Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts

Saturday, June 24, 2017

Sign of the Times: Voice Of The Deplorables

This billboard was paid for by a businessman in Boerne, Texas! It reads "ABC News: I grew up with you. We are through. The Russians didn't elect Donald Trump. I did. Kyle Courtney "





At Accuracy In Media, Don Irvine reports:
 "[Kyle] Courtney released the following statement to News4 in San Antonio:
“ABC News was the only channel I watched as a child growing up in Texas but I think they have lost touch with America and forgotten the working man. They don’t represent our voice anymore. Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign was funded by the Clinton Foundation in close coordination with the media, and now we’re seeing them try to fix what they couldn’t fix during the election. They are doing everything they can, night after night, to create narratives and sway people’s direction to impeach Donald Trump. Our democracy is at stake when a major political party and the media are in bed together. I’m not asking anyone to boycott the Democratic party. I’m not in the brainwashing business, but the liberal media is.” "
Thank you, and God bless you, Mr. Courtney. Many millions of us share your thinking -and also proudly voted FOR Donald John Trump without apology or equivocation.




*Photo Credit: Wellstar Groundwater Technologies, Mr Courtney's company

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

QOTD: Twenty Things President Trump Did Not Do


Mr Leo Decaj posted a comment on President Donald J Trump's Facebook page and asked that it be shared.  I shared it in a comment on Bill Quick's fine Deplorable Blog "Daily Pundit", and Bill liked it so well he pulled it up to a stand-alone post:

Twenty Things President Trump Did Not Do

Leo Decaj wrote: “Keep this in mind :
  1. Donald Trump did not steal your money.
  2. Donald Trump did not raise your taxes.
  3. Donald Trump did not quadruple the price of food.
  4. Trump is not stirring a race war.
  5. Trump did not leave any US soldiers in Benghazi to be slaughtered and desecrated by Muslims.
  6. Trump did not send the US Navy to fight for Syrian Al-Qaeda.
  7. Trump did not arm ISIS and systematically exterminate Christians throughout the Middle East.
  8. Trump did not betray Israel.
  9. Trump did not provide financing and technology to Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
  10. Trump did not give our military secrets to China.
  11. Trump did not remove our nuclear missile shield in Poland at the behest of Russia.
  12. Trump did not shrivel our military, and betray our veterans.
  13. Trump did not cripple our economy.
  14. Trump did not increase our debt to 20 trillion dollars.
  15. Trump did not ruin our credit, twice.
  16. Trump did not double African American unemployment.
  17. Trump did not increase welfare to a record level for eight years.
  18. Trump did not sign a law making it legal to execute, and imprison Americans.
  19. Trump did not set free all of terrorists in Guantanamo bay.
  20. Trump did not steal your rights, violate US Constitutional law, or commit treason, hundreds of times.
Yet Trump is being ripped apart in the news, non stop. Barrack Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton and the criminals occupying our government, are not. The media is the Democratic Party. Save our culture. Stop listening to them..!! 
He's right! 

Thank you, Mr Leo Decaj, for standing up for America, and for our truly elected "by the people" President, Donald John Trump!

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Thursday, December 1, 2016

FBI Hate Crime Data Excludes Victims Targeted Because Of Their Religion In Terror Attacks




The FBI recently released its annual report on Hate Crime Statistics for 2015.  It appears fairly straightforward, and clarifies certain changes in definition. But some high-profile events are missing: mass attacks, including those designated as "Terror Attacks" seem to be omitted from the FBI's  Hate Crime database.

More on that in a minute. First, let's look at the misleading use of percentages to inflate some very tiny numbers. And at the mixing of data with opinion with rumor to create something that does not exist... I think the word for it this week is Fake News.

Fake News or "a filtered product to readers"

Pew Research Center has put out a small analysis that, in keeping with the globalists' anti-Trump narrative, purports to show a huge increase in "anti-Muslim assaults" under the headline:
"FBI Data shows Anti-Muslim assaults reach 9/11-era levels",  quotes a few stats of year-old data, shows a graph, cherry picks mentions of other religions, then throws in a bunch of  opinion polls - all of which is slanted to create the impression that anti-Muslim discrimination is far worse than that against any other religion. The article wraps up with a dire-sounding number of reports, admits those reports can't be confirmed (indeed, most have been proven hoaxes), and gets to the whole reason for the article with this phrase: "in the five days following the presidential election alone."

Here's some reality to keep in mind: that's only 91 cases over the entire USA covering an entire year, from a year or more ago - all occurred before the presidential election campaign got off the ground, and particularly,  occurred before the elite media's obsession with Muslim immigration began after the San Bernadino Massacre in December 2015.

There is no evidence at all, no statistics, no data, nothing but rumor to indicate any increase in crime against people for their Muslim faith in the year 2016.  But Pew put out this article in a way that creates the appearance that there are both an increase in criminal targeting, and evidence for it.

Why is Pew Research suddenly trafficking in rumor and nuanced innuendo?

325 Million people live in the US,  three million of them are Muslim,  and  of those, 257 Muslims reported being mistreated because of their religion last year. This includes what the FBI labels "intimidation", vandalism, theft: only 91 were physical assaults.

According to the FBI's database, almost as many Christians, 244, were criminally victimized for their faith, and Jews were targets a whopping 237% more often than Muslims: 731 Jewish people in the US were victims of hate crimes last year, with a population of approximately 6 million.

Meanwhile, the Southern Poverty Law Center is still reporting dozens of false reports (and Pew Research is still happily citing their unverifiable "anecdotes" in which people pretended they were targeted "by Trump voters" or by so-called "white" people, and later admitted they made it all up.
In at least one case, a Muslim woman was charged for the false police report she made - shouldn't this be listed as a "hate crime" as well?

Pew did not bother to report that the DOCUMENTED assaults on Trump supporters before and  after the election have included brutal beatings of people - including children, one only 11 years old in his elementary classroom - targeted by multiple assailants. Many of the hate crimes against Trump supporters have been actively reported as harmless fun  or even with deliberate blamed placed on the victim by pro-Democrat elite media.

According to the FBI: " 88.4 percent of agencies participating in the Hate Crime Statistics Program reported that no hate crimes occurred in their jurisdictions."

