playing the BIG boards. options included. making the profits with this volitality !
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
so much for not discussing it any more yet you wrote 7 sentences about a subject you don't want to discuss,...
do you see the irony and hypocrisy ?
wow,..just wow !
have a wonderful night.
sorry chief,...its YOU that is jerking himself off.
sheeesh,..you can't even comprehend,...must be your stuff got in your eye while you were reading the post.
ROTFLMAO !
news flash,..i really need help from the likes you an individual like your self,...a legend in his own mind.
so FO !
then don't respond to the post,..simple.
additionally i've stopped mentally masterbating myself for several years now.
you appear to still enjoy getting your stuff all over you.
have fun,...
your format i will use to reply,...
first of all,...i have conducted quite a bit of research on this incident for my own clarification and comprehension of what in the hell could have really gone on ?
secondly after that research i concluded the official story is complete and utter BS !
that is not to say that others have conducted their research and i do not discount their findings. we just view similar evidence differently.
having said that,...
So you are suggesting that the buildings were somehow pre-loaded with shape charges?
yes
Have you ever witnessed a controlled demolition,
yes
the planning and time it takes to achieve that goal?
correct i agree
If someone had the buildings "hot wired" then why would they even bother with the planes?
distraction from the real event
They could have just pressed the button and claimed they did it.
who is the "they" you are referencing ? i can't respond to that inquiry until i know who you mean.
Or are you saying that the first responders went in and "hot wired" the buildings instead of trying to rescue the people?
no,... the first responders had nothing to do with that.
Either scenario makes no sense and your theory to me is Bull Shit.
i totally realize that to accept anything other than the official government explanation is challenging and places an individual on the opposite side of the court while playing this "who done it" game. many people have lost friends because could not agree and have shunned their friendships because both cold not accept each conclusions.
i'm not asking you or anyone to agree with my findings.
but i will ask you.,...
- how much have you independently researched and investigated the 9-11 incident outside the governments statements ?
- how much research/knowledge have you done on DEW's ?
- how much research have you done on the military and its state of the art weaponry it has ?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The mind is like a parachute. It functions best when open.
i think the evidence you are citing is not evidence. it's BS. who cares that it would have taken too many to keep this a secret.
the fact is, the evidence is right in front for all to see.
if i accept the official government explanation for matters,...thats like believing we are the only planet with life on it and there is no extraterrestrial activity visiting this planet. based on what ?,...our governments official statement on the subject.
the fact is the evidence is right in front for all to see.
i'll leave it at that.
make it a good day !
~~~~~~~~~
The mind is like a parachute. It functions best when open.
fuagf,..i've always thought the entire official 9-11 government explanation was complete BS and a fabrication.
i firmly believe that this was a controlled destruction resulting in a demolition of some sort. either by explosives with the use of Thermite or DEW's or some other technology.
there is no way that a 767 could have done what is "officially" reported.
complete and utter nonsense.
i have spoken with pilots (friends also) who have flown 747's, 767's and a few professors at the universities in the city i live. they gave me an entire different scenario of what did not and could not have occurred.
i'll leave it at that as i will not go into any more lengthy explanations.
Physicists Say Twin Towers Destroyed by Controlled Demolition on 9/11
Darius Shahtahmasebi
Sep 11, 2018
Christmas has come early for “conspiracy theorists” around the world.
An academic report published by Europhysics News in time for the anniversary of 9/11 is questioning the official explanation for the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings on September 11, 2001, and their conclusion may make even the most rational person rethink their outlook. As the report from Europhysics News, a “ magazine of the European physics community,” notes:
“It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST [U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology] reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists. Instead, the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition. Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities.”
Entitled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” the investigation was conducted by Steven Jones, a former professor of physics at Brigham Young University; Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, and a fellow of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering and the Engineering Institute of Canada; Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer; and Ted Walter, author of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s Beyond Misinformation: “What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 and 7.”
The Europhysics News report begins by questioning the official explanation for the collapse of the three buildings on September 11, 2001, as determined by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). NIST began carrying out an investigation in August 2002, and their findings are still questioned to this day. The report reminds us that:
“Indeed, neither before nor since 9/11 have fires caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise—nor has any other natural event, with the exception of the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, which toppled a 21-story office building. Otherwise, the only phenomenon capable of collapsing such buildings completely has been by way of a procedure known as controlled demolition, whereby explosives or other devices are used to bring down a structure intentionally.”
The report explains why this would be the case, offering four main explanations why steel-framed high rises have endured large fires in the past without undergoing total collapse: (1) the heat of a fire and its duration do not typically generate enough energy to heat the large structural members to the point where they would fail; (2) most high-rise buildings have fire suppression systems (such as water sprinklers) that would further inhibit the fire from reaching anywhere near the heat necessary to create a total collapse; (3) the structural members are protected by fireproofing materials, which are designed to prevent the structure from reaching failure temperatures within specified time periods; (4) steel-framed high-rise buildings are designed to be highly redundant, meaning that the buildings can suffer a partial collapse due to a fire but would not result in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
“Countless other steel-framed high-rises have experienced large, long-lasting fires without suffering either partial or total collapse,” the report points out.
It goes on to confirm the scientists’ doubts regarding the official explanation by referencing the head structural engineer of the buildings, John Skilling, who was interviewed by the Seattle Times following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Skilling, who was concerned about a possible airplane attack, performed an analysis that proved the towers would withstand the impact of Boeing 707:
“Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed…The building structure would still be there…However, I’m not saying that properly applied explosives—shaped explosives—of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage…. I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it.”
To put it politely, Skilling believed the only thing that could bring down the Twin Towers was controlled demolition, certainly not a fire alone – not even a “horrendous fire.”
A controlled demolition would better explain how the buildings were able to collapse in the manner that they did, the report argues:
“In general, the technique used to demolish large buildings involves cutting the columns in a large enough area of the building to cause the intact portion above that area to fall and crush itself as well as crush whatever remains below it. This technique can be done in an even more sophisticated way, by timing the charges to go off in a sequence so that the columns closest to the center are destroyed first. The failure of the interior columns creates an inward pull on the exterior and causes the majority of the building to be pulled inward and downward while materials are being crushed, thus keeping the crushed materials in a somewhat confined area—often within the building’s ‘footprint.’ This method is often referred to as ‘implosion.’”
The lesser-known WTC building 7, which also collapsed that day, is “remarkable because it exemplified all the signature features of an implosion.” According to the report:
“The building dropped in absolute free fall for the first 2.25 seconds of its descent over a distance of 32 meters or eight stories. Its transition from stasis to free fall was sudden, occurring in approximately one-half second. It fell symmetrically straight down. Its steel frame was almost entirely dismembered and deposited mostly inside the building’s footprint, while most of its concrete was pulverized into tiny particles. Finally, the collapse was rapid, occurring in less than seven seconds.”
In relation to WTC Building 7, the report criticizes the official NIST explanation by pointing out some heavy flaws with their investigation. The NIST investigation began with the conclusion that fires brought down WTC building 7 but then had trouble trying to reconcile the evidence with that predetermined conclusion. The NIST report also attempted to deny the building fell at free-fall speed. However, independently verifying NIST’s computer modeling is currently impossible because NIST refuses to release a large portion of its data, arguing doing so “might jeopardize public safety.”
