Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Debate entre candidatos tiró abajo los pronósticos de encuestadores. "En mi opinion" Sept. 24, 2012



PADRE NORMAN WESLIN † ARRESTADO -Descanse en Paz- DEFENDIÓ LA VIDA. La Universidad de Notre Dame es una universidad "católica", y que el sacerdote estaba en el campus de una Universidad Católica, recordando -pacíficamente insisto- la doctrina católica sobre el aborto y la coherencia del católico con esa doctrina. http://es.gloria.tv/?media=303306

NELSONHORTAREPORTA.COM Observadores recuerdan las elecciones de 1980 • Un segundo debate entre los candidatos tiró abajo los pronósticos de  encuestadores

MIAMI, 25 DE SEPTIEMBRE DE 2012, NHR.com—Las campanas electorales siguen adelante. El presidente Barack Obama y el exgobernador Mitt Ronmey siguen ofreciendo discursos y comparecencias ante distintos programas de noticias en la television; los encuestadores, entre tanto, siguen dando a conocer el nivel de preferencia del electorado a nivel nacional sembrando tensión entre simpatizantes de uno y otro candidato.
Las últimas 10 encuestas dan una ligera ventaja al presidente Obama, los encuestadores no están seguros que será una elección reñida la del 6 de noviembre.
Pero lo que a todos asombra es que estando la economía tan deteriorada, el desempleo en un 8.2 por ciento a nivel nacional, el galón de gasolina casi a 4 dólares y la pérdida de vivienda a un alto por ciento, aún los votantes puedan preferir votar por reelegir al presidente Obama.
NHR.com se puso a buscar datos sobre elecciones presidenciales en el pasado y se detuvo en las del año 1980, cuando los candidates eran el presidente Jimmy Carter y Ronald Reagan; una elección bajo circunstancias muy parecidas a la situación de ahora.
Carter enfrentaba una peligrosa situación en Irán, estudiantes extremistas islámicos habían tomado más de 80 diplomáticos como rehenes en la misión diplomática de Estados Unidos en Teherán, la inflación, los intereses y el desempleo también estaban a su nivel más alto, y Ronald Reagan cortantemente atacaba a Carter por su debilidad frente a los islámicos, algo similar a lo que ocurre hoy con Obama.
Fue el segmento DEBATE en Wikipedia, donde hallamos la descripción de lo ocurrido cuando aquella contienda presidencial:
Arguably the most important event of the entire 1980 presidential campaign was the second presidential debate, which was held one week to the day before the election (October 28).[24] On October 26, two days prior to the debate, Gallup released a survey that suggested that Carter was leading Reagan by a margin of 47% to 39%.[24] Over the course of two hours, the entire race changed drastically, and what was considered an extremely tight race with the President slightly ahead became a comfortable Republican victory for Reagan. Nothing of that magnitude has happened since in any televised confrontations.
TRADUCCION: Posiblemente el evento mas importante de toda la campaña presidencial el año 1980 fue el segundo debate que fue celebrado una semana antes del día de las elecciones, el 28 de octubre. Dos días antes, el 26 de octubre, Gallup dio a conocer una encuesta que sugería que Carter superaba a Reagan por un amplio margen de 47% a 39%, pero en el curso de dos horas la campaña completa cambió drásticamente, y lo que era considerado una elección extremadamente empatada terminó en una confortable victoria para Reagan. Nada como esto había pasado en ninguna confrontación televisiva.
Nota: LRGM -  Hoy, yo no tengo la menor duda de que todas estas encuestas son manipuladas por las agencias socialistas de encuestas, estaciones de radio y periódicos y vaticino, sin ninguna duda, que el desastre que va a sufrir el partido Demócrata en las elecciones por empecinarse en mantener un candidato comunista-musulmán, que ha hecho todo lo posible por desgraciar esta gran nación, al frente del partico como su candidato le va a traer la peor derrota en todas las elecciones en los Estados Unidos. [Guarden este pedazo de papel,  como un talismán debajo de su almohada y el día 7 de Noviembre vamos a hacer una manifestación de fiesta en la calle Flagler desde la 17 Ave. Hasta el Down Town].

¿La Historia se Repite? Ricardo Samitier.
La Revolución Francesa fue CREADA en la misma forma que ahora lo hacen OBAMA y el Federal Reserve...  Luis XVI y su ministro de hacienda Jacques Necker... cuya política financiera es la misma que está siguiendo BEN BERNANKE ...
“El Estado puede endeudarse tanto como quiera siempre que el presupuesto ordinario esté equilibrado... PERO como no se pueden aumentar los impuestos, tanto por razones políticas como por principios... Necker decía que en un FUTURO mejorando el rendimiento, especialmente con la reforma de la administración financiera, y reducir los gastos...volvería la PROSPERIDAD...  
Pero como eso es una LABOR DE TIEMPO... NECKER RESOLVIO EL PROBLEMA... toma en préstamo sumas considerables, unos 530 millones de libras, suma enorme para esa época...con unos elevadísimos intereses, ya que el crédito del Estado está en su punto más bajo... ADEMAS decidió imprimir secretamente unos cuantos millones extras... y falsear los informes...
¿Estamos en las MISMAS CIRCUNSTANCIAS... SI o NO?
El resultado todos lo sabemos... LA REVOLUCION ESTALLO... Luis XVI y su mujer fueron guillotinados... Francia quedo arruinada...   pero NECKER se retiro millonario a SUIZA... donde vivió hasta su muerte... predicando y ESCRIBIENDO su SOCIALISMO financiero...  
El Federal Reserve dirigidos por BEN BERNANKE... quien pasara a la historia como el “NECKER americano” que presidió la BANCARROTA de USA... imprimiendo 40 BILLONES de dólares mensuales... desde AGOSTO A NOVIEMBRE Para SALVAR LA REELECCION de OBAMA... mantener la presidencia y crear la revolución...
Hay que salir a VOTAR... CERRADO CONTRA TODOS LOS DEMOCRATAS... para que NO EXISTA LA EXCUSA de que hay hacer un ACUERDO BI-PARTIDISTA... recuerden la teoría comunista DOS PASOS ADELANTE  --  UNO PARA ATRÁS...
Hay que acabar con los demócratas socialistas en estas elecciones y después con los REPUBLICANOS SOCIALISTAS...

