HPIM0049

No 967 “En mi opinión” Junio 4, 2015

No 967   “En mi opinión”  Junio 4, 2015

“IN GOD WE TRUST” LAZARO R GONZALEZ MIñO EDITOR

Warning You are Entering a Politically incorrect zone…

BREAKING NEWS: Weekly Jobless Claims Fall to 276,000

FoxBusiness.com foxbusiness@newsletters.foxnews.com via hotmail.com

     
to lazarorgonzalez

The number of Americans filing for first-time unemployment benefits fell last week to 276,000 from an upwardly revised 284,000 the week prior. Economists expected claims to fall to 279,000 from an initially reported 282,000.

 

AMENPER: Política exterior de la Administración…

¿Vieron las noticias?, Kerry se rompió una pierna, la pregunta es ¿Los iraníes le rompieron la pierna a Kerry como una advertencia?, o ¿se la rompió el mismo para  salir de las negociaciones con ellos? –

Kerry dice que las conversaciones de paz están detenidas por mentiras, tácticas engañosas y  mala fe, pero él no estaba hablando acerca de las conversaciones con Irán  estaba hablando de las conversaciones con Israel.

Algo que ha logrado negociar Kerry en el Medio Oriente es llegar a un acuerdo con las fuerzas combatientes de ISIS-

Combatientes de ISIS vendrán a Baltimore a petición del gobierno ante la brutalidad de la policía para usar métodos más compasivos y menos violentos para pacificar la ciudad.

Durante su estancia nuestros amigos de ISIS celebrarán eventos para conseguir más reclutas

Planean sociales con helados y  bandas, actos de fuegos naturales presentando a un infiel ardiendo, torneos de lanzar rocas a  las mujeres,  fuegos artificiales con bombas de carros suicidas, y torneo de lanzamiento de cuchillos teniendo como blanco a judíos, y otros no creyentes. Ofreceran actos sexuales gratis, con cabras, ovejas y camellos, y un programa de  bailarinas exóticas con el cuerpo y la cara cubierta, el baile se llama  burka-es-hermoso.

Obama insiste en que esta estrategia de Kerry es parte de sus planes de su política exterior que funciona: “guerra, violencia, invasión y conquista son signos de debilidad; tenemos a ISIS exactamente donde queremos, aquí los podemos vigilar”.

Pero no piensen tan mal de Obama ahora que están en territorio americano, tiene una nueva estrategia que puede funcionar, él va a atacar a ISIS con una nueva agencia regulatoria federal implementada por el servicio de rentas internas-

 

AMENPER: El País de los Gatos por Lao She…

Lao She es sin duda uno de los novelistas más grandes de China, aunque  “El País de los gatos”, no es su mejor trabajo.  

Aun así, al ” El País de los Gatos” a menudo se le llama el primer trabajo chino de ciencia ficción con tonos políticos, y tiene más  observaciones inteligentes y un fondo satírico para hacerlo digno de la lectura.

El libro fue escrito en los años 60s. En la fatídica época de la Revolución Cultural de Mao.

Como miles de otros intelectuales en China, Lao She experimentó maltrato en la década de 1960. Guardias rojos de la Revolución Cultural le  habían atacado como contrarrevolucionario. Lo hicieron como a otros desfilar por las calles por las calles y lo golpearon en público en las escaleras de la puerta del templo de Confucio en Beijing.

Humillado grandemente tanto mentalmente como físicamente, según el registro oficial, se suicidó ahogándose en el lago Taiping de Pekín en 1966.

Lao lo hizo siguiendo la antigua tradición de los intelectuales chinos, protestando sacrificando su propia vida, pero algunos mencionaron la posibilidad de asesinato. 

Sus familiares fueron acusados de implicación en sus “crímenes” pero pudieron rescatar sus manuscritos después de su muerte, incluyendo “El País de los Gatos”,  escondiéndolos en pilas de carbón y chimeneas moviéndolos de casa en casa

El país de los gatos es un intento de sátira crítica al sistema comunista, es más sutil que digamos, “Rebelión en la Granja” (Animal Farm) de George Orwell, tiene que serlo, ya que de lo que se trata es de una crítica abierta al sistema escondida en la sátira, ya que era imposible durante la Revolución Cultural expresar abiertamente una crítica al comunismo.

Pero para el que ve lo que hay detrás de la sátira, lo disfruta porque le hace recordar a Rebelión en la Granja, ya que lleva un mensaje parecido a la crítica del socialismo usando animales.

 En Resumen, el narrador del país de los gatos viaja a Marte, que la encuentra habitada por una civilización de gatos, que está al borde del colapso debido a la decadencia interna y décadas de abuso por parte de situaciones foráneas.

Se supone que es una sátira en China de los años treinta, con sus problemas sociales aparentemente sin esperanza y con depredación extranjera, pero es realmente un vistazo muy universal que está enfocado en el extremo receptor de un sistema gubernamental, el pueblo,  y sutilmente expresada con tonos de crítica al sistema comunista.  Trata de hacer ver  cómo personas que son oprimidas a menudo empeoran su situación con lucha despistada, en lugar de luchar con eficacia insisten en culpar opresor del pasado por los problemas del presente. (Oh, hay un montón de cosas que son problemas del pueblo chino como fumar opio, que fue impuesta sobre ellos por los británicos, en Cuba la culpa era de la corrupcion y la dictadura Batistiana o en los Estados Unidos, el guerrerismo de George Bush)

 Una parte especialmente mordaz: un grupo de gatos izquierdistas quieren fundar una nueva sociedad basada en los campesinos y proletarios, “pero no tienen la noción en la cultura del postmodernismo (implica Maoísmo), sobre que fue la  agricultura  o lo que el cosa es el proletariado”.

Escondiéndose en los males de la época anterior al comunismo, con la crítica de los años dell imperialismo Británico, Lao She satíricamente hace una crítica al comunismo.  Cómo las cosas tradicionales chinas como el trabajo y la agricultura han desaparecido en la China de su tiempo bajo Mao.

