The Light To Share: February 2009

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Immigration Bullyrag

Statue Of Liberty: This is a nation of immigrants.

by Edwin A. Sumcad
February 15, 2009

I owe it to Felimar Blanco, a website master in his own right, for sending over this anti-immigration video for my comment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuOfQ

You may find my view on this matter quite different if not rare. What is seen in the video is misleading. Control of fertility rate, re, replacement growth was applied on the pre-immigration population [the green graph] but not on the additional population through immigration [the red graph placed on top of the green graph] which shows a camouflaged bias.

Statistical manipulation of this kind cannot escape the notice of one who was once a statistician in the RP bureau of census many years ago. Statistics never lies, unless you put something into it to make it lie.

The presentation was based on the wrong premise that America’s immigration policy aims at helping the underdeveloped world lessen their population explosion problem! Pebbles in the glass jar have no relevance at all as to why this country attracts different peoples from all parts of the world.

The presenter forgot what the meaning of the Statue of Liberty is – we are welcoming people of the world that seek freedom -- it is not about helping countries where they come from get rid of or lessen their overcrowding population!

This is a huge fundamental error in the understanding of the objectives and goals of the U.S. Immigration policy. It is a subtle distortion of statistical results out of a skillful manipulation of data indicating that immigration is being politicized.

The Republicans can never win on this immigration issue since they have reached the end of the rope. The nation is in total agreement that we have to guard our borders against illegal intrusions of aliens, and hardly is there any opposition to the need to establish a system to legalize undocumented immigrants. But it is a long and slow process. The Republicans were running out of patience in 2006. As a result, they lost control of Congress. Out of frustration, their ultimate solution was to criminalize some ten million undocumented immigrants in the country, and as criminals hunt them down like animals, arrest each one of them and gather them in a huge camp and deport them one by one – that is if they don’t shoot them dead in rage like ordinary criminals for resisting arrest.

The hunted will challenge authorities for their own survival and for the survival of their families and love ones … when authorities look down on them as criminals, deprive them of social legislations, i.e., without medical services for their children and families who will spread diseases in the community; without benefit of education that would turn them and their offspring into social outcast, and eventually in control of the streets as hoodlums and criminals; starve them, etc.

The problem Rednecks have is that they cannot see any farther away to where their extended nose ends. The cost to carry out this de-immigration of America will make what we spend now for them look like a penny-ante in a high poker game. And this is not a game for sonar bats to play.

Why would that be even more costly? For one we have to build detention camps all over the country to house some ten million of them, and with attitudinal murder in mind, spend huge sum of taxpayers’ money like crazy hunting them down like animals, for policing and feeding them until they get deported, and the like.

We cannot cut corners on deportation due process … they have rights under the Constitution and that means years before a single deportation out of the ten million immigrants gets through the legal process – we de-Americanize America in the eyes of the world if we deprive them of their right. And to do it right means we have to amend our Constitution on judicial due process.

How much that would cost? Billions of dollars, amidst the funding of many battles in Congress for political leverage, and the cost of opportunity losses in passing critical legislations needed as a result of unwanted diversion that decapitate the time, energy and resources of the nation. The cost of this disabling collateral damage to the nation is beyond monetary estimation.

We have to create and maintain an Army against some ten million of them. It is a retarded speculation for anyone to assume that they will not go underground and declare their war against the government as a matter of survival.

Add to this dollar cost, deaths and/or casualties as a result of civil strife. How much would this underground civil war cost us? Billions over billions of dollars not to speak of destructions an underground rebellion is expected to create. In 1861–1865, the nation almost went bankrupt at the end of the Civil War with more six hundred thousand Americans dead. In dollar, the losses this nation sustained cannot be accounted for.

Al Qaeda will be looked down as a tamed group of Katzenjammer Kids in comparison that cause certain mischiefs. The cost of the destructions they create would just be a joke in size. Remember that these immigrants illegal or not, are now living here for some time, raised their families here, and there is no doubt at all that they love this country too, like all Americans do – they think it is their fatherland too, like you and I do, after living here over the years like any other immigrant, and if their wives and dependents they love, the children and families they care so much about are kicked in the ass in a manner that brings forth the painful memories of the Holocaust, it will be so stupid for anyone to think that they will not fight.

