NYPD Barricades & Maces Peaceful Protesters
While on a peaceful march near Union Square in downtown Manhattan, multiple female protesters were penned up in the street by orange mesh barricade, then maliciously maced.
The women were peaceful and unarmed. They were secured by barricade with an overwhelming police presence. And they were then sprayed directly in the face with pressurized mace…
WeAreTheOther99 continues to peacefully occupy Lower Manhattan to begin a dialogue with the Top 1% with the goal of a peaceful transition of power back to the People.
This can no longer be stopped. But be advised, this will not be televised…
Slowed down video with analysis:
Media Black Out Of Occupy Wall Street Continues
This is the fifth communiqué from the 99 percent. We are occupying Wall Street.
On September 21st, 2011, Troy Davis, an innocent man, was murdered by the state of Georgia. Troy Davis was one of the 99 percent.
Ending capital punishment is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, the richest 400 Americans owned more wealth than half of the country’s population.
Ending wealth inequality is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, four of our members were arrested on baseless charges.
Ending police intimidation is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, we determined that Yahoo lied about occupywallst.org being in spam filters.
Ending corporate censorship is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly eighty percent of Americans thought the country was on the wrong track.
Ending the modern gilded age is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly 15% of Americans approved of the job Congress was doing.
Ending political corruption is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of Americans did not have work.
Ending joblessness is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of America lived in poverty.
Ending poverty is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, roughly fifty million Americans were without health insurance.
Ending health-profiteering is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, America had military bases in around one hundred and thirty out of one hundred and sixty-five countries.
Ending American imperialism is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, America was at war with the world.
Ending war is our one demand.
On September 21st, 2011, we stood in solidarity with Madrid, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Madison, Toronto, London, Athens, Sydney, Stuttgart, Tokyo, Milan, Amsterdam, Algiers, Tel Aviv, Portland and Chicago. Soon we will stand with Phoenix, Montreal, Cleveland and Atlanta. We’re still here. We are growing. We intend to stay until we see movements toward real change in our country and the world.
You have fought all the wars. You have worked for all the bosses. You have wandered over all the countries. Have you harvested the fruits of your labors, the price of your victories? Does the past comfort you? Does the present smile on you? Does the future promise you anything? Have you found a piece of land where you can live like a human being and die like a human being? On these questions, on this argument, and on this theme, the struggle for existence, the people will speak. Join us.
We speak as one. All of our decisions, from our choice to march on Wall Street to our decision to continue occupying Liberty Square, were decided through a consensus based process by the group, for the group.
Two Officers Indicted In Beating Of University Of Maryland Student
Read More Here
Judge:”NO, You Do NOT Have The Right To Consume Milk From Your Own Cow”
Those raw milk proponents advocating “teach, teach, teach” may want to enroll Wisconsin Judge Patrick J. Fiedler in their first class–in the kindergarten section.
In response to a request from the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, the judge issued a clarificationof his decision last week regarding his assessment of the constitutionality of food rights. The judge expanded on his original statement that such constitutional issues are “wholly without merit.”
He explained that the FTCLDF arguments were “extremely underdeveloped.” As an example, he said the plaintiffs’ use of the Roe v Wade abortion rights case as a precedent does “not explain why a woman’s right to have an abortion translates to a right to consume unpasteurized milk…This court is unwilling to declare that there is a fundamental right to consume the food of one’s choice without first being presented with significantly more developed arguments on both sides of the issue.” Gee, I thought they both had to do with the right to decide what to do with your own body.
As if to show how pissed he was at being questioned, he said his decision translates further that “no, Plaintiffs to not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;
“no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;”
Read More Here
REGARDING SOURCES OF CONFUSION ABOUT THE INCOME TAX
WRITTEN FROM BEHIND THE WIRE IN MICHIGAN BY PETER HENDRICKSON 9/04/11
LOSTHORIZONS.COM
(A few words concerning the nature of the tax generally; the care and feeding of pathological delusions on that subject; the recent outcome of a repeatedly successful rule-of-law-upholding couple’s suit in the federal court of claims; and “sources” and the 16th Amendment.)
The cognitive obstacles on anyone’s path to truly understanding the income tax are sometimes few, and sometimes many and varied.
A few impediments are nearly universal. For instance, almost everyone starts out having to get past the “big lie” notion that governments have an automatic legal claim to some or all of any wealth that changes hands in America– or even outside of America if an American is involved in the transaction! This notion has Americans as serfs of their governments, a percentage of whose labor and investment output belongs to those governments by right. It imagines your right to make fruitful use of your resources and energy to really be just a privilege, for the granting of which the state is entitled to seize “its share”.
Simply articulating this ridiculous idea reveals its absurdity. And yet, belief in it on a gut level is incredibly widespread. This is due in part to its being encouraged in every way possible by government actors, their clients and cronies (to whom much of the yielded-up wealth is passed) and those in tax-related industries, such as “tax attorneys” and many in the accounting and “human resources” professions. These folks have kept a hypnotic drumbeat of this and other socialist nonsense pounding relentlessly for generations now, which has deeply embedded many bizarre, indefensible and essentially self-hating psychopathologies into the American subconscious.
It is also due to ignorance about what the income tax really is (a fee for the profitable use of federal stuff), and how it actually works (a subject too large for this short paper, but see ‘Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America’). The average person sees governments TREATING Americans as serfs, and getting away with it. That observer thus concludes that somehow, serfdom is the lawful status of an American, and that everyone else must understand how and why, even though he himself seems to have slept through that particular high-school civics class.
In fact, there is just a cleverly designed scheme that induces ignorant Americans to CREATE a government claim to a portion of their earnings even when they HAVEN’T actually done anything taxable. These self-inflicted claims are then executed by tax agencies always eager for more money, and are enforced by courts that discreetly decline to point out to the victim that they authorized the exaction themselves. (American law presumes that everyone knows what he or she is doing.)
Together, these several behaviors can make it LOOK like the claimant government is acting on its own authority, and thus make it LOOK like feudal serfdom is being practiced. But really, it always is, and always has been just ignorance being exploited through a very mature and entrenched scam.
Happily, more and more people now recognize that their ancestors were not morons, and there ISN’T some bizarre Constitutional contradiction legitimizing their enserfdom. It’s just a shame that decades went by during which ignorance reigned and was thoroughly exploited before Americans began reacquainting themselves with the truth.
The mistaken belief that governments have an inherent claim on the proceeds of all economic activity can cause its victims severe suffering. After all, as P.J. O’Rourke pithily observed, giving money and power to politicians is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. Embracing the notion that the state can lay direct claim to your wealth on its own authority not only gives the boys liquor and wheels, but ties you to the bumper of their car, as well, and dooms you to being dragged along for the wild and ruinous ride.
Thank goodness the CtC community is out there now, cutting victims free…
Other cognitive hazards on the road to knowledge and freedom are more particular to any given traveler, although most share a common grounding. They arise from a difficulty in recognizing that the tax is as simple as it really is, and consequently perceiving subtleties and significance where neither are actually to be found. Today I want to focus on a mistaken notion about the meaning of “source” in the context of the tax.
I’m prompted to this rumination by having just looked at a federal court of claims ruling cited in support of a dismissal of a CtC-educated couple’s suit to compel several refunds. The couple is appealing, and I’ve been going through the dismissal in order to help them organize their arguments.
The dismissal is almost comical, and would be if real people weren’t being affected.
The feds don’t contest the legitimacy of the refund claims per se, and make no effort to directly argue that the couple actually owe taxes for the years involved (2004, 2005 and 2006). Nor could they credibly even attempt to do so.
These good folks have received complete refunds and on-paper acknowledgements that their earnings DON’T qualify as the federally-connected subclass of receipts subject to the tax (“income”) for each of the last four years (2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010). The economic activities they engaged in during these latter years were the same as those involved in the years for which they have had to sue.
The difference between the two periods is that the original filings for the years not yet refunded had been pre-CtC-education, and the couple had, as they later realized, mistakenly declared their earnings to be “income”. After learning the truth, these good folks filed amended returns correcting their mistaken declarations and seeking the return of their property.
As said, the government didn’t attempt to prove that these folks actually owe any tax for the older years in response to the suit. It simply asserted, without evidence, testimony, or frankly, anything but their mere declaration, that the testimony on the couple’s amended returns must be insincere; their refund claims invalid; and the court without jurisdiction to hear their claims.