TREASURY TO FORECLOSE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Posted on September 21, 2012by Jean
POSTED BY NESARAAUSTRALIA SEPTEMBER 21, 2012
The US Dept of Treasury is set to foreclose on “the Fed” by virtue of filing a UCC-1 financing statement and a lien on the Federal Reserve System.
The IRS and other parties is/are also listed as a Secured Party Creditor in accordance with the IRS becoming a benevolent organsization.
—————————————————————————————————————————————-
It’s a UCC Financing statement (File #0000000181425776) AMENDMENT which was done on August 12th of this year. And you know who the debtor and secured parties are?
Name Address
THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 20TH STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, DC 20551
E PLURIBUS UNUM THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1500 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20220 U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICES 1400 DEFENSE PENTAGON WASHINGTON, DC 20301 – 1400
COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND 1101 WOOTON PARKWAY ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
And the Secured Parties?
Name Address
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 1789 (Assignor) 50MARYLAND AVENUE ROCKVILLE, MD 20850
NORTH AMERICAN WATER AND POWER ALLIANCE (Assignor) 1400 DEFENSE PENTAGON WASHINGTON, DC 20301 – 1400
U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE (IRS) (Assignee) 600 ATLANTIC AVENUE BOSTON, MA 02106
And if you click over here to the underlying document, what’s the amount involved in this UCC filing? How about just north of $14-trillion dollars?
This “Agricultural Lien” seems to add the Comptroller of Maryland.
So what’s the change here all about? If you have any clues as to just what the hell this is about (the data seems to live on a server of Towson University which is according to it’s web site:
“Founded in 1866, Towson University is recognized among the nation’s best regional public universities, offering more than 100 bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degree programs in the liberal arts and sciences, and applied professional fields. “
Oh, and part of the University System of Maryland.
if you plug in that document number and hit search (archive) you get the original filing. which as far as i can tell pledges every person and all real land in the usa as collateral against a $14.3 trillion dollar loan. the owner of record on that property (every person and all real land) is the irs. and finally attached is a brochure for the nawpa which talks about 1000 miles of tunnels and weather engineering and climate control and utilizing the magnetosphere.
omg. it’s like someone filed the definitive document to prove all those way out in left field totally unbelievable conspiracy theories. someone please read this and tell me i’m interpreting it wrong.”
Yes, wouldn’t we all like to know! So do research and have it in my email by Sunday – we’ll post follow-up Monday morning.
But say, wouldn’t this be a reason for all them Big Wigs to be out of DC when news of this leaks out? I mean if it’s what we think it could be…
On the other hand, since one of the parties on this is listed as the North American Water and Power Alliance and this was (to quote Wikip[edia)
================
”...conceived in the 1950s by the US Army Corps of Engineers as a ‘Great Project’ to develop more water sources for the United States. The planners envisioned diverting water from some rivers in Alaska south through Canada via the Rocky Mountain Trench and other routes to the US and would involve 369 separate construction projects. “
What IF – and this is only an IF here – this is going to become suddenly real shortly and turn into a massiveredevelopment project to stave off the Second Depression, just as the Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps were rolled out to counter the effect of the (first) Great Depression?
Ok, I would like for you see this for yourselves rather than post the document, I hope you guys are ready for this one! We know that the labor of the people have been pledged for the debt right? Well, all I can say is, check this out!
When you get to that page, go to the right at bottom and search this number: 181425776
You’ll view quite an interesting document. Remember, this is the official record!

Thanks,
Stan Brewer



 

GOP Senators Pushing Constitution Subverting UN Treaty‏.

The Western Center for Journalism.

What Would You Say If We Told You That The United States Senate Is About To Ratify A U.N. Treaty That Seeks To Eradicate Your Parental Rights Advance Abortion Around The World Sexualize Children As Young As Five-Years Old And Institute Population-Control Measures At Home And Abroad?

      And what would you say if we told you that a number of Senate Republicans have joined hands with the Democrats and are actually pushing the ratification of this United Nations treaty, either because they are legitimately ignorant when it comes to the actual language of this treaty, or are simply too scared to oppose it because it is masquerading as an international effort to affirm the rights of disabled persons?

       We couldn't have made it up if we tried. As a matter of fact, Senator Jim DeMint, who is leading the charge in opposition to this United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) treaty, came right out and said: "When you look at the language in the treaty you realize THERE ARE OTHER THINGS AT STAKE HERE. A LOT OF THE LANGUAGE IN THERE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DISABILITIES...." [Emphasis Ours]

       And now, CRPD actually stands a better-than-even chance of actually being ratified because RINO Senators Richard Lugar, John Barrasso and Johnny Isakson, voted with the Democratic majority in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to send it to the full Senate for ratification...
and we're not about to let our elected officials pass this unholy thing in the dark of night while no one is looking.

       You can
stop CRPD the exact same way you just sunk the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) and the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). We need to get our elected officials on record NOW. It only takes 34 Senators to say "No" and if 34 of them put their opposition to CRPD IN WRITING, right here and right now, as they did with LOST and ATT, we can kill CRPD, dead in its tracks, without even bringing it up for a vote.