These realities of de-immigration does not justify burying our heads under the sand intentionally to give bent to our anger that an alien across the border is subverting our immigration laws. Several options are open to us in dealing with this problem without becoming a monster that we need not be or ought to be.

We cannot think like how Skinheads think, and act like what Supremacists do, putting this country to shame. They killed Joseph Ileto, a postal immigrant worker who supported his family in the hard struggle to one day realize their American Dream, to serve notice to the world that immigrants should stop coming to this country and “steal” their own jobs.

http://www.afroarticles.com/article-dashboard/Article/Immigrant-Hatred-Kills--The-Real-Problem----Ileto-Murdered-For-Taking--American--Jobs/189

No one condones any violation of our border laws or any transgression of our sovereignty. Anyone that walks the earth doing this kind of intrusion has to pay a high price. Yet that should not deter this nation from becoming humane in the treatment of immigrants, documented or not, nor should it be interpreted to mean that we are encouraging foreigners to enter into our territorial domain in willful violation of our immigration laws.

http://www.afroarticles.com/article-dashboard/myarticles/Edwin-A--Sumcad/212/Immigration/363

Speaking of social expenditures vis-à-vis illegal immigrants, right now, the cost of their being here, and the social ameliorations they received from the government, are almost equal [in some studies they take less than what they contribute to the economy] the benefits derived from the “underground economy” created as a result of their presence in the country. This will stop the moment they are hunted down as criminals. If this underground contribution to the economy is ten billion dollars to the State of California, then California will lose this bonanza and we have to put up this amount to maintain the economy at least in the same level at a certain time.

The video presenter was talking about the cost of immigration – nobody in the captive audience dared to ask him what would be the cost if we stop immigration and we all turn ourselves into mean-spirited Republicans who are going after them hammer and tong.

The presenter looks like he is a white descendant born to immigrants from Europe some hundreds years ago. He should have presented his video when his forebears were starting to “crowd” this country as immigrants many years ago. Then we would not have this “immigration problem” we have today as the presenter sees it.

The argument against the cost we carry on our shoulder for immigrants that came here legally or illegally is the most stupid selfish argument I have ever heard for the first time in a long time. This donor country spends billions of dollars “for charity” when it responds to deserving countries across the oceans year in and year out that are badly in need of “international aid” or “humanitarian aid”.

These local tightwads embarrass me when I hear them say with unconcealed pride that this benevolent nation is the richest and the mightiest on the planet! I want to slap the ignorance out of their system by telling them that misers did not make this country the wealthiest on the planet.

To deprive a baby born to immigrant undocumented or not of medical services in a downtown hospital and let the toddler die because we could no longer allegedly afford the cost, and yet proudly throw away billions and billions of our tax money for countries abroad in the name of charity, is not only inhuman but also a misguided thinking … a detestable hypocrisy.

I just said that the Republicans’ twisted mean-spiritedness cannot sway reasonable Americans on this critical immigration issue in their favor. Millions of immigrants in the country see the Liberals as their knights in shining armor. Die-hard Republicans are anti-government, whereas dye-in-the-wool Liberals and Democrats are for government, the exponents of welfare in this country for so long.

If I have to criticize the influx of immigrants in California, it is because it could lead to the demise of the two-party system. New comers to California take their oath of allegiance when naturalized as U.S. citizens. Eight out of ten register as Democrats. Exercising their right to vote will vote Liberals to office, and those who cannot vote will support the Democrats. It is from them where their welfare comes from.

I live in California to know this like I know the back of my palm. The number of my kind – conservative Americans loyal to established American values and traditions -- is a vanishing breed. Only scandals and abuses in extremis will make a Liberal candidate lose an election in California.

And to see California as the face of the nation, this is undeniably alarming. Soon there will only be a Liberal or Democratic Party. Liberals and Democrats will contest the election amongst themselves. The fundamental law on political party system is overwhelmed, and we go back to the fundamentals of reconstructing the Constitution and/or amending pertinent election laws to recreate a new political system in America.

In doing all these, we will have more cost to bear than just spending for our social capital infrastructures for this nation’s immigrants. But intolerant minds in agony are too limited to include this cost while they kick the bucket in their emotional nationwide protest.

But in so far as this anti-immigration video is concerned, it is just an old bullyrag. It exhibits a terrible amnesia of what America – the country of immigrants -- is all about. #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment at ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Part III. Economic Recovery By Hanging

by Edwin Sumcad
Date: 02/10/09
Subject: Depression

Image Caption: Hang “war criminals”
for economic stimulus.

If we hang all “war criminals”, economic recovery will be easy and swift. But it is not the way you think it is.

First we must establish by what criteria are we to judge who those “war criminals” to hang are. Second we must determine what legal maxim are we to use to “investigate” the subject before hanging if found guilty.

The Obama administration is going after President George W. Bush for alleged “war crimes” committed whether or not it is real or even if imagined, but better if it is real. He stands accused as a “war criminal” after allegedly committing “crimes against humanity”.

Since thousands of soldiers who obeyed the orders of their Commander-In-Chief are the ones who committed those “war crimes” for Bush, they fall under the category of “war criminals” if we use the mandate of law Obama’s legal hatchet men rely on.

Our former still living presidents have been accused of “war crimes” and “genocide”, and they too may be “investigated” as “war criminals” no different from Bush if such is the case.

The legal maxim adhered to in this investigation campaign is that anyone who violates the law must be prosecuted and if found guilty must be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

This applies to “war crimes”. Since war crimes are high crimes, the punishment “to the fullest extent of the law”, is hanging by the neck until dead [Ref Saddam Hussein, War Crime II].

All of these are discussed in details in War Crime I [read also War Crime II at FP. com’s homepage banner stories]. Let’s identify all of these merely as Ref for brevity. http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=045432 http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=045435

In the above-stated Ref you read, the number of “war criminals” to hang if found guilty is huge. They include members of Congress and the military as “Bush’s accomplices” [Ref]. Since death by hanging is massive, the rope manufacturing industry and the funeral homes and funeral services industries are greatly benefited.

Recorded highest number of U.S. troops in Iraq during the Surge was162,000. The shipment value of hanging ropes needed would rise by about .02% -- $8.1 million by rounding the figure.

Funeral homes and funeral services have an annual total receipt of $10.0 billion. This will increase to $11.62 billion.

But the economics of dying nationwide is estimated worth the staggering amount of $641.62 billion per annum after adding those to die by hanging. A total of 264,633 jobs were created.

All the above job and dollar figures of the industries cited were collated from the results of the national 2002 economic census.

Assume that Obama needs Congress to approve a $850.0 billion bailout package for economic recovery. The combined total amounts of money created in rope manufacturing, funeral homes and funeral services industries alone if we hang “war criminals” that the Obama-Pelosi Dobermans in Congress had so far identified, 75.5% of the financial infusion needed is already fully subscribed.

One of the fastest means for economic recovery is by hanging. The campaign to investigate Bush for “war crimes” is not just what anyone thinks it is! #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment to ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

---------------

This also appears in Freedomsphoenix.com:
Part III. Hanging For Economic Recovery
by Edwin Sumcad
02/10/09
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=045453

II. War Criminals To Hang: The Choking Cerries

by Edwin Sumcad
Date: 02/10/09
Subject: Death by hanging.
Image caption: The rope around the
neck of many war criminals to hang.

It cannot be denied that the hunt for “war criminals” is vastly rich of preys to go after. It is not an “anemic” hunting game with only Bush in the rifle sight to shoot at and bring home to adorn the wall as a prize trophy.

Hundreds of thousands of intelligence and homeland security officers and soldiers obeyed their Commander-In-Chief’s orders to commit “war crimes”. To me there was no doubt that those guys in uniform were patriots; they put their lives on the line, enough to make cynics realize that they are ready to die for the fatherland, but to Obama-Pelosi Bush hunters and based on the legal philosophy they publicly announced in print and on television shows – those “willing participants” actually committing Bush’s “crime against humanity” must be prosecuted and if found guilty must be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Many Americans have their tongues hanging out in total disbelief as to why in this time of financial scarcity and economic hardship one of the Obama administration’s priorities in uncontrollable spending spree is for the creation of armed militia in black and detention camps across the country. These are to be used in times of “emergency”.