Claro que no han desaparecido realmente, pero de esto se trata una sátira, que es la exageración para exponer un punto. Lo que quiere decir Lao She es que con el sistema comunista, la ética de trabajo y producción como es la agricultura ha bajado por la pérdida de los nuevos valores que se basan más en la política que en el trabajo para producción. 

Igual con echar la culpa al pasado cuando hace recaer la culpa de los vicios del comunismo a la época anterior.  Los que hemos vivido en situaciones parecida podemos identificarnos cuando por años Batista era el culpable de todos los problemas de Cuba así como Bush es el culpable de todos los problemas de esta administración.  En el caso del Opio Británico en Cuba era el imperialismo Yanqui.

Paradójicamente la China de hoy no es la China de Mao que nos pinta en su libro Lao She, sin embargo vemos como años después países ven en el comunismo de Mao la solución de sus problemas.

Pasamos por Mao, Stalin, Fidel, los resultados son palpablemente evidentes, ha sido un sistema que ha llevado al país donde se implanta a la miseria y la opresión.  ¿Cómo es que no aprenden? ¿Cómo es que ignoran lo obvio?

 

 

Looming White House Financial Crisis Could Erupt In 2015?

Response Action Network info@responseaction.com via

msgfocus.com

to lazarorgonzalez
Go HERE to view this message in your browser.

Below please find a special message from one of our advertisers. Please note that the following message reflects the opinions and representations of our advertiser alone, and not necessarily the opinion or editorial positions of Response Action Network.
Looming White House Financial Crisis Could Erupt In 2015?
06.03.2015 by Mike Palmer, Stansberry Researc

No one believed Porter Stansberry six years ago.

As head of one of America’s largest independent financial research firms, Mr. Stansberry’s work back in 2008 led him to a bold, but worrisome, conclusion:

That the world’s largest mortgage bankers–Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which at the time were responsible for nearly 50% of all the mortgages in America–would soon go bankrupt.

RELATED: Multi-millionaire shares his blueprint for surviving the coming currency collapse

In fact, in June of 2008, while their stock prices were still trading at well over $20 per share, Stansberry published a report to his customers titled: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Are Going to Zero.”

Inside this report, Stansberry explained:

“For those of you who don’t work in the financial industry, it might be hard for you to immediately grasp what’s so dangerous about the extreme amount of leverage employed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Let me explain exactly what Fannie and Freddie do and why they’re in so much jeopardy…”

We all know what happened next.

Both agencies went bust — and if not for a bailout from the Federal Government, both would have declared bankruptcy.

Barron’s — America’s second biggest financial newspaper — even wrote a story about Mr. Stansberry’s accurate prediction short, and called it “remarkably prescient.”

Over the years, Mr. Stansberry has made a name for himself by accurately predicting the biggest and most important collapses in America.

A few of the others he’s accurately identified well in advance include: General Motors, General Growth Property (America’s biggest mall owner), D.R. Horton (a homebuilder), and Gannett newspapers, to name just a few.

Stansberry also predicted the recent collapse of oil and natural gas prices as early as 2010, when he wrote a report titled: “Peak Oil is a Flat Lie.”

Well, now Mr. Stansberry has issued another fascinating warning, about a new and looming bankruptcy.

RECOMMENDED: Next white house scandal? Looming financial scandal could send stocks tumbling

As Mr. Stansberry writes:

“No one believed me years ago when I said the world’s largest mortgage bankers would soon go bankrupt.

And no one believed me when I said GM would fall apart… or that the same would happen to General Growth Properties.

But that’s exactly what happened.”

And, he says, that brings us today.

Stansberry says the next big bankruptcy in America will be even bigger than those he’s identified in the past. In fact, he says this looming bankruptcy will threaten your way of life, whether you own any investments related to it or not.

This collapse, says Stansberry, will change everything about our normal way of life: where you vacation… where you send your kids or grandkids to school… how and where you shop… the way you protect your family and home.

I strongly encourage you to check out Mr. Stansberry’s recent write-up on this situation.

You can access his full analysis, free of charge, on his company’s website, right here.

 

 

EXCLUSIVE: House Committee Knows Of Hillary Email Server Whistleblower

CHUCK ROSS

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform recently heard new information that could blow the lid off of the Hillary Clinton private email server scandal and shed new light on a consulting job Huma Abedin held while working as Clinton’s aide at the State Department.

The Daily Caller learned of a three-hour May 1 meeting two State Department whistleblowers held with the general counsel and staffers for the Oversight Committee, which is led by Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz.

According to a copy of notes from that meeting, State Department whistleblower Richard Higbie and another whistleblower told of an inspector-turned-whistleblower with State’s office of the inspector general who claims his investigation into Abedin’s work with Teneo Holdings, a consulting firm, led to the discovery of Clinton’s private email server.

According to the notes, the whistleblower also told Higbie that the investigation was shut down by Harold Geisel, the former acting inspector general for the State Department whose tenure was marked by accusations of political favoritism.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/02/exclusive-house-committee-knows-of-hillary-email-server-whistleblower/#ixzz3c16lU0HV

Hillary goes underwater in the polls

By Canadian Press

WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton’s campaign is barely off the runway and it’s already lost a little altitude.

In fact she’s dipped enough in the latest polls that the presumed favourite in the 2016 U.S. presidential race is now underwater, with more people expressing an unfavourable view than a favourable one.

A similar downward trend was expressed Tuesday in two new polls, released just weeks after she launched her campaign and even before her first big rally scheduled for June 13 in New York City.

One registered her lowest favourable rating in a decade.

The CNN survey put it at 46 per cent — down sharply since controversies erupted over her secretive email server and conflicts-of-interest claims involving her family foundation and far lower than her peak of 69 per cent recorded in 2011.


Special Headline: Guess Who’s About To Go Bankrupt in America will Shock you 

There’s good news for Clinton: She still leads all Republican rivals. Barely.

That survey had her beating Sen. Rand Paul by a mere percentage point, with a three-point lead over Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.

