YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

There's a myriad of ways to misuse and abuse medical information, including all of the identifiers that go with it. Many of those abuses have nothing to do with medical treatment at all, rather abuse and control over people. Things like this should be considered to be the beginning of dossiers, like those established and kept by socialist and communist governments. After all, disagreement with the state means that you're an enemy of the state, and they must have a quick way to identify you and REACH OUT AND TOUCH YOU. In this case, we would be talking about information databases on all people, not just CRIMINALS. The potential and ways for ABUSE are mind-boggling.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS SIMPLE:  THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN A FREE COUNTRY! WAKE UP! - This is NOT for MEDICAL USE!

[Soldier4Christ]

The Eagle is no longer flying free it is being oven roasted to a fine over done status.

[nChrist]

STIMULUS PACKAGE IDEAS

Has anyone seen or heard of some of the ridiculous things in this so-called STIMULUS PACKAGE of almost 900 BILLION DOLLARS.

Maybe it's time for us to all submit additional ideas that cost much less money. As an example, I just want 10 million dollars to study marbles. I'm retired and it will put ONE PERSON TO WORK - ME. This is much less money than the majority of the other BOONDOGGLES.

LET'S GET REAL - This is CRIMINAL AND CORRUPTION! We all eventually have to pay these bills, and so will our kids and grandkids if the country DOESN'T CEASE TO EXIST! OUR SO-CALLED REPRESENTATIVES COULD EACH HIRE EXPENSIVE COMEDY WRITERS AND AT LEAST GIVE US A FEW LAUGHS WITH THEIR SO-CALLED ANSWERS TO ALL OF THE PROBLEMS! What we really need to do is start putting some representatives in PRISON and RECALLING others. Our CLOWNS IN WASHINGTON are actually going to pass THIS MASSIVE PORK WASTE!

By the way, I'll be happy to study marbles for 10 million, and I promise that I won't ask for a private jet. AND, my project would be MUCH MORE WORTHY than the money being spent for NON-EXISTENT GLOBAL WARMING. I forgot to tell you that studying marbles is an emergency. If we don't start studying them RIGHT NOW, the cost will skyrocket by at least 10 times in the next 6 months. I can only guarantee the low price of 10 million for the next 30 days. In case you're wondering, I WON'T tell you how the money was spent, but you can't expect much for just 10 million. If they don't pass this massive spending bill on the first vote, I'll have time to submit my other idea:  WORM-FARMING for only 500 MILLION!

[Soldier4Christ]

Actually studying marbles might be a worthwhile project if they are the ones that our politicians have lost.

[Soldier4Christ]

For those that haven't seen some of the things that comprise this stimulus spending bill here is a note from AFA with a link to a pdf that discloses even more:


The U.S. House of Representatives just passed The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R. 1). This bill, which eventually will cost one trillion dollars, will increase the amount of taxes owed by every person in America by $3,333.

But you don't need to worry because you will never have to pay it. Neither will your children. It will be your grandchildren and their children who will pay this tax. It is utterly immoral to force our great-grandchilden to pay off our debt.

Add this amount to the $35,000 which every individual already owes, and that increases each individual's debt to $38,000.

H.R. 1 is the largest pork barrel spending bill in the history of our country. President Obama has said this bill will create four million new jobs. President Obama is under the impression that we can spend our way out of debt! That's like thinking an alcoholic can drink his way to sobriety!

Examples:

    * $20 million "for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers." (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: "20,000,000 for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers)
       
    * $400 million for STD prevention (Pg. 60 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: "CDC estimates that a proximately 19 million new STD infections occur annually in the United States ...The Committee has included $400,000,000 for testing and prevention of these conditions.")
       
    * $25 million to rehabilitate off-roading (ATV) trails (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: "$25,000,000 is for recreation maintenance, especially for rehabilitation of off-road vehicle routes, and $20,000,000 is for trail maintenance and restoration")
       
    * $34 million to remodel the Department of Commerce HQ (Pg. 15 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: $34,000,000 for the Department of Commerce renovation and modernization")
       
    * $70 million to "Support Supercomputing Activities" for climate research (Pgs. 14-15 of Senate Appropriations Committee Report: $70,000,000 is directed to specifically support supercomputing activities, especially as they relate to climate research)
       
    * $150 million for honey bee insurance (Pg. 102 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: "The Secretary shall use up to $ 50,000,000 per year, and $150,000,000 in the case of 2009, from the Trust Fund to provide emergency relief to eligible producers of livestock, honey bees, and farm-raised fish to aid in the reduction of losses due to disease, adverse weather, or other conditions, such as blizzards and wildfires, as determined by the Secretary")

See some other "job creating" programs this one trillion dollars will support:

http://www.afa.net/pdfs/porkandpayoffs.pdf

[nChrist]

I don't see the JOBS in this mess. Where are the JOBS?