As some of the above articles show about bias against President Trump's supporters, "hate crimes" against people hated by the elite media and Globalists are likely to be under-reported. It is very difficult for Christian victims to get a "hate crime" designation for their suffering.  Often, where Christians are criminally targeted there is a tendency within law enforcement as well as elite media to ignore the perpetrator and blame the victim for holding or declaring unpopular beliefs or practices.

Confusion in recording anti-Christian "hate crimes" is also caused in part because the FBI statistics break anti-Christian bias down into denomination, so if the assailant didn't specifically "hate Catholics" or "Mormons", the crime is more likely to go unreported in anti-Christian "hate crime" statistics. The FBI does not itemize various Islamic sects or Jewish ones, despite the existence of multiple branches of these religions.

Generally, there's also a great disparity in calling a crime "hate related" that depends on who the perpetrator is. Many violent assaults committed by avowed Muslim perpetrators are never classified as "hate crimes" against Christians, Jews, White Americans, Gays, Women, Children, or other groups that radical Muslims  (& often the perpetrators themselves) specifically say should be targeted: ie, the Fort Hood Massacre was labeled "workplace violence" despite the murderer's multiple and continual statements that he wanted to kill non-muslims because of their religion which was not Islam.

The Final Straw: Hate Crimes that are designated "Terror" Events aren't included in Hate Crime stats.

Even worse, and most significantly, when a massacre is  classified as an Islamic "terror attack" it is apparently excluded from law enforcement Hate Crime databases, as reported to the FBI.

In example, four non-muslims were stabbed in a terror attack at UC Merced, California, in November 2015, when Muslim student Faisal Mohammad, carrying a photocopied ISIS flag in his pocket and smiling the whole time, slashed four people with a hunting knife in a classroom & hallways. CNN reported the FBI said Mohammad had visited ISIS & terrorist websites, and that his attack was "terror-inspired".

But still, both Merced and the University of California reported zero religion-motivated hate crimes for 2015, despite the FBI's confirmation.

The Garland, Texas terror attack at an art show in May 2015, which resulted in a heroic school security guard being shot in the ankle, and the deaths of the two  Islamic jihadists, is not listed in the FBI's "hate crime" database. It should be in there, and the guard should be numbered among the victims. There is a category for "Religious bias: anti-other (unspecified) religion that should be used for these crimes.

The December 2015 San Bernadino Massacre is not listed in FBI data as a "hate crime".  Despite the deaths of 14 people and the serious injury of 22 others at a Christian religion-connected event, and despite the clear targeting of the group because of their not-muslim religious status as "infidels", all 36 people, mostly Christian but also of other faiths, are missing from the totals of religious hate crime victims, and 6 people are missing from the totals of religious hate crime perpetrators.

However, so-called "anti-Muslim" "hate crimes" arising from the jihadist massacre of innocents are included:
"In the aftermath of the shooting, CAIR reported an escalation in anti-Muslim hate crimes in the U.S., including the throwing of a pig's head at a mosque in Philadelphia, the beating of a Queens shop owner, and incidents of death threats and vandalism.[287] A number of attacks and incidents of vandalism in southern California in the weeks following the attack were investigated as anti-Muslim hate crimes"

"On December 15, 2015, three senior White House officials‍—‌Valerie Jarrett, Cecilia Munoz, and Ben Rhodes‍—‌met with American Muslim and Sikh leaders to discuss the increase in violent attacks upon members of the American Muslim and Sikh community following the attack (Sikhs are not Muslims but have been occasionally targeted in anti-Islamic bias-motivated crimes)"

The White House officials did not meet with American non-Muslim leaders to discuss the increase in violent anti-Infidel attacks upon members of their communities following this or any other attack.

Edited to add: The nine innocent people shot to death by Dylann Roof in Charleston because of their race were also not reported as victims of a racial "hate crime" in the database.

These few events alone add another 41 victims that were targeted because of bias against their religion, and 11 who were killed, injured or terrorized because of their  race, but whose deaths and suffering are not counted worthy of being considered "hate crimes".

While the FBI explicitly cautions on every page against using this data for "Ranking", and notes that the information is provided by each of thousands of jurisdictions, it is up to each user to familiarize themselves with what is and is not contained in the database.  And by "user", I think we have to include readers of articles such as this one, and the ones written by Pew Research.

Bottom line?

Bias.

Bias.

Bias.

BIAS.

BIAS:  Dec 6 2016 UPDATE:  New  York Post reports the Southern Poverty Law Center falsified the results of a survey it used to push a FAKE NEWS "narrative" against President Trump and his supporters. In particular, the SPLC omitted 2,000 reports in which students were attacked or bullied at school for being "white", and the SPLC also claimed that saying "Build the Wall" was a "racist hate crime",when in fact it is neither "anti-immigrant" nor "racist", and in fact does not indicate any bias for or against anyone, but asimple willingness to abide by the rule of law.

BIAS: Dec 11 2016 UPDATE to add the Hoax Map image, and link to the source, Sondrakisten.com and article "Hate Mischief"

BIAS: Dec 15 2016 UPDATE:  Yasmin Seweid charged with filing a false police report and with obstructing governmental administration for her hoax in which she falsely told "the police that three white men screaming “Donald Trump!” attacked her on Dec. 1 on an uptown No. 6 train at East 23rd Street, DNAinfo.com reported. She told the police that the men had called her a terrorist and that when she tried to move to the other end of the subway car, one of them followed and tried to pull off her traditional head scarf. " She made up the whole thing. Nothing happened. 

Friday, October 21, 2016

The Women's Wars: How "Smart Girl Power" Has Wrecked The World, and May Have Started WWIII

We used to hear about how peaceful the world would be "if women ran the world".

Over the past 20 years, we've had a chance to find out what happens when the people at the helm of policy and warmaking for the West are women.

The verdict? Persistent, brutal, genocidal war after war after war. Nations that had been peaceful for a century dissolved into EU/US-women-goaded wars.

The Arab Winter unleashing yet another Islamist jihad of conquest in dozens  of previously stable nations.

Collapse of order on three continents and millions of restless young males on the move, raping and enslaving every woman and child they encounter.

The lands of the Vikings are engaged in a twisted disfunction that allows Moslem men to rape and assault  hundreds of women and children in public places while the authorities cover up the assaults like a neurotic woman hiding the incest in her house from the neighbors.

Nations that had achieved equality of the sexes are promoting sex-segregated trains, telling women not to go out alone or at night,  to protect women from assault by  "asylum seekers" and "refugees".

Nations that had begun to lift their populace out of the stone age into modernity have fallen back into the pit of tribalism.

The habitual use of cruel and unusual punishments for ordinary human behaviors saw resurgence and spread.

What's that you say? Women didn't cause that! We haven't even had a woman president!

What we have had are women National Security Advisors and Secretaries of State and UN Ambassadors. Women who have driven US Foreign Policy and Military Intervention - often overriding the objections of seasoned generals and terrorism experts -  over the past two decades and across the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Barack Obama.

Hillary Clinton, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Angela Merkel, Condoleza Rice, Madelyn Albright. These are but a few of the women who overthrew settled governments, abetted and funded the wrong side in civil wars and regional wars, who failed to intervene when they should have, and who overrode military minds to meddle in the wrong places at the wrong times in the past 20 years.  Let's take a look at their "legacy":

Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State 2009-2013 

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton oversaw the most hawkish, interventionist... and ineffective foreign policy in American history, perhaps in Western history.  She called it "Smart Power". The destabilization of the Middle East and the surge of Islamist groups like ISIS were a direct result of her 2010 program "Leading Through Civilian Power": "centered on the notion of elevating "civilian power" as a cost-effective way of responding to international challenges and defusing crises.... Clinton said of the underlying message, "Leading with civilians saves lives and money."

One of her first actions, in March 2009, was to override Vice President Biden's objections to sending 20,000 American troops to Afghanistan. 

Hillary Clinton delighted in the success of her initiative when 2011's "Arab Spring" started: "Joseph Massad on Al Jazeera said the term "Arab Spring" was "part of a US strategy of controlling [the ovement's] aims and goals" and directing it towards western-style liberal democracy. Due to the electoral success of Islamist parties following the protests in many Arab countries, the events have also come to be known as "Islamist Spring" or "Islamist Winter"."

"The Hillary Doctrine", a push to make "violence against women" anywhere in the world a national security issue of the US, has been a horrific travesty for the Yazidi women enslaved by the ugly army that evolved from Hillary Clinton's meddlesome use of "Civilian Power", for the Nigerian girls kidnapped by Boko Haram, for all of the European women and girls being assaulted on the street by "refugees" unleashed by her adventurous warring.

Hillary is credited, along with Susan Rice and Samantha Power, with convincing Obama to authorize US military intervention in support of the Libyan version of Arab Spring in 2011, a civil war that destabilized West Africa and continues today.  The NYT said of her insistence: "The consequences would be more far-reaching than anyone imagined, leaving Libya a failed state and a terrorist haven". Her extra-legal blundering into military matters without Congressional authorization, in direct violation of the War Powers Act, earned President Obama a rebuke from the US House of Representatives.

Hillary did not argue for military intervention to save her Ambassador in Benghazi. (The US Embassy in Turkey was also bombed during her tenure - on her last day. )

In 2011, Hillary pointed to her "success" in Libya when she aggressively defended Obama's decision to remove our troops from Iraq, a disastrous and foolhardy move.

In 2011, Clinton attempted to apply her "Civilian Power" techniques to foment trouble in Russia. Fortunately, she was not successful in overthrowing Russian's government and her schemes were found out, forcing her to back away:
" Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin denounced Clinton, accusing her of  backing Russian protesters financially and in fact precipitating their actions."

She turned her attention to Syria in 2012, angrily "predicting" that a coup would take down Assad after she failed to get UN support for the Islamist rebels, and setting out to make it happen with a plan for the US to arm and train them anyway "with help from a neighboring state".

Hillary Clinton was one of the strongest proponents of using assassin drones. Although much is still secret,  Washington Post reported in 2011:
"Key members of Obama’s national security team came into office more inclined to endorse drone strikes than were their counterparts under Bush, current and former officials said.
"Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, former CIA director and current Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, and counterterrorism adviser John O. Brennan seemed always ready to step on the accelerator, said a former official who served in both administrations and was supportive of the 
program. Current administration officials did not dispute the former official’s characterization of the internal dynamics."

Gun-Control freak Hillary Clinton armed many of these terrorists by selling  more than $300Billion in weapons to governments she criticized for human rights violations and failure to combat terrorism (yes, at the same time) during her 3 years. International Busines Times reported:

"Under Clinton's leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation, according to an IBTimes analysis of State Department and foundation data. That figure -- derived from the three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) -- represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to the those countries and approved by the State Department during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term.

"The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. 

"These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obama’s arrival in the White House. The 143 percent increase in U.S. arms sales to Clinton Foundation donors compares to an 80 percent increase in such sales to all countries over the same time period."

And Hillary chose women advisors who are just as unpredictably fast on the war trigger as she is, including Anne-Marie Slaughter:

Anne-Marie Slaughter, Hillary's Director of Policy Planning at the State Department:

"On 26 February 2015, Forbes magazine published a piece which called for Washington policymakers to be held accountable for another war gone bad. 

"Slaughter was singled out for criticism, for her statement that “it clearly can be in the U.S. and the West’s strategic interest to help social revolutions fighting for the values we espouse and proclaim.” Writer Doug Bandow concluded: "... The Obama administration’s greatest foreign policy mistake can’t be undone... When war-happy politicians... next stand before America, voters should hold these pitiful policymakers accountable for the disaster they created in Libya."

She didn't learn. When it came to Syria, Anne-Marie Slaughter also pushed for outside agitators and US military aid to overthrow Syria's established government. When Henry Kissinger "argued that an intervention would imperil the foundation of world order" , Slaughter poo-pooed his warning and increased her efforts to gain public support for giving heavy artillary to "rebels". 

Susan Rice, National Security Council 1993-1997 (Director Peacekeeping 1993-1995, Sr Director African Affairs 1995-1997), UN Ambassador 2009-2013, National Security Advisor (2013-current): 

*Argued against intervention in the Rwandan Genocide, saying "If we use the word 'genocide' and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the November election?" 

*1997: Allowed Bin Laden to escape. Timothy M. Carney, U.S. ambassador to Sudan, reported in 2002 that "... in 1997 Sudan offered to turn over its intelligence on bin Laden but that [Susan] Rice, as NSC Africa specialist.... successfully lobbied for continuing to bar U.S. officials, including the CIA and FBI, from engaging with the Khartoum government. Similar allegations (that Rice joined others in missing an opportunity to cooperate with Sudan on counterterrorism) were made by Vanity Fair contributing editor David Rose and Richard Miniter, author of Losing Bin Laden."