The judge adopts this naked assertion without a visible blush. She observes that the amended return testimony differs from what appeared on the originals and contends that this makes its sincerity “not plausible” (but buries this lone and ridiculous “explanatory” note within 39 pages of such convoluted gibberish as to dissuade most folks from wading through it and discerning its actual emptiness).
In support of her authority to dismiss a claim she has decided to treat as “invalid”, the judge cites a ruling made last year in another case, in which a plaintiff made a series of references involving the term “source” which reflect a mistaken notion of its meaning and significance in the context of the tax. The case is Kehmeier v. United States, 95 Fed Cl. 442 (2010). In the ruling, Kehmeier is quoted from his Complaint as saying that information contained in his return is based on his “Constitutional right to resort to the source whence his income is derived as secured under the Fifth Amendment guarantee to property”, and that:
“The source of the income in question is plaintiff’s personal property and, a national tax imposed on the income from personal property is a direct tax…and is subject to the regulation as to apportionment. Because no tax-imposing operation exists anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code that is currently being apportioned, no tax is payable.”
Kehmeier is further quoted as saying that the IRS “insists on assessing a tax on the income from this Plaintiff’s own labor…” and that he determined the amounts that had been withheld from him, and which he sought as refunds by: “[c]ompany[-]provided records [and] my Constitutional right to resort to the source…” (The bracketing and other formatting elements in this quote are as rendered in the court’s opinion.)
It is clear that Kehmeier imagines that the “source” of earnings determines (or limits) the taxable character of the amount received.* But this is not true. In fact, the purpose of the 16th Amendment is to dispose of that very argument in the particular circumstances in which it had once been held to apply.
In the context of tax law, “source” acquired the status of a Constitutional term by its appearance in the 16th Amendment. As used there (and as thereby defined since for purposes of tax law), “source” means property from which is derived a discrete gain. The word appears because the amendment’s purpose is to suppress a source-related doctrine of the Supreme Court expressed in an 1895 ruling in the case of Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust, 157 U.S. 429 (1895).
Pollock owned stock in Farmers’ (now Citibank) and was due dividends based on profits resulting from its many and various investments and other activities. Farmers’ intended to diminish the dividends by deducting and paying the “income” tax first, and Pollock sued to prevent that.
Pollock made no argument concerning the characterization of the gains involved as “income”. He simply argued that to tax dividends and rent derived by the recipient due to the ownership of stock and real estate (which were called “sources”) is to effectively tax the sources themselves. Since the sources are personal property (continued the argument), the tax is a property tax rather than an “income tax”, and must be apportioned under the Constitutional rule in Article 1, Section 9. The court agreed, and ruled 10 sections of the then-current income tax law unconstitutional.
The Pollock ruling had the effect of keeping enormous profits from the use of public property and prerogatives enjoyed by multi-millionaires of the Roaring Nineties and early Twentieth Century in the banking, railroading and other federally-subsidized and -controlled businesses from being shared with the larger community whose federal creature’s stuff had been used to produce them. In response, the 16th Amendment was proposed and eventually declared adopted.
The amendment was designed to sever the court-perceived connection between the protected source and an otherwise tax-suitable gain. It dictates that no private gain from the use of public privilege can be shielded from the tax by resort to an argument about the source being personal-property, as was briefly true under the Pollock ruling. Thanks to the amendment, those enjoying private gains from federal privilege must return a portion to the federal treasury.
So, in tax law “source” has nothing to do with whether a gain is “income” (or taxable). Even the Pollock ruling didn’t hold that because a gain was derived from personal-property it therefore couldn’t qualify as “income”. It only ruled that such property-connected gains couldn’t be taxed under the “income”-excise structure.
The “Pollock” doctrinal exceptions having been undone by the 16th Amendment, IF a gain IS, in fact, the product of the exercise of a federal privilege(whether directly and personally or through investment), the gain is “income” (a measure of potential liability for the excise), and remains potentially subject to the tax NO MATTER WHAT it was derived from, or how; and no matter what the form in which it is realized. (I say “potentially” because not all “income” is actually taxed).
Importantly, the reciprocal is also true, of course. Something that DOESN’T qualify by virtue of proceeding from the exercise of federal privilege ISN’T “income” as meant in the law and isn’t subject to the tax, no matter from what source it is derived, nor what form it takes.
