LazaroAlcaldedeMiamiDade 004

No 982 “En mi opinión” Junio 23, 2015

No 982   “En mi opinión”  Junio 23, 2015

“IN GOD I TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño Editor

AMENPER: Hillary Clinton Presidente de una América Marxista

Hillary Clinton dijo en un discurso reciente que ella prefiere una sociedad que  “estemos todos juntos en esto, todos iguales”, donde “gobierno puede ofrecerle más trabajo para todos los americanos,” con “oportunidad para todos y privilegios especiales  para ninguno.”

Esto puede ser aterrador. ¿Si en el mundo que prefiere Hillary, una persona logra un éxito mayor que otro con una igualdad de oportunidades, el resultado del éxito constituye un privilegio especial que debe ser negado a los más exitosos? ¿Hay que quitarle sus privilegios y lo que logró para repartirlo entre los otros?

Esto me suena como marxismo, pero tenemos que recordar que Hillary es más un marxista doctrinal que Obama, en el mismo sentido que el Raúl y el Che Guevara eran más marxistas que Fidel.

Fidel y Obama utilizan su ideología del marxismo para su beneficio personal y no admiten compartir para beneficios del partido, algo si este algo les quita autoridad.

Me temo que realmente una presidencia de Hillary Clinton sería  mucho más peligrosamente socialista que el mandato de Obama. El narcisismo incesante de Obama y la negativa a trabajar con los líderes de cualquiera de las partes se ha presentado haciéndolo mucho menos eficaz y peligroso de lo que él pudo haber sido de lo contrario. Pero Hillary no sufre de ese problema. Ella se prestará lista a forjar alianzas, trabajar con ambos lados y acribillar enemigos políticos para  conseguir lo que quiere, y lo que ella quiere es una América Marxista. 

Desde 1971, cuando tenía un veinte tres año y era estudiante de derecho de Yale, Hillary Diane Rodham sirvió como interna para lo que era en ese entonces, el grupo de abogados más  comunista de la nación, Treuhaft, Walker y Burnstein. Este despacho nunca ocultó sobre su la conexión al partido comunista. Defendieron los comunistas del partido e incluso a miembros del grupo militante, Panteras Negras.

Algunos  cercanos partidarios políticos de  Hillary están preocupados acerca de su tiempo en el bufete. Por supuesto tratan de mantener esta historia que muestra su radicalideología marxista lo más oculta posible del público.

En un discurso de 2007 en el tema de la “moderna progresividad visión de prosperidad compartida”, la entonces senadora Hillary Clinton dijo, “es el momento para un nuevo comienzo, para poner fin al Gobierno de unos pocos, por unos pocos y para unos pocos, el tiempo para rechazar la idea de una “en su propia “sociedad y reemplazarlo con responsabilidad compartida para la prosperidad compartida. Yo prefiero una sociedad compartida y que “estemos todos en esto juntos”.

 Esto no era una idea aislada, es su doctrina, en más o menos las mismas palabras las repitió con este pensamiento en un discurso de campaña presidencial recientemente

¿Ahora me pregunto, está  América listo para esta “Visión progresista” de Hillary?

Y no nos olvidemos de le radical lazos islámicos yihadista.

Mientras que era Secretaria de Estado Hillary Clinton su diputado y  jefe de personal, Huma Abedin mantenía y todavía mantiene  estrechos lazos con la Hermandad musulmana.

No sé hasta qué punto los candidatos republicanos tengan las agallas para denunciar el marxismo de Hillary sin pelos en la lengua. 

Se lo deben a la nación, si no lo hacen y el pueblo vota por Hillary estará votando por unos Estados Unidos marxistas, si lo hacen a sabiendas, es su derecho, pero al menos que no nos digan “arrepentidos” después que no sabían que Hillary era comunista.

 

 

AMENPER: LA VERDAD LOS HARÁ LIBRES.

En estos tiempos en que vemos cómo los militantes ateos atacan a las religiones de una manera absurda, clamando que se sienten “ofendidos” en sus creencias ateas.

Pero lo absurdo del hecho es que el ateísmo no es una creencia, es exactamente la falta de creencia, y de hecho del que no cree, no tiene por qué sentirse molesto de lo que otros crean, mucho menos sentirse emocionalmente afectados.

Sin lugar a dudas los militantes ateos de hoy son realmente un movimiento político disfrazado de una religión que usa el ateísmo cómo excusa para avanzar su ideología política. El comunismo fue la primera ideología que estableció el ateísmo como doctrina y sus derivados son los que vemos ahora como los ateos militantes.

El problema es que a mi pensar el ateísmo realmente no existe, es una condición escapista con la que la persona trata de auto-sugestionarse para excusarse de la responsabilidad de una creencia. 

La historia que me hacían los compañeros de estudios que habían sido veteranos de la guerra de Corea, testificaban el hecho que durante el combate, en las trincheras no había ateos.  Todos se sentían cerca de un ser superior por la cercanía de la posibilidad del final de su existencia en este mundo y trataban de comunicar su sentimiento por la oración.

Lo que más cerca viví y vi en mi juventud realmente fuel el agnosticismo, que muchos confunden con el ateísmo, pero  que es la opinión que los valores de la verdad son relativos, especialmente con respecto a  afirmaciones religiosas tales como si Dios, cosas divinas o sobrenaturales que puedan que  existen o no existen, que pudieran existir pero es algo desconocido que no podemos negar ni afirmar, pero que no podemos afirmar tampoco que Dios no existe como dicen los ateos. 

En un sentido del término, un agnóstico es alguien que no cree ni deja de creer en la existencia de Dios, mientras que un ateo declara que no cree que exista un Dios

Pero según pasa la vida del individuo y adquiere más experiencias durante su existencia,  más consciente se hace de que no está formado de carne y huesos solamente, que hay algo que lo hace diferente a los animales, y que eso es el espíritu que es lo que lo hace racional y consciente y razona  de que alguien puso ese espíritu en su cuerpo, por ende tiene que haber un ser superior, racionalmente tiene que existir un Dios, y esta es la conclusión a la que en cualquier momento dado piensa el 98% de la humanidad.

Hay muchos conceptos de Dios, pero hay una aceptación por una gran mayoría de que existe un Dios.

Cualquier cosa menos Dios no es racional, algo más que Dios no es posible, por eso es racional hablar a través del espíritu con Dios, pero no es racional hablar a través de otra persona que se autoproclame un Dios en la tierra.

En primer lugar, es esencial que la idea de Dios deba de ser concebida como el poder más profundo en el universo y segundo, él debe ser concebido bajo la forma de una personalidad mental, no algo físico como uno de los llamados “representantes” de Dios o con un Dios con los atributos de un carácter con los defectos humanos.

Una cosa es la religión para propagar la idea de Dios, que debe de ser la razón de la existencia de las instituciones religiosas, y otras es crear doctrinas y crear un Dios como un perro de presa para controlar la vida de otros a nombre de Dios.

Un Dios que puede saborear y complacerse con esas superfluidades del horror no es ningún Dios con el que un ser humano puede realmente o se deba sentir atraído. 

La arrogancia, la vanidad de sentirse adorado, el horroroso castigo al que no lo reconoce, esto no puede ser realmente un Dios. En otras palabras el “absoluto Dios” con los propósitos y carácter humanos que se le atribuyen sería un hombre, pero así es como visualiza a  Dios  la gente común por las enseñanzas de las religiones.  No importa que el cristianismo predique desde sus orígenes al verdadero Dios de amor y perdón a su creación, los “representantes” del cristianismo “castigan” ponen penitencias y hasta han llegado a asesinar a otros en nombre de Cristo.  Y que vamos a decir de religiones como el Islam o el Judaísmo con creencias de un Dios que les ha otorgado una supremacía racista, que les da autoridad para castigar a los que no son de su raza o esas religiones de magia negra que hacen “trabajos” para eliminar a sus enemigos.

El problema es como enseñaba Aristóteles en su búsqueda de la verdad, hay que buscar la verdad en uno mismo, mundo y la experiencia no pueden nunca interrumpirse para un análisis totalmente objetivo, solamente y nada más que la mente del observador puede encontrar la verdad y el simple acto de observación o enseñanza externa afecta el resultado de cualquier aproximación empírica a la verdad la verdad llega por la mente y sus experiencias, y la naturaleza y la búsqueda de la verdad son inseparables. 

Decían Platón y Aristóteles que hay que encontrar la verdad por eliminación, haciéndose preguntas mentales y eliminando las preguntas por la posibilidad en las respuestas, hasta llegar a la verdad.

