal with the freezing of millions of US dollars of international aid. Regional trade blockades and recalls of foreign ambassadors have also had an impact.

To get a focused picture of what is brewing in Central America one must look beyond the media posturing and bias. To gather as many facts as possible requires various sources and strategies. I have linked to and embedded some. Following some study, compile a set of questions and in seeking answers you will discover truth and gain understanding far beyond what is sold as news today.

Latin America expert and professor of Political Warfare at the Institute for World Politics Mike Waller gives an update on the situation in Honduras. Dr. Waller is the Center's Vice President for Information Operations. For an introduction to Political Warfare, see Dr. Waller's primer HERE:

Honduras Factbook:

Nicaragua Factbook:

Venezuela Factbook:
Was this "ousting" in Honduras a "coup" or Impeachment?

Why would President Obama side with Leftists Ortega and Chavez? Enquiring Minds want to know...

Friday, July 3, 2009

Power and Pride - Two Space Age Products

Sphere: Related Content

North Korea is starving while Pyongyang pursues ICBM.
While this is not a recent revelation; hunger pangs seem destined to breach even the militarized fortifications that are the heart of DPRK power. The latest figures I have read from UN World Food Program indicate nearly a third of current NK people depend on food aid indicating the situation is growing ever more dangerous.

An emergency humanitarian program that began last year has ceased due to NK governmental restrictions placed on the agency’s operation and dwindling donations. Ian Kelly, U.S. State Department spokesman, indicated any future aid will have strings attached.
“We currently have no plans to provide additional food aid to North Korea, and any additional food would have to have assurances that it would be appropriately used” Kelly further stated; “We remain very concerned about the well-being of the North Korean people. But we are very concerned because we need to have adequate program management in place, monitoring and access provisions, and we don’t have that right now.”

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton previously stated there would be no U.S. economic aid to Pyongyang unless the North returned to the six-party denuclearization talks. South Korea’s Ministry of Strategy and Finance estimated North Korea’s total grain production may reach about 4.3 million tons far short of the minimum 5.1 million tons needed to feed its people. Without sufficient food to protect his troops from hunger Kim Jong Ill may finally come face to face with very harsh consequences of his own policies.

Blaming others for your choices merely spreads misery as the denial kills. Speaking of denial, is that still even considered a negative character trait among politicians? Considering the fact that missiles are useless without accurate guidance systems capable of on target delivery. Loral and Hughes would know.

Ahhh Hsu I think the Clintons virus has spread around the world.

Pride goes before destruction,
And a haughty spirit before stumbling
-- Proverbs 16:18 --

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Burma Blinks-Refuses North Korean Cargo

Sphere: Related Content

Following passage of UN resolutions the military rulers of North Korea and Burma continued doing business as usual until Sunday.

Reports from Radio Free Asia indicated The Kang Nam 1 initially presumed to be bound for Burma; was refused permission to dock if the cargo ship was carrying weapons or other prohibited materials. US officials in Washington said yesterday they do not know where the ship is headed but it was 250 miles (400 kilometers) south of Hong Kong on Tuesday and slowly heading north.

The NK cargo vessel has been trailed by an American warship for more than a week on route towards Burma in what could serve as a successful implementation of the new UN non-proliferation resolution targeting DPRK. Pyongyang re-issued warnings against any attempts to board the Kang Nam 1 saying any such action would be considered an act of war.

A US delegation headed by former Ambassador Philip Goldberg left yesterday for Beijing to discuss the UN sanctions. China's cooperation is crucial in enforcing UN 1874 sanctions aimed at steering NK back to disarmament discussions.

Questions remain as to why Burma chose to reject the cargo.

It likely is a combination of accumulated pressures both external as well as internal that have caused Burma to re-think it's position. The new tactics Washington has undertaken via the Treasury Department will restrict the flow of funds available to NK and those who conduct “business” with Pyongyang.

Another potential pressure point is the international attention being revisited on Burma. With Iranians marching in protest of a brutally oppressive government; some world leaders are refocusing on the atrocities of Burma’s military junta. Laura Bush wrote an op-ed in Sunday’s Washington Post seeking to remind the world of the plight of thousands of Burmese citizens and refugees. It is a heart wrenching recitation of rape, kidnapping, human trafficking and imprisonment.

Harvard Law School, in a new report, requests U.N. Security Council to establish a "commission of inquiry" into crimes against humanity and war crimes in Burma. She writes “With U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon planning to visit Burma this summer, it is crucial that he press the regime to take immediate steps to end human rights abuses, particularly in ethnic minority areas. There have been 38 U.N. resolutions condemning these abuses, yet the horrors continue unabated. Under the junta's brutal rule too many lives have been wasted; lives whose talents could have helped all of Burma prosper.”

Shining a light of truth inevitably increases internal pressure on darkness. The combination likely made Burma think and blink.

Burma Factbook:

Overview of NK nuclear program: