Watch live streaming video from 2011 at livestream.com
Friday, December 31, 2010
Obama Administration Forcing Employers to Post 'Union Rights'
It Appears that Obama continues to pay back the Unions for their help in getting him elected. He is going to force all employers to post Large Signs that explain the Rights people have for collective bargaining. Or better known as their Right to form a Union.
Since he knows he can't get this through Congress he is going to do an end run and make it an executive order.
Thanks to an Article on the CPUSA News, People's World, we now know about this new kickback:
"Private employers will be required to post large signs informing workers about their right to form unions under a new rule the Obama administration plans to institute by executive order.
The plan received less than the amount of publicity that might have been expected because it was announced the week before Christmas when the main focus of the news was on the legislative battles in Congress.
The National Labor Relations Board plans to issue a rule requiring almost all employers to post notices in employee break rooms or other prominent spots that explain workers' rights to bargain collectively, distribute union literature or engage in other union activity without reprisal.
In the past the NLRB usually made policy on a case-by-case basis during labor-management disputes.
The decision to issue the new order steps up even further the more aggressively pro-labor role the board has played during the Obama administration.
The president first signaled his determination to strengthen the board's role in protecting organizing rights when he made several recess appointments to give the NLRB its first Democratic majority in ten years.
The recess appointments were made because because the presiden't candidates were held up for months over GOP claims that a former AFL-CIO lawyer, Craig Becker, would be too pro-union.
The administration's new rule is opposed by big business which sees it as an attempt to achieve, by executive order, some of what labor and its allies have not been able to achieve on the legislative front. Republican filibusters have blocked passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it easier to form unions. The EFCA would allow workers to form a union as soon as a majority sign cards expressing their desire to be in a union.
Others who oppose the rule see it as a step in the direction of reversing a long-term decline in union membership. Only 7.2 percent of the natioon's work force is now unionized. Anti-union forces fear that widespread knowledge of union organizing rights will begin to reverse that trend.
The rule will not take effect until late February. From now until then, the NLRB is taking comments.
In a statement last week the NLRB said, "Many employees protected by the National Labor Relations Act are unaware of their rights under the law."
The posters private employers will be required to display are similar to those already required in the offices of government contractors and subcontractors ever since a June executive order issued by the Obama administration.
Michael Eastman, executive director of labor policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is already leading the charge against the rule, telling the press that the NLRB lacks the "legal authority" to issue such a rule.
Attorneys for the chamber and for companies opposed to the rule are telling their clients that the regulation amounts to "government sanctioning" of unions.
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the rule is "a common-sense policy necessary because there is widespread lack of understanding of the law and because many workers are justifiably fearful of exercising their rights."
Since he knows he can't get this through Congress he is going to do an end run and make it an executive order.
Thanks to an Article on the CPUSA News, People's World, we now know about this new kickback:
"Private employers will be required to post large signs informing workers about their right to form unions under a new rule the Obama administration plans to institute by executive order.
The plan received less than the amount of publicity that might have been expected because it was announced the week before Christmas when the main focus of the news was on the legislative battles in Congress.
The National Labor Relations Board plans to issue a rule requiring almost all employers to post notices in employee break rooms or other prominent spots that explain workers' rights to bargain collectively, distribute union literature or engage in other union activity without reprisal.
In the past the NLRB usually made policy on a case-by-case basis during labor-management disputes.
The decision to issue the new order steps up even further the more aggressively pro-labor role the board has played during the Obama administration.
The president first signaled his determination to strengthen the board's role in protecting organizing rights when he made several recess appointments to give the NLRB its first Democratic majority in ten years.
The recess appointments were made because because the presiden't candidates were held up for months over GOP claims that a former AFL-CIO lawyer, Craig Becker, would be too pro-union.
The administration's new rule is opposed by big business which sees it as an attempt to achieve, by executive order, some of what labor and its allies have not been able to achieve on the legislative front. Republican filibusters have blocked passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it easier to form unions. The EFCA would allow workers to form a union as soon as a majority sign cards expressing their desire to be in a union.