La verdad es lo que lo puede llevar a uno a una creencia saludable, de no buscarla, de aceptar lo que otros te digan que es la verdad, te puede hacer adoptar una creencia que te hará esclavo de la mentira.

Verdad es la función de las creencias que empiezan  y terminan con el razonamiento.

LA VERDAD OS HARÁ LIBRE. Evangelio de Juan 8:31

 

ESPAÑA ES UNA SIMPLE PROVINCIA DEL IMPERIO BILDERBERG: BILDERBERG ESCRIBE EL GUIÓN

by Nuevo Accion. Por Juan Fernández- El Espía Digital, vía “El Periódico”

Eduardo Madina fue la apuesta de Bilderberg para las primarias del partido socialista del verano pasado. Ganó Pedro Sánchez, pero el club tiene sus ojos puestos en Pablo Iglesias, que incluyó en el programa de Podemos una reclamación histórica del lobi de los poderosos: la creación de un gobierno único mundial.

La Corona. Según Martín Jiménez, el rey «pasó un cásting» frente al club Bilderberg antes de ser elegido por Franco para sucederle, y su abdicación fue también dictada por el club. Se la pidieron a la reina Sofía en la reunión del 2012  y le exigieron que no esperara al otoño pasado, que eran  los planes del Rey.

Henry Kissinger. Es el factótum del club Bilderberg, el ‘Maquiavelo del siglo XX’. Se le asigna la planificación de no pocos golpes de Estado y el apoyo a dictaduras en todo el planeta. Suya es la frase: «Una España fuerte es peligrosa». A sus 93 años, la temporada pasada publicó un libro de elocuente título: ‘Orden mundial’.

Ana Patricia Botín. El poder económico español ha mantenido estrechos vínculos con Bilderberg. Aparte de la presidenta del Santander, también han asistido a las reuniones César Alierta, José María Entrecanales, Juan María Nin o Juan Luis Cebrián. Este último es hoy el único representante español en el equipo directivo del club.

El triunfo de Felipe. Bilderberg bendijo su promoción como candidato a la presidencia del Gobierno después de que varios miembros del club se reunieran con él en 1977. Desde entonces fue uno de sus alumnos aventajados: comunicó al cónclave el sí a la OTAN antes de anunciarlo a los españoles y aceptó la orden de desmantelar la siderurgia española.

¿Y si la historia no fuera como nos la contaron? ¿Y si detrás de los grandes acontecimientos ocurridos en Occidente en los últimos 60 años no estuvieran la fatalidad o el viento de los tiempos, sino una oscura mano que diseña a conciencia el devenir de los países? El misterio que rodea al club Bilderberg -exclusivo cónclave que reúne cada año a algunas de las grandes figuras del poder político, económico y militar del planeta para mantener conversaciones cuyo contenido jamás trasciende-, alimenta las tesis de quienes ven en esta elitista camarilla al verdadero gobierno del mundo en la sombra. Hasta el punto de considerar que son ellos, y no el devenir de la historia, quienes quitan y ponen gobiernos, relevan a reyes en los tronos y eligen a los líderes que la gente luego vota en las urnas. ¿También en España?

Coincidiendo con la reunión anual del club Bilderberg, que tuvo lugar la semana pasada en un hotel de lujo de la localidad austriaca de Telfs, la periodista sevillana Cristina Martín Jiménez, considerada una experta mundial en este intrigante lobi, acaba de publicar Los planes secretos del Club Bilderberg para España (Temas de hoy), un libro donde establece conexiones directas entre algunos de los acontecimientos más decisivos de nuestra historia reciente y ciertas reuniones de este grupo de poder. Sus fuentes son los archivos desclasificados del servicio secreto norteamericano, que le llevan a hacer una afirmación inquietante: «El club Bilderberg guionizó la primera transición política española y ahora está guionizando la segunda».

Viajemos en el tiempo. Los libros de Historia se fijan en hitos conocidos, pero hay quien prefiere leer el devenir de los hechos situando el foco en sucesos menos publicitados. Desde este otro punto de vista, la democracia española pivota sobre una fecha:18 de diciembre de 1973. Ese día, Henry Kissinger, secretario de Estado del Gobierno norteamericano y principal figura de Bilderberg desde la fundación del club en 1954, viaja a Madrid y se reúne con Franco y el entonces príncipe Juan Carlos de Borbón, y le suelta a Laureano López Rodó, ministro de Exteriores: «Cualquier país que ataque a Estados Unidos pagará un alto precio».

Al día siguiente, Luis Carrero Blanco, presidente del Gobierno, saltaba por los aires en un atentado de ETA. «Cuesta creer que la CIA no supiera nada de una bomba que estalló a 100 metros de su embajada», señala Martín Jiménez. Dos meses antes, Carrero había negado a EEUU el permiso para usar las bases en la guerra del Yom Kippur. «A Kissinger, autor de la frase ‘una España fuerte es peligrosa’, le preocupaban los planes nucleares de Franco y prefería otro futuro para España. Incluso Suárez dijo: ‘No sé si ETA cobra en rublos o en dólares’», añade la investigadora.

Según los documentos desclasificados de la CIA y la Agencia de Seguridad Nacional norteamericana, mucho antes de ser designado por Franco para legarle, Juan Carlos se reunió con miembros de Bilderberg en Estados Unidos y recibió las bendiciones del selecto clan para ser él quien pilotara el futuro de España.

España y la OTAN

Esta misma situación volvió a repetirse una década más tarde con Felipe González. «Él y Luis Yánez viajaron a Washington en 1977 y se reunieron con Rockefeller y otras figuras destacadas del club. A su vuelta, González se presentó como alternativa fiable al poder», señala Martín Jiménez, quien asegura que el líder socialista comunicó a figuras destacadas de Bilderberg su intención de aceptar la permanencia de España en la OTAN antes de anunciarlo al país y se comprometió a desmantelar la industria siderúrgica española como pago por el apoyo otorgado por el club a la democracia española.

Desde que el emisario del Rey, Manuel Prado y Colón de Carvajal, se convirtió en un fijo en las reuniones, son muchos los políticos y empresarios de España que han asistido a las sesiones de Bilderberg: Zapatero, Fraga, Almunia, Rato, Dolores de Cospedal, Ana Patricia Botín… «Pero no hay constancia oficial, aunque a esos debates hayan acudido ministros, cargos públicos y la propia reina Sofía», denuncia la investigadora.

En su opinión, hay coincidencias temporales que hablan por sí solas. «Llama la atención que poco después de que Javier Solana asistiera a la reunión de 1985, fue nombrado secretario general de la OTAN. En el 2012, a escasos días de que Soraya Sáenz de Santamaría fuera invitada a la cita de ese año, España solicitó el rescate financiero», observa Martín Jiménez, para quien la UE, el euro, la crisis y las políticas de austeridad son «creaciones puramente Bilderberg».

Este club, que toma su nombre del hotel holandés donde celebró su primera reunión, nació para reforzar los lazos entre Estados Unidos y Europa frente a la URSS, pero ha devenido en un opaco cónclave que en opinión de muchos tiene más poder del aparente. El político y jurista Antonio Garrigues Walker, amigo personal de Rockefeller, lo define como «el cerebro del mundo». Y España parece ser uno de los asuntos predilectos de ese puente de mando planetario en la sombra.

«Nuestra situación geoestratégica nos convierte en una pieza muy valiosa para Bilderberg», advierte la periodista. Esa fijación por España llega a nuestros días. Según Martín Jiménez, la mano del club está detrás de la abdicación del Rey. «A la reina Sofía le dijeron en la sesión del 2012 que el Rey estaba descontrolado y convenía pensar en el relevo, que se produjo el año pasado, mientras la reina estaba de nuevo reunida con el club. Juan Carlos pensaba abdicar en otoño, pero Bilderberg creía que se avecinaba una guerra con el Estado Islámico y prefería tener resuelto antes el tema español. Ellos eligieron la fecha», asegura Martín Jiménez.

No siempre aciertan en sus apuestas. Según la investigadora, el candidato elegido por el club para dirigir el partido socialista en las primarias del verano pasado era Eduardo Madina, no Pedro Sánchez. Pero no hay peligro: en su opinión, estamos en puertas de que se repita con Pablo Iglesias la misma historia que con Felipe González. «La inteligencia de este club se mide tanto en su capacidad para elegir a los líderes como en su habilidad para atraer a los demás. Lo único que no varía es el objetivo: tener bien atado el poder y caminar hacia la instauración de un gobierno único en el mundo. Y en esa hoja de ruta -concluye Martín Jiménez-, España es una simple provincia del imperio Bilderberg».