The most surprising aspect of this report, however, is that it goes further than any “conspiracy theorist” would ever have expected it to by questioning the explanation for the collapse of the Twin Tower buildings, as well. The report acknowledges:
“Thus, the definitive report on the collapse of the Twin Towers contains no analysis of why the lower sections failed to arrest or even slow the descent of the upper sections—which NIST acknowledges ‘came down essentially in free fall’—nor does it explain the various other phenomena observed during the collapses. When a group of petitioners filed a formal Request for Correction asking NIST to perform such analysis, NIST replied that it was ‘unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse’ because ‘the computer models [were] not able to converge on a solution.””
Lastly, the report briefly argues that to this day, there is still a significant volume of unexplained evidence that further supports the theory controlled demolitions took place on that tragic day fifteen years ago, including the fact that videos and photographs show numerous high-velocity bursts of debris being ejected from “point-like sources”; the well-documented presence of molten metal throughout the debris field; and a number of eyewitness accounts (some 156 witnesses) stating they saw, heard and/or felt explosions prior to and during the collapses.
As the authors of the report note, until their hypothesis is the “subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities,” we will never know the truth of what happened for sure. People will continue to speculate, and those of us who question the official story will continue to be labeled “crazy” despite the fact that there are many unanswered questions.
For example, if it’s crazy to question why media outlets reported on the collapse of WTC Building 7 before it even collapsed, then perhaps we should never question anything.
As rapper Lupe Fiasco wrote in his song “Words I Never Said”:
“9/11, Building 7, did they really pull it?”
https://themindunleashed.com/2018/09/physicists-twin-towers-controlled-demolition.html
Physicists Say Twin Towers Destroyed by Controlled Demolition on 9/11
Darius Shahtahmasebi
Sep 11, 2018
Christmas has come early for “conspiracy theorists” around the world.
An academic report published by Europhysics News in time for the anniversary of 9/11 is questioning the official explanation for the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings on September 11, 2001, and their conclusion may make even the most rational person rethink their outlook. As the report from Europhysics News, a “ magazine of the European physics community,” notes:
“It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST [U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology] reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists. Instead, the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition. Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities.”
Entitled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” the investigation was conducted by Steven Jones, a former professor of physics at Brigham Young University; Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, and a fellow of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering and the Engineering Institute of Canada; Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer; and Ted Walter, author of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s Beyond Misinformation: “What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 and 7.”
The Europhysics News report begins by questioning the official explanation for the collapse of the three buildings on September 11, 2001, as determined by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). NIST began carrying out an investigation in August 2002, and their findings are still questioned to this day. The report reminds us that:
“Indeed, neither before nor since 9/11 have fires caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise—nor has any other natural event, with the exception of the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, which toppled a 21-story office building. Otherwise, the only phenomenon capable of collapsing such buildings completely has been by way of a procedure known as controlled demolition, whereby explosives or other devices are used to bring down a structure intentionally.”
The report explains why this would be the case, offering four main explanations why steel-framed high rises have endured large fires in the past without undergoing total collapse: (1) the heat of a fire and its duration do not typically generate enough energy to heat the large structural members to the point where they would fail; (2) most high-rise buildings have fire suppression systems (such as water sprinklers) that would further inhibit the fire from reaching anywhere near the heat necessary to create a total collapse; (3) the structural members are protected by fireproofing materials, which are designed to prevent the structure from reaching failure temperatures within specified time periods; (4) steel-framed high-rise buildings are designed to be highly redundant, meaning that the buildings can suffer a partial collapse due to a fire but would not result in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
“Countless other steel-framed high-rises have experienced large, long-lasting fires without suffering either partial or total collapse,” the report points out.
It goes on to confirm the scientists’ doubts regarding the official explanation by referencing the head structural engineer of the buildings, John Skilling, who was interviewed by the Seattle Times following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Skilling, who was concerned about a possible airplane attack, performed an analysis that proved the towers would withstand the impact of Boeing 707:
“Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed…The building structure would still be there…However, I’m not saying that properly applied explosives—shaped explosives—of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage…. I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it.”
To put it politely, Skilling believed the only thing that could bring down the Twin Towers was controlled demolition, certainly not a fire alone – not even a “horrendous fire.”
A controlled demolition would better explain how the buildings were able to collapse in the manner that they did, the report argues:
“In general, the technique used to demolish large buildings involves cutting the columns in a large enough area of the building to cause the intact portion above that area to fall and crush itself as well as crush whatever remains below it. This technique can be done in an even more sophisticated way, by timing the charges to go off in a sequence so that the columns closest to the center are destroyed first. The failure of the interior columns creates an inward pull on the exterior and causes the majority of the building to be pulled inward and downward while materials are being crushed, thus keeping the crushed materials in a somewhat confined area—often within the building’s ‘footprint.’ This method is often referred to as ‘implosion.’”
The lesser-known WTC building 7, which also collapsed that day, is “remarkable because it exemplified all the signature features of an implosion.” According to the report:
“The building dropped in absolute free fall for the first 2.25 seconds of its descent over a distance of 32 meters or eight stories. Its transition from stasis to free fall was sudden, occurring in approximately one-half second. It fell symmetrically straight down. Its steel frame was almost entirely dismembered and deposited mostly inside the building’s footprint, while most of its concrete was pulverized into tiny particles. Finally, the collapse was rapid, occurring in less than seven seconds.”
In relation to WTC Building 7, the report criticizes the official NIST explanation by pointing out some heavy flaws with their investigation. The NIST investigation began with the conclusion that fires brought down WTC building 7 but then had trouble trying to reconcile the evidence with that predetermined conclusion. The NIST report also attempted to deny the building fell at free-fall speed. However, independently verifying NIST’s computer modeling is currently impossible because NIST refuses to release a large portion of its data, arguing doing so “might jeopardize public safety.”
The most surprising aspect of this report, however, is that it goes further than any “conspiracy theorist” would ever have expected it to by questioning the explanation for the collapse of the Twin Tower buildings, as well. The report acknowledges:
“Thus, the definitive report on the collapse of the Twin Towers contains no analysis of why the lower sections failed to arrest or even slow the descent of the upper sections—which NIST acknowledges ‘came down essentially in free fall’—nor does it explain the various other phenomena observed during the collapses. When a group of petitioners filed a formal Request for Correction asking NIST to perform such analysis, NIST replied that it was ‘unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse’ because ‘the computer models [were] not able to converge on a solution.””
Lastly, the report briefly argues that to this day, there is still a significant volume of unexplained evidence that further supports the theory controlled demolitions took place on that tragic day fifteen years ago, including the fact that videos and photographs show numerous high-velocity bursts of debris being ejected from “point-like sources”; the well-documented presence of molten metal throughout the debris field; and a number of eyewitness accounts (some 156 witnesses) stating they saw, heard and/or felt explosions prior to and during the collapses.