Others who oppose the rule see it as a step in the direction of reversing a long-term decline in union membership. Only 7.2 percent of the natioon's work force is now unionized. Anti-union forces fear that widespread knowledge of union organizing rights will begin to reverse that trend.
The rule will not take effect until late February. From now until then, the NLRB is taking comments.
In a statement last week the NLRB said, "Many employees protected by the National Labor Relations Act are unaware of their rights under the law."
The posters private employers will be required to display are similar to those already required in the offices of government contractors and subcontractors ever since a June executive order issued by the Obama administration.
Michael Eastman, executive director of labor policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is already leading the charge against the rule, telling the press that the NLRB lacks the "legal authority" to issue such a rule.
Attorneys for the chamber and for companies opposed to the rule are telling their clients that the regulation amounts to "government sanctioning" of unions.
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the rule is "a common-sense policy necessary because there is widespread lack of understanding of the law and because many workers are justifiably fearful of exercising their rights."
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Modern Presentation of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto
Here is a Little Marx for my Marxist Readers, which lately I seem to be getting quite a following according to my emails.
Granted it's Hate mail but what would one expect.
For those who aren't Marx fans this is an oversimplified explanation of the Communist Manifesto.
Does any of this Look Familiar to you?
Granted it's Hate mail but what would one expect.
For those who aren't Marx fans this is an oversimplified explanation of the Communist Manifesto.
Does any of this Look Familiar to you?
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Marxist Radical Revolutionaries Run Government Advisory Body to LA City Council
The South City Neighborhood Council (Pictured Above) in Los Angles is, according to it's website, "an official government entity, serving as an advisory body to the Los Angeles City Council and all other city departments with the ability to influence decisions that effect the community."
It is also Run by Marxist Radical Revolutionaries.
Looking at this screen shot from the LA Department of Neighborhood Empowerment website, the South City Neighborhood Council is run by:
The President of the Council is listed as Celina Benitez, a known Communist Radical that is the LA contact for the Salvadorian Communist Organization CISPES.
Clemente Franco and Jose Lara, High School Teacher, are both known Marxists and friends of Celnia Beneitez and Ron Gochez.
But the most well known and disturbing member of the leadership is the known Marxist Revolutionary, High School Teacher, Anti-Semite and Vice President of the Neighborhood Council, Ron Gochez.
Mr. Gochez is best known for the calling of a Mexican Revolution in the United States in order to take back 'Occupied Territory' at a rally at UCLA in 2007.
Here is the Video that made him infamous:
Mr. Gochez was then caught on video telling the 'youth' that the Police only serve the Rich. In the Video he says:
Here is the Video:
Considering Mr. Gochez likes to give the 'youth' advice, it shouldn't surprise anyone that his Marxist Mexican Militant Group,Union del Barrio, have opened a Marxist and Mexican Reconquest Militant Center right next to the High School were he teaches.
Here is a Video of the Center:
Coincidentally the 'Marxist Center', also known as the Centro Cultural Francisco Villa, is the Meeting Place for The South Central Neighborhood Council. As you can see in the Picture at the Top of this Article, the Marxist Center is Complete with a Flag of the Marxist Murder Che Guevara and the Flag of the Marxist Mexican group Union Del Barro. (Picture taken from the Communist Party USA News, People's World)
What is most disturbing is that Mr. Gochez and his Marxist Allies were Elected to their Positions on the Council. Here is a Video about the fact that they were running for office:
The South Central Neighborhood in LA is becoming a Breeding Ground for Marxist Revolutionaries complete with their own Council Advisory Board, Marxist Revolutionary Center and Teachers willing to prey on the Youth.
It would seem the Red Menace is reaching far and wide across this Nation.
While many in this Country are quick to dismiss this as a "Red Scare"...
Evidence like this may help to make a Believer out of the most Stubborn of Skeptics.
.
.
