|
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Typos happen...
It's all in the title...Typos happen... and will from time to time continue to happen..
3:43 pm pdt
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
U.S. Congress use of filibuster option helping to tear nations Democratic Republic apart
When the U.S. Congress changed the rules pertaining to the use of filibusters, making it a process that could
be used through notice rather than actual physical effort..The U.S. Congress help set the stage for a serious downgrade
in the effectiveness, representational content, level of debate ect.. in this critical branch of our U.S. government.
The misuse of this process under current rules has clearly been contributory to the current public
levels of performance dis-satisfaction, through ongoing entropic stalemates, and inaction.
As currently
being used this filibuster process is dis-proportionately separating our U.S. congress from being able to fulfill
it's mandate to represent the will of the voting populace in a more traditionally regular proportion to the votes
being cast in the electorial process..
CSM
9:49 am pdt
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Recently some leaders of other Christian denominations claim Mormonism to be a cult
I find this to be one, predictable- unfortunately.. Sadly funny in a respect..It's kind of a situation where we have the pot calling the kettle black..
With the Christian denominations, once you get outside of the basic tenants
of the ten commandments you can really start getting into some very irrational processes, (and even with the Ten
Commandments..the parts about God, graven images..get a little goofy),
These "biblical" processes
become even more problematic when you view them outside of the historical/cultural context under which they came
into existence. I.E. The biblical literalist...
The problem with the Mormon situation, is that it came into existence as a "form/branch/weed" of Christianity in fairly recent history.. At the time of it's formation
it's organizational/historical underpinnings/claims were beyond the means of mainstream society to dispute, or
hold up as the fabrication of some creative minds..
Little could the creative thinkers that formed up this
"new faith" have known that right around the corner was coming the advent of modern archaeology. Within
a hundred years or less key points behind much of their formative structural history could be logically/academically demonstrated to be false/wrong..If the product of actual communication with supernatural beings..these beings
were either very confused or ignorant about history, and the real facts having to do with the America's.
The rational conclusion being that Mormonism is the product of some creative thinkers..creative thinkers
that had no educational background in central American native cultures/histories, or the indigenous animal species.
(Most/all monotheistic faiths suffer from similar short- comings...)
Do I want someone who
believes in the more discriminatory aspects of the Mormon belief system to hold any type of public office..hell
no.. No more than I would want followers of any religious belief system that supports or advocates discriminatory
policies or processes to hold public office.
Do I think that any adult that is willing to stand
up and proclaim that they actually and fully believe as fact/truth some of the more outrageous aspects of the Mormon faiths view or rendition of historical events are unqualified to hold public office..or God forbid get
control of the nuclear football?
Go to www.whatismormonism.com
Hell yes.. I feel the same way about any adult that actually thinks Jesus walked on water, that the
story of Adam and Eve is true etc..
Why do I believe this is more of an issue today than in the
past.. well for me it's because I believe our planet is dying, our political and social and economic processes are
failing.. and I see far too many connections to these failures in our western societies to the beliefs systems- methods of operation propagated by the biblical literalist.
{ I use the term biblical literalist...this
can often time be exchanged for "biblical mis-interpretationist", or biblical myth creationist etc..}
All the above---
(Does not explain what is going on in China, or other non- Christian developing nations...I
think, at least as far as China goes..the problems are based upon a natural desire or need to achieve
material/living standards or equality.
That they should have all that the west/or other developed nations
have, and have had for so long... There are other issues involved here as well based upon societal issues
supported by the actual/real suffering they have had to endure to stay in "the game"avoid collapse, or
various other disasters..and they want what they want for their society/people.
My problem with the
current mainland China development process is that a large aspect is moving forward with the same, "and the
so what if humanity goes extinct in the process", process that we see here in the west ect..
Some might be quick to point out that a large portion or that suffering their government/economic model forced
them to endure.., and there is a certain truth behind this perspective, but still,..I can imagine the resentment.
We "The U.S." have failed to keep our house in order, "economic/social/environmental etc..", our
processes have often fallen far below the "Good Neighbor" standard.., granted sometimes for cause, more
often inexplicably for not... China is putting tremendous efforts towards clean energy production, but as the data
demonstrates, when you are trying to cover as much ground as the Chinese with the current levels of help and global
co-operation now seen/available, it's not a big surprise when you become the worlds largest polluter..In many
key areas finally over taking the U.S.
Need to clearly do better. but do we have the time?
Where
were the corrective processes of the Christian faiths, Muslim? How about the Masons? Skull and Bones..? Tri lateralists.Bildenbergers?? Bottom line... our epitaph may well read
Here lies the human race, had some
real potential..but went and over bred themselves to death. Like rats! "They found
reality and rationalism to be too much work"
I just don't think we can afford to put up with the
goofy level of this shit for very much longer..
Update-12/9/11, (Recent research is showing strong evidence
that rats have very strong empathetic/and altruistic behavior traits..so lets work to adopt these traits for our
selves, while seriously taking steps to address the "over bred themselves to death" scenarios in
a positive/timely progressive fashion.)
CSM
It's going to be real interesting when the glacial
ice has been reduced to the point that it is no longer able to function as a global cooling agent.
12:38 pm pdt
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Is it assassination, or a legal act/s of war?
The debate over the U.S. military killing of leaders of Anti-U.S. militant groups has been heating up as of late..
Another level of concern has been raised due to the fact that a recently targeted/killed Anti-U.S. militant
leader was a U.S. citizen.
There is a another issue involved having to do with what the rules, or legal
constraints should be in regards to the U.S. military engaging in military operations in which said operations
require that they enter/cross the legally recognized borders of a sovereign nation without first obtaining
the approval to do so from the Government of said sovereign nation.
I summarize my
analysis as follows.
If the current U.S. military operations currently engaged in, in several nations, are
under legally accepted conditions/mandates, allowing U.S. military operations-- say vs.. a purely "civilian
law" enforcement response/issue... Then I believe that if a group of enemy combatants are located, they
can, and should expect to be targeted by any and all available and reasonably used U.S. military resources.
I would say that if you are a U.S. citizen and you have clearly allied yourself with active Anti-U.S. militants
and are clearly taking part in military operations against the U.S.--even if your role is more involved in the planning
vs the operations end of things.. and all the conditions discussed in the above paragraphs exist, you should reasonably
expect a cruise missile up your tail pipe..or if possible, perhaps a Navy Seal will come a knocking on your
door.
Same goes for those enemy combatants that are not U.S. citizens..
Sometimes a mission has
the ability to meet it's objectives and the taking of prisoners is going to be an acceptable part of the op..After
which they can, should expect to be processed according to legally acceptable military doctrine/rules/rights/regs
ect..
Other times an op might be a plane flying over head, dropping a bomb on target, not really possible
to take prisoners.
( I do want to come to a clear understanding about what actually took place
in the "Bin Laden" compound. This in light of the conflicting accounts that are now circulating.) I believe
shooting/killing an unarmed enemy combatant could under various circumstances be a considered a "war crime"..
really want to have these conflicting stories vetted.. and dismissed or acted upon.--and-- serious legitimate
consideration should be given/and expected towards those involved in the operation, and the degree of threat they
considered themselves to be exposed.-- If it was an assassination--which could only be determined by
examining the details of the op--well again,-- shooting unarmed captives "can be/is" a war crime.
I also believe that some act's of terrorism should clearly be treated as "criminal acts" to be addressed using the resources of the targeted nations civilian law enforcement/criminal court system. VS something that
will be expected to trigger a nations full military response
It really comes down to the size and scope of
the (terrorist?) operation, and location of point of origin, I.E. domestic or foreign..If you have allied yourself
with governments that protect you and provide you sustenance...If you engage in militant strikes across the
globe--you should anticipate your actions to be considered an act of war, and responded to accordingly.
As far as the border crossing issues go, I would say that crossing a border into an allied nation without
prior approval does appear to be potentially illegal..
I would expect that if something like this was
done under the auspices of a "lessor of harms" defence that I'm sure the gratitude of the violated
nation would require that they choose not to make an issue of it.. No called harm, no called foul..
If
said violated nation does cry foul then the issue exists, and any complaint should expect to be given full legal
consideration, and sanctioned accordingly.
I also think that if a nation that claims to be an ally, is in
fact found to be harboring a person engaged in acts of war..or terrorism/extreme violence..said nations may find
that they have also engaged in an act of war?
With all the expected response to said "acts of war" to
also be within the realm of possibility.
The U.S. government that I'm willing to support does not shoot unarmed prisoners..It also does not violate international law..Right now I give the benefit of the doubt to the U.S. in reference to these issues, but I want to see, in due time, an in depth analysis of these
matters.
CSM
P.S. I also wanted to add that I agree with those that want to make
sure that proper review processes, record keeping, and hard wired constitutional legal requirements exist for
any type of government sponsored homicide, that can/could be grouped into an extra-judicial process/es.
These
types of actions no matter how appropriate? Push us as a society towards a slippery slope..As a democratic republic
that recognizes the importance of having a multiple/independant branches,- form of government.. We do not
wish for such power to reside within the grasp of any individual, or branch of government that is not exposed to
regular, and transparent public disclosure, and stringent review. With clearly stated criminal penalties for
the abuses associated with such processes clearly defined as well.
1/6/2012- Update.. I also wanted to add,
so that my position is even more clear...If you have some one who is engaged actively in "making war"
against the United States- in active theatres of recognized conflict, a legal/ expected military type of response/action
should not be unexpected...Nor do I believe it poses a serious legal/ constitutional concern.. How-ever, as I have
said else where the legitimacy of this type of response is to be measured against the size & scope of
the activity..
If you have a small group of individuals..operating outside of the recognized theatre of active
"traditionally understood" military conflict.. then these are "civil criminal" issues that should
be pursued and prosecuted as such..
We recognize that under the ever changing world that "grey" areas
exist..where things/responses could get "confused"?
We believe that erring on the side of caution must
be the policy I.E. ensuring the rule of law and constitutionality of the process...That a process of full review
and transparency must be followed, while protecting recognized intelligence assets. With full legal accountability..criminal
prosecution for those..who make a mistake..and deprive an individual or individuals of life, liberty, ect.. without
due process of law.
We realize that this can give some bad people the first "shot" or "punch"
sometimes.. But we're supposed to be the good guys..It goes with the territory, and the values that we are supposed
to hold as sacred.
Acts of war are one thing..illegal assassination another.. the fact that our government
has become so lost constitutionally, AGAIN, that we are having these discussions is disturbing.
3:03 pm pdt
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Topics of interest: 1.)Politics2.)Economics3.)Civil
Rights4.)Social issues5.)Environmental Protections6.)Restorative
Justice& many morePlease contact us if you have
any questions Thank you.Sunrisecontact@aol.com
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|