Think of members of the U.S. Armed Forces, homeland security officers, agents of FBI, CIA and covert search-and-destroy commandos with no names, that one way or another, are going to be hunted down as Bush’s conspirators in committing these abominable “crimes against humanity”. Indeed, we have a horrifying “national emergency” if they are to confront Obama’s fully armed peacekeepers eyeball-to-eyeball. Those who blink first are going to be casualties of this civil war that looms darkly in the horizon.

But I bet that our still living presidents may not cause trouble to this administration’s covert law enforcers. These living presidents had also led wars and accused of “war crimes” and “genocide”, but I think being old now they would just go voluntarily and peacefully straight to any nearby detention camp lead by Obama himself who will also be “investigated” as active participants and conspirators for the alleged commission of “war crimes”, and when tried and found guilty hanged by the neck until dead.

And if this is to become the main preoccupation of the day under the Obama administration, the rope and lariat industry will perhaps be the only businesses that will experience “an economic boom” in the midst of today’s 1920s gloom and doom.

For, indeed, there will be pervasive multiple hangings in all parts of the country. The demand for a hangman’s noose made of abaca rope and synthetic threads or materials will create a nationwide Keynesian aggregate demand that would arrest the economic downturn and trigger the much needed recovery.

Is this a pundit’s joke? Not at all if there are those who believe that the rope economic incentive is a much better alternative to this on-going trillion-dollar robbery where the people’s tax money goes to the pockets of criminals who committed egregious “economic crimes”. Their necks actually more than deserved the hangman’s rope.

But here comes the “kill joy”. In the House hearing committee, CIA director nominee Leon Panetta assured Congress that no intelligence officer would be prosecuted for “war crimes”. Only the heads of those who “ordered the war crime” are in the chopping block. They are only after Bush, the top dog of “war crimes”.

And that was the first remarkable message of Obama’s CIA director-to-be to terrorists in behalf of his administration. Under this new liberal-socialist regime, the Panetta doctrine of political hot pursuit aptly called “Panattasm” means the Obama administration is only after Osama bin Laden, the head of terrorism, not those cutthroat assassins under his leadership command who did the criminal act of mass murder and wanton destruction, just as they are only after Bush, not those who committed the crime under his order as Commander-In-Chief.

This latest development in the political front forced me once again to climb the belfry to ring the bell of alarm: Every American must prepare for “dirty bombs” that could blow up Los Angeles or New York to kingdom come. For, under the Obama regime, “Panettasm” sees to it that terrorists are legally free to do their worst. If arrested, they would not even be prosecuted.

Panetta had already announced this assurance in Congress to all and sundry. He spilled the beans of what lurks behind the campaign to get Bush. In effect this legal excuse behind the “hang-Bush” campaign applies to the “get-Osama-bin-Laden” campaign… they are only after Osama bin Laden who orders the carnage those Islamic assassins and terror hirelings commit. It may sound sickening, but that’s the mentality of the power that governs.

How about this sing-along legality that those caught violating the law must be prosecuted a.k.a. persecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Well, they spit out the exception when they swallow hook and sinker what they said about the dictate of the law as a reason to tenaciously pursue the investigation of those who commit “war crimes.”

The other day, I had this one of the most terrifying scares of my life. I watched a 3-year old baby swallow a mouthful of cherries with all the seeds that almost choked the little toddler to death.

What came back to me in split seconds was that vivid picture of Saddam Hussein … turning blue and breathless while hanging and struggling at the end of the rope like a hooked fish in dry land.

Luckily, after less than a minute or so of contorted bodily struggle which seemed to have lasted longer than eternity, the baby discharged the choking seeds out of his mouth. I couldn’t forget this incredible smile of relief as if he was saying to everybody that what he had coughed out was the exception to what he had scooped into his mouth that could not and should not be swallowed for the sake of survival.

Dying of asphyxiation by choking is, like hanging by the neck at the end of the rope, not only painful but also in the eyes of God, a disgraceful way of ending life. Judas hanged himself in a nearby tree. The stigma of betrayal and treachery is never looked at with favor even in the afterlife.