As the authors of the report note, until their hypothesis is the “subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities,” we will never know the truth of what happened for sure. People will continue to speculate, and those of us who question the official story will continue to be labeled “crazy” despite the fact that there are many unanswered questions.
For example, if it’s crazy to question why media outlets reported on the collapse of WTC Building 7 before it even collapsed, then perhaps we should never question anything.
As rapper Lupe Fiasco wrote in his song “Words I Never Said”:
“9/11, Building 7, did they really pull it?”
https://themindunleashed.com/2018/09/physicists-twin-towers-controlled-demolition.html
PRIZE POST OF THE DAY !!!! thanks stockfan100
=================
Glad I can help again. All updated 2016-2018! Enjoy!
Here is the Solid research that management has done so far! Undeniable!
Here is the rigorous research behind some of $OWCP patents,,,
https://stks.freshpatents.com/One-World-Cannabis-Ltd-nm1.php
Novel cannabinoid combination therapies for multiple myeloma (mm) (23 pages)
https://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20180705ptan20180185324.php
Use of cannabis to treat fibromyalgia, methods and compositions thereof (19 pages)
https://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20180503ptan20180116998.php
Cannabis-based extracts and topical formulations for use in skin disorders(31 pages)
https://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20180215ptan20180042890.php
Preparations of cannabis emulsions and methods thereof (33 pages)
https://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20180215ptan20180042845.php
Novel condom comprising cannabis derived compositions for enhancement of sexual pleasure and decrease of erectile dysfunction symptoms(10 pages)
https://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20171228ptan20170367875.php
Count... Patent Family... Filing Domain... Application Published
1....Mlt Myeloma.... IL....12.15.2016
2.... AU.... 12.15.2016
3.... CA.... 12.15.2016
4.... USPTO....05.07.2018
5.... EPR.... 04.18.2018
6.... Mlt Myeloma 2.... IL.... 02.06.2016
7.... EPR.... 04.10.2017
8.... AU.... 02.06.2016
9.... CA.... 02.06.2016
10.... Fibromyalgia.... IL.... 11.17.2016
11.... AU.... 11.17.2016
12 CA.... 11.17.2016
13.... EPR.... 03.21.2018
14.... USPTO....05.03.2018
15.... Pharma Emuls.... IL.... 09.22.2016
16.... EPR.... 01.24.2018
17.... CA.... 09.22.2016
18.... AU.... 09.22.2016
19.... USPTO....02.15.2018
20.... Migraine..... IL.... 06.16.2016
21.... Sexual Func.... IL.... 06.23.2016
22.... USPTO.... 12.28.2017
23.... EPR.... 06.23.2016
24.... Skin Disord.... IL....06.30.2016
26.... AU.... 06.30.2016
26.... USPTO.... 02.15.2018
*The Psoriasis agreement with Sheba Academic Medical Center provides that all intellectual property that is conceived during the course of the research is to be jointly owned by Sheba and One World Cannabis.
ah,...companies don't do that. especially OWCP that is no top of their sector with a cannabis based product(s).
it's just not done in the way you are suggesting.
example;,...post any proof that APPLE was conducting their research and work on their iPhone when it was still in experimental phase of perfecting the device ????
there was none !!!
but because online information was not available to be collected that in no way meant it was not going on in APPLE's R&D...and we know what history now proves,....
your point is mute,...
try again.
stockfan100,...OWCP will be the surprise of the year to all investors and shareholders !!!!!
glow one can't stop his defamation agenda of OWCP.
it's actually libel...because he placed his defamations of the company in writing !
again,...OWCP will be the surprise of the year to all investors and shareholders !!!!!
with a new Dr on board it's beginning to shape up and the picture is only becoming clearer.
if OWCP has it's patents in place and other companies are in the least infringing,...it's royalty time $$$$$$ for OWCP
continue having an awesome day !
that dog don't hunt any longer. same ole, same ole crap posted with no proof of anything !!! just your own input.
your posts remind me of the cul-de-sac thinking. same houses but you fail to notice you are going around and around thinking you're seeing something different,. it's the same ole houses,...
you are in a cul-de-sac of your own thinking.
here's a concept to ponder,...
You think you're right, because you think you're right.
doesn't mean you are accurate but you keep buying your own thinking about OWCP which is fundamentally inaccurate.
thanks for the mid afternoon chuckle
great post and addition to the OWCP team,...thanks for sharing the latest news.
Prof. Yuval Ramot,...he must be one of those "people" crablover described,...
"A bunch of so called expert people working on fooling trusting pople"
yea,...Prof. Ramot is going to risk his flawless reputation to "fooling trusting pople"
ROTFLMAO.
where do these people get the crap they post ?
thanks again for your post to prove positive that they are collecting a fantastic array of industry experts.!!!!
===========================
Professor Ramot is the Head of the Psoriasis Clinic at Hadassah – Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem, Israel (“Hadassah”) and specializes in Dermatology and Venereology.
Professor Ramot holds an MD and an MSc degree in Biochemistry from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. Following his medical training, he specialized in hair research in the Department of Dermatology at Lübeck University, Germany.
In March 2016, he joined the Department of Dermatology at Hadassah and the Center for Genetic Diseases of the Skin and Hair, where he focuses on research of genetic skin and hair diseases and toxicology of the skin. His main clinical interest is in inflammatory diseases of the skin.
He is the director of the psoriasis and hidradenitis suppurativa clinics at Hadassah. He is the recipient of the Minerva Post-doctoral Fellowship and the Young Dermatologist International Achievement Award.
He has also co-authored 10 chapters in books and more than 135 articles in peer-reviewed journals.
i'm not buying the story one bit. there are soooo many holes in your story that do not add up.
here's one item you posted that reeks of BS,...
right on target moxa ! this is precisely where OWCP products differ.
and the more US states legalize cannabis and the more individuals that research and discover the benefits of taking cannabis products is the huge gap between a company like BM vs OWCP.
i don't know this for a fact if OWCP's products use cannbinoids,... but cannabis also has cannabinoids which give huge benefits to the oral consumer than a product from BM.
a small detail you missed.
possibly Bristol-Myers Psoriasis drug could be infringing on OWCP's patents.
now,...IF that is accurate not only will OWCP be able to collect royalties for retail sales by BM,...but also a licensing fee for continued production of BM's product.
hey,...its a speculation and i have no proof ,...but its sure more logical than the crap being posted here.
exactly ! pure garbage speculation on the posters behalf.
a more likely scenario is traders bought at the low and selling at the high. occam's razor is in effect.
any other assumptions (Newbridge dumping, blah,blah, blah ) has no third party validation or any proof of that.
pure garbage assumptions.
even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
this is just the individuals who have been talking down the company and who the need to be right,...they are having their day now with wild unproven speculations.
i just bought a bunch more,... 8^)
PegnVA,...bottom line for me,...Peace At Every Step.
any other action is a waste of time.
Poem: Defuse Me
If I were a bomb ready to explode, if I have become dangerous to your life, then you must take care of me. You think you can get away from me, but how? I am here, right in your midst. You cannot remove me from your life. And I may explode at any time. I need your care. I need your time. I need you to defuse me. You are responsible for me, because you have made the vow and I heard it to love and to care.