*Susan Rice  "supported the Rwandan, Ugandan, AFDL and Angolan invasion of Zaire (later known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo) from Rwanda in 1996 and overthrow of dictator Mobutu Sese Seko, saying privately that "Anything's better than Mobutu." ....the [resulting] Congo Wars spearheaded by Rwanda led to over five million deaths. "

*Urged US intervention in Libya to overthrow its legitimate government and remove Gaddafi. "Together with National Security Council figure Samantha Power,.. and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, ...the three overcame internal opposition from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, security adviser Thomas E. Donilon, and counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, to have the 
administration advance a UN proposal to impose a no-fly zone over Libya and authorize other military actions as necessary"

Samantha Power, National Security Counsel (Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights) 2009-2013, UN Ambassador 2013-present

*One of the strongest proponents of US military action in Libya, joining Hillary and Susan Rice in overruling Defense Secretary Robert Gates, security adviser Thomas E. Donilon, and counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, all of whom advised against interferring and destabilizing yet another Middle Eastern country. " American Thinker, a conservative blog, complains that Mr. Obama has “outsourced foreign policy” to Ms. Power."

*2015 - Samantha Power's motorcade ran over a child in an African village at a high rate of speed and did not stop "because it was too dangerous". The little boy was killed instantly. She crept back at 25 MPH later that day, met with the boy's parents and promised "compensation" for the little boy's death. 

*Robert Power wrote: [Susan Power] "...operates with glaring selectivity in deciding who deserves protection as she advances a neocon/liberal interventionist agenda. She is turning “human rights” into an excuse not to resolve conflicts but rather to make them bloodier.

"Thus, in Power’s view, the overthrow and punishment of Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad takes precedence over shielding Alawites and other minorities from the likely consequence of Sunni-extremist vengeance. And she has sided with the ethnic Ukrainians in their slaughter of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

"In both cases, Power spurns pragmatic negotiations that could avert worsening violence as she asserts a black-and-white depiction of these crises. More significantly, her strident positions appear to have won the day with President Barack Obama, who has relied on Power as a foreign policy adviser since his 2008 campaign."

* 2016 Yemen.  Huffington Post says "The Obama Administration Should Be Guilty of War Crimes
in Yemen" for funding Saudi Arabia's war there: "In the case of Yemen, however, the genocide is not happening due to the mere omissions of the West, and in particular the U.S. — rather, it is taking place with the active support of the U.S., including [Samantha Power’s] own intervention at the U.N. which prevented any independent investigation of the Saudi crimes in Yemen." 
Even the UN has found the Saudi-led "Coalition" is responsible for most attacks on Yemeni civilians. 
Another article notes   the US is helping fund and arm Saudi aggression against religious minorities: Zaydis and Houthis, branches of Shia Islam. Dan Kolvik writes: " the coalition is attacking and starving out the north while allowing humanitarian aid to the south (where members of the Sunni group known as Shafi’ists predominate)."

*Wall Street Journal has called on Power to resign because of the horrible mess her wrong-sided policies have made in Syria. "Susan Power is guilty of exactly the same negligence toward the Syrian civil war that she once criticized when the Clinton administration failed to intervene in the 
Rwandan genocide, and should resign, the Wall Street Journal said in an editorial Friday. ... The Journal concludes that “Power has become an echo of the officials she once denounced for justifying American inaction in the face of mass slaughter. The honorable decision would be to resign.” 

"Breitbart News urged Power to resign in 2013, when she was still a national security adviser at the White House, in charge of a useless committee called the Atrocities Prevention Board that did nothing about Syria."

* Consortium News reports:" It turns out that Gaddafi was not wrong about some of his enemies. Today, Power is a leading force opposing meaningful negotiations over Syria and Ukraine, again staking out “moralistic” positions rejecting possible power-sharing with Assad in Syria and blaming the Ukraine crisis entirely on the Russians. She doesn’t seem all that concerned about impending genocides against Assad’s supporters in Syria or ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

"In 2012, at a meeting hosted by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, former U.S. Ambassador Peter W. Galbraith predicted “the next genocide in the world will likely be against the Alawites in Syria” — a key constituency behind Assad’s secular regime. But Power has continued to insist that the top priority is Assad’s removal."

* Ukraine: "Similarly, Power has shown little sympathy for members of Ukraine’s ethnic Russian minority who saw their elected President Viktor Yanukovych overthrown in a Feb. 22, 2014 coup spearheaded by neo-Nazis and other right-wing nationalists who had gained effective control of the Maidan protests. Many of these extremists want an ethnically pure Ukrainian state.

"Since then, neo-Nazi units, such as the Azov battalion, have been Kiev’s tip of the spear in slaughtering thousands of ethnic Russians in the east and driving millions from their homes, essentially an ethnic-cleansing campaign in eastern Ukraine. Yet, Power traveled to Kiev to deliver a one-sided propaganda speech on June 11, portraying the post-coup Ukrainian regime simply as a victim of “Russian aggression.”

"Despite the key role of neo-Nazis acknowledged even by the U.S. House of Representatives Power uttered not one word about Ukrainian military abuses which have included reports of death squad operations targeting ethnic Russians and other Yanukovych supporters."

Condoleza Rice: National Security Advisor 2001-2005, Secretary of State 2005-2009:

* July 10, 2001, Emergency briefing on immanent risk of Al Qaeda attack, held at request of CIA Director George Tenet.   August 6, 2001, President's Daily Brief "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" Yet, on Sept 11, 2001, she had prepared a security plan that downplayed any threats from "non-state actors". 

* Approved of "Enhanced Interrogation Techiniques":  "on July 17, 2002, Rice met with CIA director George Tenet to personally convey... administration's approval of the proposed waterboarding" "The Senate report also "suggests Miss Rice played a more significant role than she acknowledged in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee submitted in the autumn"

* 2003: Actively lobbied the public to support US invasion of Iraq, claiming Saddam had atomic weapons.

*Senator Byrd argued against appointing her as Sec State because her " view of America is one which encourages our Nation to flex its muscles without being bound by any calls for restraint " and further said: 
"...where in the Constitution can the President claim the right to strike at another nation before it has even threatened our country, as Dr. Rice asserted in that speech?  To put it plainly, Dr. Rice has asserted that the President holds far more of the war power than the Constitution grants him.

"This doctrine of attacking countries before a threat has "fully materialized" was put into motion as soon as the National Security Strategy was released.  Beginning in September 2002, Dr. Rice also took a position on the front lines of the Administration's effort to hype the danger of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction.

"Dr. Rice is responsible for some of the most overblown rhetoric that the Administration used to scare the American people into believing that there was an imminent threat from Iraq..."

Madeleine Albright, UN Ambassador 1993-1997,Secretary of State 1997-2001:

*UN Ambassador during Rwandan Genocide. Reported to have "avoided describing the killings in Rwanda as "genocide" until overwhelmed by the evidence for it." but she has written "My deepest regret from my years in public service is the failure of the United States and the international community to act sooner to halt these crimes."

* "According to Albright's memoirs, she once argued with Colin Powell for the use of military force by asking, "What's the point of you saving this superb military for, Colin, if we can't use it?" 

* Albright and her State Department ignored direct requests for more security at US Nairobi Embassy before it and the Tanzanian Embassy were bombed in 1998  by an Osama bin Laden group, killing more than 200 people, including 12 Americans, despite multiple CIA reports over the previous year of plans by Islamists to blow up the Embassy. The New York Times reported: 

" In the spring of 1998, Prudence Bushnell, the U.S. ambassador to Kenya, sent an emotional letter to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright begging for the secretary's personal help.

"Ms. Bushnell, a career diplomat, had been fighting for months for a more secure embassy in the face of mounting terrorist threats and a warning that she was the target of an assassination plot. The department had repeatedly refused to grant her request, citing a lack of money. But that kind of 
response, she wrote Albright, was "endangering the lives of embassy personnel."

"The CIA and the FBI had been amassing increasingly ominous and detailed clues about potential threats in Kenya, officials said. But the State Department bureaucracy still dismissed Ms. Bushnell. She was even seen by some at the State Department as a nuisance who was overly obsessed with 
security, according to one official.

"Albright took no action. And three months later, on Aug. 7, the American Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were simultaneously attacked with car bombs. Twelve American diplomats and more than 200 Africans were killed in Kenya."

*Promoted US backing of Kosovo Moslem Albanians' notorious KLA against Serbian Christian minorities, and NATO bombing in 1999 Yugoslavian civil war, despite the Islamic Albanians' 20 year pogram of ethnic cleansing and war crimes against Serbs, crimes that included organ harvesting. After Independence, Kosovo became an organized crime house of horrors, a center for black market organ trafficking that continues today.

"57,000 Serbs have left Kosovo in the last decade" due to murder, rape and persecution [by the Kosovo Albanian government and citizenry]" – wrote the New York Times in 1982. Slobodan Milosevic gained political power by pledging to discontinue this repression." "During the Kosovo War, over 90,000 Serbian and other non-Albanian refugees fled the war-torn province. In the days after the Yugoslav Army withdrew, over 200,000 Serb and other non-Albanians were forced from the province by Kosovo Albanians"