PORK BARREL SPENDING does create some short-term JOBS, but this MESS doesn't create 4 million jobs. Common sense should tell you this MESS will only create a TINY PERCENTAGE of the JOBS promised, and they will be short-term.

Let's get real - what is this GIANT MESS?  DREAM PORK AND WASTE!

[Soldier4Christ]

This was public knowledge years ago. Our government is just now waking up to the truth.

__________

Congress warned: 'Beware of CAIR'
Takes cue after FBI cuts off Muslim group for terror ties

Warning: Do not meet with representatives of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a "Dear Colleague" letter sent yesterday to every U.S. House member says.

The three-page letter, a copy of which was obtained by WND, warns legislators to "think twice" about meeting with CAIR officials due to mounting evidence the group is tied to terrorists.

FBI officials have been canceling planned outreach events with CAIR chapters across the country, following a recent directive by FBI headquarters to sever ties with the group.

"The FBI has cut ties with them," the congressional letter says. "There are indications that this group has connections to Hamas," the Palestinian terrorist group.

The letter, signed by five Republicans, including the head of the House Anti-Terrorism/Jihad Caucus, is attached to an article by IPT News, a counter-terrorism news service. It notes that FBI field offices have sent letters to CAIR chapters explaining they can no longer pursue an outreach relationship, because of concerns about the CAIR national office in Washington.

The letter, written under the bold-faced title, "BEWARE OF CAIR," was signed by Reps. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., co-chair of the Anti-Terrorism Caucus; Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich.; Trent Franks, R-Ariz.; Paul Broun, R-Ga.; and John Shadegg, R-Ariz.

CAIR, which claims to be a "moderate" voice for Muslim-Americans, declined comment.

The disengagement policy is a major change for the FBI, which has met regularly with CAIR officials since 9/11, mostly to hear complaints about terrorism investigations in the Muslim community. Bureau officials have even attended CAIR fundraisers.

FBI sources, however, say the new policy has not been uniformly followed since it was put into effect late last summer. They say there is still political resistance to the rule, which has generated complaints from some in the Muslim community.

The policy coincides with the successful prosecution of leaders of a large U.S. Muslim charity who were convicted this fall of funneling more than $12 million to Hamas suicide bombers and their families. CAIR and its co-founder Omar Ahmed were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the case against the Holy Land Foundation.

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, moreover, was caught on tape participating in a meeting with Hamas leaders to mask the payments as charity. He once told a Muslim crowd: "I am in support of the Hamas movement."

During court testimony, FBI agents described CAIR as a front group for violent extremists, casting doubt on CAIR's repeated denials that it supports terrorism.

Meanwhile, former clients of CAIR are suing it for criminal fraud.

In a recently filed class-action lawsuit, several Muslims say CAIR, which describes itself as an advocate for Muslims, fraudulently took thousands of dollars from them in exchange for help in attaining U.S. citizenship.

According to the federal lawsuit filed in Washington, CAIR directed an unlicensed lawyer to handle their immigration cases. The phony lawyer proceeded to steal their money while bungling their cases, the suit charges.

When the victims threatened to talk to the press, the suit also alleges, CAIR's board threatened to sue them and coerced them into signing release agreements.

CAIR said in a statement that while the lawyer was unlicensed, it fired him and did not try to cover up the scandal. It also maintained that it offered to pay restitution to the defrauded Muslim immigrants.

[nChrist]

I would say that nothing surprises me these days, but that wouldn't be the TRUTH. I can't imagine how our representatives have been so ignorant and naive about this and many other subjects. Further, I wondered if they really cared and whether or not they were being paid off by CAIR. As far as I'm concerned, great amounts of information has been available for years that CAIR is a front for financing TERRORISM. Average people can wear themselves out reading this information, and they don't need a security clearance to view classified materials. The point I would make is that our representatives have access to much more information than average people, SO WHAT IS THEIR PROBLEM IN FIGURING THIS OUT? Try to imagine how an organization like CAIR would have been handled 20 to 30 years ago. By the way, this would have been a time BEFORE ULTRA-LIBERAL LUNATICS started taking control over government with their UNLIMITED MONEY TO RUN FOR OFFICE. So, in reality, PUBLIC OFFICES ARE BOUGHT - not earned by the best qualified candidate. The vast majority of the BEST QUALIFIED CANDIDATES don't have the money to play the POLITICS GAME! Obscene amounts of money are spent in buying public offices these days. Things like this lead to many other questions about organizations like CAIR. Who didn't know what CAIR was doing, and how much money was paid for folks to look the other way!