The bad news for her is the lead has shrunk considerably. Her standing among self-described independents has suffered, with only 37 per cent describing her as honest and trustworthy.

The Republican party revelled in the surveys on Tuesday by posting a roundup of all the media reaction on its website, with headlines like: “Clinton Faces Questions of Trustworthiness,” and “Clinton Unfavourable Numbers Highest in 14 Years.”

Still, with 17 months to go before the election, the former secretary of state, senator and first lady remains in the enviable position of having a monumental lead in her own party’s nomination race.

While a crowded Republican ring will spend the coming months in a political battle royal, Clinton’s closest threat on the Democratic side is, according to the CNN survey, 50 percentage points back.

That long shot is Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in second place, followed by the other declared candidate on the Democratic side, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley.

“If either one of them were to win, it would be the greatest upset in the history of politics,” said Dan Pfeiffer, a former Obama White House aide now a CNN political analyst.

To avoid a repeat of her 2008 primary loss, Clinton has tacked left on a series of issues: more lenient prison sentences, campaign-finance reform, immigration, same-sex marriage. She’s kept silent on other issues where she’s been to the right of her party grassroots — such as free trade and the Keystone pipeline.

But she’s not nearly as left-leaning as Sanders.

The 73-year-old, self-described socialist supports Canadian-style health care. He’s among the minority in Congress fighting a surveillance bill that would replace expired provisions of the 2001 Patriot Act. And, unlike Clinton, he voted consistently against tough prison sentences and the Iraq war before it became politically fashionable.

And he’s developing an enthusiastic online following.

Flattering posts about Sanders have been getting up to 70,000 mentions on Facebook and Twitter, with headlines like: “Bernie Sanders has big ideas, and they deserve our attention.”

That’s more than triple what positive items about the far-more-famous Clinton have generated over the same period, according to the monitoring site Spike. Sanders has also been speaking to overflow rooms and has raised enough money to add to his paid organizers in Iowa — he currently has two, compared with Clinton’s estimated 30 in that state.

 

Rush Limbaugh: Our Delusional President

RUSH: Have you heard what Obama said?  Grab audio sound bite number 18.  This is yesterday in Washington at the White House, the president speaking to fellows of the Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative.

OBAMA:  One of the important principles for me has always been treating everybody fairly.

RUSH:  Right.

OBAMA:  So whether that’s women or people of different races —

RUSH:  Right, yeah.

OBAMA:  — or, uh, different religious faiths —

RUSH:  Right, yeah, right.

OBAMA:  — or different sexual orientations —

RUSH:  Oh, yeah.

OBAMA:  — one of my core principles —

RUSH:  Yes?

OBAMA:  — is that I will never engage in a politics in which I’m trying to divide people —

OBAMA: — or make them less than me because they look different or have a different religion.  That’s a core principle! I…  That’s not something I would violate.

RUSH:  Really?  Folks, this is classic.  Go out… It’s just the exact opposite.  He clearly sees certain people as lesser.  He clearly sees people that he doesn’t like that he considers to be enemies, people that need to be gotten even with, and he clearly has divided people.  I mean, by design! There could be no other result for some of the reasons or same things that Obama has done as president.  But it got even funnier — or maybe you would say more delusional.

OBAMA:  People don’t remember, when I came into office, uh, the United States in world opinion ranked below China and just barely above Russia.  And today, once again the United States is the most respected country on earth.

RUSH:  (laughing)

OBAMA:  And part of that I think is because of the work that we did to, uh, reengage the world and say that we want to work with you as partners, uh, with mutual interests and mutual respect.  It’s on that basis that we were able to end two wars.

RUSH:  Here’s the thing: I think he really believes it.  I don’t think that he’s just saying this for the record.  I think he really believes this stuff, folks.  This is what makes this so problematic to me.  Now, he’s delusional. If he really means this, if he really believes this, he’s delusional.  If I’m wrong, if he doesn’t believe it, if it’s just political positioning, it doesn’t matter.  In stuff like this, motivation actually doesn’t matter. 

It’s the hard, actual fact or result that you have to deal with.  The motivation’s just a sideline.  And this is absurd.  The country was never hated and despised.  The first myth here and one of the things that got Obama elected was the media and the Democrat Party running around claiming the world hated the United States because of George Bush and Dick Cheney. It despised us, hated us, and we needed to elect these guys to once again make Europe love us!

Because Europe was the cutting edge. Europe was the gold standard. Europe and being European was exactly what we should aspire to. Being loved and adored by European socialists, and being loved and adored by our enemies in the Middle East.  I’m sure that Obama, in his world, as a narcissist, actually does walk around thinking that he has rebuilt all this love and respect and adulation for himself and for the country.

But this idea, “I’ve restored America to the host respected country on earth”?  Next he’s going to say, “I made Baltimore the safest city in America,” and he’ll follow that by saying, “Hillary Clinton and I made Libya, Iraq, and Syria the safest countries on earth.” Next, “Hillary and I also neutered Russia and China with our reset program!” He will say, “We have got the cheapest health care system in the world now, thanks to me.”

Have you heard the news about that today, folks?  Have you heard what your health care premiums next year are gonna do?  Have you heard about increases along the lines of 26%?  Do you know why?  Because they don’t have enough members. They don’t have any people signing up for health care in large enough groups to bring the prices down.  Yet there’s Obama. He promised everybody premiums gonna come down $2500! “Keep your doctor and keep your plan if you like it!

“Everybody’s gonna have health care! Health care’s gonna be much cheaper and much more accessible.”  So the next thing he’s gonna tell us is he never lied about health care. He made health care cheaper than it’s ever been in the United States.  He’ll follow that by pointing out that he has created the greatest growth in GDP in the entire history of the American economy.  He will remind us that he said he was gonna cut the national debt in half, and then he will claim that he did it.

He’ll follow that by saying, “I made the Veteran Administration Hospitals the greatest health care providers on earth.”  I mean, to run around and say that he’s restored America to the most respected country on earth is no different than saying he’s made Baltimore the safest city on earth and that he’s lowered health care costs dramatically across the board.  This is delusional.  But you see, the thing is, we once again are up against it. 