Ahmadinejad: "Iran Now a Nuclear Country"
According to an Article on the Russian News, RT, Iran has declared today that they are a Nuclear Country and Sanctions aren't going to do squat:
"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has declared that Iran is a “nuclear country,” while warning that the only option for the West is co-operation with the Iranian nation.
"They (the West) did not like us becoming a nuclear country, but we became nuclear,” the Iranian president told a cheering crowd on Tuesday in the northern Iranian city of Karaj. “The Iranian nation won the political war of the past years.”
Ahmadinejad, with an eye to upcoming talks in late January with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, as well as Germany, said that the “previous path” of imposing sanctions against Iran will not achieve the desired results.
“That road is closed,” he said.
Instead, the Iranian president continued, the West would have to choose the “second path,” which is “co-operation with the Iranian nation and recognition of the rights of the Iranian people.”
The United States and other Western nations suspect that the Islamic Republic is attempting to build nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian nuclear energy program. In June, the UN Security Council imposed its fourth round of sanctions against Iran in an effort to block Tehran from enriching uranium.
The Iranian leader dismissed the UN sanctions against Iran as "illegal," adding that such efforts would only "strengthen the Iranian nation and accelerate the pace of our progress."
Iran held a first round of talks earlier this month with officials from the US, China, Russia, France, Britain, Germany and the European Union in Geneva.
One EU diplomat, who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity due to his participation in the talks, said that it appeared Ahmadinejad was attempting to strengthen his hand with tough rhetoric before the upcoming meeting with the UN Security Council.
“He [Ahmadinejad] would like everyone to believe that any further resolutions and sanctions to prevent Iran from further enriching uranium will end in failure,” the diplomat said. “But that is an issue that will have to be settled by all of the attending members [of the Security Council], and not by Mr. Ahmadinejad himself.”
The European's Union's foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, hinted to reporters in Geneva that some level of co-operation with Tehran over the nuclear issue may be possible.
At the Istanbul meeting "we plan to discuss practical ideas and ways of co-operating toward the resolution of our full concerns about the nuclear issue," she said.
Ahmadinejad also warned in his speech that any country that attempts to “prevent the Iranian nation from achieving its rights" would “regret it.”
No desire to “become like the West”
Meanwhile, in a separate meeting with intellectuals and managers of Alborz Province on the same day, Ahmadinejad said Iran is “on the threshold of a historical leap in a variety of fields,” as quoted by Press TV, the Iranian news agency.
He outlined the importance of drafting an "Iranian-Islamic" model of planning in order to redirect the country away from a Western-based path to development.
"We plan to set a system and develop an Islamic and Iranian model for planning,” Ahmadinejad said. “We don't want to become a country similar to Western states."
The Iranian president expressed confidence that 99 per cent of the Iranian nation would resoundingly reject the opportunity “to have a country just like the Western states in the future."
"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has declared that Iran is a “nuclear country,” while warning that the only option for the West is co-operation with the Iranian nation.
"They (the West) did not like us becoming a nuclear country, but we became nuclear,” the Iranian president told a cheering crowd on Tuesday in the northern Iranian city of Karaj. “The Iranian nation won the political war of the past years.”
Ahmadinejad, with an eye to upcoming talks in late January with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, as well as Germany, said that the “previous path” of imposing sanctions against Iran will not achieve the desired results.
“That road is closed,” he said.
Instead, the Iranian president continued, the West would have to choose the “second path,” which is “co-operation with the Iranian nation and recognition of the rights of the Iranian people.”
The United States and other Western nations suspect that the Islamic Republic is attempting to build nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian nuclear energy program. In June, the UN Security Council imposed its fourth round of sanctions against Iran in an effort to block Tehran from enriching uranium.
The Iranian leader dismissed the UN sanctions against Iran as "illegal," adding that such efforts would only "strengthen the Iranian nation and accelerate the pace of our progress."
Iran held a first round of talks earlier this month with officials from the US, China, Russia, France, Britain, Germany and the European Union in Geneva.
One EU diplomat, who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity due to his participation in the talks, said that it appeared Ahmadinejad was attempting to strengthen his hand with tough rhetoric before the upcoming meeting with the UN Security Council.
“He [Ahmadinejad] would like everyone to believe that any further resolutions and sanctions to prevent Iran from further enriching uranium will end in failure,” the diplomat said. “But that is an issue that will have to be settled by all of the attending members [of the Security Council], and not by Mr. Ahmadinejad himself.”
The European's Union's foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, hinted to reporters in Geneva that some level of co-operation with Tehran over the nuclear issue may be possible.
At the Istanbul meeting "we plan to discuss practical ideas and ways of co-operating toward the resolution of our full concerns about the nuclear issue," she said.
Ahmadinejad also warned in his speech that any country that attempts to “prevent the Iranian nation from achieving its rights" would “regret it.”
No desire to “become like the West”
Meanwhile, in a separate meeting with intellectuals and managers of Alborz Province on the same day, Ahmadinejad said Iran is “on the threshold of a historical leap in a variety of fields,” as quoted by Press TV, the Iranian news agency.
He outlined the importance of drafting an "Iranian-Islamic" model of planning in order to redirect the country away from a Western-based path to development.
"We plan to set a system and develop an Islamic and Iranian model for planning,” Ahmadinejad said. “We don't want to become a country similar to Western states."
The Iranian president expressed confidence that 99 per cent of the Iranian nation would resoundingly reject the opportunity “to have a country just like the Western states in the future."
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
CPUSA Claims Christmas is a Time For 'Revolutionary Hope'
You have to Love Propaganda, the Communist Party USA Does.
Leave it to the Communists to take the Christmas Story of Jesus and turn it into a Class Warfare Saga where the 'Poor are Fed and the Rich are Relieved of their Ill-Gotten Gains.'
Here is an Article from the CPUSA website that says Christmas isn't a Time for Jesus but for Revolutionary Hope:
"Christmas time can be so depressing. It brings out some of the worst features of capitalism and rubs them in our faces. You can't escape, whatever your philosophical or religious belief.
Advertisements spur on feelings of guilt if you don't buy enough of the right kinds of consumer products for people you love. Creative financing is offered so that lenders can make even more profit. And it is an environmental disaster ... more plastic, cardboard and packaging is produced, carted about, and dumped into landfills, vacant lots, and incinerators at Christmas time than at any other time of the year.
And yet ... Nearly smothered beneath piles of gift catalogs and sale circulars, nearly drowned in a sea of synthesized elevator-music Christmas carols, in a locked theological vault guarded down through the centuries by legions of preachers, priests and pontiffs, there burns a persistent secret flame. It is the flame of a revolutionary hope - hope for a better world, a more just society, where the social order is turned upside down so that the poor are fed and the rich are relieved of their ill-gotten gains. And it is something that working people of any culture, any religious or philosophical background can relate to.
What does Christmas have to do with the class struggle? In a word - everything. The story goes like this:
Once upon a time, in a land far away on the edge of a great empire, there was a people with an ancient culture, a storied past, and a great literature, who had been conquered by a technologically advanced imperial power. They were occupied by foreign soldiers and ruled by corrupt local despots who collaborated with the foreign oppressors. There were periodic revolts of local peasants and slaves that were put down mercilessly.
In the midst of all that, a young unmarried girl becomes pregnant out of wedlock. You might think she would regret this development, but on the contrary, she finds in the anticipated birth of a child a reason to rejoice and to hope for a better world. In her joy and determination, she sings an ancient song of liberation:
My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed; for he who is mighty has done great things for me -- He has shown strength with his arm, he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts, he has put down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty. (Luke 1:46-53)
She and her fiancee are then forced to make a difficult journey while she is in the last weeks of her pregnancy, ostensibly to comply with the demands of their imperial rulers to register for a census. They are denied lodging in local inns. Homeless, the young family takes shelter in a stable, where the mother goes into labor and gives birth to a baby boy among barnyard animals.