The happy fact is, the income tax is really very simple. Granted, there is an enormous body of law associated with the tax. But even so, difficulty understanding the subject is mostly a self-inflicted problem. Aside from deliberate fog generated by beneficiaries of the status quo, the greatest source of confusion on the path to understanding is the impulse to imagine that the law DOESN’T mean what it says, or means what it DOESN’T say.
But the law DOES mean what it says– in fact, it must. Keeping that firmly in mind is the most important rule for a student of the tax. (Reading ALL the relevant law, so as to know what the law really SAYS, is the next most important rule…)
Here’s a little trick that’ll help keep one’s feet on the right path. Consider how the tax is known: The “Federal Income” Tax. Right there in that label, taken exactly as said, and simple as pie, we see the actual object of the tax distinguished from the broad class represented by the common word ‘income’ into the special tax-relevant subclass of “federal income”. What could be easier to understand?
Below, you’ll find three hyperlinks. Follow them each in turn, and read what you find, in turn– carefully and thoroughly. You’ll learn things critically important to the American people, and more important now than ever before in our history.
DON’T miss this opportunity. And when you’re done, please share what you’ve learned with others.
*(Kehmeier also apparently fails to understand that “income”, when used in the context of the tax, means “gains that qualify as being subject to the unapportioned income tax”. Thus, regardless of what he may believe qualifies as federally taxable without apportionment and what does not, he had effectively declared his earnings to qualify for the tax. At the same time, he put $0s on his tax return where “income” receipts are to be reported, thereby providing the court with a rationale for deeming his filing invalid.)
*****
To get a concise, illuminating introduction to the liberating truth about the tax, see http://losthorizons.com/Intro.pdf .
To get the comprehensive picture, including details on what Congress has provided for correcting the all-too-typical misapplication of the tax to earnings to which it DOESN’T apply, see http://losthorizons.com/Cracking_the_Code.htm for the published, real-deal-in-your-hands-and on your-coffee-table edition; or http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf for the no-charge (but donation appreciated) .pdf version.
To learn about the eight-year-long corrupt effort by beneficiaries of widespread ignorance of the truth, see http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf .
The 13 Most Evil U.S. Government Experiments on Humans
Mind Control, Child Abuse – Project MKULTRA, Subproject 68
This is the stuff of nightmares.
The CIA-ran Project MKULTRA paid Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron for Subproject 68, which would be experiments involving mind-altering substances. The entire goal of the project was to probe examination into methods of influencing and controlling the mind and being able to extract information from resisting minds.
So in order to accomplish this, the doctor took patients admitted to his Allen Memorial Institute in Montreal and conducted “therapy” on them. The patients were mostly taken in for issues like bi-polar depression and anxiety disorders. The treatment they received was life-altering and scarring.
In the period he was paid for (1957 – 1964) Cameron administered electroconvulsive therapy at 30-40 times the normal power. He would put patients into a drug-induced coma for months on-end and playback tapes of simple statements or repetitive noises over and over again.
The victims forgot how to talk, forgot about their parents, and suffered serious amnesia.
And all of this was performed on Canadian citizens because the CIA wasn’t willing to risk such operations on Americans.
To ensure that the project remained funded, Cameron, in one scheme, took his experiments upon admitted children and in one situation had the child engage in sex with high-ranking government officials and film it.
He and other MKULTRA officers would blackmail the officials to ensure more funding
Mustard Gas Tested on Soldiers via Involuntary Gas Chambers
As bio-weapon research intensified in the 1940′s, officials also began testing its repercussions and defenses on the Army itself.
In order to test the effectiveness of various bio-weapons, officials were known to have sprayed mustard gas and other skin-burning, lung-ruining chemicals, like Lewisite, on soldiers without their consent or knowledge of the experiment happening to them.
They also tested the effectiveness of gas masks and protective clothing by locking soldiers in a gas chamber and exposing them to mustard gas and lewisite, evoking the gas chamber image of Nazi Germany.
EFFECTS OF LEWISITE: Lewisite is a gas that can easily penetrate clothing and even rubber. Upon contact with the skin, the gas immediately causes extreme pain, itching, swelling and even a rash. Large, fluid-filled blisters develop 12 hours after exposure in the form of intensely severe chemical burns. And that’s just skin contact with the gas.
Inhaling of the gas causes a burning pain in the lungs, sneezing, vomiting, and pulmonary edema.