I know that to take care of me you need much patience, much coolness. I realize that in you there is also a bomb to be defused. So why don't we help each other?
I need you to listen to me. No one has listened to me. No one understands my suffering, including the ones who say they love me. The pain inside of me is suffocating me. It is the TNT that makes up the bomb. There is no one else who will listen to me. That is why I need you. But you seem to be getting away from me. You want to run for your safety, the kind of safety that does not exist.
I have not created my own bomb. It is you. It is society. It is family. It is school. It is tradition. So please don't blame me for it. Come and help, if not, I will explode. This is not a threat. It is only a plea for help. I will also be of help when it is your turn .
Thich Nhat Hanh, Call Me By My True Names (Berkeley: Parallax Press, 1999)
https://www.mindfulnessbell.org/archive/2015/12/poem-defuse-me
it can't get any clearer than this. from Mollie Tibbets Father,...
Don't Distort Her Death To Advance Racist Views
Rob Tibbetts, Guest columnist
Published 3:37 p.m. CT Sept. 1, 2018
Ten days ago, we learned that Mollie would not be coming home. Shattered, my family set out to celebrate Mollie’s extraordinary life and chose to share our sorrow in private.
At the outset, politicians and pundits used Mollie’s death to promote various political agendas. We appealed to them and they graciously stopped. For that, we are grateful.
Sadly, others have ignored our request.
They have instead chosen to callously distort and corrupt Mollie’s tragic death to advance a cause she vehemently opposed. I encourage the debate on immigration; there is great merit in its reasonable outcome. But do not appropriate Mollie’s soul in advancing views she believed were profoundly racist. The act grievously extends the crime that stole Mollie from our family and is, to quote Donald Trump Jr., “heartless" and "despicable.”
Make no mistake, Mollie was my daughter and my best friend. At her eulogy, I said Mollie was nobody’s victim. Nor is she a pawn in others’ debate. She may not be able to speak for herself, but I can and will. Please leave us out of your debate. Allow us to grieve in privacy and with dignity. At long last, show some decency. On behalf of my family and Mollie’s memory, I’m imploring you to stop.
Throughout this ordeal I’ve asked myself, “What would Mollie do?” As I write this, I am watching Sen. John McCain lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda and know that evil will succeed only if good people do nothing. Both Mollie and Senator McCain were good people. I know that both would stand up now and do something.
The person who is accused of taking Mollie’s life is no more a reflection of the Hispanic community as white supremacists are of all white people. To suggest otherwise is a lie. Justice in my America is blind. This person will receive a fair trial, as it should be. If convicted, he will face the consequences society has set. Beyond that, he deserves no more attention.
To the Hispanic community, my family stands with you and offers its heartfelt apology. That you’ve been beset by the circumstances of Mollie’s death is wrong. We treasure the contribution you bring to the American tapestry in all its color and melody. And yes, we love your food.
My stepdaughter, whom Mollie loved so dearly, is Latina. Her sons — Mollie’s cherished nephews and my grandchildren — are Latino. That means I am Hispanic. I am African. I am Asian. I am European. My blood runs from every corner of the Earth because I am American. As an American, I have one tenet: to respect every citizen of the world and actively engage in the ongoing pursuit to form a more perfect union.
Given that, to knowingly foment discord among races is a disgrace to our flag.It incites fear in innocent communities and lends legitimacy to the darkest, most hate-filled corners of the American soul. It is the opposite of leadership. It is the opposite of humanity. It is heartless. It is despicable. It is shameful.
We have the opportunity now to take heed of the lessons that Mollie, John McCain and Aretha Franklin taught — humanity, fairness and courage. For most of the summer, the search for Mollie brought this nation together like no other pursuit. There was a common national will that did transcend opinion, race, gender and geography. Let’s not lose sight of that miracle. Let’s not lose sight of Mollie.
Instead, let’s turn against racism in all its ugly manifestations both subtle and overt. Let’s turn toward each other with all the compassion we gave Mollie. Let’s listen, not shout. Let’s build bridges, not walls. Let’s celebrate our diversity rather than argue over our differences. I can tell you, when you’ve lost your best friend, differences are petty and meaningless.
My family remains eternally grateful to all those who adopted Mollie so completely and showered us with so much care, compassion and generosity. Please accept our desire to remain private as we share our loss. We love Mollie with all our hearts and miss her terribly. We need time.
Mollie Tibbetts' father Rob Tibbetts talks about the search for the missing 20-year-old University of Iowa student during an interview Thursday, Aug. 2, 2018, in Grinnell, Iowa.
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/2018/09/01/mollie-tibbetts-father-common-decency-immigration-heartless-despicable-donald-trump-jr-column/1163131002/
i for one am sooooo sick and tired of most our elected in congress and the senate be made something they really are not.
in each persons heart of heart these individuals in the congress and senate might be good people at their core. maybe if they hadn't of gotten caught in this game of politics maybe they would actually be decent human beings. but,...
these people choose to function their life in politics. they choose to get caught in the machine of manipulation and deals.
observe the country and it's condition. we are where we are at for a few reasons,..1- we voted these individuals in office believing their rhetoric, 2 - they knew in full understanding that they were becoming part of organized crime.
yep,...this government and its elected individuals are all criminals. but, i am also the criminal. we all are.
why would i say that??? look at where we are as a country,...this is the product of our elected. garbage in, garbage out. they've actually created an environment of separation between the citizens of this country. what is good about that ? what will that produce ? it allows them to continue their dastardly deeds keeping our attention tied up from the important stuff.
that is each individuals fault. we are allowing ourselves to be taken in by the rhetoric and manipulation. that is on us.
it's time as a citizen of this country that all of shake the cobwebs off and remove every single one of those in congress and the senate and start anew. yes, it will take tremendous efforts.
but what is our choice ?
stay bound by the condition these elected individuals have produced or remove them !
for me what prompted this was the McCain death and funeral. the immaturity displayed could not be hidden. in fact the caustic environment created at the funeral was beyond my comprehension. i thought it pathetic that the focus to exclude certain people took more center stage and was reported on equal to the televised coverage. what sense did it make to slam particular individuals when the focus was supposed to be on the love for another human being. why insert anything other than love ? why ?
i only can sense that if i conducted my self in that manner i'd have to call my self an angry, imbalanced human being at that time...i don't have the psychological tool to counter my misplaced anger. until i wake up from my self imposed somnolism i can only remain in denial of who i really am.
it might be cliche' but, as the saying goes, "When you point your hand and finger at someone, three more fingers on your hand are pointing back at you." meaning we all need look at ourselves first and condemn ourself before we place the blame where it might not be warranted.
it's time we ALL wised up and begin to comprehend we have been puppets for this type of government. and if we don't do something soon this entire country is going down. further than it already has.