Hardly an auspicious beginning for a child in whom his mother had placed such hope. And then things get worse. The local ruler, a collaborator who is kept in power through an occupation army, decides on an act of terror. Convinced that a revolt is brewing in the village where the young couple has just had their baby, he sends in death squads to kill all the male children under a certain age.
Fortunately, the young family is tipped off and they flee into a neighboring country. There they wait until they receive news of the death of their corrupt local despot, and thereafter return to raise their son in their hometown. When he grows up, the boy becomes a carpenter. As if to fulfill the revolutionary hope expressed in his mother's song, he goes on to organize a movement for social and economic change. It is composed of a coalition of fishermen, reformed prostitutes, the unemployed and low-level public servants, with a cross-section of men and women, and people of different ethnic backgrounds.
The aims of the movement are clear from the very beginning:
Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low, and the crooked shall be made straight ... (Luke 3:4-5) .
He has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable Year of the Lord. (Luke 4:18-19)
And so, when you look at the Christmas story closely, you find a story of working-class people living in difficult times, in circumstances not too different from those faced by millions of people today. These are people who are aware of their history of struggle. They draw strength from the lessons of the past and nourish hopes and dreams for a better world.
Mary, the young mother in the Christmas story is supremely confident that the future will be better. Her song, known as the Magnificat, is nothing less than revolutionary.
This revolutionary aspect of Christmas is also found in the popular Christmas carol "O Holy Night" (Cantique de Noel). The words were written by the French socialist Placide Cappeau de Roquemaure and it was translated into English by the American abolitionist John Sullivan Dwight. The music was written by Adolphe Charles Adam, a friend of Cappeau's who was Jewish. One verse of the carol states:
"Truly he taught us to love one another; his law is love and his gospel is peace. Chains shall he break, for the slave is our brother; and in his name all oppression shall cease!"
The political ramifications of this carol were well understood by some reactionaries in our own country and it continues to be controversial. The song was banned for years in many conservative churches in the U.S. and many radio stations in the South refused to play it.
So, whenever you get weary of the holidays and all the claptrap that surrounds them, remember the young family of the Christmas story, how they hoped and dreamed for a revolutionary transformation of their country and how they persevered in the face of oppression.
Whoever you are, have a merry and revolutionary Christmas. And let us then enter the new millennium resolved to wipe out homelessness, poverty, racism and injustice once and for all!"
Leave it to the Communists to take the Christmas Story of Jesus and turn it into a Class Warfare Saga where the 'Poor are Fed and the Rich are Relieved of their Ill-Gotten Gains.'
Here is an Article from the CPUSA website that says Christmas isn't a Time for Jesus but for Revolutionary Hope:
"Christmas time can be so depressing. It brings out some of the worst features of capitalism and rubs them in our faces. You can't escape, whatever your philosophical or religious belief.
Advertisements spur on feelings of guilt if you don't buy enough of the right kinds of consumer products for people you love. Creative financing is offered so that lenders can make even more profit. And it is an environmental disaster ... more plastic, cardboard and packaging is produced, carted about, and dumped into landfills, vacant lots, and incinerators at Christmas time than at any other time of the year.
And yet ... Nearly smothered beneath piles of gift catalogs and sale circulars, nearly drowned in a sea of synthesized elevator-music Christmas carols, in a locked theological vault guarded down through the centuries by legions of preachers, priests and pontiffs, there burns a persistent secret flame. It is the flame of a revolutionary hope - hope for a better world, a more just society, where the social order is turned upside down so that the poor are fed and the rich are relieved of their ill-gotten gains. And it is something that working people of any culture, any religious or philosophical background can relate to.
What does Christmas have to do with the class struggle? In a word - everything. The story goes like this:
Once upon a time, in a land far away on the edge of a great empire, there was a people with an ancient culture, a storied past, and a great literature, who had been conquered by a technologically advanced imperial power. They were occupied by foreign soldiers and ruled by corrupt local despots who collaborated with the foreign oppressors. There were periodic revolts of local peasants and slaves that were put down mercilessly.