Islam dominará al mundo, al diablo con la libertad. Amenper.
Obama tiene planeado un discurso  ante las Naciones Unidas, “Imparcial y objetivo” condenando los ataques a todas las religiones, las Islámicas, las cristianas y las musulmanas.
Sin tomar en consideración, que cuando se ataca a otra religión o filosofía política en una libertad es el derecho básico del individuo. Para una democracia es el derecho de todos expresar su opinión aunque no estemos de acuerdo  con él. 
Pero la reacción de las instituciones religiosas cuando son atacadas, es mucho más importante que los ataques, y de esto es realmente lo que se trata.
Por eso la “objetividad” de Obama no tiene validez. De lo que se trata es de la incivilidad de los musulmanes ante los ataques, completamente diferente a la de los Judíos y los Cristianos, en las historia moderna, que cuando han protestado lo han hecho dentro de los vehículos civiles.
La destrucción de la propiedad privada, aunque el video hubiera dado motivo, no es excusable ni en este caso ni en ningún caso, y sólo le da la razón a los que dicen que el Islamismo no es una religión sino una organización creada por Mahoma para motivar a sus miembros para la guerra y para dominar el mundo.

17 Numbers That Prove That The Redistribution Of Wealth Has Greatly Accelerated Under Obama

September 24, 2012 8:26 am

What is the number one job of the U.S. government?  Well, at this point the federal government in spending more time and money on redistributing wealth than it is on anything else.  In fiscal year 2012, 62 percent of the federal budget will be spent on entitlements.  How much farther do we have to go until everyone finally admits that we have become a socialist nation?  Our government has become the largest engine of wealth redistribution in the history of the world, and the redistribution of wealth has greatly accelerated during the presidency of Barack Obama.  Yes, wealth redistribution as a share of the economy also grew under George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, but Barack Obama has taken things to an entirely new level.  Back when Ronald Reagan took office, less than 30 percent of all Americans lived in a home where at least one person was receiving government benefits.  Today, an all-time record 49 percent of all Americans live in a home where at least one person receives government benefits.  Of course we always want to help the poor, the needy and those that cannot help themselves, but things in this country have gotten way out of balance.  And most Americans agree with me – according to a new Rasmussen survey, 64 percent of all Americans believe that too many Americans are dependent on government assistance.  We have become a nation that expects the government to take care of us from the cradle to the grave, and all of this government dependence is causing our debt to spiral completely and totally out of control.
Yes, without a doubt we will always need a safety net.  Nobody wants to see any American go without food or sleep under a bridge.
But we simply cannot afford to have more than 100 million Americans relying on that safety net.  It was never designed to accommodate so many people and the entire system is going to fail if we continue with this foolishness.
Sadly, a large percentage of the American people have become trained to vote for the politician that will promise them the most goodies.  Government benefits have become a way to “buy votes”, and it is deeply corrupting our system.
In such an environment it probably should not be a surprise that we elected a president that has publicly declared that “I actually believe in redistribution.
A growing percentage of the American people are actually convinced that the job of the federal government is to act as some sort of cosmic Robin Hood.  They are convinced that the federal government should take money away from the rich and give it to them.
But what kind of a society will we have if we continue down this road?  Will we have a society where the “dependent class” is always clamoring for more and where the “working class” has no ambition to work hard and make money because the government is just going to come along and take most of it away?
Socialism does not work.  But that is where the United States (along with most of the rest of the world) is headed.
The following are 17 numbers that prove that the redistribution of wealth has greatly accelerated since Barack Obama has been president….
#1 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, an all-time record 49 percent of all Americans live in a home where at least one person receives financial assistance from the federal government.  Back in 1983, that number was less than 30 percent.
#2 Right now, more than 100 million Americans are enrolled in at least one welfare program run by the federal government.  And that does not even count Social Security or Medicare.  Overall, there are almost 80 different “means-tested welfare programs” that the federal government is currently running.
#3 The number of Americans enrolled in the food stamp program has grown from about 17 million in 2000 to 31.9 million when Barack Obama took office to 46.6 million today.
#4 The number of Americans receiving Social Security disability payments has risen by more than a million since Obama has been in office.
#5 The growth of government dependence is far outpacing job growth in the United States even though we are supposed to be in an “economic recovery”.  Between the beginning of April and the end of June, the U.S. economy added only 200,000 new jobs, but 246,000 more Americans were added to the Social Security disability program and 265,000 more Americans were added to the food stamp rolls.
#6 Back in August 1967, there were approximately 65 workers for each American that was collecting Social Security disability payments.  Today, there are only 16.2 workers for each American that is collecting Social Security disability payments.
#7 Federal housing assistance outlays increased by a whopping 42 percent between 2006 and 2010.
#8 Back in 1990, the federal government accounted for just 32 percent of all health care spending in the United States.  This year, it is being projected that the federal government will account for more than 50 percent of all health care spending for the first time ever.
#9 The number of Americans on Medicaid grew from 34 million in 2000 to 54 million in 2011.
#10 Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid.  Today, approximately one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid.
#11 It is being projected that Obamacare will add 16 million more Americans to the Medicaid rolls.
#12 Medicare is also growing by leaps and bounds.  As I wrote about the other day, if current policies continue it is being projected that the number of Americans on Medicare will grow from 50.7 million in 2012 to 73.2 million in 2025.
#13 Thanks to our foolish politicians (including Obama), Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars over the next 75 years.  That comes to approximately $328,404 for each and every household in the United States.
#14 Real median household income has decreased by more than 4000 dollars since Barack Obama entered the White House.
#15 As I have written about previously, the number of Americans living below the poverty line has risen by 6 million since Barack Obama became president.
#16 Overall, the amount of money that the federal government gives directly to the American people has risen by 32 percent since Barack Obama first took office.
#17 When you account for all government transfer payments and all forms of government employment, more than half of all Americans are now at least partially financially dependent on the government.

Carta abierta de cirujanos a Raúl Castro.       

Sep 22, 2012 
Carta abierta del Servicio de Cirugía General del Hospital “Calixto García” al Primer Secretario del PCC y Presidente de los Consejos de Estado y de Ministros, General de Ejército Raúl Castro Ruz
La atención médica, y sobre todo quirúrgica, en nuestro centro, es un gran desastre, caracterizada por:
- Hospital destruido en su estructura física, por su edad e innumerables reparaciones de pésima calidad y corta duración.
- Falta de importantes recursos en la atención a los pacientes por distribución inadecuada, por gestiones insuficientes o por exceso de trabajo ante la reducción de la actividad en otros centros por causas similares.
- Deterioro humano mental acompañante por la pérdida de la mínima atención al hombre, que bajo largas jornadas de trabajo gratuito en un número importante de horas, y en un país donde las gratuidades se terminaron, tienen un confort para su trabajo que está por debajo de la de cualquier lugar pobre del mundo.
Nuestro centro hospitalario, en el aspecto quirúrgico, se ha ido reduciendo, de unos 30 salones para todas las especialidades, a no más de 10 en la actualidad, los que aún con gran destrucción brindan esta vital atención al pueblo; las irregularidades en estos salones, sus continuas roturas de aires acondicionados, falta de agua, falta de equipamiento adecuado en algunos de ellos, provocan que pacientes con cáncer no puedan ser intervenidos a tiempo en nuestra institución, que otros con patologías benignas susceptibles de ser resueltas de forma mediata a su diagnóstico lleguen complicadas por la falta de rapidez en la solución de sus problemas, y como si esto fuera poco, las patologías urgentes también tienen grandes dificultades. Estas, que constituyen un número importantes de casos, que llegan remitidas de cualquier lugar de la ciudad, muchas veces mal enviadas, poniendo en peligro la vida de los pacientes y causando incluso muertes que teóricamente se podrían haber evitado, y a pesar de que es la única prioridad quirúrgica con que trabaja el hospital una buena parte del tiempo, deben en ocasiones esperar más de 24 horas entre su anuncio y su intervención urgente, debido sobre todo a la falta de disponibilidad de salones, del personal suficiente y adecuado, pero además al cansancio físico y psíquico de los médicos que plantean, replantean y discuten los problemas a todos los niveles posibles y/o hacen buena parte de las veces de camilleros, de auxiliares de limpieza, además de cargar con toda la responsabilidad de un paciente enfermo ante su familia, el propio paciente y la sociedad. Las deficiencias en el sistema de atención médica son tan graves, en nuestra opinión, que nos obliga por estas cuestiones y otras de recursos que se mantienen de forma transitoria o permanente, a no brindar una atención profesionalmente ética y digna a nuestro pueblo, como es nuestro sagrado deber.
Por otra parte, las reparaciones emprendidas en nuestro centro, y que llevan más de 10 años de ejecución, poco han cambiado la inviabilidad de un hospital horizontal en los tiempos actuales; la mayoría de las reparaciones son coloretes a edificios viejos, realizados con una pésima calidad y, por supuesto, una corta duración, lo cual aumenta la frecuencia de la nueva reparación. Salas que han demorado 10 años, hoy se desmoronan 4 meses después de su apertura, ante el primer aguacero; filtraciones, derrumbes en los falsos techos, y un número importante de áreas declaradas inhabitables, constituyen el diario en nuestro trabajo y la estancia de nuestros pacientes. Las suspensiones de operaciones por causa del clima, del agua, insuficientes salones, o de cualquier cosa, dejaron de ser imprevistos, para convertirse en algo cotidiano. Ya las unidades quirúrgicas dejaron de ser las que tienen que estar listas para resolver los problemas de los pacientes, ahora somos los cirujanos los que tenemos que priorizar a uno u otro paciente en una lamentable y desgastante búsqueda de oportunidades quirúrgicas para un cubano que solo conocemos lamentablemente por causa de su enfermedad.
Solo a este panorama deprimente necesitamos sumarles las condiciones de confort que tienen los médicos y el personal en general, donde empezando por un salario que no le alcanza para vivir a él y a su familia, una atención degradante en los servicios de trabajo y guardia, que incluyen la ausencia de un lugar para descansar en las largas jornadas quirúrgicas o de trabajo, los varios kilómetros caminados en el recorrido entre salas, bajo el polvo, el sol y muchas veces la lluvia, la pésima calidad y suficiencia de la alimentación, la falta de un lugar decente donde practicar sus necesidades fisiológicas, y duchas para refrescar en el intenso calor o su limpieza ante una intervención contaminante, casi obligan, cuando se convierten en permanentes, a cambiar mentalidades. La fatiga, bien estudiada duplica las complicaciones [4, 5, 6, 7]; si además adjuntamos la cifra ridícula de 10 litros de gasolina que le dan mensualmente a los afortunados que tienen autos, y que no alcanza ni para ir al trabajo la primera semana del mes, entre otras muchos maltratos, se completa el cuadro de deterioro que influye de forma determinante en la atención medica que se le brinda al pueblo. Hoy es imposible pedirle a un médico, aún con auto, que acuda al hospital en el horario de la noche a ver su paciente operado, o que venga el domingo, como ha sido habitual en los cirujanos históricamente; más que eso, es imposible pedirle que venga a reintervenir un paciente complicado a las 10 PM y que no hace falta ser muy inteligente para saber lo que pasa con un caso que se ha tenido que reintervenir 5 veces por cirujanos distintos.
Nosotros consideramos que esta situación desastrosa indiscutiblemente genera complicaciones en los pacientes, donde estudios demuestran que después de 6 horas de trabajo de un cirujano las complicaciones se le multiplican [4, 5, 6, 7]; por supuesto, hablamos de trabajo con confort adecuado. También en muchos casos, la muerte, que le brindamos cuando se trata de un paciente terminal que casi no tiene salvación, no es éticamente digna, pues no se puede hacer con él lo que merece o lo que se debe hacer, en el tiempo que se debe hacer: ejemplos múltiples tenemos todos los cirujanos que laboramos en este centro, y gran parte de la población que observa y critica que lo que se dice en el panorama informativo nada tiene que ver con nuestro país y nuestros hospitales.
Pensamos que el gobierno nuestro tiene compromiso en todo esto, pues existen para satisfacer las necesidades del pueblo, para resolver los problemas del pueblo, de los trabajadores, porque simplemente son los responsables de mantener los centros hospitalarios, de que los trabajadores se formen adecuadamente en un sistema educacional justo y de calidad, que les imprima una educación ética y consecuente con la labor que van a realizar, o nadie piensa por qué los médicos, ingenieros, constructores, en las misiones se entregan en su trabajo: lo hacen porque el trabajo genera su mejoría, la de su familia y la de la sociedad donde viven, pero por desgracia, eso solo se alcanza en nuestro país saliendo del mismo, saliendo del país que nos vio nacer [10], el que es nuestro, por derecho, el que nadie, absolutamente nadie, tiene el derecho de arrebatarnos nuestra identidad por ningún concepto, y por el que debemos entregar incluso la vida para que siga siendo nuestra nación independiente.
Las desgracias narradas no vienen solas, llegan despacio cuando se mantiene por años la inversión del nivel de vida de las personas con su capacidad y entrega, ley socialista bien conocida por todos: “a cada cual según su trabajo”. Cuando los gobiernos, con sus leyes, decretos, circulares especiales, y sus decisiones y disposiciones, van comprometiendo el futuro, ¿hasta cuándo vamos a agradecerle a la generación del centenario por haber cumplido con su deber y su obligación de liberar a Cuba, mientras nuestra generación espera para cumplir con su deber de desarrollar y darles a nuestra familia, a nuestros hijos, a nuestros hermanos cubanos la vida que se merecen, mientras las destructoras huellas de la corrupción transitan con libertinaje singular para cada lado de la sociedad al que se pueda dirigir la mirada? Como decía José Martí: “en lo común de la naturaleza humana, se necesita ser próspero para ser bueno”. El gobierno es responsable de todo esto, y no solo de saberlo, sino también de resolverlo. Por eso, y antes de que continúe siendo tarde y sucedan acontecimientos como los del hospital de Mazorra, decidimos en este colectivo de médicos, sacrificados, trabajadores, dedicados, éticos, y sobre todo bien mal tratados, informar a usted y a los responsables de todas estas preocupaciones, graves en nuestra modesta opinión, desde este lugar tan subvalorado en la escala social como lo constituye el heroico e histórico servicio de cirugía general del hospital más antiguo de nuestra querida patria.
La culpa, como siempre, no es del mono sino del toti. Quieren sacrle lasca a Fast and Furius para quitarle/evitar que los ciudadanos Americanos tengan la abilidad de comprar armas - "(Armas para que?" como dijo Fidel) by Fern Hid.

MEXICO COMES KNOCKING
A seemingly ridiculous plan by the Mexican government to sue u.s. gunmakers for drug-cartel violence south of the border could spell doom for America’s firearm industry.
America's 1st Freedom. Oct. 2011.
By Dave Kopel
Certainly, the Mexican government has legitimate grounds for a lawsuit against Obama administration staffers and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (batfe) employees who organized “Operation Fast and Furious.” That “investigation” coerced licensed firearm dealers into selling guns to straw purchasers who were plainly buying guns on behalf of criminals.
As the result of that Obama/batfe fiasco, approximately 2,500 guns were put into the hands of criminals, and many of them were taken to Mexico for use by drug cartels, especially the Zetas. Subsequently, the guns have been used in many shootings, homicides and other crimes in Mexico.
“Operation Fast and Furious” was, in fact, a plain violation of u.s. law—specifically the Arms Export Control Act, which prohibits anyone from exporting firearms to other countries unless the u.s. State Department issues a permit. There is no “law enforcement” exception that would apply to “Fast and Furious.”
The United States has the legal authority to bring cases against people in foreign countries who organize conspiracies to smuggle illegal weapons into the United States with the intent that those weapons end up in the hands of gangsters. Likewise, Mexico has the legal authority to file lawsuits—or even criminal charges—against Americans who intentionally conspire to promote illegal gun smuggling into Mexico.
The Mexican government has every right to be furious about “Operation Fast and Furious.” Indeed, the government has said that it wants to extradite the “Fast and Furious” perpetrators to Mexico for criminal trial. Unfortunately, Mexican President Felipe Calderón also is laying plans for baseless lawsuits against law-abiding Americans.
In conjunction with President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder, Mexico’s Calderón spent late 2008 and early 2009 loudly complaining that guns from the United States constitute about 90 percent of Mexican “crime guns.” Shortly thereafter, the Obama administration’s “Fast and Furious” program began, which would have the immediate and inevitable effect of increasing the number of American guns used in Mexican crimes.
However, the Obama-Calderón team was not able to convince Congress that cracking down on law-abiding Americans is the solution to Mexico’s drug cartel problem.
Moreover, the assertions about American guns in Mexico turned out to be greatly exaggerated. Only a fraction of crime guns found in Mexico are traced by batfe agents. Most of the traces fail. Many of the American guns turn out to have originally been supplied to the Mexican army or police, and then given to Mexican gangsters by corrupt Mexican government employees.
A report by the u.s. Department of Justice revealed that the average age of an American gun found in Mexico is 14 years. That shows that the American guns in Mexico are mainly guns that are stolen one at a time in the United States and sold into the black market, where some of them get taken to Mexico. In other words, the typical American gun found in Mexico is not a new firearm that was recently purchased from a gun store in the southwest u.s.
The Calderón government, however, seems willfully oblivious to the facts. Not surprising, since yanqui-bashing has long been politically popular in Mexico. According to Mexico’s ambassador to the United States, American gun stores could be described as “providers of material support to terrorists.” (In an April 11, 2011, letter to the Dallas Morning News, the ambassador argued against the claim that Mexican cartels were “terrorists.” He said that if they were, then American gun stores were terrorist supporters.)
Never mind the fact that every time an American gun store sells a firearm, the store first must get permission from the fbi’s National Instant Check System or a state police equivalent.
And never mind that the only way that American gun manufacturers sell firearms to consumers is via federally licensed firearm dealers who only make a sale after approval from the government.
None of those facts has stood in the way of the Mexican government taking steps to sue American gunmakers. The Mexican government has already hired a law firm: Reid, Collins & Tsai. That firm, with offices in New York City and Austin, Texas, is a boutique firm specializing in innovative cases. They were retained by Mexico on Nov. 2, 2010.
Where would such a lawsuit take place? Well, one obvious place is in a Mexican court. None of the American state and federal protections against abusive anti-gun lawsuits would apply in a Mexican court. Of course, the Mexican government, in a Mexican court, would be the “home team.” It would not be fair to say that all Mexican courts are corrupt, but it would be realistic to acknowledge that Mexico’s federal government would have the ability to pressure Mexican judges.
Why would a Mexican court have jurisdiction over American gunmakers? To start with, many American gunmakers have voluntarily done business in Mexico by selling guns there. The vast majority of such sales are to the America and other nations.
What about the American gunmakers who do not sell to Mexico? Getting Mexican court jurisdiction over them would be hard, but not necessarily impossible. The Mexican government could allege that the American manufacturers knew, or should have known, that the manner in which they sell guns in the United States would inevitably have consequences in Mexico.
Following a victory in a Mexican court, likely including an award of millions of dollars in damages, the Mexican government could then ask an American court to seize the money in the American gunmakers’ bank accounts, or to seize their other assets, such as manufacturing equipment, buildings or land. American courts are usually willing to enforce judgments from foreign courts unless there was some procedural irregularity in the foreign court. So as long as the Mexican government is careful to play by the rules in the Mexican court, the result could be the financial destruction of American gunmakers.
Another potential venue is the International Court of Justice. Informally known as the “World Court,” the icj is located in The Hague, Netherlands. It is part of the United Nations, which should tell you all you need to know about its probable attitude towards gun rights and citizen gun ownership.