 

 

Coming crisis of spending and national debt

By The Joplin Globe,

A report released this week puts front and center an issue that few politicians — including presidential candidates — are discussing. Yet this issue dwarfs the significance of anything else that has overtaken the national conversation. We’re talking about federal spending and the national debt, which is now at $18 trillion.

Currently, the debt held by the public is at 74 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. That is money that is borrowed on the open market from domestic and foreign investors and is owed back. The rest of the national debt is internal debt, meaning it is money our government has borrowed from itself, such as when it raids Social Security’s trust fund. But that, too, is money collected from the public in the form of taxes with the promise that it will be there when needed.

Unless something changes, the national debt will exceed the gross domestic product by 2040, according to projections from the Congressional Budget Office. That may sound a long way off, but given that it has taken us decades to get into this mess, 25 years is a short time frame to make a difference. One-third of that time — eight years — could be consumed by the next person elected president.

A recent Concord Coalition analysis determined: “Achieving the same level of debt relative to the economy by 2040 as we have now would require a $210 billion cut in spending or increase in revenues — about $1,450 per person — every year for 25 years from the levels assumed in current projections. To reduce the debt to its 50-year average (38 percent of GDP) would require a $480 billion cut in spending or increase in taxes every year.”

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

–By the end of the next president’s second term — should he or she have one — “the major health and retirement programs, along with interest on the debt, will account for over two-thirds of total spending — up from 58 percent of spending in 2017.”

–“In 2017, when the next president takes office — the nation will spend $331 billion just in interest payments on that debt, an amount that grows to more than $800 billion by the end of the next president’s possible second term.”

Just so you know, the interest payment on all that debt will be more than the current federal spending on defense, education, transportation and medical research combined.

No matter where the candidates stand on other issues, none of it will really matter unless they can stand up to runaway federal spending. In the end, it’s even less about the candidate than it is about each of us. What choices, commitments and sacrifices are we willing to make in order to avoid the coming national debt crisis? Are we willing to demand that our next president make spending and debt the top priority?

 

 

Black GOP Senator Just Destroyed Obama’s Response to Church Shooting With This One Burning Question

“I think the president is off base on this one to be honest with you.”

  1. Christopher Agee

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., appeared on Fox News Channel’s The Kelly File Friday to share his reaction to the recent mass shooting in his state. He began by offering some perspective to those quick to pin any certain label on shooting suspect Dylann Roof.

“We have a man who committed a heinous crime,” he said, “and it seemed like his heart was completely filled with hate and it scrambled his mind.”

RELATED STORIES

Instead of attempting to diagnose him any further at this point, however, Scott said he is more interested in tending to “a community that is suffering because of his actions.”

As for Barack Obama’s knee-jerk reaction in calling for addition gun control legislation in the aftermath of the shooting, Scott shared his disapproval.

“I think the president is off base on this one to be honest with you,” he said.

TRENDING STORIES

He went on to pose a question to those who advocate gun control as a way to prevent violence.

“What type of gun law would have made this situation not occur?” he asked. “Frankly, he was already breaking gun laws that currently exist when he went into a church with a gun.”

Scott went on to explain that many of the gun control measures endorsed on the left would have had no impact on this shooting anyway.

“He had a handgun,” he noted, “which is not an automatic weapon, so there is really no conversation to be had that somehow the gun laws we have are not working.”

Scott concluded: “Laws are created for a just society. This guy was not trying to be a part of a just society.”

 

 

Obama uses the N-word

If it’s not ok for a white guy to say it than it is not ok for a black guy to say.
Check it out:

President Barack Obama did not mince words in discussing race in a recent interview, going so far as to use the N-word in talking about America’s complex racial history when speaking to Marc Maron on the comedian’s “WTF” podcast in Los Angeles last week.

“The legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, discrimination in almost every institution of our lives, you know, that casts a long shadow, and that’s still part of our DNA that’s passed on. We’re not cured of it,” Obama said in the interview, posted in full on Monday. “And it’s not just a matter of it not being polite to say ‘n——-’ in public. That’s not the measure of whether racism still exists or not. It’s not just a matter of overt discrimination. … Societies don’t overnight completely erase everything that happened 2-300 years prior.”

Addressing last week’s attack at a historic black church in Charleston, South Carolina, Obama reiterated his point that “no other advanced nation on Earth … tolerates multiple shootings on a regular basis and considers it normal.” In Australia, Obama noted, there was a mass shooting in Tasmania that was “so shocking” that the country changed its gun laws.
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2015/06/obama-uses-the-n-word/

 

Boom: The Supreme Court Just Issued A Decision In Favor Of A Church Battling Government

Rob Crandall / Shutterstock.com

Associate Justice Clarence Thomas offered the court’s opinion.

James Beattie 

The United States Supreme Court overturned a law Thursday which prohibited an Arizona church and other religious institutions from displaying advertisements for events.

In Reed v. Gilbert, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Pastor Clyde Reed and the Good News Community Church in Gilbert, Ariz., which challenged a town ordinance placing restrictions on “directional signs” advertising events for religious organizations. The restrictions mandated that signs be limited to six square feet in size and could only be put up within 14 hours of an event. Political signs and others, however, could be displayed for several months. Western Journalism’s B. Christopher Agee gave background on the case last year:

RELATED STORIES

Two lower courts found that the town is within its rights to impose differing rules on sign placement based on the parties involved, provided the regulations are not based on the sign’s content.

Associate Justice Clarence Thomas offered the court’s opinion. “The Town has offered no reason to believe that directional signs pose a greater threat to safety than do ideological or political signs,” wrote Thomas. “If anything, a sharply worded ideological sign seems more likely to distract a driver than a sign directing the public to a nearby church meeting.”

A sign ordinance narrowly tailored to the challenges of protecting the safety of pedestrians, drivers, and passengers—such as warning signs marking hazards on private property, signs directing traffic, or street numbers associated with private houses — well might survive strict scrutiny.

The signs at issue in this case, including political and ideological signs and signs for events, are far removed from those purposes. As discussed above, they are facially content based and are neither justified by traditional safety concerns nor narrowly tailored.

 

 

Judge Demands More Answers from IRS
Try telling the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that you lost some tax documents and then magically found them again once legal pressure was applied. What do you think the end result would be for you if you tried to operate this way?  Judicial Watch is succeeding in court in its effort to remind the Obama IRS that it isn’t above the law.  But it’s clear to us after reviewing a seven-page court filing the IRS finally submitted in response to a court order that the tax agency is working to stonewall our efforts.

Last week, just to review, I told you how Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a Judicial Watch request to issue an order requiring the IRS to provide answers by June 12, 2015, on the status of the Lois Lerner emails the IRS had previously and falsely declared lost. Judicial Watch raised questions about the IRS’ handling of the missing emails in a June 2 court filing, demanding answers about Lerner’s emails, which had been recovered from backup tapes. Judge Sullivan agreed that Judicial Watch deserved answers and issued the court order on June 4, 2015.

So, late last Friday President Obama’s recalcitrant IRS agency finally complied with Judge Sullivan’s June 4 order requiring the agency to provide answers to Judicial Watch. Contrary to previous agency claims that the emails were lost and unrecoverable, the IRS finally admits that it has as many as 6,400 new Lerner emails but won’t promise to turn them over to us just yet. Even though the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) already identified and removed emails that are duplicates, the IRS is in “the process of conducting further manual deduplication of the 6,400” emails, rather than reviewing them in response to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act requests that are more than two years old now.

Our lawyers went back to the court right away and blew the whistle on this continued obstruction.  On Monday (June 15), our attorneys filed another response with the court.  We said the IRS should stop stonewalling and turn over the records it says it now has:

Judicial Watch respectfully requests that the Court order the IRS to start producing any non-exempt, responsive emails contained within the 6,400 emails immediately and disclose whether they are all or a subset of the recovered emails from the 1,268 backup tapes.

And we highlighted that the Obama IRS has no response to our well-founded accusations that it lied to Judicial Watch, the court, and to Congress.  In addition to withholding key information about Lerner’s “lost and found” emails, the Obama IRS:

does not refute in its seven-page Response that the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (“TIGTA”) was able to locate the Lois Lerner backup tapes within one day of its investigation or that the IRS never requested the backup tapes from its technicians before declaring that the emails were lost forever.