until we all realize that the terrorist, the white-supremacists, the immigrant, the illegal, the elite 1%, the manipulators of truth,...until we realize that each of these traits are in all of us. yes, we all are these things. and we are at odds because we haven't worked on ourselves and inaccurately think if we eradicate the outside foe the inner foe will calm down. it doesn't work that way. a great teacher once stated, "Those without sin, throw the first stone." what do we do?,...we throw the stone and wonder why another stone is coming back at us.
maybe because that individual is as immature and un-evolved as we are. we might think we are a mature and evolved but the answer is clearly seen simply viewing our actions. unfortunately we continue to delude ourselves to feel we are on the winning team. that thought on its own just created a larger separation between individuals.
all of us who point the finger have no idea that the problem is actually arising in us and we don't possess any other tool to fight it except to lash out into the outside world. it's our work to clean our act up. and if anyone thinks they don't need to do that work then they are in an even deeper hole than thought.
do i sense that there is beauty and wonder in this country ? yes !
but if we all practice and only focus on the negative then we miss the positive. thought follows energy and where we place out energy,...we become that.
it's all of ours move,...see the truth.
but what is that ?,..truth ? it appears to be something that we all cannot agree on. i'm fine with that. we don't have to agree. but,...
we do need to respect that other point of view and not kill it. the other point of view, either misguided or not in our personal point of view, has a right to be here and express itself. every point of view has it's right to expression. it can only grow in negativity or positivity if we add to the mix.
it's time we ceased fighting over immature and childish concerns.
we are being manipulated.
would now be a good time to wake up ?
sortagreen,...if you want to view a movie that defines how billionaires think and act,...
take a view of "All The Money In The World". based on true events.
Christopher Plummer is magnificent and but Michelle Williams shines.
the trailer does'nt really do the movie justice. there is much more depth and character development.
the storyline is about JP Getty,...what a piece of crap this guy was in his personal life.
thanks. 8^)
they sorta have a "like" button. take a look on this post. on the right side under the date is a little gray box. that is iHub's like button.
when it's pressed it collects the amount of like that particular post has and then display that, IF the post has collected several likes, and posts that in the iHub front page.
it will take you through a few steps that takes a bit of patience.
hope that assists.
Y/W. I just like to have as many perspectives I can to make informed decisions.
there are always 'other sides of the story'. regarding McCain,...
i was wondering why would those that were around McCain have an almost opposite perspective of his actions (or nonactions) regarding POW's and Vietnam ?
why, in McCains book he would mention that he was "amazed" of how he handled himself while in captivity and addressed concern if "his father" ever knew of his weakness ?
strange questions to ask if one was supposed to be a "hero".
in full disclosure, ...i never bought McCains stories. my gut told me he was an ego manic and not a truth teller and in fact was covering things. turns out others had a similar perspective and actual different stories
to follow through on McCain and another side of the story,...
John McCain and the POW Cover-Up
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE
Sydney Schanberg
May 25, 2010
Eighteen months ago, TAC publisher Ron Unz discovered an astonishing account of the role the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, had played in suppressing information about what happened to American soldiers missing in action in Vietnam. Below, we present in full Sydney Schanberg’s explosive story.
http://www.unz.com/article/mccain-and-the-pow-cover-up/
excellent post sortagreen. the 14 words,...this kind of mandate can only be portrayed by christians (fundamentalists) as respectable and decent.
everyone else (intelligent individuals) hears the hate and fear that created this type of protectionism.
in the meantime, you'd think these individuals would read their holy book which states;
“I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”.
where does this type of speech (the 14 words) derive from ?
it's easy to plainly see this is from individual(s) that are filled with fear and insecurity and attempting to interpret their holy book words into something that is not even there.
"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children"
where in this sentence is the presence of any "love for their fellow man"? there is not. just plain out hateful vitriol.
those 14 words are actually a display of their ignorance. they are their own evil that they are projecting onto others not claiming their spiritual responsibility to see clearly. the ego mind is in total control when an individual makes a statement like those 14 words.
full blown wetiko !!!
great example DaleC ! yep,...the darkness hides in the light.
no god fearing individual dare think it was there in plain sight...which is why most religions are blinded by their own beliefs.
WOW ! Donahue is not only a pedophile himself but a liar, with delusional tendencies...laced with a huge streak of consciously denying reality.
do the catholic parishioners actually believe this shit ?
this is the only accurate statement, partially;
Given all the places he’s pointing his finger, you’d think he’d eventually end up pointing in the right direction.
himself. but he just offers up more immature and irresponsible explanations.
wow,..just wow. the stupidity and ignorance has more to go i guess.
i'll know some sanity has come along when Donahue, and his likes, are taken down by a proper authority.
In this case, he was under the spell of the devil.
This time, he’s blaming Satan for making the pedophile priests do all those horrible things.
At some point, he’ll get around to blaming the kids for seducing the priests, or feminists for making the priests feel inadequate, or Democrats for not doing enough to protect victims of abuse in all circumstances…
Paul Manafort associate pleads guilty, agrees to cooperate with Mueller investigation
Bart Jansen,
USA TODAY
Aug 31, 2018
(CBS confirms this new info,..link below this article ~ nlightn)
A Washington consultant, who was a business associate of Paul Manafort, pleaded guilty Friday to failing to register as a lobbyist working on behalf of a Ukraine political party and agreed to cooperate with authorities, according to federal court records.
W. Samuel Patten, 47, was charged with one count of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act for failing to register with the Justice Department, according to the four-page charging document from Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo.
Patten was a business associate of Konstantin Kilimnik, who has ties to Russian intelligence. Kilimnik worked closely with Manafort and is a co-defendant in the pending case that accuses them both of witness tampering.
Patten pleaded guilty before U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who will also be hearing a case against Manafort starting Sept. 24 involving charges of money laundering and failing to file as a foreign agent.
Manafort, President Donald Trump's former campaign chairman, was convicted Aug. 21 of eight counts of tax and bank fraud in a separate trial in Virginia.
A federal jury has found the former Trump campaign manager guilty on five counts of submitting false tax returns, one count of failing to report foreign bank and financial accounts, and two counts of bank fraud. USA TODAY
Patten surrendered his passport and was released on his own recognizance pending sentencing. He faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, referred Patten's case to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.
Under the 10-page plea agreement requiring cooperation with the government, Patten no longer faces potential charges for making false statements or obstructing the Senate Intelligence Committee, or for causing foreign money to contribute to Trump's 2016-2017 inauguration committee.
But Patten must cooperate fully, truthfully and completely with Mueller's office and other law enforcement authorities, including testifying in court, under the agreement.
Patten represented the Opposition Bloc, a Ukrainian political party and its members, including a prominent oligarch, according to court records. For his work, the company that Patten created with a Russian national who isn’t named in the documents received more than $1 million through an offshore Cypriot account.