Worse examples involve groups like ACORN that are actually being financed with our tax dollars. CONGRESS STILL APPEARS TO BE DETERMINED TO FUND ACORN and who knows how many other organizations just like them. Their methods are against the law and much like those used in COMMUNIST COUNTRIES. SO, WHAT'S THE REAL PROBLEM WITH OUR SO-CALLED REPRESENTATIVES? Do law-abiding citizens want groups like ACORN to be funded by their tax dollars? NO! This is still a FREE COUNTRY and nothing like RED CHINA - YET!

[Soldier4Christ]

Bill creates detention camps in U.S. for 'emergencies'
Sweeping, undefined purpose raises worries about military police state

Rep. Alcee L. Hastings, D-Fla., has introduced to the House of Representatives a new bill, H.R. 645, calling for the secretary of homeland security to establish no fewer than six national emergency centers for corralling civilians on military installations.

The proposed bill, which has received little mainstream media attention, appears designed to create the type of detention center that those concerned about use of the military in domestic affairs fear could be used as concentration camps for political dissidents, such as occurred in Nazi Germany.

The bill also appears to expand the president's emergency power, much as the executive order signed by President Bush on May 9, 2007, that, as WND reported, gave the president the authority to declare an emergency and take over the direction of all federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments without even consulting Congress.

As WND also reported, DHS has awarded a $385 million contract to Houston-based KBR, Halliburton's former engineering and construction subsidiary, to build temporary detention centers on an "as-needed" basis in national emergency situations.

According to the text of the proposed bill, the purpose of the National Emergency Centers is "to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster."

Three additional purposes are specified in the text of the proposed legislation:

    * To provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of federal, state and local first responders;

    * To provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response and recovery efforts of government, private, not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations;

    * To meet other appropriate needs, as defined by the secretary of homeland security.

The broad specifications of the bill's language, however, contribute to concern that the "national emergency" purpose could be utilized by the secretary of homeland security to include any kind of situation the government wants to contain or otherwise control.

Rep. Hastings created controversy during the 2008 presidential campaign with his provocative comments concerning Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

"If Sarah Palin isn't enough of a reason for you to get over whatever your problem is with Barack Obama, then you damn well had better pay attention," Hastings said, as reported by ABC News. "Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don't care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through."

H.R. 645, which seeks to allocate $360 million for developing the emergency centers, has been referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and to the Committee on Armed Services.

[Soldier4Christ]

States consider mileage tax

Imagine being taxed for every mile you drive.

The idea could be a few years away for drivers in Oregon, where a task force is looking at having global positioning devices installed in every new vehicle across the state for that purpose. Meanwhile, other states are beginning to debate the benefits of such a plan — at a time when many drivers are using less gas.

Revenue from gasoline taxes — the traditional way to pay for transportation projects — is drying up nationwide. The shortfall has left many states looking for other options, from increasing taxes to alternatives such as Oregon's proposal.

"We've got to get people to realize that we're still using roads as much or more than we ever have, but with these wonderful high-mileage vehicles, they're not producing the revenue," said Shelley Snow, spokeswoman for the Oregon Department of Transportation.


A mileage tax isn't yet under consideration in Missouri or Illinois, but it is an idea that's probably inevitable in the next two or three decades, said Pete Rahn, head of the Missouri Department of Transportation.

"We will end up paying for what we drive, where we drive and when we drive," he said.

Rahn envisons a tax where "if you want to drive a Hummer, or whatever that vehicle might be 30 years from today, at 7:30 in the morning on I-70, you're going to pay a higher rate. If you're going to drive a Civic on side streets at 10:30 in the morning, you're going to pay a lower rate."

The obstacle isn't technology, Rahn added.

"The hugest impediments to implementing this type of system are the privacy issues," he said. "Americans don't like the idea that someone, or the reality would be some machine, would know when you drove or where you drove."