EFFECTS OF MUSTARD GAS: Symptomless until about 24 hours after exposure, Mustard Gas has mutagenic and carcinogenic properties that have killed many subjected to it. Its primary effects include severe burns that turn into yellow-fluid-leaking boils over a period of time. Although treatment is available, Mustard Gas burns heal very, very slowly and are extremely painful. The burns the gas leaves on the skin are sometimes irreparable.
It was also rumored that along with the soldiers, patients at VA hospitals were being used as guinea pigs for medical experiments involving bio-warfare chemicals, but that all experiments were changed to be known as “observations” to ward off suspicions.
U.S. Grants Immunity to Involuntary-Surgery Monster
As head of Japan’s infamous Unit 731 (a covert biological and chemical warfare research and development unit of the Imperial Japanese Army during World War II), Dr. Shiro Ishii (head of medicine) carried out violent human experimentation of tens of thousands during the Second Sino-Japenses War and World War II.
Ishii was responsible for testing vivisection techniques without any anesthesia on human prisoners. For the uninitiated, vivisection is the act of conducting experimental surgery on living creatures (with central nervousness) and examining their insides for scientific purposes.
So basically, he was giving unnecessary surgery to prisoners by opening them all the way up, keeping them alive and not using any anesthetic.
For a disturbing video about vivisection, please go here .
During these experiments he would also force pregnant women to abort their babies. He also played God by subjecting his prisoners to change in physiological conditions and inducing strokes, heart attacks, frost bite, and hypothermia. Ishii considered these subjects “logs”.
Following imminent defeat in 1945, Japan blew up the Unity 731 complex and Ishii ordered all the remaining “logs” to be executed. Not soon after, Ishii was arrested. And then, the respected General Douglas McArthur allegedly struck a deal with Ishii. If the U.S. granted Ishii immunity from his crimes, he must exchange all germ warfare data based on human experimentation.
So Ishii got away with his crimes because the US became interested in the results of his research.
While not directly responsible for these acts, the actions of the American government certainly illustrated it was more than willing to condone human torture for advancements in biological warfare that could kill even more people.
Not a surprise, considering its past resume. Ishii remained alive until 1959, performing research into bio-weaponry and probably thinking up more plans to annihilate people in different, Dr. Giggles-esque ways to his dying day.
Coming up this week on The Global Freedom Report with special guest host Jacob Hornberger!
Mon. Sept. 19 Sheldon Richman, editor of The Freeman
Tue. Sept. 20 James Bovard, author of Lost Rights
Wed. Sept. 21 Scott Horton, host of Antiwar.com radio
Thu. Sept. 22 Anthony Gregory of the Independent Institute
Fri. Sept. 23 Lew Rockwell of Ludwig von Mises Institute
Plus!
A daily analysis of current events within a libertarian framework, including income taxation, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the drug war, Iraq, Afghanistan, torture, economic liberty, free markets, socialism, interventionism, and imperialism.
Abolish The Police – Arm The Citizens!
“What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive? Or, if during the periods of mass arrests … people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang on the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood that they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?”
Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago
“They are coming to kill us!” exclaimed a young resident of Sagra, Russia as he spied a column of vehicles approaching the tiny village at the feet of the Ural Mountains. Responding to the alarm, several dozen residents mustered near the town entrance, bearing whatever weapons they could find. Some of them grabbed pitchforks, chains, or knives. Three men arrived on the scene with shotguns.
The leader of the approaching convoy was Sergei “The Gypsy” Lebedev, head of a criminal gang that had tormented Sagra for months. Lebedev’s followers swiped anything of value that was left unguarded. Power tools, appliances, and other household property disappeared; homes were vandalized as copper tubing and wiring were ripped out to be sold to scrap metal dealers. An onslaught of shoplifting threatened the survival of the village’s only significant retail store.
Exasperated citizens complained to the police in nearby Yekaterinberg, only to be treated with a mixture of amusement and impatient annoyance. Mounting hostility against Lebedev and his underlings prompted the gangster to withdraw – but only to gather reinforcements.
Lebedev was no petty cut-purse; his entourage included at least one vory v zakone (“thief in law”) – that is, a member of a politically protected mafia.
The gang leader’s intent was to seize control of the village as a base of operations for a drug operation, and he clearly enjoyed the covert support of the region’s “law enforcement” establishment. Thus it was that late in the evening of July 1, Ledbedev assembled a contingent of about 60 armed thugs and mounted a punitive expedition against the village of 130 people.