The work involved setting up meetings in January 2015 with officials in the executive branch and members of Congress, to influence U.S. policy. Patten and his partner drafted periodic op-ed articles for U.S. press, including in January and February 2017.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/08/31/paul-manafort-associate-pleads-guilty-help-mueller-investigation/1159475002/
AND
Manafort-linked lobbyist W. Samuel Patten admits using straw donor to buy Trump inaugural tickets for Russian, Ukrainian
The operative pleaded guilty in court Friday and has agreed to cooperate
with special counsel Robert Mueller.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/lobbyist-charged-failing-register-foreign-agent-manafort-linked-case-n905386
my two cents,...occum's razor. Don/Con's lieing doesn't bother her because,....she is a liar also.
so she not offended because if she was,...she'd be offended by her own self.
and narcissists can't afford to not admire themselves.
occum's razor is the problem-solving principle that the simplest solution tends to be the right one.
THE LIST OF PRODUCTS AND FOODS THAT HAVE TESTED POSITIVE FOR MONSANTO’S CARCINOGENIC GLYPHOSATE
written by Alex Pietrowski
August 31, 2018
Monsanto is receiving considerable global backlash after the agrochemical and seed giant was found guilty of malice and of covering the fact that their flagship product can cause cancer.
At issue is glyphosate, the active chemical ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup and Ranger herbicides. For years, evidence has been mounting that glyphosate is carcinogenic, which is quite alarming considering that it is the most widely used (and overused) agricultural chemical ever.
“Americans have applied 1.8 million tons of glyphosate since its introduction in 1974. Worldwide, 9.4 million tons of the chemical have been sprayed onto fields. For comparison, that’s equivalent to the weight of water in more than 2,300 Olympic-size swimming pools. It’s also enough to spray nearly half a pound of Roundup on every cultivated acre of land in the world.” ~Newsweek
Glyphosate is so prevalent in our environment that trace amounts of it is now found in a wide variety of consumer products, including foods and personal hygiene products, in the human body, and in water supplies.
To some scientists and related officials, none of these products individually contain high enough levels of glyphosate to pose a health risk, however, others argue that consuming trace amounts leads to dangerous accumulations within the body, as it is known to bio-accumulate in major organs and bones.
The, “EPA’s high-end estimate of infant exposure to glyphosate exceeds the level the Agency considered safe for them in 1983.” [Newseweek]
The following list of products that have tested positive for glyphosate is quite unsettling, and the retailers who sell these products would do well for themselves to take the lead in calling for an outright ban on glyphosate.
Products and Foods Which Have Tested Positive for Glyphosate Contamination
(embedded links in full article accompanied with the LIST of foods with GLYPHOSATE CONTAMINATION)
https://www.awarenessjunkie.com/the-list-of-products-and-foods-that-have-tested-positive-for-monsantos-carcinogenic-glyphosate/
glad you found value Peg ! 8^)
great read,...
FACTFULNESS - The Reasons We're Wrong About the World - and Why Things Are Better Than You Think
by Hans Rosling
=============
FACTFULNESS: The stress-reducing habit of only carrying opinions for which you have strong supporting facts.
When asked simple questions about global trends—what percentage of the world’s population live in poverty; why the world’s population is increasing; how many girls finish school—we systematically get the answers wrong. So wrong that a chimpanzee choosing answers at random will consistently outguess teachers, journalists, Nobel laureates, and investment bankers.
In Factfulness, Professor of International Health and global TED phenomenon Hans Rosling, together with his two long-time collaborators, Anna and Ola, offers a radical new explanation of why this happens. They reveal the ten instincts that distort our perspective—from our tendency to divide the world into two camps (usually some version of us and them) to the way we consume media (where fear rules) to how we perceive progress (believing that most things are getting worse).
Our problem is that we don’t know what we don’t know, and even our guesses are informed by unconscious and predictable biases.
It turns out that the world, for all its imperfections, is in a much better state than we might think. That doesn’t mean there aren’t real concerns. But when we worry about everything all the time instead of embracing a worldview based on facts, we can lose our ability to focus on the things that threaten us most.
Inspiring and revelatory, filled with lively anecdotes and moving stories, Factfulness is an urgent and essential book that will change the way you see the world and empower you to respond to the crises and opportunities of the future.
“This book is my last battle in my life-long mission to fight devastating ignorance…Previously I armed myself with huge data sets, eye-opening software, an energetic learning style and a Swedish bayonet for sword-swallowing. It wasn’t enough. But I hope this book will be.”
— Hans Rosling, February 2017. (less)
Debt-Free United States Notes Were Once Issued Under JFK And The U.S. Government Still Has The Power To Issue Debt-Free Money
Most Americans have no idea that the U.S. government once issued debt-free money directly into circulation. America once thrived under a debt-free monetary system, and we can do it again. The truth is that the United States is a sovereign nation and it does not need to borrow money from anyone. Back in the days of JFK, Federal Reserve Notes were not the only currency in circulation.
Under JFK (at at various other times), a limited number of debt-free United States Notes were issued by the U.S. Treasury and spent by the U.S. government without any new debt being created. In fact, each bill said “United States Note” right at the top. Unfortunately, United States Notes are not being issued today. If you stop right now and pull a dollar out of your wallet, what does it say right at the top? It says “Federal Reserve Note”. Normally, the way our current system works is that whenever more Federal Reserve Notes are created more debt is also created. This debt-based monetary system is systematically destroying the wealth of this nation.
But it does not have to be this way. The truth is that the U.S. government still has the power under the U.S. Constitution to issue debt-free money, and we need to educate the American people about this.
Posted below are pictures of the front and the back of a United States Note printed in 1963 while JFK was president….
FRONT
BACK
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/United-States-Note-JFK-1963-Back.jpg
Notice that there is a red seal instead of a green seal on the front, and it says “United States Note” rather than “Federal Reserve Note”.
According to Wikipedia, United States Notes were issued directly into circulation by the U.S. Treasury and they were first used during the Civil War….
They were originally issued directly into circulation by the U.S. Treasury to pay expenses incurred by the Union during the American Civil War. Over the next century, the legislation governing these notes was modified many times and numerous versions have been issued by the Treasury.
So why are we using debt-based Federal Reserve Notes today instead of debt-free United States Notes?
It seems rather stupid, doesn’t it?
Well, that is what Thomas Edison thought too.
Thomas Edison was once quoted in the New York Times as saying the following….
That is to say, under the old way any time we wish to add to the national wealth we are compelled to add to the national debt.
Now, that is what Henry Ford wants to prevent. He thinks it is stupid, and so do I, that for the loan of $30,000,000 of their own money the people of the United States should be compelled to pay $66,000,000 — that is what it amounts to, with interest. People who will not turn a shovelful of dirt nor contribute a pound of material will collect more money from the United States than will the people who supply the material and do the work. That is the terrible thing about interest. In all our great bond issues the interest is always greater than the principal. All of the great public works cost more than twice the actual cost, on that account. Under the present system of doing business we simply add 120 to 150 per cent, to the stated cost.
But here is the point: If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good.
Our current debt-based monetary system was devised by greedy bankers that wanted to make huge profits by creating money out of thin air and lending it to the U.S. government at interest.
Sadly, the vast majority of the American people have no idea how money is actually created in this nation.
In a previous article about money and debt, I explained how more government debt is created whenever the U.S. government puts more money into circulation….