On the one hand over here we have reality.  On the other hand we have the media and Obama and a combo desire to make Obama look as though he has been and is the greatest president the country’s ever had.  Make no mistake: That’s the objective.  So Obama goes out and says this, and that permits the media to report it and to stand on it and to analyze it and to write stories about how it’s actually true. (interruption) Well, you wait! That’s the next thing that’s gonna happen. 

There will be deep analytical pieces, fact-check type stories, too.  “Is Obama’s claim that he’s restored America to the most respected country on earth true or false?”  And you’re gonna see in depth — oh, you won’t believe it, in-depth analysis — going back eight years, interviews with world leaders all over the world, and they will come to the conclusion that while it may not look like it on the surface, Obama has dramatically made this country more respected than it was when he took office.

It’ll be another opportunity to bash Bush and bash the Republicans.  So once again an alternative reality will be created that will be taught in schools. It’ll be in the mainstream media, Drive-By Media on a daily basis. They will just create this stuff out of whole cloth, and it will become the next new reality.  Half the country or more are gonna be sitting around scratching their heads wondering, “How the hell can this happen?”

Everybody is gonna be asking, “Are you kidding me?  How in the world is this happen?”

The answer’s gonna be like every other answer is: “It cannot happen without a complicit, compliant bunch of accomplices in the media,” pure and simple.  There won’t be any push-back on the Republican Party on this. This is not even about Hillary Clinton’s campaign.  This is not about electing the next Democrat.  This is all about legacy.  This is like Benghazi.  It’s like restructuring what really happened in Benghazi. 

By the end of his administration, Benghazi’s gonna be nothing really happened there except a great, great policy that nobody was able to see at the time. (Obama impression) “I’m gonna tell you what.  I’m the first president to guarantee health care for every American.  Affordable!  And I’m the first president that made sure that we deal with Iran on nuclear weapons.”  He won’t say how. He’s just gonna say he’s the first president to have done it.  That’s what he wants in the history books, and that’s what these claims are all about.  Let’s just see if I’m right. 

Let’s see how long it takes for there to be in the mainstream media little stories analyzing these claims. Some fact check-type stories such as you get in the Washington Post and the AP and other deep analytical places, in places like the New York Times Sunday Magazine, the New York Review of Books, places like the Brookings Institute, think tanks and so forth. Deep, deep analysis! I mean, so much intellectual-speak that nobody can follow it, keep up with it, translate it, understand it.

But the conclusion will be, “My God, Obama was right!” That’s what’s being set up here.  We have to be able to just entirely… (interruption)  It is two universes here.  The real universe is where you and I are, and there’s this alternative, alternate universe over here, which we don’t understand.  Well, no.  We understand it.  What we don’t understand is how so many people can buy into it so readily. 

 

 

Menendez Joins Colleagues in Introducing Bill to Deny Resources to Castro’s Military& Security Services

Wednesday, June 3, 2015
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) today joined a group of Senators in introducing the “Cuban Military Transparency Act,” bipartisan legislation that would ensure any increase in resources to Cuba reach the Cuban people by prohibiting financial transactions with the Castro regime’s military and security services.

Lead by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), the bill’s co-sponsors also include: Senators R Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Cory Gardner (R-CO), David Vitter (R-LA) and Mark Kirk (R-IL).

“U.S. policy should be guided by one, single principle – supporting the Cuban people’s aspirations for a democratic future,” Menendez said. “With the Cuban government and armed forces controlling more than 80 percent of the country’s economy, current efforts to expand commerce and travel to Cuba only enrich the Castros’ military monopolies. The Cuban military uses these funds to violate human rights and jail its opponents. This common sense legislation aims to ensure the American public is not a blind accomplice to the Castro regime’s repression.”

“It is not in the interest of the United States or the people of Cuba for the U.S. to become a financier of the Castro regime’s brutality,” said Rubio. “The Cuban Military Transparency Act would prevent U.S. dollars from getting into the hands of the Cuban military and would demand accountability from the Obama Administration regarding fugitives of American justice in Cuba, the return of stolen and uncompensated property and the role of the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces and the Ministry of the Interior in Cuba.”

“The United States must stand squarely on the side of the Cuban people and take every possible action to weaken the brutal rule of the Castro regime,” said Cotton. “This bill is one such step. It denies the Castro security services hard currency and aims to hold the regime accountable for its past crimes and misdeeds.”

“The Obama administration has already sent terrible signals to Fidel and Raul Castro by relaxing economic sanctions on Cuba and removing their regime from the State Sponsors of Terrorism List,” Cruz said. “It is now beholden on Congress to intervene and ensure that this misguided policy does not result in our facilitating the Castros’ more than fifty years of aggressive hostility towards the United States and our allies. I commend Sen. Rubio for his work on the Cuban Military Transparency Act, and I am proud to co-sponsor this legislation that will prevent America from enabling Cuba’s odious security apparatus. Congress should send a clear directive to the President: We will stand with the Cuban people and promote freedom and prosperity, but we will not assist the Communist regime that has oppressed them for so long.”

“For over 50 years, the Castro dictatorship has brutally repressed the Cuban people,” said Gardner. “Despite President Obama’s historic change in policy this year, the Cuban authorities continue to jail dissidents and abuse the human rights of their citizens. This legislation would ensure that any economic benefit gained by Cuba from our policy shift does not finance the regime’s police state, but directly benefits the Cuban people.”

“The Castro’s regime of internal and external terror should never be funded with American money,” Kirk said. “The U.S. policy toward Cuba should always seek to hold the Castro regime fully accountable while supporting the Cuban people’s internationally recognized human rights and aspirations for freedom.”