In the midst of all that, a young unmarried girl becomes pregnant out of wedlock. You might think she would regret this development, but on the contrary, she finds in the anticipated birth of a child a reason to rejoice and to hope for a better world. In her joy and determination, she sings an ancient song of liberation:
My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed; for he who is mighty has done great things for me -- He has shown strength with his arm, he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts, he has put down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty. (Luke 1:46-53)
She and her fiancee are then forced to make a difficult journey while she is in the last weeks of her pregnancy, ostensibly to comply with the demands of their imperial rulers to register for a census. They are denied lodging in local inns. Homeless, the young family takes shelter in a stable, where the mother goes into labor and gives birth to a baby boy among barnyard animals.
Hardly an auspicious beginning for a child in whom his mother had placed such hope. And then things get worse. The local ruler, a collaborator who is kept in power through an occupation army, decides on an act of terror. Convinced that a revolt is brewing in the village where the young couple has just had their baby, he sends in death squads to kill all the male children under a certain age.
Fortunately, the young family is tipped off and they flee into a neighboring country. There they wait until they receive news of the death of their corrupt local despot, and thereafter return to raise their son in their hometown. When he grows up, the boy becomes a carpenter. As if to fulfill the revolutionary hope expressed in his mother's song, he goes on to organize a movement for social and economic change. It is composed of a coalition of fishermen, reformed prostitutes, the unemployed and low-level public servants, with a cross-section of men and women, and people of different ethnic backgrounds.
The aims of the movement are clear from the very beginning:
Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low, and the crooked shall be made straight ... (Luke 3:4-5) .
He has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable Year of the Lord. (Luke 4:18-19)
And so, when you look at the Christmas story closely, you find a story of working-class people living in difficult times, in circumstances not too different from those faced by millions of people today. These are people who are aware of their history of struggle. They draw strength from the lessons of the past and nourish hopes and dreams for a better world.
Mary, the young mother in the Christmas story is supremely confident that the future will be better. Her song, known as the Magnificat, is nothing less than revolutionary.
This revolutionary aspect of Christmas is also found in the popular Christmas carol "O Holy Night" (Cantique de Noel). The words were written by the French socialist Placide Cappeau de Roquemaure and it was translated into English by the American abolitionist John Sullivan Dwight. The music was written by Adolphe Charles Adam, a friend of Cappeau's who was Jewish. One verse of the carol states:
"Truly he taught us to love one another; his law is love and his gospel is peace. Chains shall he break, for the slave is our brother; and in his name all oppression shall cease!"
The political ramifications of this carol were well understood by some reactionaries in our own country and it continues to be controversial. The song was banned for years in many conservative churches in the U.S. and many radio stations in the South refused to play it.
So, whenever you get weary of the holidays and all the claptrap that surrounds them, remember the young family of the Christmas story, how they hoped and dreamed for a revolutionary transformation of their country and how they persevered in the face of oppression.
Whoever you are, have a merry and revolutionary Christmas. And let us then enter the new millennium resolved to wipe out homelessness, poverty, racism and injustice once and for all!"
NYC Employee Destroys SUV
Remember those that work for the the Government Care about you and your stuff.
Warning Foul Language.
Hat Tip The Blaze
Warning Foul Language.
Hat Tip The Blaze
Monday, December 27, 2010
Newly Elected "Tea Party" Congressmen Refuses Government Health Care Plan
According to an Ariticle on The Blaze, someone going to Washington is actually living up to his Principles:
"A newly-elected GOP Rep. announced that he is refusing the congressional health insurance plan in a show of solidarity with the American people.
Rep-elect Joe Walsh (R-IL) told the New York Times that he will stick to his Tea Party roots and decline the government health care provided to members of congress.
“I don’t think congressmen should get pensions or cushy health care plans,” he said. But it‘s a decision that’s not being welcomed by everyone in his family. Walsh’s wife has a pre-existing medical condition, and she’ll now be charged with the difficult task of finding a plan on the open market.
Walsh joins two other Republicans in declining the government’s health plan. So far, incoming Reps. Bobby Schilling (IL) and Mike Kelly (PA) have made similar decisions."
Obama Supports Giving Back Parts of U.S. to Native Americans?
According to an Article on World Net Daily the President appears to support a UN Resolution that might give parts of the U.S. back to the Native Americans:
"President Obama is voicing support for a U.N. resolution that could accomplish something as radical as relinquishing some U.S. sovereignty and opening a path for the return of ancient tribal lands to American Indians, including even parts of Manhattan.
The issue is causing alarm among legal experts.
In recent remarks at the White House during a "tribal nations conference," Obama endorsed the "United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People," which includes a sweeping declaration that "indigenous peoples have a right to lands and resources they traditionally occupied or otherwise used" but that later were acquired by occupying forces.
"U.N. resolutions like this claiming amorphous rights can be a stalking horse for future attempts to have international courts enforce broad interpretations of those rights at the expense of American sovereignty," Theodore Frank, a fellow with the Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute, a leading public policy think tank in New York City, told WND.
Academic legal experts indicate that American Indians during the Carter era first drew up plans for reacquisition of lost tribal lands, setting the stage for the U.N. resolution that Obama is embracing. The feasibility study, eyeing 650 million acres of federally owned land in the U.S., was conducted by the Indian Education Institute at Eastern Oregon State, one expert recalled for WND.
"Re-purchase would restore land back to its original owners thus strengthening tribal sovereignty and jurisdiction over its people and land," Julianne Jennings Nottoway, a professor of anthropology at Pima Community College in Tuscon, Ariz., said. "Also, it would allow tribes the opportunity to develop socially, politically and economically as competitors as nation-states within a global context under the act of self-determination."
The Bush White House refused to support the U.N. resolution. But last year, the Democrat-majority House and Senate passed a resolution that, in Obama's words, acknowledges "the sad and painful chapters in our shared history – a history too often marred by broken promises and grave injustices against the First Americans."
The president said, "No statement can undo the damage that was done. But it is only by heeding the lessons of our history that we can move forward."
To Read the Rest of the Article Go Here.
.
"President Obama is voicing support for a U.N. resolution that could accomplish something as radical as relinquishing some U.S. sovereignty and opening a path for the return of ancient tribal lands to American Indians, including even parts of Manhattan.
The issue is causing alarm among legal experts.
In recent remarks at the White House during a "tribal nations conference," Obama endorsed the "United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People," which includes a sweeping declaration that "indigenous peoples have a right to lands and resources they traditionally occupied or otherwise used" but that later were acquired by occupying forces.
"U.N. resolutions like this claiming amorphous rights can be a stalking horse for future attempts to have international courts enforce broad interpretations of those rights at the expense of American sovereignty," Theodore Frank, a fellow with the Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute, a leading public policy think tank in New York City, told WND.
Academic legal experts indicate that American Indians during the Carter era first drew up plans for reacquisition of lost tribal lands, setting the stage for the U.N. resolution that Obama is embracing. The feasibility study, eyeing 650 million acres of federally owned land in the U.S., was conducted by the Indian Education Institute at Eastern Oregon State, one expert recalled for WND.
"Re-purchase would restore land back to its original owners thus strengthening tribal sovereignty and jurisdiction over its people and land," Julianne Jennings Nottoway, a professor of anthropology at Pima Community College in Tuscon, Ariz., said. "Also, it would allow tribes the opportunity to develop socially, politically and economically as competitors as nation-states within a global context under the act of self-determination."
The Bush White House refused to support the U.N. resolution. But last year, the Democrat-majority House and Senate passed a resolution that, in Obama's words, acknowledges "the sad and painful chapters in our shared history – a history too often marred by broken promises and grave injustices against the First Americans."
The president said, "No statement can undo the damage that was done. But it is only by heeding the lessons of our history that we can move forward."
To Read the Rest of the Article Go Here.
.