Yesterday evening, Judge Sullivan indicated that he was not satisfied with the IRS’ non-response to his court order.  He ordered a comprehensive report from the IRS by June 29:

The IRS shall file a supplemental report, setting forth any new information regarding: (1) TIGTA’s recovery of emails from the backup tapes; (2) TIGTA’s production of emails to the IRS; (3) the IRS’s review of emails and production to the plaintiff; and (4) the status of the TIGTA investigation.

And he also ordered the IRS into his court for a hearing on July 1 to discuss the notices.

We are pleased that the court is demanding answers.  Our attorneys battling the IRS in several federal courts are doing more than Congress, the media, or the Justice Department to hold the Obama IRS to account for its outrageous conduct and lies.  Barack Obama and his corrupt allies in Washington may think using the IRS to harass, audit, and intimidate Obama’s opposition so he can steal an election is no big deal.  Judicial Watch is happy to remind the Obama gang, which is still running and abusing the power of the IRS, the rule of law still applies to them. 

The Obama IRS isn’t the only agency on the radar of Judicial Watch and, again, Judge Sullivan…. 

Reopen Clinton FOIA Lawsuit

Revelations that Hillary Clinton used a secret email account to conduct official business while serving as secretary of state has led to more decisive action today by U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. Judge Sullivan issued a decision to reopen a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records about Huma Abedin, the former deputy chief of staff, to Hillary Clinton.

This is actually the second Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit that has been reopened because of Hillary Clinton’s hidden email records.  Judicial Watch is aware of no prior instances of closed FOIA cases being reopened by federal courts.

Judge Sullivan ruled that the “changed circumstances” of the discovery that Hillary Clinton and members of her State Department staff used secret email accounts to conduct government business warranted “reopening” the lawsuit. 

In asking Judge Sullivan to reopen the lawsuit, Judicial Watch cited a federal court rule (Rule 60(b)(3)) that allows a party to reopen a case due to “fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party”:

The State Department had an obligation under the Federal Records Act to properly preserve, maintain, and make available for retrieval records of its official functions. In fact, it is the obligation of the head of every federal agency to do so.  Secretary Clinton plainly violated her own legal obligations. Doing so was misconduct.

The State Department originally agreed with Judicial Watch’s request but later changed its mind and asked the Court to reopen the lawsuit because of “newly discovered evidence.”  In today’s ruling, Judge Sullivan simply reopened the case, rather than “spilling ink” on whether Hillary Clinton and the State Department committed fraud, misrepresentation or misconduct. 

Huma Abedin left the State Department in February 2013, and in May 2013, Politico reported that, since June 2012, she had been double-dipping, working as a consultant to outside clients while continuing as a top adviser at State. Abedin’s outside clients included Teneo, a strategic consulting firm co-founded by former Bill Clinton counselor Doug Band. According to Fox NewsAbedin earned $355,000 as a consultant to Teneo, in addition to her $135,000 SGE compensation.  As JW’s chief investigative reporter Micah Morrison documents:

Teneo serves as a kind of private-enterprise satellite to Clinton Inc. Doug Band, Mr. Clinton’s right-hand man for many years, is a Teneo founder. Huma Abedin, Mrs. Clinton’s right-hand woman for many years, was a senior advisor to Teneo at the same time she held a top position as part of Mrs. Clinton’s inner circle at the State Department. Bill Clinton was both a paid adviser to Teneo and a client. Secretary of State Clinton’s former Economic Envoy to Northern Ireland, Declan Kelly, is a Teneo co-founder and CEO.

JW was first to disclose the State Department’s sham approval of Bill Clinton’s “arrangement” with the Teneo sham operation.  

It was on March 2, 2015, that The New York Times reported then-Secretary Clinton used at least one non-“state.gov” email account to conduct official government business during her entire tenure as the secretary of state. It also was reported that Clinton stored these records on a non-U.S. government server at her home in Chappaqua, New York.

When the scandal came to light there were nearly 20 lawsuits and about 160 Judicial Watch FOIA requests affected by the Clinton email cover-up. In our various FOIA lawsuits, our lawyers have informed attorneys for the Obama administration that Hillary Clinton’s account and any other secret accounts used by State employees should be secured, recovered and searched.

Since the scandal broke, we filed two dozen FOIA requests on the email issue alone.  By my count, we filed eight new lawsuits just to get Hillary Clinton’s hidden emails and details about how they were illegally hidden from the American people, the courts, and Congress.  Our most recent lawsuit (the ninth!) is against John Kerry, Hillary Clinton’s successor as secretary of state, to try to force him to follow the law and retrieve the government email records purloined by Clinton.

It is now apparent that Hillary Clinton’s massive email cover-up is unraveling. We welcome Judge Sullivan’s decision to reopen this lawsuit. Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration concealed records and lied to obstruct federal courts and Judicial Watch from finding out about the secret emails.  The court battle to get to the truth about Huma Abedin’s “special government employee” (SGE) privileges at State is underway. The reopening of this case brings Judicial Watch one step closer to forcing the State Department to ensure that the government records in Hillary Clinton’s “secret” email system are properly preserved, protected and recovered as federal law requires. 

Given Huma Abedin’s key role in the Clinton’s cash raising operation, and even the Benghazi scandal, this resuscitated lawsuit could not be timelier. 

Judicial Watch Goes to Court for Details on Bill Clinton’s Travels with Sex Offender

Establishment Washington goes through a memory wipe for favored, often leftist, politicians. Bill Clinton’s record of sexual depravity and assault is verboten.  Every once in a blue moon, the Big Media will remind us that he has had some problems in this area.  Vanity Fair did an expose on the issue back in 2008, though more to help Barack Obama, the then-leftist favorite.

At one time or another, Judicial Watch represented many of the female victims of Bill Clinton and his enablers – like Hillary Clinton and George Stephanopoulos.  So you can imagine we don’t have much patience for the joking manner of sloughing off credible allegations of rape against Bill Clinton by Juanita Broaddrick.  Or the sexual assault and abuse as described by Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey.  Or the terrifying threats and intimidation recounted by Dolly Kyle and Gennifer Flowers. 

So we take seriously the concerns about Bill Clinton’s trips to the Caribbean hideaway of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. One question we want answered is simple:  how much are taxpayers wasting on Secret Service protection for Bill Clinton’s dubious travel?   Simple question, but the Obama administration is in cover-up mode for Michelle Obama’s putative successor.

So, on June 15, 2015, we filed a Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to obtain records of all expenses incurred to provide “security and other services” to the former playboy president. Flight logbooks show that former President Clinton took more than a dozen flights on Epstein’s private jet. That’s what was first reported by Gawker.com. On at least one of these trips, Clinton was accompanied by four Secret Service agents.

The logbooks also show Clinton flew alongside a woman who prosecutors believe procured underage girls to service Epstein and others.  We filed the FOIA lawsuit after DHS failed to comply with a January 15, 2015, FOIA request to the U.S. Secret Service, seeking the following:

Any and all records reflecting expenses incurred to provide security and/or other services to former President Bill Clinton and any companions for trips to the Caribbean island owned by Jeffrey Epstein known as Little St. James from 2001 to the present date.

The scandal involving Epstein’s Boeing 727, dubbed the “Lolita Express,” and his private Caribbean island of Little Saint James first came to light in December 2014, when Virginia Roberts – now a married, 31-year-old mother of three – filed an affidavit in a Florida federal court charging that at age 15 she was procured by socialite Ghislaine Maxwell to satisfy the sexual needs of Epstein and his friends.  Flight logs show that Clinton shared Epstein’s plane with Maxwell and Sarah Kellen, Epstein’s former assistant, on at least 11 flights in 2002 and 2003.

New York Magazine reported that, in 2002, Clinton recruited Epstein to make his plane available for a week-long anti-poverty and anti-AIDS tour of Africa with Kevin Spacey, Chris Tucker, billionaire Ron Burkle and Clinton confidant Gayle Smith (who now serves on Barack Obama’s National Security Council). The logs from that trip show that Maxwell Kellen and a woman named Chauntae Davis joined the entourage for five days. Davis is a soft-core pornography movie actress, who appeared in Epstein’s address book under an entry for “massages.”  Clinton allegedly severed his connections with Epstein once allegations over the millionaire sex offender’s illegal behavior surfaced and he was arrested back in 2005. 

Just to show you the kind of company Bill Clinton is keeping these days, Epstein is registeredas a “Tier 1” sex offender with the U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Justice. He served 13 months in jail after signing a plea agreement with the U.S. government in 2008. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is said to have identified about 40 potential victims of the former investment banker.  Is Bill Clinton innocent of anything inappropriate or illegal?  Read closely this New York Post story and judge for yourself.  Here’s a snippet:

According to Virginia Roberts, who claims to have been one of Epstein’s many teenage sex slaves, Clinton also visited Epstein’s private Caribbean retreat, known as “Orgy Island.”

“I remember asking Jeffrey, ‘What’s Bill Clinton doing here?'” Roberts said in 2011. The former president, she added, was accompanied by four young girls during his stay – two of whom were among Epstein’s regular sex partners. “And [Jeffrey] laughed it off and said, ‘Well, he owes me a favor.’ He never told me what favors they were.”

Beginning with his misuse of state troopers when he was Arkansas governor, Bill Clinton has a long record of abusing his taxpayer-funded security details to facilitate and cover-up his illicit sexual activities. (By the way, if you think the Secret Service would never allow its officers to be used this way, you should track our website more closely.  For instance, clickhere for our Corruption Chronicles report on new documents we released about an obscene abuse of Secret Service resources to help out a “friend”/administrative assistant of the former Secret Service director.)

If there is nothing to hide in the Epstein scandal, then why is the Obama administration breaking federal transparency law rather than giving us information about his travels?  That we’ve now had to go to federal court to try to get this Secret Service information speaks volumes.
Until next week…


Tom Fitton
President

 

 

 

Republican Support for Trans Pacific Partnership Treaty Shows Their True Colors

by David R.

Congressional Republicans really showed their true colors this past Friday. Even though the bill did not pass, 191 house GOP members sided with President Obama and voted to grant him fast track authority over the Trans Pacific Partnership Treaty. As you may well know, this fast track authority would have given the president the power to negotiate any trade deal with any nation, without congressional approval of any kind. This is a scary proposal as for weeks we have heard report after report of congressmen having to be escorted into the basement of the capital building just to view the bill. Even though many have not read it, they still supported it because of its alleged “free trade” proponents. The most disappointing aspect of Friday’s vote is knowing it was Nancy Pelosi, who will always be remembered as saying “we have to pass it to see what’s in it” when it came to Obama care, is the one who ultimately killed the bill. It is highly likely that Pelosi’s actions are motivated by the fact that the unions were strongly opposed to this trade agreement. Whatever the case may be, the Republicans support for this trade authority proves beyond a reasonable doubt that there are very few in Washington who are truly working for the American people and that most support the money powers, even the President.

President Obama easily won the 2008 presidential election because many Americans saw the actions of the Republican Party being motivated by “corporate greed.” Liberals have accused the conservatives of caring about nothing but profits and corporate power. This tactic endured throughout the duration of Obama’s presidency and was successful in bringing the Republican Party into alignment with many of the Presidents goals. The support for fast track authority and the Trans Pacific Partnership Treaty not only proved the liberals making these accusations were right; it also brings into question the true motivations and loyalties of President Obama. While many liberals have fallen for the false notion that Obama is about protecting the poor and middle class, his actions have consistently proven otherwise. President Obama has proven over and over again that he is a stooge for big corporate power and that his policies actually do more to redistribute wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy elite he conditions you to hate. The best example is how he enabled Jeffrey Immelt, president of G.E, to pay no taxes and ship jobs overseas while serving as his “jobs czar.” This action alone should have shown the liberals who Obama really is. While the Republican establishment may support this kind of corporate greed, real conservatives certainly don’t. Unfortunately, the Republican Party is stacked with those that pose as conservatives and support this type of corporate power under the guise that it grows the economy.

Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz are two Republican Presidential contenders who were in favor of granting fast track authority to Obama. As I mentioned in my article “The Application of Social Science through a Ted Cruz Presidential Run,” Ted Cruz’s wife is an executive at Goldman Sachs, who would obviously have a big interest in seeing this trade agreement finalized. Rubio and others support the bill because it expands on the nation’s H1-B visa program. This program allows companies to bring in foreign workers who have degrees in high tech fields and hire them on a temporary basis. This actually displaces American workers as those motivated by higher profits are firing current employees and hiring foreigners, mostly from India, to do the work at less than half the cost. Even Disney is in on the action. Does this sound like something that a politician who has America’s best interest at heart would support?

The Guardian.com released a damning report citing the amount of money U.S. senators received to support the Fast Track Authority and Trans Pacific Partnership Treaty. According to the report, a total of $1,148,971 was given to the senate. Of that amount, the average senator that voted yea to support the bill received $17,676.48. Breaking it down further, the average Republican, that includes Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, were paid a total of $19,673.00 while Democrats only received $9,689.00. Well, at least Republicans held out as long as they could.

As it stands right now there are a whopping 92, 898,000 Americans who are not participating in the labor force. This is the highest number in over 37 years according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In the seven years since Obama took office over 12 million American workers have left the work force and that number continues to grow despite the claims that the economy is improving. According to the Center of Immigration Studies the number of jobs held by immigrants whether legal or illegal has increased since 2007, while the number of jobs held by American citizens since that time has actually decreased. This essentially means that much of the job growth in the United States has gone to immigrants while American workers continue to drop from the labor force. From The Center of Immigration Studies-

The BLS reports that 23.1 million adult (16-plus) immigrants (legal and illegal) were working in November 2007 and 25.1 million were working in November of this year — a two million increase. For natives, 124.01 million were working in November 2007 compared to 122.56 million in November 2014 — a 1.46 million decrease. 

Although all of the employment growth has gone to immigrants, natives accounted for 69 percent of the growth in the 16 and older population from 2007 to 2014. 

The number of immigrants working returned to pre-recession levels by the middle of 2012, and has continued to climb. But the number of natives working remains almost 1.5 million below the November 2007 level. 

More recently, natives have done somewhat better. However, even with job growth in the last two years (November 2012 to November 2014), 45 percent of employment growth has gone to immigrants, though they comprise only 17 percent of the labor force. 

America does not this treaty. It is due time to put American workers first and stop these insane policies that enable corporations to seek the cheapest labor possible. There is a point where it is no longer excusable to claim the cost of paying labor is “too expensive” and that point is when you sell out your own country in order to fatten your own wallet.

For those Americans who find themselves enamored with false conservatives like Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, it is time to do some real soul searching. They are the establishment that is selling out your children’s future with their support for big corporate policies. In fact, it is safe to say the vast majority of people sitting in the halls of the people’s government are voting for their own interest, not yours. This vote for fast track authority and the Trans Pacific Partnership Treaty proves that. Forty four house Republicans voted against the trade vote on Friday, of which I am proud to say my representative, Congressman Jim Bridenstein is one of them, and for that he deserves a thank you from his constituents, as do all of those that voted no. It is a safe bet that this fight is not over. There is little chance, seeing the amount of money that was paid to the senate, that the big corporate players will just let this fall to the wayside. Watch closely America and don’t let them get away with selling out your children’s future so big corporations can profit a few extra dollars.
Read more at http://patriotupdate.com/articles/republican-support-for-trans-pacific-partnership-treaty-shows-their-true-colors/

 

 

 

 

Mark Meadows to Fight GOP House Leadership: ‘Sometimes You Have to Make Changes to the Coach’

Josh Siegel @SiegelScribe /

A conservative House lawmaker angry at “a culture of punishment and fear” created by Speaker John Boehner and his leadership team has had enough.

“For the last six months they have doled out small punishments in a variety of forms,” said Rep. Mark Meadows of the conservative House Freedom Caucus.

“I personally have received those. I have not gone public until now—because they went pulic first. The leadership team wants to create a culture of punishment and fear without a culture of debate and dialogue. But there is no honor in bowing to a bully. There is only honor in fighting a good fight—win or lose. This is not a fight I will back down from.”

Meadows, R-N.C., was greeted in his Capitol Hill office last Thursday by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the House Oversight and Government Reform chairman, and given a lose-lose choice.

The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.  We’ll respect your inbox and keep you informed.

Sign Up

He could resign as chair of the Government Operations subcommittee or be removed from the role.

His misdeed?

Meadows, bucking party leaders intent on giving trade powers to President Obama, was one of 34 Republicans to vote against a normally routine procedural vote that allowed a vote on Trade Promotion Authority to occur.

Last week, in a similar show of force against its own party, House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., removed Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Steve Pearce of New Mexico and Trent Franks of Arizona from the GOP vote-counting (whip) team.

In response to this “trend” of retribution, conservative lawmakers planned a phone call for Monday tonight to discuss how to respond.

Meadows, in an interview with The Daily Signal, hinted that the response would be aggressive.

“My punishment has nothing to do with job performance,” said Meadows, adding that his vote against the procedural rule on trade was the first time he had voted against such a motion.

“I was given the option of resigning. But I felt like resigning would be admitting that I did something wrong, when all I did was vote with my conscience. This is designed to intimidate and humiliate me and I wear that as a badge of honor. It is a badge of honor to stand for freedom.”

Added the normally mild-mannered Meadows:

There has been a suggestion that I should keep quiet and mind my manners for several months and then I will be given an opportunity to receive some of the benefits leadership allows. But if we allow ourselves to be bullied in the House of Representatives, how will we stand for Americans being stripped of their freedoms?

This past weekend, in an interview with Politico, Chaffetz, using a sports reference, compared his action against Meadows to how a coach “needs to make a change on the field.”

Today, Meadows turned that reference around—directing his ire at Boehner.

“The number one thing [to fight back] is changing legislation,” Meadows said. “If leadership won’t allow that, the next course of action is to be clear that the consequences of leadership’s actions are felt here in Washington, D.C. Just like Chaffetz said sometimes you have to make changes to the team, sometimes you have to make changes to the coach. Speaker Boehner is not allowing all of the members of his team a chance to compete.”

Josh Siegel

Josh Siegel is the news editor for The Daily Signal.Send an email to Josh.

 

 

 

 

SECURITYNEWS

More Hillary Clinton Benghazi Emails Revealed

Sharyl Attkisson @SharylAttkisson /

There’s new evidence that the investigative record has long been incomplete on the administration’s actions surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on the U.S. compounds in Benghazi, Libya.

Only now—more than two-and-a-half years after the attacks—has the House Select Committee investigating Benghazi finally obtain additional, related emails exchanged through former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private server.

Ironically, it is longtime Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal who provided the emails.

Blumenthal, who The New York Times has reported had business aspirations in Libya, turned over his email exchanges with Clinton as part of a committee document request prior to his deposition last week.

The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.  We’ll respect your inbox and keep you informed.

Sign Up

A statement issued Monday by the Republican-led committee stated that the emails “should have been, but were not, [previously] turned over in response to committee requests.”

“Once again the Benghazi Committee uncovers information that should already be part of the public record but was not made available to the American people or congressional investigators,” said Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C. “These emails should have been part of the public record when Secretary Clinton left office and at a bare minimum included when the State Department released Clinton’s self-selected records on Libya.”

In yesterday’s statement, Gowdy asked the State Department to provide the House their copies of the emails by the end of the day, if they have them. The State Department had earlier claimed it already passed onto the committee all Benghazi-related emails from Clinton’s private server, as required under a court order.

It’s unclear as to whether Clinton failed to provide the emails at issue to the State Department, or whether the State Department withheld them from the committee.

The Benghazi Committee’s lead Democrat, Elijah Cummings of Maryland, criticized Monday’s public release of the Blumenthal-Clinton emails.

“Before today, Chairman Gowdy had not officially released a single email from a single witness in this entire investigation, which has lasted more than a year. Now, he has apparently decided that this one witness is so critical that his emails—and his alone—must be released,” said Cummings in a statement.

Blumenthal is a former aide to President Bill Clinton and a one-time reporter for The Washington Post, The New Yorker and Vanity Fair. Part of the reason for the controversy over his role in possibly advising Secretary Clinton via her private server is that the White House had reportedly barred him from working for the State Department. At the time, Obama officials were said to blame Blumenthal for negative stories about Barack Obama when he faced Clinton in the Democratic primary.

Excluded from the State Department, Blumenthal was hired by the Clinton Foundation and communicated with Secretary Clinton through her private server as he allegedly positioned himself to develop business relationships with the government of Libya after the ousting of dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

Some of the emails indicate that Clinton received intelligence and advice from Blumenthal. The emails were not turned over previously in response to congressional requests or Freedom of Information Act requests.

The emails show that Clinton was not just a passive recipient of memos or that she did not read them. They include an excerpt in which Clinton asked Blumenthal for information before official meetings with foreign officials. In another email, Clinton responds to a memo Blumenthal sent by stating, “This strains credulity based on what I know. Any other info about it?” And in other emails, Clinton prods Blumenthal to “keep ‘em coming,” referring to intel memos and information Blumenthal had passed along.

According to the Benghazi Committee, Blumenthal also “[planted] stories regarding the secretary’s role in Libya policy and the aftermath of the attacks in Benghazi.”

One email from Blumenthal advises Clinton, “When Qaddafi himself is finally removed, you should of course make a public statement before the cameras wherever you are, even in the driveway of your vacation house … The most important phrase is: ‘successful strategy.’”

Other emails read, “H: Got done and published. Sid” and “H: Got all this done. Complete refutation on Libya smear. [Hillary Clinton adviser] Philippe [Reines] can circulate this links. Sid”

“It is significant our top diplomat was directly receiving unvetted intelligence information, which may have come from sources with financial interests in Libya,” said Gowdy. “It is clear from these emails Secretary Clinton encouraged Mr. Blumenthal to send them in some instances calling into question her previous characterization of them as ‘unsolicited.’”

Clinton’s unusual use of a private server for some government business at the State Department means that independent sources are unable to search it for any public emails and documents. After the private server was exposed last year, Clinton gave the State Department 30,000 emails that she determined were official in nature. She admitted deleting and then wiping her server of more than 30,000 other messages that she says were private in nature.

@SharylAttkisson. Sharyl Attkisson

 

 

 

 

 

Nota: esto es bochornoso hasta  donde la necesidad llega que hay que robar para poder “resolver” como se llama allá al verbo de las penurias, nunca pensé que la Cuba que yo nací se convirtiera en un pueblo tan humilde, ¡nunca Cuba fue así!

JORGE A VILLALON: Vandalizan obras de la Bienal de La Habana

Si este evento, que termina hoy, pretendía invitar a «sentir la ciudad y su gente», sin duda alguna alcanzó sus objetivos

lunes, junio 22, 2015 | Ernesto Pérez Chang

LA HABANA, Cuba. – Si la duodécima Bienal de La Habana, según han expresado sus organizadores, pretendía invitar a «sentir la ciudad y su gente», sin duda alguna alcanzó sus objetivos.

Al menos los actos de vandalismo que han arruinado muchas de las obras y que en varios casos han motivado el retiro de piezas e instalaciones importantes, de manera irónica demuestran la verdadera utilidad práctica del arte para algunos cubanos.

Después de casi un mes de exhibición, lo que fuera una inmensa galería de arte a cielo abierto ha terminado convertida en un muestrario de calamidades. José Sierra, una de las personas encargadas del cuidado de las obras emplazadas en el Malecón habanero, nos comenta sobre lo que ha sucedido:

“Los primeros días la gente más o menos se paraban a mirar, algunos tocaban, sobre todo los niños, había policías en todas partes pero ya después ha sido un desastre. (…) No solo porque el mar y la lluvia han hecho lo suyo sino porque la gente te vigila, te juega cabeza o vienen bien tarde, por la madrugada y arrancan pedazos. Todo lo que sea de utilidad se lo llevan. Hasta se han robado las manijas de la pirámide de gaveteros [se refiere a la obra Secreter, de Lina Leal]. (…) Hace unos días yo vi cómo, al descaro, dos tipos sacaban los clavos de unos tablones. Estaban sentados en el piso dando martillazos como si estuvieran en el patio de su casa. Ya ni la policía les dice nada. Esto es como un “sírvase usted”. (…) Más allá de que sean incultos o no, lo cierto es que hay mucha necesidad”.

Moraima Cobas, también celadora, nos da una idea de los destinos de los fragmentos de algunas piezas:

“Ayer le oí decir a un hombre que la gente se lleva los trozos [de una obra que simula un pastel gigante] porque, como es de colores vivos y de un material como de plástico, lo cortan en pedacitos, los rebajan, les dan forma y hacen collares, pulsos, y cosas de artesanía. La gente no respeta nada. (…) Han tenido que acordonar el caldero [Delicatesen, de Roberto Fabelo] para que no se pierdan los tenedores. ¿Tú te imaginas que, en vez de tenedores, esa cosa la hubieran llenado de pollo o de carne? (…) Los 150 pesos [6 dólares como único pago mensual] que nos dan por cuidar no pagan todo el trabajo que pasamos toreando a la gente. Hay que tener mil ojos porque aquí en Cuba la gente se ha convertido en magos. Si los custodios del Capitolio se quedaran dormidos, ahí no queda ni la zapata”.

Durante todos estos días, quienes recorren las zonas de exposición han podido escuchar no solo frases de admiración o desconcierto de los espectadores sino, además, los comentarios sobre los posibles usos de aquel “montón de cosas” que, después de concluida la Bienal el próximo 22 de junio, pudieran ser mucho más útiles a esos que, en medio de tanta miseria, resulta penoso recriminarlos por su interpretación de este importante acontecimiento cultural solo como un rotundo carnaval del despilfarro o un mercadillo de gangas.

Alrededor de obras tan atractivas como la playa improvisada, las atalayas de madera o la “pista de hielo” ya se van alistando los hombres y mujeres que, carretillas en mano, aguardan con desesperación la clausura de la duodécima Bienal de La Habana para comenzar el acarreo de la arena, los hierros, los palos y cuanto material les sea útil. ¿Quién negará entonces que, si no los artistas, al menos sus obras terminarán integrándose a “las mecánicas de lo cotidiano?”.

 

Jorge Alberto Villalón Y.

 

(EMO) “Cuba es un pais del septimo mundo” LRGM

 

 

Stella McCartney’s New “Anti-Cruelty” Fashion Line Celebrates Fidel Castro and Che Guevara

Humberto Fontova | Jun 19, 2015

With a little help from her friendly Dad (Paul) Stella McCartney has made quite a name for herself as an ultra-chic fashion designer. This week she introduced her spring line on Manhattan’s Elizabeth Street with a Cuba-themed garden party where Fidel Castro and Che Guevara featured among the main props of the cheeky soiree.

The Stalinist mass-murderers were featured both as mannequins and as live costumed humans who walked around posing for pictures with the ultra-chic models and guests along with the delighted (and scrupulously vegetarian) hostess.

In keeping with Stella Mc Cartney’s “anti-cruelty” beliefs, the event featured strictly vegetarian foodstuffs. None of that musty “generation-gap” stuff for Stella! That stuff is “SOOOO 60’s” after all. Instead she’s a proud Daddy’s girl, and as such a proud vegetarian and PETA spokesperson. Indeed, Stella ritually denounces many fellow fashion designers as “heartless” should leather or– heaven forbid!—fur show up in any of their creations.

“The collection is a celebration of spring: new life, color, hope, energy and fun!” gushed McCartney about her spring line. “It’s about flowers and color and I love designing spring. Cuba is just to have some fun. Fun on top of fun!”

“Cuba libre!” was how Style titled the event.

In case any Saturday Night Live or Comedy Central writers are perusing Townhall today, here’s a few ideas for scripts and skits:

The main props to Stella Mc Cartney’s “Fun, Joy, Life and Anti-Cruelty!”- themed garden party were  inspired by her unabashed adulation of a regime that jailed and tortured political prisoners at a higher rate than Stalin’s during the Great Terror and more Cubans in his first three years in power than Hitler’s murdered Germans during his first six. Her “Peace & Love” icons also craved—and came closest of anyone in history– to wantonly igniting a world-wide nuclear war.

In the above process the props to Stella Mc Cartney’s “Fun!” themed party converted a nation (Cuba) which had enjoyed a higher per-capita income than half of Europe and a huge influx of immigrants into one that now repels Haitians and boasts the highest suicide rate in the Western Hemisphere.

Over twenty-times as many Cubans have died attempting to escape the “Fun!” Cuba of Stella Mc Cartney’s garden party props as Germans died trying to escape East Germany. And the Cubans died much more horribly; of exposure, thirst, drowning or from being eaten alive by sharks. The lucky ones were machine-gunned to death much like East Berlin escapees!

Fidel Castro and Che Guevara also made it a criminal offense for their Cuban subjects to listen to Stella’s Dad’s music. During the mid 60’s Castro and Che’s ever-vigilant STASI-trained secret police was very scrupulous in ferreting out the counter-revolutionary crime of listening to the Beatles. The hapless Cuban youths guilty of this heinous crime were herded into forced labor camps at Soviet bayonet point (Full documentation for these seemingly preposterous claims, including accounts by Cuban torture-victims themselves can be found here.)

Among Stella’s Dad’s most famous quotes we find: “All You Need is Love!”

Well, among the cheekiest quotes by her garden-party props and icons (Fidel, Che) we find these:

* “My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood!”

* “Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any surrendered enemy that falls in my hands! With the deaths of my enemies I prepare my being for the sacred fight and join the triumphant proletariat with a bestial howl!”

*“I’d like to confess, papa, at that moment I discovered that I really like killing.”

*“Hatred is the central element of our struggle!… Hatred that is intransigent…Hatred so violent that it propels a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him violent and cold- blooded killing machine…We reject any peaceful approach. Violence is inevitable. To establish socialism rivers of blood must flow. “

* If the nuclear missiles had remained (in Cuba) we would have fired them against the heart of the U.S. including New York City. The victory of socialism is well worth millions of atomic victims!” (Full documentation for all of the above quotes can be found here.)

Thus spoke the icons of flower-children, and apparently of the daughter of one very famous flower child. Please note: had Nikita Khrushchev not yanked the nuclear missiles from her garden party icon in the nick of time on that fateful October 28th of 1962, the very site of Stella Mc Cartney’s garden party would be radioactive.

The regime founded by Stella Mc Cartney’s fun-loving party props jailed and tortured 35,150 Cuban women for political crimes, a totalitarian horror utterly unknown—not only in Cuba—but in the Western Hemisphere until her party icons assumed absolute power to world applause. Some of these Cuban ladies suffered twice as long in Castro’s Gulag as Alexander Solzhenitsyn suffered in Stalin’s.

Their prison conditions were described by former political prisoner Maritza Lugo. “The punishment cells measure 3 feet wide by 6 feet long. The toilet consisted of an 8 inch hole in the ground through which cockroaches and rats entered, especially in cool temperatures, when the rats came inside the cells to seek the warmth of our bodies and we were often bitten. The suicide rate among women prisoners was very high.” When suffering their tortures most of these women were in their 20’s.

An estimated 16,000 Cubans were murdered by firing squad by Stella Mc Cartney’s garden party icons. Here we see videos of Stella’s fashion icons putting their words into action. (Warning, graphic content.)

Murder on video hardly started with ISIS. The ones above on the orders of Che Guevara and Fidel Castro date from 1959. Some of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara’s murder victims were women much younger than Stella Mc Cartney. On Christmas Eve of 1961 a young Cuban woman named Juana Figueroa Diaz spat in the face of the executioners who were binding and gagging her. Castro and Che’s Russian-trained secret police had found her guilty of feeding and hiding “bandits” (Cuban rednecks who took up arms to fight the Stalinist theft of their land to build Soviet –style Kolkhozes.) When the blast from the  Castroite firing squad demolished her face and torso Juana was six months pregnant.

Thousands of Cuban women have drowned, died of thirst or have been eaten alive by sharks attempting to flee the horrors imposed on the Cuban people by Stella Mc Cartney’s “FUN(!)” party icons. This from a nation formerly richer than half the nations of Europe whose citizens considered the U.S. their “vacation playground.” Yes, in 1953 more Cubans vacationed in (then voluntarily returned home from) the U.S. than Americans vacationed in Cuba.

Alas! The above item doesn’t appear in Godfather II so it’s mostly unknown.

 

 

CUBA: EL PASTOR DA LA VIDA POR LOS LOBOS

Por Armando F. Valladares. Miami, domingo 14 de junio de 2015. 

El cardenal Jaime Lucas Ortega y Alamino, a lo largo de sus 34 años al frente de la arquidiócesis de La Habana, se ha transformado en uno de los mayores y más indispensables defensores del régimen comunista. El 5 de junio pp., el cardenal Ortega, en entrevista a la emisora española Cadena Ser, afirmó que “en Cuba no quedan presos políticos” y que los indultados por ocasión de la visita de Benedicto XVI a la isla-cárcel, en 2012, ya eran simples “presos comunes” (Diario de Cuba, Jun. 07, 2015).

Las declaraciones cardenalicias causaron consternación en los opositores cubanos. El ex preso político Ciro Alexis Casanova Pérez, que fue considerado “prisionero de conciencia” por Amnistía Internacional, declaró con indignación que esa afirmación del cardenal Ortega sobre la supuesta inexistencia de presos políticos en Cuba “es una total mentira”, y lo incriminó por dedicarse a “apoyar la dictadura de los hermanos Castro” (Diario de Cuba, Jun. 11, 2015).

Desde Cuba, el periodista independiente Mario Félix Lleonart señaló: “Raya en lo enigmático cómo alguien en la posición de este hombre se preste a aseverar algo que nadie cree en lo absoluto, y que no le ha hecho ningún favor, ni a la Iglesia que representa, ni a sí mismo. Es obvio que tan desatinada declaración echa por tierra toda la doctrina social de la Iglesia que está llamado a respaldar y a practicar” (14 y Medio, Jun. 12, 2015).

El ex preso político Daniel Ferrer, quien fuera declarado prisionero de conciencia por Amnistía Internacional, lamentó desde la isla: “Negar que en Cuba haya presos políticos es mentir cínicamente y un seguidor de Aquel que murió crucificado por salvar a la humanidad y defender a los humildes, discriminados y perseguidos, no debería comportarse de tal forma. El cardenal Ortega no resulta ser un ‘Buen Samaritano’ (S. Lucas 10, 25) cuando niega la existencia de presos políticos, cuando no condena abiertamente las flagrantes violaciones a los derechos fundamentales de los cubanos, incluyendo los derechos de los católicos, y cuando minimiza conscientemente la importancia de la labor de quienes luchan con amor por la libertad, la justicia y el bienestar de la nación” (Religión en Revolución, Jun. 2015).

Una integrante del movimiento Damas de Blanco, Ada María López Canino, quien el domingo 7 de junio pp. fue  agredida y lesionada en La Habana por turbas castristas,  declaró:  “Yo le pregunto al cardenal por qué (para citar dos ejemplos) Ángel Santiesteban está cumpliendo una larga condena, y por qué Danilo Maldonado está como preso político encarcelado. Yo quiero saber, si no son presos políticos, ¿qué son? Las Damas de Blanco marchamos pidiendo la liberación de los presos políticos en Cuba. Y esas fotos que nosotras presentamos, ¿de dónde las sacamos si no son las fotos de los presos políticos que están en las mazmorras castristas? ¿Qué pretende decir, que nosotras mentimos? Que me perdone, pero es un mentiroso, debiera llamarse Raúl Castro, no Cardenal Ortega” (Cubanet, Jun. 10, 2015).

Por su parte, la Comisión Cubana de Derechos Humanos dijo que las declaraciones del Cardenal no tienen que ver con la realidad del país. “Ahora mismo, hay más de 50 presos políticos” (Radio Martí, Jun. 08, 2015).

En realidad, es difícil saber el número de presos políticos en Cuba, porque el régimen constantemente detiene y condena a opositores muchas veces incriminándolos por delitos comunes, para ocultar que se trata de persecuciones políticas. Según la filosofía totalitaria del régimen y de acuerdo con las disposiciones de la Constitución y el Código Penal sobre las libertades de religión y de expresión, éstas solamente se toleran en la medida en que no se opongan a la ideología comunista. Se trata entonces de una isla-presidio cuyos 12 millones de habitantes podrían ser considerados como “prisioneros de conciencia”, subyugados por un implacable torniquete jurídico-político-policial.

Recientes “excarcelaciones” de presos políticos de la isla están siendo amplificadas por grandes medios de comunicación, y por altos líderes políticos y religiosos como actos de liberalización del régimen. Sin embargo, los opositores ya han hecho notar que en el lenguaje “jurídico” cubano términos eufemísticos como “excarcelación” y “licencia extrapenal” significan “libertades condicionales”, cosméticas, que en la actual coyuntura sirven para facilitar las negociaciones con el presidente Obama y para no desacreditar al mentor de esas negociaciones, el pontífice Francisco. Algunos recientes “excarcelados” están siendo amenazados por los órganos de seguridad de que en cualquier momento pueden volver a la prisión para continuar pagando por sus “crímenes” contra el Estado comunista. A otros “excarcelados” se les ha retenido toda la documentación, y quedan en una especie de limbo jurídico, como parias dentro de la sociedad comunista  (La Vanguardia – Europa Press, Enero 09, 2015).

En realidad, todos esos fraudes y farsas castristas son conocidos por las embajadas en La Habana y por las cancillerías del mundo entero, especialmente por la secretaría de Estado de los Estados Unidos y por la secretaría de Estado del Vaticano. El mismo botox publicitario que ahora el régimen aplica nuevamente por ocasión de las negociaciones con los Estados Unidos, y en función de la próxima visita del pontífice Francisco, ya había sido aplicado en vísperas de las visitas papales de Juan Pablo II y de Benedicto XVI. No obstante, se mantiene un misterioso silencio sobre esas farsas del régimen cubano. Y el cardenal Ortega continuó y continúa, como si nada ocurriera, como Pastor del desdichado rebaño católico cubano.

Tal vez nunca antes en la Historia tantos dirigentes mundiales convergieron para salvar del naufragio a una dictadura, como es el caso del régimen castrista. Los cubanos dentro y fuera de la isla que dedicamos nuestras vidas a luchar, en el plano de la ideas, por la libertad y dignidad de Cuba, estamos dispuestos a continuar desenmascarando las maniobras de la dictadura castrista y analizando públicamente las actitudes de sus altos protectores, esperando contra toda esperanza (Epístola a los Romanos, 4-18 y 19).

En el caso del cardenal Ortega, por su larga trayectoria de décadas de actitudes procastristas, estamos ante un Pastor dispuesto a dar su vida por los propios Lobos, y no por el rebaño a él encomendado, que se encuentra indefenso, huérfano y desamparado.

Es preciso decirlo: todo este drama cubano, de casi seis inimaginables décadas de injusticia, miseria comunista y sangre, se desarrolla ante la Indiferencia, con I mayúscula, de buena parte de la opinión pública mundial, así como ante la pertinaz y enigmática Colaboración, con C mayúscula, de considerable número de dirigentes y élites del mundo entero.

Que el buen Dios, al que en este momento recurro clamando por Justicia, ayude al indefenso, huérfano, desamparado, maltratado y diezmado rebaño cubano y remueva la Indiferencia mundial hacia ese drama inimaginable.

Armando Valladares, escritor, pintor y poeta, pasó 22 años en las cárceles políticas de Cuba. Es autor del best-seller “Contra toda esperanza”, donde narra el horror de las prisiones castristas. Fue embajador de los Estados Unidos ante la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de la ONU bajo las administraciones Reagan y Bush. Recibió la Medalla Presidencial del Ciudadano y el Superior Award del Departamento de Estado. Ha escrito numerosos artículos sobre la colaboración eclesiástica con el comunismo cubano y sobre la “ostpolitik” vaticana hacia Cuba.
Puede leerse el más reciente de esos artículos, en español y en inglés, en los siguientes links:

Francisco, el nuncio y el tirano
http://www.cubdest.org/1506/c1505castrorom.htm 

Francis, the nuncio and the tyrant
http://www.cubdest.org/1506/c1505castroromen.htm 

(este artículo puede difundirse libremente, en cualquier medio de comunicación; opiniones, pedidos de subs cripción, rem oción, etc. pueden enviarse a 
armandovalladares2012@gmail.com


Artist, writer and poet; he began to study painting at the School for Visual Arts in his hometown of Pinar del Rio, Cuba.

 

In 1960, while working in the Office of the Ministry of Communications for the Revolutionary Government of Fidel Castro, he was arrested for openly expressing his disapproval of communism.  Without any evidence or witnesses to accuse him, in less than a week he was sentenced to 30 years in prison; his only crime was having a different point of view and moral conviction.  Refusing to succumb to the indoctrination of the prison’s political rehabilitation program, he was subjected to torture, kept in isolation and in solitary confinement cells for long periods of time, even years.

 

Written on cigarette papers, he was able to clandestinely smuggle out his collection of poems so they could be published outside of Cuba and his work be known by intellectuals worldwide.  The PEN Club of France honored him with the Freedom Prize, awarded to writers in prison.  In several European countries, Valladares Committees were established to work on achieving his freedom.  Amnesty International adopted him as a prisoner of conscience.  The worldwide campaign spearheaded by his wife Martha resulted in French president François Mitterrand’s personal petition to Fidel Castro, which resulted in his release after 22 years in prison on October of 1982.

 

After his release, he wrote the international best seller “Against All Hope”, his memoirs based on his time in prison, which has been translated into 18 languages.  After reading the book, President Ronald Reagan named him U.S. Ambassador to the UN Human Rights Commission where he demonstrated that in Cuba, as in all dictatorships, their exists torture and human rights violations.  President Reagan also honored him with the Presidential “Citizens” Medal, the second highest award given to a civilian in the U.S. He was also bestowed the Superior Award by the U.S. Department of State.

 

He also has been honored with the Italian Prize for International Journalism, the ISCHIA, and the Order of José Cecilio del Valle, the highest distinction granted to a foreigner by the government of Honduras.

Many of his art pieces are held in private collections in the United States, Central and South America, Spain and France.  He has also participated in numerous individual and collective art exhibitions.

 

“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