The Real Solution To The Debt Problem?
In his famously doleful, dystopian novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell described a world enthralled to what was functionally a “permanent war economy,” an “economy existing by and for continuous warfare.”
Today, on the heels of a debt ceiling increase calculated to forestall a federal-government default, we both are witnessing and are yoked to the many indispositions of what could be characterized as a permanent debt economy.
The Federal Reserve System, as the radix and arguably most defining component of the American economic paradigm, is fostering a scourge on productive activity that has metastasized through society to a now-catastrophic degree.
As a malignant growth eating away at the foundations of prosperity and freedom, the state, together with its parasitic courtiers, could not survive without the debt and insolvency that Congress’s latest actions have endorsed.
Behind the spurious language of compromise and pragmatism, the Washington power elite have damned Americans to what a talk by Mises Institute president Doug French styled “The Culture of Debt and Despair.” The state’s fraudulent system, grounded on the fool’s paradise of an ever-expanding monetary base, is perfectly adapted to engender an indissoluble condition of dependency in the great majority of Americans.
Though mainstream commentators scarcely ever acknowledge it, there is a critical causal relationship between the banking system that prevails in the United States and the ballooning federal debt; the two are intimately linked in both theory and practice, a fact that has been well understood by free-market economists — and particularly the Austrian School — for generations, and that manifests itself today.
As Professor Jörg Guido Hülsmann observes in The Ethics of Money Production, within a fiat-money system, public debt increases “at a much faster rhythm” than even the distended money supply. Pointing to the United States since 1971 as an example, Professor Hülsmann notes that while the money in circulation “increased by the factor 6,” the federal government’s debt grew by a factor of 20.
This imbalance is not a coincidence. The warped incentives of the cartelized banking environment encourage the precarious imbalances of the state-privileged banker class, existing completely outside of market discipline. The commercial banks collude with the central bank in a symbiotic partnership, one in which the former group gorges itself on government-debt bonds while the bonds furnish easy money at no cost and backed by no value. We cannot hope, then, to address the problem of a snowballing federal debt without first confronting the underlying infirmity bedeviling the economy, the centralized banking framework.
In 1817, the English free marketer and opponent of protectionism, William Cobbett, percipiently recognized the unique connection between government debt and central banking. In Paper Against Gold, he wrote:
[I]t was soon found, that to pay the interest of its Debt, the government needed something other than gold and silver; which, indeed, any one might have foreseen, because the Debt itself necessarily arose from the want of gold and silver within the reach of the government. It was, therefore, supreme folly to suppose, that the government, who had borrowed people’s guineas from want, would long have guineas enough to carry on wars and to pay [its creditors] too.
In a cycle through which one illusion is built on and follows from the next, the free market’s inherent protections against systemic breakdown are overturned by the state. In a true free market,
Palestine announces UN bid for statehood
So … as i was reading the news scroll at the bottom of the zionist controlled media on the muted tv (you can actually get important info when you turn off the chattering monkeys) when it said isreal ask for a observer position in the un somethen or other but they have to talk more with isreal ……What ? why does the UN need to ask isreal what to do about PALISTINE ? anyway heare is what was said …
ELIZABETH JACKSON: The Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas has announced his intention to apply to the United Nations Security Council for full membership for a Palestinian state.
In a speech delivered overnight, he said he’d ask the UN to back the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem.
(Excerpt from speech)
MAHMOUD ABBAS (translation): We go to the United Nations to ask it to shoulder its responsibilities, carrying the olive branch. Hopefully they won’t take it off of us, the same branch of the former Palestinian president Yasser Arafat, 36 years ago.
(Sound of applause)
ELIZABETH JACKSON: That’s the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas.
Well what exactly would recognition of a Palestinian state mean – not just at the United Nations but on the ground?
Australian Robert Dann is the adviser to the UN envoy in the Middle East and he is speaking here to our correspondent in Jerusalem Anne Barker.
ROBERT DANN: You actually only know what it means when you see precisely what they vote for and even on that level, you hear different things about what might end up being put forward.
If there were recognition of the state of Palestine that would lead potentially to Palestine becoming an observer state of the United Nations; at the moment it is an observer mission but at the moment it is not an observer state.