In Oregon, Gov. Theodore Kulongoski's proposed budget calls for a task force to work out details of the plan. Eventually, GPS devices could be recording every mile driven, and possibly which routes motorists use. Motorists would pay a mileage tax at the pump in place of a gasoline tax. The state tested the concept in 2006 and 2007 with 285 volunteers and a handful of gas stations in Portland, Ore.

The idea of mileage fees is gaining traction. States such as Texas, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Ohio are discussing similar projects.

"What's motivating us is this concern about the long-term viability of the motor fuel tax," said Ken Buckeye, program manager for the Minnesota Department of Transportation. "Particularly now, the tax you pay for using the road is based on consumption of the wrong commodity. We think it should be based on consumption of the road."

The concept also is gaining federal support. Last year, the National Surface Transportation Police and Revenue Study Commission established by Congress reported that a mileage tax should be "strongly considered as a long-term replacement for the current fuel tax."

A study under way at the University of Iowa is looking at the technological and institutional issues, as well as potential public response, involved with mileage fees.

In states such as Illinois, California, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Iowa, legislators are considering raising the gasoline tax for the time being to fill budget gaps and potholes, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In Missouri, revenue from the 17-cent tax on gasoline and diesel fuel is expected to be $498 million, down from $520 million collected in 2008.

Opponent to the plan in Oregon made privacy a top concern. Many are concerned that a mileage taxing system could lead to government officials' tracking their whereabouts.

"I see this as a privacy invasion," one man commented on the Argus Observer website, a newspaper in Ontario, Ore. "Whose business is it how often and how much I drive my car?"

Jim Whitty, manager of the Oregon Department of Transportation's Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding, said the state had no interest in tracking people.

"The people who have spoken up are intense about it," he said. "They're very concerned about issues like privacy and whether green vehicles would be at a disadvantage."

In the Portland test, vehicles and gas stations were equipped with technology similar to that in cell phones and electronic toll collection systems. When drivers pulled up to a gas pump, the vehicle equipment would broadcast the mileage traveled since the previous fill-up. The station charged the motorists 1.2 cents per mile rather than the state's 24-cent gasoline tax.

The equipment did not pinpoint vehicle locations, but it was able to determine when a driver had left the state. It also kept track of what time of day the car was driven so a premium could be charged for rush-hour driving.

Lee Younglove, who volunteered for the pilot test, said he wasn't concerned about privacy but had friends who were. He has come to believe a mileage tax is more equitable way of paying for roads and bridges.

"There are cars now that are plug-in electrics. They don't pay anything," he said.

For the time being, Oregon legislators are considering raising the state gasoline tax by 2 cents. The time frame for implementing a mileage tax, Whitty said, is at least six or seven years away.

If the state continues to move toward a mileage tax, equipment would have to go through another round of tests. Policy decisions would have to be made, such as whether to charge a higher fee for heavier, gas-guzzling vehicles.

And if electric cars grow in number, the state would have to find another place besides gas stations to charge mileage fees.

"Once we know their habits, we'll create a system for them," Whitty said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Actually what they need to do is to stop stealing money for their personal little pork projects and put the money where it belongs in the first place.

With all of the actions taking place such as the last two posts and more it can easily be seen where there will be chaos, confusion, and yes even total revolt against a government that is not for the people.

[Shammu]

Bill creates detention camps in U.S. for 'emergencies'

Hopefully these camps will never be used to inter any American citizen. America is a diverse melting pot of ethnicity from all over the world. When the Nazi’s were building the concentration camps, there were those who honestly believed they were intended to become resorts.

[Soldier4Christ]

When the Nazi’s were building the concentration camps, there were those who honestly believed they were intended to become resorts.

Precisely.

[nChrist]

Brothers,

I think that the so-called silent majority might wake up if some of these things became probable. The so-called government needs to be reminded that they work at the pleasure of the people. The people can recall them or vote them out of office. The people can also demand prosecution when representatives commit crimes. One or more of those detention camps could be used for politicians.   

After all, many politicians need to be punished for their crimes, retrained, and rehabilitated. They would also need a place to live after all their assets were confiscated for restitution. The balance left unpaid could be worked off in chain-gangs. I'm wondering if Sheriff Joe would be willing to take all the POLITICIAN PRISONERS. Sheriff Joe did say that he had unlimited space in the desert.   