The “Cuban Military Transparency Act” would:

  • Identify and prohibit financial transactions with the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, the Ministry of the Interior, their sub-divisions and leadership;
  • Amend the Department of State’s Rewards for Justice Program to include the arrest or conviction of the individuals responsible for the February 24th 1996 deadly attack on United States aircraft;
  • Direct the Attorney General to coordinate with Interpol regarding the capture of U.S. fugitives in Cuba;
  • Direct the President to provide reports on the role of the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces and the Ministry of the Interior in Cuba and the return of property that has been confiscated by the Government of Cuba; and
  • Provide exemptions for current “cash-in-advance” sale of agricultural commodities, medicine and medical devices and remittances to family members and transactions related to democracy promotion programs.

###

 

 

 

Jorge A. Villalón: WHY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT  MUST RETURN THE US. NAVAL BASE IN GUANTANAMO (GITMO) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF CUBA ???
By Colonel Juan Armando Montes, USA (Ret), Graduate from High School “La Luz School” 1944-1955,

Havana-Cuba,  also a Graduate  Juris  Doctor (JD) St. Thomas Villanova University, Havana, Cuba

 (1955-1960).  General Staff, USA. Armed Forces Staff College and US. Army Command & General Staff College Graduate,  Foreign Area Officer (FAO), Department of Defense Institute Security Assistance Management (DISAM),  US. Special Forces (Green Beret), Infantry, Airborne & Ranger Qualified. Brigade 2506 Naval, N-468.

============================================================================================

WHY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA “MUST” RETURN THE US. NAVAL BASE (GITMO) TO CUBA…….

Is it now the right time and place in history for the Government of the United States of America (USG) to return the US. Naval Base in Guantanamo, to the Government of Cuba (GOC)?

First of all there is a Legal Bi-Lateral Treaty Binding both Nations to the letter and spirit of the Law.  This is a simple but profound question to be answered by Legal Scholars’ minds giving knowledgeable advice to the American People, to be decided “Only” by the Congress of the United States of America consenting or not about this sensitive matter and then the President of the USA acting on it, approving or vetoing it.

The USG must only return “GITMO” to a legitimate and sovereign democratically elected government by secret and universal vote by all the Cuban People in the sland and abroad,

only, and only then, when the Nation of Cuba is absolutely Free and Democratic his people united in close bond as one Nation, free of oppression and universally sovereign in the eyes of all Free Nations, only then!

The time is not yet in the horizon. The time to return “GITMO” is not now! Simple as that. It will be a grave historical unforgivable error and disservice to our present generation and generations to come, and obviously, paramount to the Cuban People if the President of the USA wants to impose now his will and mandate for political expediency or ideological reasons.

The President of the USA must act accordingly to the legal framework under the Constitution.

He cannot and should not act unilaterally in a legal matter of this magnitude without Congressional Consent and the absolute support of his Nation.

This sensitive diplomatic matter must not be solved by “Executive Order”

 

WHY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT  MUST RETURN THE US. NAVAL BASE IN GUANTANAMO (GITMO) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF CUBA ???

By Colonel Juan Armando Montes, USA (Ret), Graduate from High School “La Luz School” 1944-1955,

Havana-Cuba,  also a Graduate  Juris  Doctor (JD) St. Thomas Villanova University, Havana, Cuba

 (1955-1960).  General Staff, USA. Armed Forces Staff College and US. Army Command & General Staff College Graduate,  Foreign Area Officer (FAO), Department of Defense Institute Security Assistance Management (DISAM),  US. Special Forces (Green Beret), Infantry, Airborne & Ranger Qualified. Brigade 2506 Naval, N-468.

============================================================================================

WHY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA “MUST” RETURN THE US. NAVAL BASE (GITMO) TO CUBA…….

Is it now the right time and place in history for the Government of the United States of America (USG) to return the US. Naval Base in Guantanamo, to the Government of Cuba (GOC)?

First of all there is a Legal Bi-Lateral Treaty Binding both Nations to the letter and spirit of the Law.  This is a simple but profound question to be answered by Legal Scholars’ minds giving knowledgeable advice to the American People, to be decided “Only” by the Congress of the United States of America consenting or not about this sensitive matter and then the President of the USA acting on it, approving or vetoing it.

The USG must only return “GITMO” to a legitimate and sovereign democratically elected government by secret and universal vote by all the Cuban People in the sland and abroad,

only, and only then, when the Nation of Cuba is absolutely Free and Democratic his people united in close bond as one Nation, free of oppression and universally sovereign in the eyes of all Free Nations, only then!

The time is not yet in the horizon. The time to return “GITMO” is not now! Simple as that. It will be a grave historical unforgivable error and disservice to our present generation and generations to come, and obviously, paramount to the Cuban People if the President of the USA wants to impose now his will and mandate for political expediency or ideological reasons.

The President of the USA must act accordingly to the legal framework under the Constitution.

He cannot and should not act unilaterally in a legal matter of this magnitude without Congressional Consent and the absolute support of his Nation.

This sensitive diplomatic matter must not be solved by “Executive Order”

 

UN METEORO LLAMADO MARCO.

Por Alfredo M. Cepero Director de www.lanuevanacion.com http://twitter.com/@AlfredoCepero

El número de aspirantes a la postulación por el Partido Republicano es el mayor jamás registrado desde que Abraham Lincoln fue postulado en la Convención Nacional Republicana de 1860, en la ciudad de Chicago. Ahora, casi dos docenas de candidatos republicanos de distintas ideologías, religiones, fortuna personal, sexos y razas aspiran a enfrentarse a Hillary Clinton, la candidata con mayores probabilidades de ser postulada por el Partido Demócrata. Sin embargo, lo que cuenta para estos aspirantes republicanos son las probabilidades que cada cual tenga de ser postulado por su partido, así como de ser lo suficientemente atractivo a los electores independientes–que son quienes decidirán las elecciones–como para resultar electo en las presidenciales de 2016.

Dentro de esta literal sopa de letras han destacado nombres de candidatos con cuantiosas fortunas personales, largas trayectorias políticas y amplia experiencia en la administración de gobiernos estatales. Hace un año muy pocos analistas y consultores políticos consideraban al senador republicano por la Florida, Marco Rubio, como un aspirante con probabilidades de resultar postulado por su partido. Marco no es un hombre acaudalado, su trayectoria política ha sido relativamente breve y jamás ha administrado una demarcación política o una empresa privada. Sus detractores han llegado a endilgarle el “San Benito” de ser una versión cubana de la elocuencia y la inexperiencia de Barack Obama. Han dicho incluso que su “cara de bebé” le resta fuerza y credibilidad a sus aspiraciones presidenciales.