In April 2010, Chicago’s then- Mayor Richard Daley held the 10th annual “Richard j. Daley Global Cities Forum,” with mayors from around the world. At the event, Daley announced the idea of suing American gun manufacturers in the World Court. Also endorsing the idea was Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter and Mexico City Mayor Marcelo Ebrard Casaubón.
The World Court can only issue binding decisions in nation vs. nation suits. For example, a current case is Costa Rica v. Nicaragua, brought by Costa Rica because the Marxist Sandinista government of Nicaragua has been sending its military across the border and has built military camps in Costa Rica.
Thus, a World Court case would have to be Mexico v. United States of America. Unlike some nations, the United States has not given blanket consent to World Court jurisdiction, so the World Court could hear the case only if the Obama administration allowed it.
It’s not hard to imagine the Obama administration doing so and then putting up a deliberately weak “defense” in the World Court. The result could be a World Court order that the u.s. government impose drastic new restrictions on gunmakers and gun owners. The Obama administration would then have the perfect pretext of “international law requirements” to create all sorts of harsh new regulations. American courts could uphold those regulations since they would supposedly be necessary for the American government to comply with its obligations under international law.
The other possible international court for a Mexican government case would be the Inter-American Court of Human Rights located in Costa Rica. This court is part of the Organization of American States (oas), a group which is quite hostile to gun ownership.
The Obama administration has been attempting—so far unsuccessfully—to get the Senate to adopt the oas’ gun control treaty, known as cifta. As I explained in a policy study for the Heritage Foundation, cifta would obligate the u.s. government to impose drastic new gun controls. [“The oas Firearms Convention Is Incompatible with American Liberties.”]
Again, the Obama administration would have to cooperate in order for the Inter-American Court to hear the case. The result could be the same as from the World Court: a mandatory international obligation for the u.s. federal government to impose severe regulations on gun owners and gunmakers.
The final possibility for the Mexican suit is in an American federal court. The Calderón government could cherry-pick a court with the most anti-gun judges. Or the government could follow the strategy of the anti-gun lawsuits that the Brady Center masterminded in 1998-1999—sue in many courts all over the United States, the better to force the gun manufacturers to defend a plethora of suits all at once and to prevent them from sharing their legal costs.
The Mexican lawsuit, or lawsuits, would, of course, have a serious obstacle. The 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (plcaa) prohibits nearly all anti-gun suits except those arising from criminal conduct on the part of a gunmaker or gun seller. Many states have similar laws, although not all are as strong and comprehensive as the plcaa.
The Mexican government could allege that the firearm retailers are engaged in criminal conduct by knowingly selling to retailers (or by selling to wholesalers who sell to such retailers) who violate federal law by selling guns to straw purchasers or other illegal buyers.
Such a claim would be very difficult to prove because it isn’t true. But the Brady Center makes this claim all the time, and the thin collection of bogus “facts” that the Brady Center cites in support of the claim might be enough for a court to decide not to throw the case out immediately. Then, the Mexican government could engage in “discovery.” It would have the legal right to go on fishing expeditions into the documents of the gun manufacturers and to interrogate their employees at length. The hope would be that enough evidence could be found to keep the case going, and that perhaps a judge who is hostile to Second Amendment rights might eventually rule in Mexico’s favor.
Alternatively, or additionally, Mexico could attack the plcaa itself. This would be an uphill battle, since the Brady Center has already launched numerous failed legal attacks on the plcaa.
The u.s. Supreme Court, however, has never ruled on the plcaa. So the strategy of the Mexican government could be to accept some defeats in lower courts while moving the case toward the Supreme Court.
The process would probably take several years, which could give President Obama (if he is re-elected in 2012) time to appoint more anti-gun justices to the u.s. Supreme Court. An Obama-dominated court could throw out the plcaa entirely. Or the court could invent some kind of implicit exception to the plcaa so that the Mexican lawsuit could succeed. All it would take is one more Obama appointment. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Second Amendment only survived by a single vote in 5-4 decisions.
In any American court, the government of Mexico would be an especially powerful plaintiff. Most judges spend their entire careers without ever hearing a case brought by a foreign government. Any judge will understand that it would be a national security disaster for the United States if the Mexican government were to be overthrown by the cartels and Mexico became a narco-state. Some intelligence analysts are speculating that the Mexican cartels might attempt a takeover in the next year or two.
Yet if the Mexican government is in danger, Americans are not to blame. Still, judges tend to be cautious people, and if the Mexican government comes into court claiming that its survival depends on a judge overturning the plcaa and cracking down on American gun rights, some judges might be persuadable. That could be more likely if the Obama administration were filing friend-of-the-court briefs in support of the Mexican government.
Whatever constraints a desire for re-election may place on Barack Obama’s anti-gun ideology, those constraints will immediately vanish on Nov. 7, 2012. A Mexican government lawsuit, ultimately decided by Obama-appointed judges, could wipe out American gun manufacturers—all without a need for any judge to formally overrule Heller and repudiate the Second Amendment.