"The Serbian government and a number of international human rights groups (e.g., Amnesty International) claimed that NATO had carried out war crimes by bombing civilians."

~~~~~

And these events and women are only the tip of the iceberg. 

Margaret Mead observed ""I do not believe in using women in combat, because females are too fierce."  She wasn't kidding. As she later elaborated:
"We know of no comparable ways of training women and girls, and we have no real way of knowing whether the kinds of training that teach men both courage and restraint would be adaptable to women or effective in a crisis. But the evidence of history and comparative studies of other species suggest that women as a fighting body might be far less amenable to the rules that prevent warfare from becoming a massacre and, with the use of modern weapons, that protect the survival of all humanity. This is what I meant by saying that women in combat might be too fierce."

US women as leaders have shown themselves dangerously willing to take world-changing risks on their own whims, pushing their influence while ignoring wisdom from seasoned warriors. 

And the consequences of their naive gaming has been unmitigated disaster. 

Hillary Clinton, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Angela Merkel, Condoleza Rice, Madelyn Albright.... have unleashed the massacre. 





Monday, July 4, 2016

The First Amendment and Hand Cranked Printing Presses



On this Independence Day, a little history lesson. "The Press" did not mean "journalists" when our nation was founded. It did not mean television, radio, or the internet. It did not mean respectable owners of newspapers or members of the White House Press Corps or people with Journalism Degrees or writers who make their living as full time reporters or only respectable bloggers or official licensed anything.

It meant "The Printing Press" of the type seen above, which is what Benjamin Franklin, Printer, used to print newspapers, broadsides, editorials, and -  to make a living - various advertising and other works for hire.  It meant anyone who owned a press or who could pay for something to be printed.

Franklin had a LOT to say about "freedom of the Press" and the right to freely publish things that offended some people.  

Most of the concepts we still apply to "Freedom of the Press" came from Franklin's own experience. His older brother James was a Printer, and was jailed for a month for printing some political outrage and then refusing to divulge the name of his source. Franklin, his apprentice, was 16 at the time and the court tried to force him to share the name as well. He stubbornly refused. He later wrote:
"During my brother's confinement, which I resented a good deal, notwithstanding our private differences, I had the management of the paper; and I made bold to give our rulers some rubs in it, which my brother took very kindly, while others began to consider me in an unfavorable light, as a young genius that had a turn for libelling and satire. My brother's discharge was accompany'd with an order of the House (a very odd one), that 'James Franklin should no longer print the paper called the New England Courant.'" 
James got around that ban by releasing Ben from his apprenticeship (basically "graduating" him), and putting Ben's name on the masthead.

Then, as now, stubborn and recalcitrant "printers" are essential to prevent the never-ending attempts to censor Everyman. "Hate Speech" laws and "Blasphemy" laws are two sides of the same anti-Constitutional coin.  Freedom of the Press means both the right to print things the Printer himself disagrees with, and the right to print things that offend some people or even "all" people.

Just like in Franklin's day, sometimes the *authors* will need to be anonymous. But the Printers need liberty to make their platforms - whether Google or Facebook or Amazon or Wordpress or the New York Times  - available to all viewpoints without any government interference whatsoever.

In 1731, Franklin printed an advertisement from a ship captain who said he would not accept priests from the Church of England as his passengers.  Since America was still a colony of Great Britain, the Church of England was the OFFICIAL government-supported religion, and King George was the head of it. Other denominations were persecuted and "upstanding community leaders" were indignant over the advertisement.

Below is the full text of Franklin's response to the mob of pre-Twitter outrage:


An Apology for Printers by Benjamin Franklin

"Being frequently censured and condemned by different persons for printing things which they say ought not to be printed, I have sometimes thought it might be necessary to make a standing apology for myself, and publish it once a year, to be read upon all occasions of that nature. Much business has hitherto hindered the execution of this design; but having very lately given extraordinary offence by printing an advertisement with a certain N.B. at the end of it, I find an apology more particularly requisite at this juncture, though it happens when I have not yet leisure to write such a thing in the proper form, and can only in a loose manner throw those considerations together which should have been the substance of it. 

I request all who are angry with me on the account of printing things they don't like, calmly to consider these following particulars: 

1 . That the opinions of men are almost as various as their faces; an observation general enough to become a common proverb, "So many men so many minds"; 

2. That the business of printing has chiefly to do with men's opinions; most things that are printed tending to promote some, or oppose others; 

3. That hence arises the peculiar unhappiness of that business, which other callings are no way liable to; they who follow printing being scarce able to do anything in their way of getting a living, which shall not probably give offence to some, and perhaps to many; whereas the smith, the shoemaker, the carpenter, or the man of any other trade,  may work indifferently for people of all persuasions, without offending any of them; and the merchant may buy and sell with Jews, Turks, heretics and infidels of all sorts, and get money by every one of them, without giving offence to the most orthodox, of any sort; or suffering the least censure or ill-will on the account from any man whatever; 

4. That it is as unreasonable in any one man or set of men to expect to be pleased with everything that is printed, as to think that nobody ought to be pleased but themselves; 

5. Printers are educated in the belief, that when men differ in opinion, both sides ought equally to have the advantage of being heard by the public; and that when truth and error have fair play, the former is always an overmatch for the latter. Hence they cheerfully serve all contending writers that pay them well, without regarding on which side they are of the question in dispute; 

6. Being thus continually employed in serving both parties, printers naturally acquire a vast unconcernedness as to the right or wrong opinions contained in what they print; regarding it only as the matter of their daily labor. They print things full of spleen and animosity, with the utmost calmness and indifference, and without the least ill-will to the persons reflected on, who nevertheless unjustly think the printer as much their enemy as the author, and join both together in their resentment; 

7. That it is unreasonable to imagine printers approve of everything they print, and to censure them on any particular thing accordingly; since in the way of their business they print such great variety of things opposite and contradictory. It is likewise as unreasonable what some assert, "That printers ought not to print anything but what they approve;" since if all of that business should make such a resolution, and abide by it, an end would thereby be put to free writing, and the world would afterwards have nothing to read but what happened to be the opinions of printers; 

8. That if all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed; 

9. That if they sometimes print vicious or silly things not worth reading, it may not be because they approve such things themselves, but because the people are so viciously and corruptly educated that good things are not encouraged. I have known a very numerous impression of Robin Hood's songs go off in this province at 2 s. per book, in less than a twelvemonth; when a small quantity of David's Psalms (an excellent version) has lain upon my hands above twice the time; 

10. That notwithstanding what might be urged in behalf of a man's being allowed to do in the way of his business whatever he is paid for, yet printers do continually discourage the printing of great numbers of bad things, and stifle them in the birth. I myself have constantly refused to print anything that might countenance vice, or promote immorality; though by complying in such cases with the corrupt taste of the majority I might have got much money. 

I have also always refused to print such things as might do real injury to any person, how much soever I have been solicited, and tempted with offers of great pay; and how much soever I have by refusing got the ill-will of those who would have employed me. I have hitherto fallen under the resentment of large bodies of men, for refusing absolutely to print any of their party or personal reflections. In this manner I have made myself many enemies, and the constant fatigue of denying is almost insupportable. 