Dicho en términos simples: Marco Rubio ha sido subestimado por detractores y por adversarios como un candidato presidencial viable, algo que seguramente lo ha hecho feliz. Porque esta no es la primera vez que Marco Rubio ha convertido el error de sus adversarios de percibirlo como un “perdedor potencial” en un arma para salir victorioso en campañas políticas. Para comprobarlo sólo hay que pasar revista a la paliza que le propinó al ex gobernador floridano Charlie Crist durante la campaña por un escaño senatorial en las parciales de 2010.

Crist lo tenía todo. Experiencia administrativa, fondos de campaña, conocida imagen política, altos niveles de popularidad y hasta el apoyo de la maquinaria del partido. Mientras los adversarios de Marco lo subestimaron sus amigos le aconsejaron que no se apurara y que esperara su “turno”, porque tenía la juventud para esperar. Pero este joven ha demostrado no estar dispuesto a esperar “turnos” porque le sobran habilidades con las cuales crear las condiciones para triunfos electorales inesperados y relámpagos. Como Don Quijote contra los molinos, se lanzó a la arena política en una campaña tripartita donde compitió contra Christ–que aspiró como independiente– y el demócrata Kendrick Meek. El resultado: Rubio 49, Crist 30 y Meek 20. Misión cumplida y nació una estrella.

Esa estrella brilla ahora con luz propia en el firmamento republicano y se propone proyectar su luz sobre unos Estados Unidos embargados por las sombras de la ineptitud, la pusilanimidad y el fanatismo de Barack Obama. En enero de este año, una encuesta conducida por Zogby Analitics se ubicaba a Marco Rubio en tercer lugar entre los aspirantes presidenciales republicanos con un nivel de aprobación de 13 por ciento, superado únicamente por los acaudalados ex gobernadores Mitt Romney y Jeb Bush.

Abundando sobre encuestas, hace escasamente una semana, según Real Clear Politics, Romney había desaparecido, Bush mantenía un nivel de aprobación de 14.8 por ciento y Marco ocupaba un tercer lugar con un 12.2 por ciento, superado únicamente por el Gobernador de Wisconsin, Scott Walker, con un 13 por ciento. Y más allá de las encuestas, un analista político de la perspicacia de Charles Krauthammer, de la Cadena Fox News, considera que, en estos momentos, Marco Rubio es el aspirante con más probabilidades de ser postulado por el Partido Republicano y de ganarle a Hillary Clinton. De hecho, fuentes cercanas a esta señora afirman que Rubio es el candidato que la mantiene despierta en sus noches de megalomanía y avaricia.

Por otra parte, ustedes y yo sabemos que estos niveles de popularidad están sometidos a variaciones constantes y a veces inexplicables. Que en los 17 meses que nos separan de las presidenciales de 2016, seremos testigos de docenas de cambios en los niveles de popularidad de los candidatos. Pero, como lo ha demostrado antes, Marco Rubio es un hombre con una misión que no presta atención a las encuestas, no teme a los obstáculos, ni se deja intimidar por los adversarios. En el 2010, le ganó la partida a Charlie Crist. En estas presidenciales de 2016 le presentará batalla a sus adversarios, incluyendo a su antiguo mentor Jeb Bush.

Todo indica además que va a competir para ganar, no para mitigar el aburrimiento o satisfacer ansias de notoriedad como hacen algunos de los que integran la larga y estrambótica lista de aspirantes republicanos. Y yo creo que tiene grandes probabilidades de ganar porque Marco Rubio despliega una inusual seguridad en mismo, no teme asumir riesgos, tiene una habilidad especial para escoger sus temas de campaña, muestra una marcada ecuanimidad para responder preguntas controversiales y no pierde tiempo en recuperar el terreno perdido, tal como lo hizo en el tema de la inmigración.

Resulta asimismo revelador que, en sus declaraciones de campaña, Marco no diga “si soy electo presidente” sino “cuando sea electo presidente”. Él lo da por hecho y anda de prisa con su característica velocidad de meteoro. Porque sabe que la situación es desesperada y que la tarea será difícil y prolongada. Que tendrá que desenredar la madeja de errores y claudicaciones de un presidente que se ha empecinado en transformar a la primera potencia del mundo en una inocua nación tercermundista. Esto equivale nada menos que a dejar a merced de una manada de hienas a un león al que le arrancaron las garras y los colmillos. En este caso, las hienas se llaman Rusia, China, Irán, Corea del Norte, Cuba, Hezbollah, ISIS, al Qaeda, Boko Haram y otras que harían la lista demasiado larga.

En Marco vemos, por otra parte, una especie de simbiosis de John Kennedy y de Ronald Reagan, la frescura del primero y los principios del segundo. Y como los dos un carisma extraordinario para granjearse la simpatía del gran público norteamericano. Incluso antes de ser electo, ha tenido la audacia de ofrecer una “Doctrina Rubio” sobre política exterior. Ha dicho que la misma está basada en tres pilares que son: Poderío Militar Norteamericano, Protección de la Economía Norteamericana en un mundo globalizado y Claridad Moral a la hora de aplicarla. En este sentido ha dicho:”El objetivo del poderío militar de EEUU es prevenir la guerra en vez de promoverla”. Despliega su orgullo de este país diciendo que: “Los Estados Unidos son la primera potencia en la historia motivada por el deseo de expandir la libertad en vez de por conquistar territorios”.