When the government wants more money, the U.S. government swaps U.S. Treasury bonds for “Federal Reserve notes”, thus creating more government debt. Usually the money isn’t even printed up – most of the time it is just electronically credited to the government. The Federal Reserve creates these “Federal Reserve notes” out of thin air. These Federal Reserve notes are backed by nothing and have no intrinsic value of their own.
When each new Federal Reserve Note is created, the interest owed by the federal government on that new Federal Reserve Note is not also created at the same time.
So the amount of government debt that is created actually exceeds the amount of money that is created.
Isn’t that a stupid system?
The U.S. Constitution says that the federal government is the one that should actually be issuing our money.
In particular, according to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, it is the U.S. Congress that has been given the responsibility to “coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures”.
So why is a private central banking cartel issuing our money?
As is the case with so many other issues, we desperately need to get back to the way the U.S. Constitution says that we should be doing things.
The debt-based Federal Reserve system is literally stealing the future from our children and our grandchildren.
Back in 1910, a couple years prior to the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, the national debt was only about $2.6 billion.
A little over 100 years later, our national debt is now more than 5000 times larger.
So why don’t we just admit that this system simply does not work?
Our current debt-based monetary system also requires very high personal income taxes to pay for it.
In fact, it is no accident that the personal income tax was introduced at about the same time that the Federal Reserve system originally came into existence.
Our children, our grandchildren and many generations after that are facing a lifetime of debt slavery because of us.
As I have written about previously, if the federal government began right at this moment to repay the U.S. national debt at a rate of one dollar per second, it would take over 440,000 years to pay off the national debt.
Neither the Republicans or the Democrats are proposing any solutions to this problem. Rather, both parties are only trying to slow down the rate at which we are going into even more debt.
But the truth is that the federal government does not have to go into a single penny of additional debt.
How could this be?
It is not too complicated.
If Congress took back the power over our currency and started issuing debt-free money a lot of our problems could be fixed.
A basic plan would look something like this….
#1) The U.S. Congress votes to take back all of the functions that it has delegated to the Federal Reserve and begins to issue debt-free United States Notes. These United States Notes would have the exact same value as existing Federal Reserve Notes, and over time all existing Federal Reserve Notes would be taken out of circulation.
#2) The U.S. Congress nationalizes all debt held by the Federal Reserve. That would instantly reduce the national debt by 1.6 trillion dollars. In fact, there are a few members of Congress that have already proposed this.
#3) A Constitutional amendment is passed limiting future U.S. government deficits to a reasonable percentage of GDP. Any future deficits would not be funded by borrowing. Rather, future deficits would be funded by newly created United States Notes. Therefore, the federal government would never again accumulate another penny of debt.
And it would be important to inject new money into the economy from time to time. When existing money is destroyed or when the population grows it is important to inject a certain amount of new money into the system in order to avoid deflation.
#4) The existing national debt would be very slowly paid off with newly created United States Notes. The U.S. government spent over 454 billion dollars on interest on the national debt during fiscal year 2011, and over time this expense would go to zero.
If the national debt is paid off slowly enough, it would not create too much inflation. I believe that it could be paid off gradually over 50 years without shocking the economy too much.
There are some that would object to any measure that would ever cause a small amount of inflation, but my contention is that we have created a $15 trillion dollar debt mess for future generations, and it would be absolutely criminal to pass that legacy on to them.
We created this mess, and it is our responsibility to clean it up.
While there is certainly a danger that we would have a limited amount of inflation under a debt-free monetary system such as the one described above, the reality is that we are absolutely guaranteed inflation under the Federal Reserve system.
Most Americans believe that inflation is a fact of life, but the sad truth is that the United States has only had a major, ongoing problem with inflation since the Federal Reserve was created back in 1913.
Sadly, the U.S. dollar has lost well over 95 percent of its value since the Federal Reserve was created.
So, yes, there would be a need for strict monetary discipline under a debt-free monetary system, but it would be hard to do worse than the Federal Reserve has already been doing.
And Congress could always slow down inflation using other methods. For example, raising the reserve requirements for banks (which should be done anyway) would help keep inflation in check.
If the above proposals were adopted, the end result would be something that we could all live with. The Federal Reserve system would be abolished, the national debt burden on future generations would be wiped out, the economy would not have to go through a devastating economic collapse that could last a decade or longer, and we could eventually make a fairly smooth transition to “hard money” if we wanted to after the national debt is gone.
Is there any other proposal out there that does all of those things?
There are many out there that would dispute some of the points above, and debate is good. By engaging in debate, we can hopefully help educate the American people about the nature of money.
The key is to get rid of our current debt-based Federal Reserve Notes and replace them with debt-free United States Notes.
The American people need to understand that it is a lie that the U.S. government “must” borrow money from somebody else.
When the U.S. government borrows money, it slowly transfers wealth from the American people to those that lent it.
At this point, we have created a financial nightmare for future generations that is unlike anything the world has ever seen before. We owe it to future generations to eliminate the debt problem without destroying the United States economy. Adopting debt-free money would allow us to do that.
But sadly, neither political party is even talking about debt-free money. In fact, most of the politicians in both political parties probably do not even know what debt-free money is.
So we need to get the American people educated about these things. Because if we stay on the course that we are currently on, an economic collapse is inevitable.
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/debt-free-united-states-notes-were-once-issued-under-jfk-and-the-u-s-government-still-has-the-power-to-issue-debt-free-money
"I do the best bribes! Everyone says so!"
Poll: 60 percent disapprove of Trump, while clear majorities back Mueller and Sessions
msn.com
Aug 31,2018
President Trump’s disapproval rating has hit a high point of 60 percent, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll that also finds that clear majorities of Americans support the special counsel’s Russia investigation and say the president should not fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
At the dawn of the fall campaign sprint to the midterm elections, which will determine whether Democrats retake control of Congress, the poll finds a majority of the public has turned against Trump and is on guard against his efforts to influence the Justice Department and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s wide-ranging probe.
Nearly half of Americans, 49 percent, say Congress should begin impeachment proceedings that could lead to Trump being removed from office, while 46 percent say Congress should not.
And a narrow majority — 53 percent — say they think Trump has tried to interfere with Mueller’s investigation in a way that amounts to obstruction of justice; 35 percent say they do not think the president has tried to interfere.
Overall, 60 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump’s job performance, with 36 percent approving, according to the poll. This is only a slight shift from the last Post-ABC survey, in April, which measured Trump’s rating at 56 percent disapproval and 40 percent approval.
The new poll was conducted Aug. 26 to 29, in the week after former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort was convicted of federal tax and bank fraud and after former Trump attorney Michael Cohen pleaded guilty and implicated the president in illegal payments to silence women who alleged sexual encounters with Trump.
The four-month gap between Post-ABC polls makes it difficult to attribute the modest uptick in disapproval of Trump to specific events. Other public polls have shown Trump’s disapproval rating in the low- to mid-50s and have not tracked a rise since the Manafort conviction and Cohen guilty plea.
Trump has tried to rally support for Republican candidates in the Nov. 6 elections by pointing to his economic record. This week’s poll finds that despite the president’s unpopularity with voters, he gets better ratings when it comes to the economy: 45 percent of Americans approve and 47 percent disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy.