But the public being unacquainted with all this, whenever the poor printer happens either through ignorance or much persuasion, to do anything that is generally thought worthy of blame, he meets with no more friendship or favor on the above account, than if there were no merit in it at all. Thus, as Waller says. "Poets lose half the praise they would have got Were it but known what they discreetly blot;" yet are censured for every bad line found in their works with the utmost severity. 

I come now to the particular case of the N. B. above-mentioned, about which there has been more clamor against me, than ever before on any other account. 

In the hurry of other business an advertisement was brought to me to be printed. It signified that such a ship lying at such a wharf would sail for Barbados in such a time, and that freighters and passengers might agree with the captain at such a place. So far is what's common; but at the bottom this odd thing was added, "N. B. No Sea-hens nor Black Gowns will be admitted on any terms." I printed it, and received my money; and the advertisement was stuck up round the town as usual. I had not so much curiosity at that time as to enquire the meaning of it, nor did I in the least imagine it would give so much offence. 

Several good men are very angry with me on this occasion. They are pleased to say I have too much sense to do such things ignorantly, that if they were printers they would not have done such a thing on any consideration, that it could proceed from nothing but my abundant malice against religion and the clergy. They therefore declare they will not take any more of my papers, nor have any further dealings with me, but will hinder me of all the custom they can. All this is very hard! 

I believe it had been better if I had refused to print the said advertisement. However, it's done, and cannot be revoked. I have only the following few particulars to offer, some of them in my behalf, by way of mitigation, and some not much to the purpose; but I desire none of them may be read when the reader is not in a very good humor: 

1. That I really did it without the least malice, and imagined the N. B was placed there only to make the advertisement stared at, and more generally read; 

2. That I never saw the word Sea-hens before in my life; nor have I yet asked the meaning of it. And though I had certainly known that Black Gowns in that place signified the clergy of the Church of England, yet I have that confidence in the generous good temper of such of them as I know, as to be well satisfied such a trifling mention of their habit gives them no disturbance; 

3. That most of the clergy in this and the neighboring provinces, are my customers, and some of them my very good friends; and I must be very malicious, indeed, or very stupid, to print this thing for a small profit, if I had thought it would have given them just cause of offence ; 

4. That if I had much malice against the clergy, and withal much sense, it's strange I never write or talk against the clergy myself. Some have observed that it's a fruitful topic, and the easiest to be witty upon of all others; yet I appeal to the public that I am never guilty this way, and to all my acquaintances as to my conversation; 

5. That if a man of sense had malice enough to desire to injure the 
clergy, this is the most foolish thing he could possibly contrive for that purpose; 

6. That I got five shillings by it; 

7. That none who are angry with me would have given me so much to 
let it alone; 

8. That if all the people of different opinions in this province would engage to give me as much for not printing things they don't like, as I can get by printing them, I should probably live a very easy life; and if all printers were everywhere so dealt by, there would be very little printed; 

9. That I am obliged to all who take my paper, and am willing to think they do it out of mere friendship. I only desire they would think the same when I deal with them. I thank those who leave off, that they have taken it so long. But I beg they would not endeavor to dissuade others, for that will look like malice; 

10. That it's impossible any man should know what he would do if he were a printer; 

11. That notwithstanding the rashness and inexperience of youth, which is most likely to be prevailed upon to do things that ought not to be done, yet I have avoided printing such things as usually give offence either to church or state, more than any printer that has followed the business in this province before; 

12. And lastly, that I have printed above a thousand advertisements which made not the least mention of Sea-hens or Black Gowns; and this being the first offence, I have the more reason to expect forgiveness. 

I take leave to conclude with an old fable, which some of my readers have heard before, and some have not: 
"A certain well-meaning man and his son were traveling towards a market town with an ass which they had to sell. The road was bad, and the old man therefore rode, but the son went afoot. The first passerby they met asked the father if he was not ashamed to ride by himself, and suffer the poor lad to wade along through the mire; this induced him to take up his son behind him. 
"He had not traveled far, when he met others, who said, they are two unmerciful lubbers to get both on the back of that poor ass in such a deep road. Upon this the old man got off, and let his son ride alone. The next they met called the lad a graceless, rascally young jackanapes, to ride in that manner through the dirt, while his aged father trudged along on foot; and they said the old man was a fool for suffering it. 
"He then bid his son come down, and walk with him, and they traveled on leading the ass by the halter, till they met another company, who called them a couple of senseless blockheads, for going both on foot in such a dirty way, when they had an empty ass with them, which they might ride upon. The old man could bear it no longer. 'My son,' said he, 'it grieves me much that we cannot please all these people. Let me throw the ass over the next bridge, and be no further troubled with him.'" 

Had the old man been seen acting this last resolution, he would probably have been called a fool for troubling himself about the different opinions of all that were pleased to find fault with him. Therefore, though I have a temper almost as complying as his, I intend not to imitate him in this last particular. I consider the variety of humors among men, and despair of pleasing everybody; yet I shall not therefore leave off printing. 

I shall continue my business. I shall not burn my press and melt my letters. "

                                                             ~B. Franklin, 1731, Pennsylvania Gazette







Friday, May 20, 2016

And It's Only Monday: Texas Governor Abbott Keeps Sanctions on Iran, Adds More, Declares Texas a "Strong Ally" of Israel

The Obama Administration seems to operate on Khufu's Maxim, as explained by Will Cuppy: "He [Khufu] had discovered the fact that if you tell somebody to do something, nine times out of ten he will do it."  

Because, even though "narrative" fiction writer Ben Rhodes has bragged to the world that "the Iran Deal" as reported to us was all imaginary, and even though Iran has continued to act as though no deal exists, President Obama is still trying to get more resources for Iran, wanting Texas to lift sanctions.  

Texas Governors are not "nine out of ten", however.  Counter Jihad reports that this past Monday, Governor Abbott said no: 
"Texas Governor Greg Abbot has not only refused to lift Texas’ sanctions on the Iran regime, according to a letter he sent to the White House, he has ordered new sanctions be designed against Iran.  Texas has sufficient economic clout for these sanctions to be telling, as the state is a large enough economically that if it were an independent nation it would be the world’s 12th largest economy (as of 2014).  Gov. Abbot insists that new sanctions will be put into place."
The Algemeiner reports:
 "Governor Greg Abbott explained that the letter was in response to a written appeal made by Obama on April 8, requesting that Texas “review” its economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic – as was promised to Tehran in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the nuclear deal between Iran and world powers reached in July.
“I strongly oppose the Iran deal because it undermines the national security of the United States and its strategic allies abroad – especially our most important Middle East ally, Israel,” Abbott wrote to Obama. “Entering into an agreement with a country that consistently calls for ‘death to America,’ and repeatedly articulates antisemitic policies is short-sighted and ignores geopolitical realities.” 
[Speaking with Jewish media in New York about the matter, and his recent visit to Israel,] "Abbott concluded: “Israel has no stronger ally in the United States than the state of Texas. That’s true for several reasons, in part because of our personality similarities, but also in part because of our commitment to defending religious liberty [and] state sovereignty. There is no state — I say with a smile — in the country that defends state sovereignty more than Texas. And there is no country that defends state sovereignty more than the nation of Israel. As Prime Minister Netanyahu made clear to me during our meeting… Israel is the nicest house in a rough neighborhood… I am deeply disturbed by the Iran deal that was struck by President Obama. I view it as a potential existential threat to Israel and, frankly, to nations across the globe. It makes no sense to me why the United States would be an accomplice to arming and aiding economically a nation that to this day seems to be devoted to terrorism. And every step of the way during the negotiation and post-negotiation process…Iran has repeatedly shown unwillingness to comply with any of the demands that were expected of them. And you all know probably better than I do what Iran did in March, where it launched missiles, saying in Hebrew that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. If that is not a message that the world should comprehend and understand the magnitude of, then the world needs to wake up.”  (Click through to read the rest)