Y quizás lo más emotivo para nosotros los cubanos es que Marco Rubio se siente orgulloso de sus padres cubanos y que quiere para Cuba la misma libertad que disfrutan los Estados Unidos y que él se propone defender frente a los enemigos de este país. En unas declaraciones con motivo del 20 de mayo, aniversario de la independencia de Cuba, Marco dijo: “Nunca debemos de olvidar que la única forma de verdadera independencia para el pueblo de Cuba consiste en un régimen de libertad y democracia, y nosotros debemos de dedicar los esfuerzos de esta nación a ayudarlos a lograr ese objetivo vital”. Tomen nota los tiranos y aquellos que contribuyen a prolongar su tiranía porque se les acaba el tiempo.

6-3-15

La Nueva Nación es una publicación independiente cuyas metas son la defensa de la libertad, la preservación de la democracia y la promoción de la libre empresa. Visítenos en : http://www.lanuevanacion.com

Jorge A. Villalón:

Cuba no está preparada para la inversión,

afirma multimillonario

     

Cuba no está preparada para la inversión, afirma multimillonario

Stephen Ross, estadounidense y promotor inmobiliario dijo que no espera ver un cambio real en Cuba

martes, junio 2, 2015 | CubaNet

 

Stephen Ross, multimillonario promotor inmobiliario

Después de un reciente viaje a Cuba, el multimillonario estadounidense y promotor inmobiliario Stephen Ross, dijo el martes que el país no está muy abierto para los negocios, mientras el gobierno de Castro esté en el poder.

“Se oye mucho sobre Cuba. Se oye mucho acerca de las oportunidades que se tendía en Cuba. No me pareció ver esa gran cantidad de grandes oportunidades. Fue como retroceder en el tiempo“, dijo el presidente y fundador de la global inmobiliaria The Related Companies el martes a CNBC.

El presidente Barack Obama comenzó a normalizar las relaciones con Cuba a finales del año pasado, por lo que es más fácil para los turistas estadounidenses visitar el país comunista. El viernes, Estados Unidos sacó a Cuba de su lista de estados patrocinadores del terrorismo.

Ross dijo que no espera ver un cambio real en Cuba, siempre y cuando los líderes del país se mantengan en el poder. Fidel Castro y su hermano Raúl, han mantenido el control del país durante más de medio siglo.

Se necesita un gobierno que realmente quiera el cambio, que realmente quiera negocios, y que realmente quiera ver el crecimiento, y no tienen ningunos de estos sentimientos en absoluto“, dijo Ross.

Ross, nacido el 10 de mayo de 1940, en Detroit, Michigan, es dueño de equipos estadounidenses de deportes, desarrollador de bienes raíces y filántropo. Es el presidente y dueño mayoritario de The Related Companies, una firma global de desarrollo inmobiliario que fundó en 1972. Related es mejor conocida por el desarrollo del Time Warner Center, donde Ross actualmente vive y trabaja.

Según la revista Forbes, Ross tiene un patrimonio neto de $4.800 millones. Ross es también el principal propietario de los Miami Dolphins y Sun Life Stadium.

Ross es un gran benefactor de su alma mater, la Universidad de Michigan; a la que ha hecho aportaciones de $313 millones, siendo el donante más grande en la historia de la universidad.

 

 

 

Top Ten Politically Incorrect Terms for Today’s Conservative

Liberals love to change the meaning of words. We love to rile them up and use the right word. Here are some of our favorites.

Check it out:

  1. Call them Thugs. We all know a thug when we see a thug.
  2. Call it fraud. The junk science of climate change is nothing but lies for big government control.
  3. Call abortion Murder. We can always hope that the careless liberal heart will somehow get touched.
  4. Call them Radicals. It’s not that Radicals are Muslim, it’s that Muslims are Radical.
  5. Call them the Democrat Party. Because we all know there is nothing Democratic about them.
  6. Call them Illegals. Why should we care if it is insulting to them? Sometimes the truth hurts.
  7. Call them Islamic State. Obama says ISIL, the media says ISIS, but we like to point out they are followers of Islam.
  8. Call him Jeb. When he wins the Democrat nomination, we won’t want to associate him with our Bush.
  9. Call her Hillary. They’re trying to get on the Clinton bandwagon, don’t let them!
  10. Call him he. His God given DNA will always say he’s a man.
    Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2015/06/top-ten-politically-incorrect-terms-for-todays-conservative/

 

 

 

HOME | POLICY | FINANCE

Obama’s trust-me approach falls flat with Democrats

Greg Nash

By Mike Lillis 

President Obama’s argument that Democrats should trust his vision on trade is falling flat on Capitol Hill.

Democrats — even some of Obama’s closest allies — say it’s not enough for the president to pronounce his trade agenda the most progressive in history.

The lawmakers want assurances that the agreements under negotiation, particularly a huge deal being finalized with Pacific Rim nations, will protect U.S. jobs — assurances many say they simply haven’t gotten. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“I take the president at his word that he believes … the argument he’s making, but I think he’s wrong,” Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) said Wednesday. 

“The analysis I’ve done comes to a very different conclusion,” he added. “It’s clear that this will, in the long term, not result in the growth of American jobs and an increase in wages.”

Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said he’s in talks with administration officials, who have yet to convince him the president’s trade agenda would create jobs in North Carolina.

“I’m still at the place I’ve always been: leaning no,” Butterfield said Wednesday.   

“There’s a difference between growing the economy and helping American companies grow the bottom line, and creating jobs,” he added.

Trade promotion authority (TPA), also known as fast-track, passed the Senate last month but faces a tougher road in the House.

Sponsored by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the bill would grant Congress an up-or-down vote on Obama’s trade deals, but deny lawmakers the power to amend or filibuster those agreements. The additional power is seen as necessary to Obama finalizing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) — a 12-nation behemoth that stands as a top priority in his second term.

The president has acknowledged the failures of trade pacts of the past — particularly the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed by former President Clinton. But he’s sought to reassure Congress that he’s learned from those mistakes and is negotiating the “most progressive trade deal in history.”

“When people say this trade deal is bad for working families, they don’t know what they’re talking about,” Obama said in April. “My entire presidency has been about working families.”