Trump’s overall popularity breaks down along lines of partisanship, ethnicity and gender, according to the poll. While 78 percent of Republicans approve of his performance, 93 percent of Democrats and 59 percent of independents disapprove. More men support him than women, and while 45 percent of whites back him, 19 percent of nonwhites approve.
The poll finds that there are clear limitations to Trump’s efforts all summer to politicize and discredit the Russia investigation. The president has fired a near-daily barrage of tweets labeling the probe a “witch hunt” and attacking the credibility of Mueller and several current and former Justice Department officials.
But 63 percent of Americans support Mueller’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, with 52 percent saying they support it strongly; 29 percent oppose the probe.
Opinions on Mueller’s work also break down on partisan lines, with 61 percent of Republicans opposing the probe but an even larger 85 percent of Democrats expressing support. Among independents, however, a two-thirds majority of 67 percent back the investigation.
Trump has complained that Manafort was treated unfairly by Mueller’s prosecutors, and after a jury convicted Manafort earlier this month the president tweeted that he felt “very badly” for him.
But 67 percent of Americans think Mueller’s case against Manafort was justified, while 17 percent say it was unjustified, according to the poll.
Trump’s praise of Manafort has stirred speculation that he might pardon his former campaign chairman, but the poll finds that it would be a political land mine for the president. Two-thirds of Americans oppose Trump pardoning Manafort — 53 percent strongly oppose it — and 18 percent support a pardon.
Trump has ratcheted up his public attacks on Sessions in recent weeks and has consulted his personal attorneys and other advisers about firing the attorney general, whom he has viewed as insufficiently loyal after Sessions recused himself last year from overseeing the Russia investigation because of a conflict of interest.
But the public is squarely behind Sessions. Sixty-four percent of Americans do not think Trump should fire Sessions, with 19 percent saying he should and 17 percent saying they have no opinion. Nearly half of Republicans, 47 percent, say Trump should not fire the attorney general, with 31 percent saying he should.
Just under a quarter of Americans, 23 percent, say they agree with Trump’s criticisms of Sessions for allowing the Mueller investigation to proceed, while 62 percent say they side with Sessions, who has said he is following the law.
Two-thirds of Americans say they had read or heard at least some of the news about Cohen’s guilty plea to eight violations of banking, tax and campaign finance laws, though less than a quarter heard “a great deal” about the news.
Cohen told a federal judge last week that before the 2016 campaign, then-candidate Trump directed him to pay off two women to keep their stories of alleged affairs with Trump from becoming public.
The poll finds that 61 percent of Americans think that Trump committed a crime if he did direct Cohen to make the payments, while 31 percent say he did not commit a crime.
Democrats are hoping to retake control of one or both houses of Congress in November’s elections. If they do, party leaders will face pressure from their energized base to use congressional oversight committees to investigate potential misconduct by the president and his administration, as well as perhaps begin impeachment proceedings.
The survey finds a clear partisan divide on the issue. While 75 percent of Democrats say Congress should beginimpeachment hearings, 82 percent of Republicans say lawmakers should not. Among independents, 49 percent support impeachmentwhile 46 percent oppose it.
The Post-ABC poll was conducted among a random national sample of 1,003 adults reached on conventional and cellphones; the margin of sampling error for overall results is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
philip.rucker@washpost.com
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/poll-60-percent-disapprove-of-trump-while-clear-majorities-back-mueller-and-sessions/ar-BBMGZQx?ocid=spartandhp
continuing your post,...Joe Biden gives emotional tribute to John McCain
Former Vice President Joe Biden before Sen. John McCain's casket. Photo: Matt York-Pool/Getty Images
Former Vice President Joe Biden gave an emotional tribute to Sen. John McCain at his service in North Phoenix Baptist Church on Thursday, referring to him as a "gentle giant" who fought for civility in politics, even when certain sides disagreed.
Key quote: Biden emphasized that, for McCain, politics were not most important — it was the underlying values that mattered. He "could not stand the abuse of power wherever he saw it, in whatever form, in whatever country,” Biden said.
An anecdote from Biden:
"[McCain would] come over on the Democratic side and we'd sit…It was in '96 and we were about to adjourn for what we call the [Senate lunch] caucuses...and we both went into our caucus and coincidentally we were approached by our caucus leaders..." Biden said.
"'Joe it doesn’t look good you sitting next to John all the time," Biden recalled being told. "Same thing was said to John."
"That’s when things began to change for worse in America in the Senate...It was always appropriate to challenge another senator’s judgement…never appropriate to challenge their motive. When you challenge their motive...it's impossible to reach consensus. It began to go downhill from there..."
The last day John [was] on the Senate floor, what was he fighting to do? He was fighting to restore what we call regular order. To start to treat one another again like we used to."
— Joe Biden
Cindy McCain, with son, Jack, arriving for the memorial service. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
"I think it’s something more intangible...I think it’s because they knew John believed so deeply and impassionately in the soul of America that he made it easier for them to have confidence and faith in America."
Meghan McCain and her husband walk to the funeral. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
"He didn’t believe that America's fate rested on heroes…Heroes didn’t run this country, ordinary people given half a chance are capable of doing extraordinary things."
Former Vice President Joe Biden. Photo: Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images
"John was a hero. His character, courage, honor, and integrity. His optimism. That’s what made John special. It made John a giant among all of us."
Former Vice President Joe Biden wipes tears away at Sen. John McCain's funeral service in Arizona. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
"His belief — and it was deep — that Americans can do anything, withstand anything, achieve anything, was both unflagging and utterly reassuring."
https://www.axios.com/john-mccain-joe-biden-funeral-speech-e0258d28-4b2a-4f95-babc-4851dbb19192.html
Corporate profits aren't as great as you think (and might not last)
axios.com
Aug 31, 2018
Data:
Companies had a stellar second quarter: profits rose more than 16 percent from last year, according to the Commerce Department. That's great news, right?
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=l1F8
Reality check:
Look at corporate profits as a share of the economy. That figure is nowhere near its 2012 high point. In fact, the number has not changed that drastically in the last few years.
What's next:
The rosy earnings season helped propel stocks to record highs, but some market watchers think the good times won't last. "I really think the big story 6 to 9 months from now is going to be the colossal decline in earnings growth," said Jim Paulsen, chief investment strategist at The Leuthold Group, a research firm.
Here are a few factors that might derail the corporate boom:
- Waning tax cut benefit: Tax cuts automatically boost earnings, but it's much harder for them to boost earnings growth.
- Rising rates: Consumer spending sent inflation to a six-year high, which makes more of a case for the Federal Reserve to continue its plan to raise interest rates. The luxurious years of low corporate borrowing costs might be coming to an end.
- Tariffs: Fears of an escalation of the trade war were a common theme this quarter. Jack Daniels maker Brown-Forman trimmed its earnings forecast for the year, thanks to the trade war. Retailers, too, are monitoring the situation closely.
https://www.axios.com/corporate-profits-not-so-great-9d1d13de-36ff-492a-a8d8-5fc0a407b39f.html