Not a bad day's work. Thank you, Governor Abbott.


Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Flint Michigan, and the Realities of Water Supplies: DIY Solutions Texans Have Used For Decades

I was glad to see the indictments come down against the local officials who hid problems with Flint Michigan's water quality.  Just as East Orange, New Jersey, faced up to dereliction of duty by employees and local politicians in its water management, so must Flint,

There are health issues that now must be addressed, caused by the unknowns in the past. The website "FlintWaterStudy.org" has good information on what is known so far, and what is being done. They also have factual info about how residents themselves can improve water quality in their homes - in some instances by simply using more water:
"The very low water use rates in some Flint homes, hinders recovery of the system due to the improved corrosion control. Less water use means that the orthophosphate and chlorine added to help improve the water quality and reduce lead and bacteria, are not flowing through the homes as much as is desired. Regular water use is needed to help clean out loose lead deposits and control biofilms within the pipes.  Moreover, occasionally drawing water at a high rate from a tap with unrestricted flow such as a roman bath spout, hose bib or mud sink, will help to achieve velocities inside pipes that are needed to scour deposits that contain lead and iron rust."

It was the city government's responsibility to notify the residents about the acidic water, but at this point, the people - the residents and citizens - of Flint Michigan are now solely responsible for the safety of their future drinking water. No one else. Whatever or whoever caused it, now the people know about it and they need to come together to fix it, just as they would take action to repair their car or their roof or their church.

Waiting on government will just make them feel more helpless.

But they also need to know they are not alone with these problems. Despite the fact that the media pretends this is some new crisis, in reality people all over America have been solving this kind of water problem for themselves, as individuals and as communities, for decades.

When I was growing up in Oklahoma, we knew never to drink water from the hot water tap, and to let the water run for a minute before filling a jug or pot. That advice has been around for as long as indoor plumbing. The folks in Flint (and elsewhere) must not have been taught that, but now they know these measures are essential, just as they were 60 years ago.  People living in other communities need to take note, and apply these safety precautions as well.

I raised my children in West Texas, where we have been buying our drinking/cooking water in gallon jugs or refilling milk jugs at "Water Stores" (seriously) or via under-sink Reverse Osmosis Filtering machines, since the 1970s, due to the high level of salts and minerals in local water supplies. It is the normal way of life for most people in the western half of Texas.

In old houses today, it is easy to run new flexible lines to faucets because the new lines can remain above ground, they don't have to be buried. Neighborhoods can get together and pool their resources and labor to do this work.

When it comes to the original problem that Flint faced, the need for a pipeline to a new city water supply, there is a precedent for that too.

Olney Texas has twice faced the need for new water pipelines that they could not afford.. so they took responsibility and laid those lines themselves.

It was supposed to cost a million dollars and take a year. It took the townspeople 25 hours and cost $350.

ALL the citizens turned out and labored for free, under direction, to solve their problem. Here are the stories, from 1978, and again in 1984. There's no hype, this is what really happened:
  http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20071429,00.html
"A firm of consulting engineers told Mayor Alan Myers Jr. of Olney, Texas that the town's rapidly diminishing water supply would evaporate altogether within 120 days unless a highly unlikely deluge of rains came. In the best of times Olney, a community of some 5,000 in the arid cactus-and-mesquite country west of Dallas, gets no more than 24 inches of rain a year, and for the past four years of drought less than half that amount has fallen. The shortage was compounded by a heat wave that parched Texas with searing temperatures of over 100° every day for 35 days. "It scared me to death," said Mayor Myers. "It looked like we didn't have much farther to go." 
The solution—to pipe in water from lakes out of the drought zone—would cost a million dollars (the entire town budget), the engineers said, and take a year. "The town would have died before we could finish," says Myers, "even if we could afford it." He and Acting City Manager Jack Northrup set out to find an alternate plan. If a pipeline could somehow be built from Olney's cracked and drying Lake Cooper to Lake Kickapoo, part of the Wichita Falls reservoir system 14 miles away, the crisis might be averted. 
The Wichita Falls city council agreed to sell a million gallons a day, but the problem remained of finding pipe and laying it down fast. A friend of the mayor's remembered "invasion pipe," which Army engineers had installed aboveground in combat zones during World War II. "He said there might be some in storage somewhere, so I started calling around to see." 
Meanwhile word of the daring project filtered through the churches, Rotary and Lions clubs and Rodge's, the town's only cafe. "Jack Northrup told me the people were saying they could lay the pipe themselves if I could get it," says Myers. Within a few days he located a supply of 1940 invasion pipe in Texas state warehouses. 
Olney rose instantly to the occasion in the spirit of the town motto: "Lead, follow—or get out of the way." On July 14 some 230 unlikely pipeliners—merchants, lawyers, executives, ranchers, Mayor Myers and the one-armed Northrup—put signs on their homes, offices and shops: "Closed. Gone for water."   Click through to read the rest...

Then, six years later, they had to extend the pipeline (click through to read the newspaper scan:  https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2519&dat=19840703&id=-otiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=sHcNAAAAIBAJ&pg=2230,210509&hl=en 

Oh and the latest drought brought the problem back, so this time they are taking a new approach, they are going to reuse their treated sewer water: http://www.newschannel6now.com/story/29173726/olney-takes-final-step-before-water-reuse-construction-phase

Never feel helpless against the problems you face. God created us to be problem solvers for ourselves. Take a new look at whatever challenges your family, your home, your community, and talk to others. Fnd out what YOU can do. We CAN help ourselves and our neighbors, and will have better results and happier lives because of it.

5/11/2016:  Thanks to Bill Quick over at Daily Pundit for the link! 

Saturday, November 21, 2015

A Pat On The Back For Everyone Who Works For A Living



Here's to people whose job won't get done if they aren't there to do it. No one with a professional job works 40 hour weeks. Most work 60 to 80 hours a week, 50 or more weeks a year. Every salary includes long long hours, nights, weekends, going in early and staying late.  It includes being "on call" 24/7/365. It includes coming back early from vacation to take care of a problem - or spending hours on conference calls and email and preparing documents in the hotel while "on vacation". It includes losing PTO every year because there is not time to take off two weeks in a row, not in the summer, not at Christmas, not at Easter. It includes earning a commission or a bonus that never materializes. It includes performance reviews that set impossibly higher targets every quarter just to keep earning the salary they have.

And here's to people whose job makes it possible for us to shop or eat or solve problems or take care of our own business. Most are stuck with weird schedules that change from week to week so they never know what days or hours they will have to be there. Weekends, nights, holidays, going in early and coming back in late on the same day but still "part time". It includes being called in for overtime only to be sent home again when they change their minds. Working "relief" or "temporary" means doing the same job with the same pressure and responsibilities as someone else, often for months or years, but for 60% less pay, no insurance, no paid time off. It often means juggling 2 or 3 or 4 "little" jobs that add up to working 60 or 80 hours a week with no overtime and a big tax bill at end of year because while no one else noticed they needed more witholding, the IRS sure did.

The truth is, everyone who works for a living does some essential job or they would not get paid for it. And no one gets the recognition or appreciation or pay they deserve.

So to everyone out there who is working hard for long long hours, going above and beyond every day for the people who count on you, here's a pat on the back. Even though you didn't ask for it - especially because you didn't ask for it. No one deserves it more than you.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails