To Kill a Mockinbird... Again

Today the Florida State Attorney, Angela Corey, announced that there will be no grand jury for Trayvon Martin’s killer, George Zimmerman. Even though Ms. Corey said since the beginning that there might be no need for a grand jury, for me this news came as a surprise. Came as a surprise because the fate of George Zimmerman rests solely on the shoulders of Ms. Corey and whatever decision she comes to the decision is absolute, there are no appeals.

What if she announces that she reached the conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman is not guilty? What will the parents of Mr. Martin to do?

I cannot conceive, given this announcement, the findings will be that of a guilty verdict. I believe that if a person is found guilty, there should be a jury. Is Ms. Corey going to be the judge, juror and executioner? Doubt it. Then, this must mean that she will find him not guilty and that would be one of the greatest injustices that I’ve heard since I can remember.

I fear that Ms. Corey will find the murderer not guilty, especially after reading an article from the Examiner.com where it read: “According to Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett, the city’s emergency management team has met regularly with the DOJ to construct a plan. Extra police officers and fire department officials are on standby and neighboring agencies have also been asked to assist if needed.” - That statement doesn’t sound too promising. For me that translates to Mr. Zimmerman will be found Not Guilty and the city is preparing for the riots that will follow that announcement.

If the findings are not favorable to Mr. Martin’s family, they will feel devastated, disillusioned and rightfully enraged and so will most of the citizens of the United States.

If my suspicions are correct, we can be sure that in this country justice is not blind and will not be for a long time. It hasn’t been in over 500 years, why would we expect it to be any different now? That dame might be blindfolded but her scale is definitively tipped.

Karma is a Bitch...

On April 3^rd of this year, the Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) released a study that corroborates what many of us have been saying for about a decade: That the people of Sudan, in particular Darfur, have been enduring a constant attack that at best kills them and at worse leaves them facing a slow death, an ethnic cleansing. There have been numerous accounts of all type of torture imaginable perpetrated on the non-Arab speaking citizens of Sudan: rapes, beatings, electrocutions, gunshots, bombings, burnings, amputations and killings that, for reasons incomprehensible to me, the world has refused to act, react or admit that these atrocities are taking place under their watch for a decade. The governments of the “civilized” world have sided with China and Russia – the two major forces that are supporting Omar al-Bashir in his ethnic cleansing.

Perhaps I am being too harsh in saying that the world or governments are siding with China and Russia – but isn’t doing nothing the same as accepting? I can understand that there is too much at risk, the last thing anyone wants is a war, especially against these world superpowers; however, there is no excuse for us to continue conducting business with them as if they were not monsters against humanity. By continuing with “business as usual,” we are in a way helping perpetuate the massacre and we are supporting the tormentor.

The PHR's study might help to put pressure on those with the power to do something. So far, there has been no reliable proof that any of these atrocities were taking place, at least that is what the governments of the world have claimed up to now. This study will help shine a light on this matter that, perhaps because it is so atrocious, others have refused to accept it and what’s more important, do something about it.

This study reveals that nearly half of the women treated were victims of rape or gang rape. There were even reports of men that were sexually assaulted and some even raped. The evidence also showed that injuries inflicted on these people were consistent and showed evidence of beatings, fires, amputations and all other forms of torture. We must remember the evidence at hand is only from those that survived or reached a medical center; how many others died on the field or on the way to the center are unknown. Every single piece of the evidence recorded and examined by PHR was consistent with the claims. Every single one. PHR stated in their study “Our findings show that in all of the medical records that contained sufficient detail, the medical evidence was considered to be at least consistent with (if not highly consistent with or virtually diagnostic of) the human rights violations disclosed by the patients.” Further in the study, PHR said, “Rape and other forms of sexual violence have been recognized as war crimes and crimes against humanity, as well as instruments of genocide.”

The study represents a milestone that will aid the International Criminal Courts in proceeding with more tangible proof and with any luck receive the support of other nations in the capture of Omar al-Bashir and put an end to his reign of terror.

There might be something worthwhile celebrating this Easter week: Hopefully these findings will mark the beginning of the end for al-Bashir and a new beginning for the people of Darfur. 

I encourage the reader to look at the PHR’s study. Please, click here to read it.

To donate to the Save Darfur Organization, click here .

To donate to Amnesty International, click here.

To sign the International Petition for the People of Darfur, click here.

The Path to Prosperity... But Whose?

Paul Ryan has presented in Congress what he calls “The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal.” This Budget Report has been in the news too much lately, which piqued my curiosity to know what exactly was in it. As most of us do, I tend to listen to what others have to say and I confess that at times, I am too lazy to do my own research. Having Medicare and Medicaid jeopardized by this proposal, I overcame my apathy and decided to read it and scrutinize it myself to reach my own conclusions. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me, after all this is a public blog and all views are welcome, but ultimately it is mine and I always say things as I see them if you don’t like it, move on.

Anyone who reads this report lightly and without giving it too much thought or analyzing the significance of what is being proposed, would think that he is presenting a great remedy for what ails our economy today. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The tax reforms Mr. Ryan is proposing, will mostly affect the lower income families. He is proposing a maximum cap of 25 percent for those that make an obscene amount of money, including the new “people” on the block: Corporations. The rest of us, which are the ones being over-taxed and practically sustaining this economy, will pay 10 percent across the board. This approach doesn’t sound too bad, except that his proposal still includes and “improves” incentives for the "job creators" and we all know what that really means. Corporations will still be getting large sums of money in the form of tax breaks for them to honor us by giving us a job, usually at minimum wage and at times not even a full-time position (avoiding having to offer us health benefits.) Basically these companies will be getting cheap labor, which at times and thanks to the “incentives” these workers wages will be paid by the working class in the form of taxes paid, which in turn the government will pay the Corporations to hire new workers, and the vicious cycle keeps repeating itself. It is sickening!

In this report, Ryan also proposes an Energy reform, which not surprisingly, offers to lift all precautionary regulations. He is proposing to remove the Environmental Protection Agency and allow the private sector to develop sources of “American-made” energy. We have seen how "responsible" the private sector is when it comes to the environment and safety. It is well known that when it comes to the environment and safety, if unregulated, corporations will be more interested in saving money and how much profit they can make if they overlook the impact their projects will have on the environment and safety. I cannot say that all corporations behave this way, but sadly, most of them do. They must be regulated.

As we have grown accustomed to by now the GOP, and in particular in this report, Ryan is proposing to get rid of the National Labor Relations Act. It is no secret that Republicans despise Labor Unions, and we should not be surprised that they keep attempting to remove any representation that workers have to fight the injustices perpetrated by the freshly introduced “people” in this nation. In Ryan’s own words “Because a majority of union members in the United States now works for the public sector, organized labor has become an increasingly powerful force on behalf of bigger government and higher taxes. Policymakers must make sure America has a public sector that works for the people it serves – not the other way around.” The question I have is, since corporations are now people, when he refers to “a public sector that works for the people” which people is he referring to, the workers or the corporations?

In the same breath, he continues to mention all the benefits that will entail getting rid of the NLRA, which according to him will increase revenues and fees by lifting moratoriums and bans on energy supplies, again claiming that the energy corporations (oil companies) are environmentally responsible. I wonder what planet Mr. Ryan lives on!

Mr. Ryan didn’t overlook protecting the banking giants either. Wall Street and the financial companies will also see a protection from this “reform.” This path to prosperity ensures that the financial institutions will be free to do whatever they want once more and help them get rid of the government ‘micromanagement’ which has impede their rapid growth. He closes this section with these words: “to ensure that the costs to the private sector and to the taxpayer do not outweigh their benefits, and that regulations are both essential and not unduly burdensome.” If this passes, we will be back to building a castle from a deck of cards!

There is one section of this report that I kind of agree with, that is if my understanding of it is correct. Mr. Ryan proposes a freeze in the federal workforce for the next three years, I am not necessarily pleased with that but, if what follows is true, then I am all for it: “The federal government’s responsibilities require a strong federal workforce. Federal workers deserve to be compensated equitably for their important work, but their pay levels, pay increases and fringe benefits should be reformed to better align with those of their private-sector counterparts.“ Ryan goes on saying that "Immune from the effects of the recession, federal workers have received regular salary bumps regardless of productivity or economic realities." As far as I know, Congressmen and women ARE Federal employees and this means that they will lower their own salaries and hopefully their raises will be based on merit, which it's long overdue. Of course, I know he is referring to the ‘lower class’ Federal workers and not the fat cats sitting in Congress but if this portion goes through, we can demand the same be applied to them.

The farmers did not escaped unharmed on this “path to prosperity.” The report proposes to reduce the help that farmers receive from the government. While we know that there are giants in the farming industry that really do not deserve a hand from the government and yet they take it, we also know that many family owned farms do need help or they will be overtaken by the giants. We need to help our farmers, the ones that are struggling to continue to supply us with fresh and organic vegetables and grains. These farmers are just beginning to make a positive impact in our health and they deserve any help they can get, otherwise we will continue ingesting GM foods, and there would be only one winner, Monsanto.

We all know that most crops are solely dependent on Mother Nature. We have seen what drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, cold weather, floods and natural disasters can do to crops. Well, Ryan is proposing that the government stops the crop insurance offered to farmers, making a farmer responsible for “management risks” as other businesses do. The difference between a farmer and, for example, a banker is that the farmer cannot control nature; the banker can control the market.

What brought me to read the report in the first place was the healthcare, Medicare and Medicaid reforms. According to Ryan, the current system that we have is displacing “the family, civic and religious institutions that serve communities across the nation.” Really, how? The only thing that comes to mind is the now infamous contraceptives and the 'right" for a religious institution to tell a woman that no contraceptives will be included in her insurance because what goes against the views of the employer supersedes the right of any woman.  This report gives an institution more rights than a human being.

After reading the section in its entirety, and you can do the same by following the link I’ve provided, I concluded that what its being proposed – regarding Medicare and Medicaid – is simply what has been proposed so many times before: privatization of these services. The report is proposing that the government with a voucher or check will cover your private insurance premiums. If the person selects a coverage that is higher than the value of the voucher, he or she will have to assume the difference. If you choose a lower coverage, then you will get a check from the government for the difference. The people that have money will be able to afford better plans and those that don’t will have to accept the less desirable insurance. It’s like having a PPO or a HMO, simple.

Mr. Ryan ensures that under this reform, insurance companies will not be able to deny services or increase their premiums for pre-existing conditions. I believe that has been taken care of by President Obama’s Healthcare Reform.

Mr. Ryan ends his report by giving praise to the Republican Party’s god: Ronald Reagan and his Reaganomics: "In 1981, President Ronald Reagan inherited a stagnant economy and a tax code that featured 16 brackets, with a top rate of 70 percent.  When he left office in 1989, the tax code had been simplified down to just three brackets, with a top rate of 28 percent.  Reagan's major tax reforms, enacted with bipartisan support without raising taxes, proved to be a cornerstone of the unprecedented economic boom that occurred in the decade during his presidency and continued in the decade that followed." 

While it is true that Reagan inherited a “stagnant economy” this was primarily due to the global oil crisis that resulted from the turmoil in Iran. In 1979, as a consequence of massive protests and the imminent threat of a civil war, the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi fled Iran and the Ayatollah Khomeini took over of the country. This event inflicted a significant impact on the production of oil and the global economy.

Reaganomics, according to Wikipedia, consisted of four simple pillars: Reduction of government spending; reduction of income tax and capital gain tax; reduction of economic regulations and control of the money supply to reduce inflation. That’s it. While it sounds perfect and we are all for “reductions” it is far from perfect, no matter how much the Republicans try to sanctify it, it is still bad economics.

During the eight years that Reagan was president, he single-handedly managed to raise our national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion. Thanks to Reaganomics, the United States shifted from being the largest international creditor to being the largest debtor, but you will never hear a Republican say that.

The same can be said about spending. Reagan’s GDP from 1981-1988 averaged 22.4%, 1.8% above the highest GDP from 1971 to 2009; public debt also saw a staggering increase during the Reagan's years, from 26% GDP when he took office to a whopping 41% (from $712 billion to $2,052 billion) by the end of his second term. Reagan holds the honor of being the only president who didn’t increase the minimum wage.

Reagan was not a man for the working class or the poor. If anyone thinks differently they hold the man in a very different light than he deserves.  In an interview Reagan gave to the New York Times by the end of his second term, he was asked about the homeless problem facing the nation, his response should be enough to know that while Reagan had charisma, his heart was as dark as his artificially colored hair. His reply to that question was: “[the homeless] make it their own choice for staying out there."

That statement personifies the core values of the Republican Party and we are foolish if we think that they could ever have a heart.


To see the names of the Congressmen and women supporting this proposal, click here.

Links:  To read the Report:  http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Pathtoprosperity2013.pdf

Reagonomics:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics

Edited by J. Schapiro

The Right to Bear Arms

Today, on a beautiful day after April Fools Day and during the holiest of weeks for the Christian community, a gunman entered a private Korean Christian College and opened fire, killing seven people and wounding three others.

I don’t intend to describe what happened, I wouldn’t even attempt it. The coverage of the crime is all over the media and quite honestly, I wasn’t there and I am sure they can cover the event much better than I ever could.

I only have one question: Why does this happen so often?

Researching about what for me represents the main issue, the repetitive act of murdering students at any given school, I came across some information that I find disturbing.

I found out that during the last 16 years, worldwide, there has been 73 such cases. That might not sound like a very high number and perhaps it’s not, but 75% of those cases were perpetrated in the United States. Seventy-Five percent is a very high percentage!

Looking further into this data, I found out that in all of the countries where these crimes were committed, people have the right to bear arms. Some of the countries have stricter laws than others, but they all embrace the same excuse to own a gun for hunting.

During the last sixteen years, 261 people died and another 245 were injured at the hands of whom for most of us must be a mentally unstable person. The common denominator in all these cases is the right to bear arms, a gun.

When are we, a supposedly “civilized” country, going to admit that the “right to bear arms,” as written by our Forefathers, should be removed from the Constitution? The time when George Washington, Thomas Jefferson etc. lived are not the present times. Back in those days, you defended your honor in a duel; that’s unthinkable today. Laws are meant to change with the times so they are applicable to current circumstances; they are always changing, except that particular one, because it is supported by the strongest, most powerful lobbyist in the Nation: the NRA.

The National Rifle Association is what has permeated the laws where automatic and semi-automatic and assault weapons are sold in this country to anyone over the age of 21 and after a waiting period between 3 to 14 days depending on the State. That waiting period is known as the “cool-off period.” At 21, it’s very feasible that you don’t have a criminal record and you will have no problem purchasing a gun, legally. If you have a criminal record, don’t dismay! There are plenty of illegal guns on the black market, usually acquired by thieves who find them in the nightstand tables or under the mattresses of many overzealous gun owners.

I have always found it interesting that besides a criminal record, only age matters. There are no psychological studies or questionnaires to determine if the individual is mentally stable. You are not required to undergo a professional psychological evaluation or a drug test and I think that should be mandatory.

When you visit the NRA website, one of the pictures they have is of a man carrying a weapon with a caption saying "protecting your right to protect yourself." The only interest the NRA has is not to protect our right to bear arms, but the money they make with it and they couldn’t care less how many people die on a yearly basis because of guns, after all “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” I’ve been hearing that nonsense forever. It is true that people kill people, but it makes it so much easier when all they have to do is to press on a trigger and shoot from a distance!

When I looked at their merchandise, I was appalled to see a section for children, granted, it contains videos and books on gun safety, but why would a child be near a gun to begin with?

While visiting the NRA website, on their home page you can find the following post written by Chris W. Cox, NRA-ILA Executive Director:

“March 20, 2012

'Fast and Furious' Part of Eric Holder's Anti-Gun Brainwashing Campaign

Editorial in The Daily Caller

NRA has been saying for years that Attorney General Eric Holder, our nation's chief law enforcement officer, is an anti-gun extremist. He's been toeing the Obama anti-gun ideological line for his entire life, and now we have more evidence.

Brietbart.com has unearthed a 1995 video of Eric Holder speaking to the Women's National Democratic Club. In that video, then-U.S. Attorney Holder urges support for a public campaign to "really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way."

Not to actually look at the data on gun ownership and crime. Not to consider the value of firearms as a means of self-defense. Not to lock up violent criminals. Not to pay any attention to the facts or the truth.

Brainwash.

Holder's vision for brainwashing the American people against our firearm freedoms even included enlisting the advocacy skills of former Washington, D.C. mayor, and convicted felon, Marion Barry, and of course, that paragon of honesty, Jesse Jackson.

In retrospect, Holder's speech was an ominous foreshadowing of the lengths he was willing to go to push a gun-ban agenda.

Today, our country is reeling in disgust over Operation Fast and Furious, a criminal gun-running scheme engineered by Holder's Justice Department to blame our Second Amendment freedoms for Mexican drug cartel crime.

We now know that this illegal pipeline of guns to Mexico — established by our government, with our tax dollars — was responsible for the deaths of a U.S. Border Patrol agent, hundreds of Mexican citizens and, very likely, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent.

And now, this video only offers further evidence that Operation Fast and Furious was a premeditated, criminal act, conceived — and then covered up — under an anti-gun ideologue who is intent on brainwashing Americans into giving up our Second Amendment rights.

When Operation Fast and Furious was first uncovered, NRA said that Holder is either lying or incompetent, and that he can't be trusted with the powers of his office or the sanctity of our freedoms.

Now, with the emergence of this damning new video, Americans need to ask how much more it will take — in the name of Eric Holder's brainwashing campaign — before he is removed from office.”

The above is an obvious attempt to use the same rhetoric they have been using against Democrats for years. In this post, Mr. Cox claims that Attorney General Eric Holder and President Obama - who have been in their respective positions for over three years – are fighting to abolish the “so sacred” Second Amendment. I wish they were but they are not. I do not dispute that perhaps both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are against guns; quite honestly I believe any human being with a conscience should be; but claiming that they are trying to change the Second Amendment is simply a lie, the same lie used on every election where a Democrat is most likely to win.

Needless to say, all the rednecks who love their guns much more than they love their spouse will be, literally, up in arms. I think a prerequisite for owning a gun is to not have too many brain cells, hence the insatiable desire to own a “big” gun. Perhaps owning a big gun compensates for the miniscule size of their virile organ... who knows! But the most fervent and loud supporters of the NRA are usually not that educated, not too smart and for some odd reason, they love beer as much as they do their guns.

The NRA must be very happy today. After all, another gun aficionado went hunting for… people.


Timeline of Worldwide School Shootings: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777958.html
Gun Laws by Country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law