All kidding aside, I think that the vast majority of folks still believe in the RULE OF LAW and the CONSTITUTION! This vast majority would obviously include most of the Armed Forces, Law Enforcement, and even many HONEST POLITICIANS. The abuse and/or detention of law abiding citizens would not be tolerated. Anyone who attempted such a thing would be given a fair trial and imprisoned. Generations paid dearly for our FREEDOM and LIBERTY, and these things will NOT be given up. There would be armies of people willing to fight in JUST the OVER AGE 70 CATEGORY. So, whoever tries to abuse or detain law abiding citizens will need to bring a lot of help and be ready for prison when they are brought to justice. One last note:  the majority of people who have ever taken an oath to uphold the CONSTITUTION MEANT IT!

[Soldier4Christ]

United Nations' threat: No more parental rights
Expert: Pact would ban spankings, homeschooling if children object

A United Nations human rights treaty that could prohibit children from being spanked or homeschooled, ban youngsters from facing the death penalty and forbid parents from deciding their families' religion is on America's doorstep, a legal expert warns.

Michael Farris of Purcellville, Va., is president of ParentalRights.org, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association and chancellor of Patrick Henry College. He told WND that under the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, or CRC, every decision a parent makes can be reviewed by the government to determine whether it is in the child's best interest.

"It's definitely on our doorstep," he said. "The left wants to make the Obama-Clinton era permanent. Treaties are a way to make it as permanent as stuff gets. It is very difficult to extract yourself from a treaty once you begin it. If they can put all of their left-wing socialist policies into treaty form, we're stuck with it even if they lose the next election."

The 1990s-era document was ratified quickly by 193 nations worldwide, but not the United States or Somalia. In Somalia, there was then no recognized government to do the formal recognition, and in the United States there's been opposition to its power. Countries that ratify the treaty are bound to it by international law.

Although signed by Madeleine Albright, U.S. ambassador to the U.N., on Feb. 16, 1995, the U.S. Senate never ratified the treaty, largely because of conservatives' efforts to point out it would create that list of rights which primarily would be enforced against parents.

The international treaty creates specific civil, economic, social, cultural and even economic rights for every child and states that "the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration." It is monitored by the CRC, which conceivably has enforcement powers.

According to the Parental Rights website, the substance of the CRC dictates the following:

    * Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.

    * A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.

    * Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.

    * The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent's decision.

    * A child's "right to be heard" would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.

    * According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children's welfare.

    * Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.

    * Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.

    * Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.

    * Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.

"Where the child has a right fulfilled by the government, the responsibilities shift from parents to the government," Farris said. "The implications of all this shifting of responsibilities is that parents no longer have the traditional roles of either being responsible for their children or having the right to direct their children."

The government would decide what is in the best interest of a children in every case, and the CRC would be considered superior to state laws, Farris said. Parents could be treated like criminals for making every-day decisions about their children's lives.

"If you think your child shouldn't go to the prom because their grades were low, the U.N. Convention gives that power to the government to review your decision and decide if it thinks that's what's best for your child," he said. "If you think that your children are too young to have a Facebook account, which interferes with the right of communication, the U.N. gets to determine whether or not your decision is in the best interest of the child."

He continued, "If you think your child should go to church three times a week, but the child wants to go to church once a week, the government gets to decide what it thinks is in the best interest of the children on the frequency of church attendance."

He said American social workers would be the ones responsible for implementation of the policies.

Farris said it could be easier for President Obama to push for ratification of the treaty than it was for the Clinton administration because "the political world has changed."

At a Walden University presidential debate last October, Obama indicated he may take action.

"It's embarrassing to find ourselves in the company of Somalia, a lawless land," Obama said. "I will review this and other treaties to ensure the United States resumes its global leadership in human rights."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been a strong supporter of the CRC, and she now has direct control over the treaty's submission to the Senate for ratification. The process requires a two-thirds vote.

Farris said Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., claimed in a private meeting just before Christmas that the treaty would be ratified within two years.

In November, a group of three dozen senior foreign policy figures urged Obama to strengthen U.S. relations with the U.N. Among other things, they asked the president to push for Senate approval of treaties that have been signed by the U.S. but not ratified.

Partnership for a Secure America Director Matthew Rojansky helped draft the statement. He said the treaty commands strong support and is likely to be acted on quickly, according to an Inter Press Service report.

While he said ratification is certain to come up, Farris said advocates of the treaty will face fierce opposition.

"I think it is going to be the battle of their lifetime," he said. "There's not enough political capital in Washington, D.C., to pass this treaty. We will defeat it."