Mexican Families to Sue ATF Over Fast and Furious

·  Katie Pavlich
News Editor, Townhall

Back in September, it was confirmed by Mexican Attorney General Marisel Morales that at least 200 Mexican citizens have been killed as a result of the Obama Justice Department's Operation Fast and Furious. Last week, Mexican Ambassador to the United States Arturo Sarukan said the lethal operation, of which the Mexican government was left in the dark about, has caused a major loss of trust in the U.S. from the Mexican people.
"Mexico was never apprised how the operation would be designed and implemented," Sarukhan told officials at a forum hosted by the New Democrat Network, or NDN, a center-left think tank and advocacy organization, and the New Policy Institute, one of its sister organizations.

"Regardless of whether this was or was not the intent or the design of Fast and Furious," Sarukhan said, "the thinking that you can let guns walk across the border and maintain operational control of those weapons is really an outstanding lack of understanding of how these criminal organizations are operating on both sides of our common borders."

He added that the ill-conceived operation had "poisoned the wellsprings" of public opinion in Mexico, putting strains on the strides that had been achieved between the United States and Mexico in combating illegal gun trafficking.
Now, families of "Rapido y Furioso" in Mexico are preparing a civil lawsuit against the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms and the lawyer representing them is risking everything, including her life, to represent them. The following is a translated portion of this Spanish article.
A Mexican lawyer is preparing a civil lawsuit against the Agency Snuff, Firearms and Explosives (ATF, for its acronym in English) United States, representing relatives of victims of the operation 'Fast and Furious', with which the U.S. government illegally brought weapons into the country to trace and catch the criminals that were acquired.

This is Eugenia Gonzalez Diana Saldana, who has two master's degrees in Criminal Science and Criminology from the University Autonomous of Nuevo Leon, and who, in coordination with an office in Houston, Texas, intends to take legal action against U.S. dependence for the damage caused by the operation, whose failure has already been publicly acknowledged by the government of Barack Obama.

This would, she says, the first lawsuit brought by Mexico against the promoters of the failed plan to trace weapons smuggled into Mexico, most of which ended up, of course, at the hands of organized crime.

In an interview, the lawyer who litigates in particular, specifies that the Texan firm that shall assist asked to collect 50 cases to present solid way of a civil complaint in the neighboring country to the north.

Currently, she says, has documented four cases, including that of Mario Gonzalez Rodriguez, brother of the exprocuradora the state of Chihuahua, Patricia Gonzalez Rodriguez, who was kidnapped and killed by one of the two thousand weapons smuggled into the country as part of the operation "Fast and Furious".

With this lawsuit, which claims not charged to those affected, she risks her integrity, but feels the need to do citizen, said the criminal.
"I'm playing the single. I'm risking my life, my things, my family, everything, but it's something that someone has to do because nobody has had the pants to do so. I can not believe anyone has come up with this idea, but what happens is that everyone is afraid, for angas or sleeves, "says Gonzalez.


Thursday, August 9, 2012

High-Ranking Mexican Drug Cartel Member makes Explosive Allegation

Posted by Bill Rummel
~~~~‘Fast and Furious is not what you think it is'
Posted on August 9, 2012 by
The Blaze A high-ranking Mexican drug cartel operative currently in U.S. custody is making startling allegations that the failed federal gun-walking operation known as “Fast and Furious” isn’t what you think it is.


It wasn’t about tracking guns, it was about supplying them — all part of an elaborate agreement between the U.S. government and Mexico’s powerful Sinaloa Cartel to take down rival cartels.

The explosive allegations are being made by Jesus Vicente Zambada-Niebla, known as the Sinaloa Cartel’s “logistics coordinator.” He was extradited to the Chicago last year to face federal drug charges.

Zambada-Niebla claims that under a “divide and conquer” strategy, the U.S. helped finance and arm the Sinaloa Cartel through Operation Fast and Furious in exchange for information that allowed the DEA, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies to take down rival drug cartels. The Sinaloa Cartel was allegedly permitted to traffic massive amounts of drugs across the U.S. border from 2004 to 2009 — during both Fast and Furious and Bush-era gunrunning operations — as long as the intel kept coming.

This pending court case against Zambada-Niebla is being closely monitored by some members of Congress, who expect potential legal ramifications if any of his claims are substantiated. The trial was delayed but is now scheduled to begin on Oct. 9.

Zambada-Niebla is reportedly a close associate of Sinaloa Cartel kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman and the son of Ismael “Mayo” Zambada-Garcia, both of which remain fugitives, likely because of the deal made with the DEA,
federal court documents allege.


Based on the alleged agreement ”the Sinaloa Cartel under the leadership of defendant’s father, Ismael Zambada-Niebla and ‘Chapo’ Guzman, were given carte blanche to continue to smuggle tons of illicit drugs into Chicago and the rest of the United States and were also protected by the United States government from arrest and prosecution in return for providing information against rival cartels which helped Mexican and United States authorities capture or kill thousands of rival cartel members,” states a
motion for discovery filed in U.S. District Court by Zambada-Niebla’s attorney in July 2011.

A source in Congress, who spoke to TheBlaze on the condition of anonymity, said that some top congressional investigators have been keeping “one eye on the case.” Another two members of Congress, both lead Fast and Furious Congressional investigators, told TheBlaze they had never even heard of the case.

One of the Congressmen, who also spoke to TheBlaze on the condition of anonymity because criminal proceedings are still ongoing, called the allegations “disturbing.” He said Congress will likely get involved once Zambada-Niebla’s trial has concluded if any compelling information surfaces.

“Congress won’t get involved in really any criminal case until the trial is over and the smoke has cleared,” he added. “If the allegations prove to hold any truth, there will be some serious legal ramifications.”

Earlier this month, two men in Texas were
sentenced to 70 and 80 months in prison after pleading guilty to attempting to export 147 assault rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition to Mexico’s Los Zetas cartel. Compare that to the roughly 2,000 firearms reportedly “walked” in Fast and Furious, which were used in the murders of hundreds of Mexican citizens and U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry, and some U.S. officials could potentially face jail time if they knowingly armed the Sinaloa Cartel and allowed guns to cross into Mexico.

If proven in court, such an agreement between U.S. law enforcement agencies and a Mexican cartel could potentially mar both the Bush and Obama administrations. The federal government is denying all of Zambada-Niebla’s allegations and contend that no official immunity deal was agreed upon.

To be sure, Zambada-Niebla is a member of one of the most ruthless drug gangs in all of Mexico, so there is a chance that he is saying whatever it takes to reduce his sentence, which will likely be hefty. However, Congress and the media have a duty to prove without a reasonable doubt that there is no truth in his allegations. So far, that has not been achieved.

Zambada-Niebla was reportedly responsible for coordinating all of the Sinaloa Cartel’s multi-ton drug shipments from Central and South American countries, through Mexico, and into the United States. To accomplish this, he used every tool at his disposal:

Boeing 747 cargo planes, narco-submarines, container ships, speed boats, fishing vessels, buses, rail cars, tractor trailers and automobiles. But Guzman and Zambada-Niebla’s overwhelming success within the Sinaloa Cartel was largely due to the arrests and dismantling of many of their competitors and their booming businesses in the U.S. from 2004 to 2009 — around the same time ATF’s gun-walking operations were in full swing.

Fast and Furious reportedly
began in 2009 and continued into early 2011.

According Zambada-Niebla, that was a product of the collusion between the U.S. government and the Sinaloa Cartel.

Soldiers and police officers guard packages of seized marijuana during a presentation for the media in Tijuana, Mexico. (AP Photo/Guillermo Arias)

The claims seem to fall in line with
statements made last month by Guillermo Terrazas Villanueva, a spokesman for the Chihuahua state government in northern Mexico who said U.S. agencies ”don’t fight drug traffickers,“ instead ”they try to manage the drug trade.”

Also, U.S. officials have previously acknowledged working with the Sinaloa Cartel through another informant, Humberto Loya-Castro. He is also allegedly a high-ranking member of the Sinaloa Cartel as well as a close confidant and lawyer of “El Chapo” Guzman. Read more>>
High-Ranking Mexican Drug Cartel Member makes Explosive Allegation: ‘Fast and Furious is not what you think it is’



ENVIEN  “EN MI OPINION”  A SUS CONTACTOS
Lázaro R González Miño
305 445 7364 lazarorgonzalez@hotmail.com   MrLazaroRGonzalez.blogspot.com
https://www.facebook.com/lazarorg
“Salmo109” 7-Cuando fuere juzgado salga culpable; 8-Sean sus días pocos; tome otro su oficio,
Porque tuyo es El Reino, El Poder y La Gloria Eterna. AMEN

WE OWN THIS COUNTRY, DON’T DARE TEST US 

No comments:

Post a Comment