That would in some sense increase its standing or status but it would not be the same as becoming a member of the organisation.
ANNE BARKER: So without the support of the UN Security Council would that give it any sort of rights or is it just a symbolic move?
ROBERT DANN: It has some symbolic value and no doubt within the procedures of the general assembly it may alter Palestine’s ability to participate in various deliberations of the body, although Palestine already has an ability to do so.
ANNE BARKER: How did it get to this stage?
ROBERT DANN: Anne we’ve been trying as an international community for the last two-and-a-half years to bring the parties back into a meaningful negotiation and that remains the goal of the international community.
Now we have not been able to bring the parties into such a negotiation over many difficult disputes between them. Initially there was a major dispute over Israeli settlement activity in the Palestinian territory and a moratorium on settlement activity expired and the Palestinians discontinued talks.
And of course we still hope and believe that the right way forward ultimately, whatever happens in the UN, is also for the parties to come to the table in good faith, address each other’s core concerns as well as their own and negotiate an agreement – very difficult to do.
ANNE BARKER: So do you see this process then as possibly achieving that?
ROBERT DANN: This is ultimately a judgement that every member state will have to make when the issue is before them.
I don’t think that even the Palestinians think that it will bring that result. President Abbas has been very clear that regardless of what happens in the UN, ultimately the path the Palestinians need to pursue is the path of negotiations.
ANNE BARKER: And what would be the implications on the ground for both Israel and the Palestinians if this campaign did succeed?
ROBERT DANN: That depends of course on what happens. There is a sense of frustrations among the Palestinians; they’ve had a very successful process of preparing their institutions for statehood. There is frustration that they’re not able to realise that on the ground.
We of course hope that whatever happens in the UN that the situation on the ground remains stable, that neither party reacts or overreacts in a way that would not be constructive. We see sometimes speculation that Israel might take counter measures, or that Palestinians may react in frustration if the measures are not as they see fit.
It’s very important that everyone keeps their eye on the prize. The prize is for the parties to resolve this conflict between them with the help of the international community. It is regrettable that we are not at that point at the moment.
ELIZABETH JACKSON: That’s Robert Dann, advisor to the UN Envoy in the Middle East, talking to our Middle East correspondent Anne Barker in Jerusalem.
The Mission Paper
http://www.un.int/wcm/content/site/palestine/pid/11550
Top Bills in Congress- H.R.2583 Security Assistance Act of 2011 February 22, 2012
- H.R.3630 Welfare Integrity and Data Improvement Act February 22, 2012
- S.1720 Regulatory Responsibility for Our Economy Act February 22, 2012
- Constance Cumbey’s Blog
- THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT'S LATEST: Shut down the corporations??? On my 17th Birthday at that!? February 10, 2012
- OCCUPY MOVEMENT MAKES WAR ON CATHOLIC SCHOOLGIRLS, RIGHT TO LIFE February 2, 2012
- THE NEW AGE HIDDEN DANGERS OF NEWT GINGRICH January 28, 2012
- Dr. Ott’s Blog
- “Fraud College” 101: “Don’t Let TRUST Blind You to Scams” Good Mormons!! February 17, 2012
- MUST WATCH VIDEO!!!! STUNNING EDOMITE CONFESSIONS OF 9-11!! February 14, 2012
- A Lunatic Goy Video Goes Viral – When will America WAKE UP???? February 13, 2012
- Open Congress Blog
- Dems Re-Intro Super PAC Disclosure Bill February 21, 2012
- Unemployment Insurance Cuts in the Latest Deal February 15, 2012
- With SOPA Shelved, Congress Readies its Next Attack on the Internet February 13, 2012
- Anti-Web Censorship Bill Protest from Our Perspective at OC February 8, 2012
- Senate Passes FAA Bill With Anti-Union Language February 7, 2012
- House Getting Creative With the Earmark Moratorium February 6, 2012
- Liberate OpenGovData Now February 1, 2012
- Senate debates STOCK Act, dodges real issue of money in politics February 1, 2012
- The Week Ahead in Congress January 30, 2012
- Congress Links - STOCK Act January 30, 2012
Heart And Body Extract
Social Network
Add Us To Your iGoogle Homepage
Micro Effect - Listen Live - Talk Radio
Alternative News - Alternative Thinkers
-
Stats