The White House pitch has paid some dividends, as several on-the-fence House Democrats have come out in recent weeks behind fast-track. Reps. Ami Bera (Calif.) and Rick Larsen (Wash.) are two such backers, and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) become the latest supporter on Wednesday, arguing that the TPP would be a boon for his export-heavy district. 

“I’ll probably be very lonely in New England,” Himes said by phone.

“But my district is a very strong exporting district. … It’s got the possibility of increasing exports and growing jobs.”

But the vast majority of House Democrats oppose the president’s trade agenda, naming a long list of concerns — from food safety to the environment, currency manipulation to labor rights and the loss of U.S. jobs.

They’re also accusing the administration of pushing trade agreements benefiting corporations and other well-heeled interests, while leaving working-class Americans out in the cold. 

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) characterized the TPP as “a secret deal negotiated in back rooms and designed to help multinational corporations reap trillions while Americans lose their jobs.” 

Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said assertions that fast-track will help the working class have “no accountability whatsoever.”

“There is no way as an elected official you can say you are … fighting for working families and still vote for this kind of bill,” he said.

Driving that point home, top Democrats on Wednesday joined forces with labor unions and other TPA critics to trumpet a petition with 2 million signatures opposing the legislation.

Democratic support will be crucial to the TPA’s success, because GOP leaders are struggling to rally the votes to pass the measure on their own.

Yet Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Wednesday acknowledged in an interview on Fox News Radio’s “Kilmeade & Friends” that he doesn’t have the votes to pass fast-track.

“I don’t think we’re quite there yet,” he said.

Republicans have talked about winning 200 votes for fast-track from their conference, a high bar given many in the House GOP are reflexively against voting to grant Obama additional powers.

If the GOP sees more than 50 of its members defect — a real possibility — Democrats would need to provide about two dozen votes.

Only 16 Democrats are yes votes on The Hill’s Whip List.

  The White House is confident its outreach strategy will succeed in swaying enough undecided Democrats for fast-track to pass.

“We’re not expecting to lose it,” press secretary Josh Earnest said when asked about the House vote, while cautioning there is still work to be done.

Obama is offering his full support to Democrats who back him on trade and face blowback from unions and liberal groups in primary elections.

“Those who are concerned about it, I think, do take a lot of solace in knowing that they can count on the support of President Barack Obama in a Democratic primary if they need it,” Earnest said, noting that surveys show the president is “the most popular, influential and well-liked figure in Democratic politics.”

But in a setback for the White House, two undecided Democrats — Reps. John Carney (Del.) and Cedric Richmond (La.) — said this week that they’re leaning no. 

“I’ve got a whole set of criteria as it relates to Delaware, and there are a number of things that they’re just not there yet on,” Carney said. 

Obama’s battle with Democrats over trade has been intense, and there were further signs of the strain on Wednesday.

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), who opposes fast-track, argued on “The Bill Press Show” that the White House is taking the issue too personally by promising to stand behind those who back Obama on trade.

“What it suggests to me is this is really personal for the president,” she said. “He’s basically saying, ‘For the seven years that you’ve kind of had my back and been with me, [it’s] irrelevant. Because I’m making all my decisions now on TPP and TPA.’

“And I don’t think that’s a good message to be sending to Democrats frankly, if you’re trying to ensure that some of them who are waffling right now are going to stand with you,” she said.

Speier went on to say that Democrats don’t have great feelings for Obama after his seven years in office.

Asked if Obama has a reservoir of goodwill with House Democrats, she said: “I can’t say that he does.”

 

 

Obama Just Tossed Away His Last Card On Iran’s Nukes

Israel will be left to carry out a strike, it will have no option.

Via NY Post:

As the June 30 deadline for the Iran nuclear deal approaches, President Obama is putting all his cards on the table — by announcing he is keeping no cards in his hand.

In an astonishing interview with Israel’s Channel 2, the president declared that “the best way to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon is a verifiable, tough, agreement.

“A military solution will not fix it, even if the United States participates. It would temporarily slow down an Iranian nuclear program, but it would not eliminate it.”

Why is this astonishing? Because Obama is publicly eliminating any American possibility that we will bomb Iran’s nuclear sites even if the deal in which he has invested so much collapses.

Despite his declaration at a Washington synagogue last week that “Iran must not, under any circumstances, be allowed to get a nuclear weapon,” the president is in fact making it very clear Iran will go nuclear, and with his implicit assent.

Period.

Note that he has decided to eliminate the possibility of a military strike even though he has already indicated his deal will allow Iran to go nuclear in 2028.

 

 

LA  CUBANA  GORDITA 

Una  cubana, un poco gordita, esta maquillándose frente al  espejo del baño de una discoteca. 

De  pronto entra una hermosa pelirroja: ojos azules, esbelta, estrechade  cintura. 

Viste ajustados pantalones de cuero, se mira al espejo y dice antes de salir: ¡¡¡Gracias 

Diet  Coke!!!
La cubana  viendo de reojo queda paralizada,
lápiz labial sin llegar a  los labios.
Unos minutos después entra una hermosa
morena,  doblemente espectacular, mucho más
escultural que la chica  anterior. Lleva un
estrecho vestido, se mira al espejo de  arriba a
abajo y dice antes de marcharse:
¡¡¡Gracias  Ultra Slim Fast!!!
La cubanita queda  atónita con el tubo de rímel
en las manos a medio abrir.
Al poco rato entra una hermosa rubia, todavía más
bella  que las dos anteriores: Despampanante, un
cuerpo que para el tráfico, piel suave y tersa, largas y bien
torneadas  piernas. La muñeca se mira al espejo, observa su bien
formado trasero bajo el estrecho pantalón de seda
y  murmura: ¡¡¡Gracias Special K!!!
Haciendo un gran  esfuerzo, la cubana se recupera,
termina de maquillarse y se alista para salir. Al dar
una mirada final al espejo,  exclama:
¡¡¡ ME CAGO EN TU MADRE, LA  CARRETA!!

 

 “FREEDOM IS  NOT  FREE”

“En mi opinión”

Blooger:  https://www.blogger.com/home

https://enmiopinionlrgm.wordpress.com/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s