Obama’s legal centurions who do not leave any single stone unturned in their quest for a presidential investigation to hang President Bush swallowed hook and sinker the mandate of the law that anyone – anybody regardless who that might be -- violating the law must be prosecuted to the fullest. But they are spitting out the legal exception: At least CIA agents that actually committed “war crimes” for Bush, will not be prosecuted.

The Obama cult in power has introduced a new legalese I just described – “Panettasm”. This emerging mentality in legalism may be difficult for the layman to understand but it is there ready to be used to political advantage. To the eyes of rabid followers now known as “Obamaniacs”, the new pro-people liberal-socialist government must always appear politically correct. That would induce smiles in the faces of those who voted for Obama in the last presidential election that are getting trite, corny and sour as the days roll by.

This roaring segment of the American public waving a sea of flaglets for change in front of TV cameras loves Panetta as the cry baby who choked up with cherries.

As CIA Director [only to become the CIA Director at this writing], Panetta will survive any character assassination attempt within Obama’s treacherous mutual admiration club the moment the political sailing turns from calm to rough while his boss – Obama himself – hangs with the rest of the presidents who were all in pari delicto in committing “war crimes”.

For the final ingredient to this menu of absurdities I just broiled to feed those joining this presidential hanging expedition, I would like to add a spice of immortality borrowed from John Wayne’s cliché -- war is tough, but it is a lot tougher to those who are deliberately stupid. #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment to ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

--------------------

Also published in Freedomphoenix.com
II. War Criminals To Hang: The Choking Cherries
by Edwin Sumcad
02/10/09
with inside title II. War Criminals To Hang: Panetta Assures Underlings Committing War Crimes Cannot Be Prosecuted, at http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=045435

Part I. War Criminals To Hang: Those Hunting Them Fry On Their Own Lard

by Edwin Sumcad
Date: 02/10/09
Subject: Criminal Justice System

Image: The end of the rope.

They have committed “war crimes” according to Obama’s legal hatchet men. The main target was former president George W. Bush. But based on the legal criterion they are using to identify what a war criminal is, the hunt goes beyond Bush.

The legal benchmark of pursuit has been publicly announced: Those accused of “war crime” or “genocide” must be investigated and if found guilty must be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Based on that publicized legalese, “war criminals” to be investigated are identifiable. This may shock the public. There are 373 of them in Congress, plus six still living presidents of the United States which includes Bush and Obama himself.

The number explodes beyond one’s wildest imagination if those who committed “war crimes” by following the orders of their Commanders-In-Chief are included.

Under this classification of “war criminals” based on the new administration’s legal jargon [legal guideline], are those who actually committed the crime: Officers of our intelligence community, homeland security personnel and thousands of members of our U.S. Armed Forces that committed “war crimes” by order of their Commander-In-Chief.

This legal pursuit of “war criminals” to hang will fry Obama and his underlings in their own lard.

I repeat without fear of contradiction, that President Obama and Speaker Pelosi’s barking Dobermans in Congress that smelled blood and now want President Bush hanged as a “war criminal” may fry in the simmering oil they themselves boiled.

Let’s help them jump into their frying pan the most helpful way we can.

I would like to restate this action baseline for clarity: Their legal ding-a-ling is that those accused of committing “war crimes” must be persecuted – I mean prosecuted and if found guilty must be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Since “war crimes” are high crimes punishable by death, the ultimate punishment is usually hanging by the neck until dead.

The “monster” in human clothing that recently had a terminal date with the hooded hangman fashionably dressed in black in celebration of death, was the infamous dictator of Iraq Saddam Hussein.

This war criminal head of state reached the end of the rope, and died immediately without a chance of growing his dreaded mustachio like Hitler’s, the Holocaust war criminal who took the law into his hand and ended it all.

Nose-leading blood-thirsty Dobermans in a Bush-hunting Safari in this manner, it is imperative that we must first call their attention to the fact that without this war on terror and the war in Iraq, there would be neither “war crimes” to speak of nor “crime against humanity” to level off against Bush in the first place.

Bush is currently hunted for allegedly committing “genocide” in Iraq. War crime hunters premised this rather obsessive belief that Bush is a “war criminal” on and because of what he did in Iraq [to America’s enemies that joined forces against U.S. in the Iraq war], and what he did to captured terrorists and those caught on the act, to protect Americans from Islamic terrorism – save us from enemies of the state who were surreptitiously conducting their clandestine operations right here in the homeland.

The alleged criminal acts -- real or imagined -- were speckled and wide-ranging, but the intensity of the charges narrows down to “waterboarding” or “torture”, which Obama’s hatchet men in black toga claim is a serious “crime against humanity”.

But this is what they forgot, or if not, are trying to ignore. Facts are facts nonetheless, and they need facts to carry in their luggage in this expedition to hunt down “war criminals” to hang.

There were 373 “war criminals” in Congress who were “Bush’s accomplices” if such is the case. We are presenting this proof to them in their own language. On October 10 and October 11, 2002, Congressmen and Senators voted for the “Resolution of Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq …” -- the power they gave to Bush to commit those alleged “war crimes” in Iraq.

296 co-conspirators in the House of Representatives and 77 co-conspirators in the Senate voted for what those who voted now call “misadventure” in Iraq, seeing to it that Bush commits the “war crimes” they have authorized him to commit.

We call upon those Senators and Congressmen as witnesses to fry in their own lard. We take as evidence their statements on record that the war powers they gave to Bush are “unconstitutional, felonious and treasonous”.

Most if not all of these “war criminals” are now in Obama’s Cabinet. Obama himself is an accomplice. He voted at least 11 times since 2003 to fund “Bush’s war” … the “war of mass murder, maiming and torture” as the put it without batting an eyelash.

As Bush’s war crime accomplices, they also voted several times for those several amendments of the Patriot Act that created the Military Tribunal to try terrorists, and on top of that conspiracy to commit “war crimes” they authorized by law the use of military Information Interrogation Technique [torture] to extract information from the captured enemy of the state to save millions of American lives that the discovered plots had targeted to wipe out.

It has been said that only a fool can fool a fool more than anyone else.

As it is illustrated in this editorial piece, the imagery is pithy and forceful, its headiness sharp and pungent: The fool who cut off the fellow’s head that lay asleep, and hid it, and then waited to see what this guy would say when he awaked and missed the head-piece, was right in the first thought, that a man would be surprised to find such an alteration in things since he fell asleep; but the head chopper was a little mistaken to imagine the man could awake at all after the head was cut off. [Tatler] #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment to ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

------------------
Also appeared in Freedomphonenix.com:
Part I. Hunt War Criminals And Fry On Your Own Lard
Date: 02/10/09
by Edwin Sumcad
Subject: Criminal Justice System
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=045432

Hanging By Public Acclamation: Are We To Hang All Our Presidents?

C'mon,Baby, Hang
by Edwin Sumcad
Date: 02/08/09

I raise this question if we must hang our presidents after run-of-the-mill government stalkers in Congress pressured President Barack Hussein Obama to investigate Bush and VP Dick Cheney of the alleged “war crimes” they have committed while in office, and if found guilty, to be hanged by the neck.
My real concern is not on the political aspect of what appears to be a vengeful “witch hunt”. Politicians can fry on their own lard for all I care. But hundreds of thousands of our intelligence agents and homeland security officers nationwide not to include the entire U.S. Armed Forces, obeyed President Bush’s order as their Commander-In-Chief, and kept us alive to this day while the war on terror intensified. They willfully participated in this alleged “crime against humanity” to defeat terror and keep us alive.
Obama’s ax-wielders in black toga and Nancy Pelosi’s political Dobermans in Congress – by the way, one of the most ferocious of them all that smelled blood was Cong. John Conyers, Jr. of the House Judiciary Committee -- stand on the rock of this legal maxim they touted that those who violated the law must be persecuted ... I mean prosecuted and punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Does this mean then that those thousands of intelligence and homeland security officers and all the soldiers that participated in this alleged “war crimes”, must also be “investigated” and if found guilty must be hanged by the neck until dead?
The legal premise advocated in going after Bush -- the 43rd President of the United States -- is that he is accused of committing “crime against humanity”.
And this is where I am worried to death: We have fought so many wars. Winning them shaped our destiny. U.S. presidents – the Commanders-In-Chief, if you may – who led those wars have been accused of committing “war crimes” and “genocides” both by external enemies we have vanquished and by the enemy within who thinks that the Federal Government is actually Al Qaeda, and President Bush was actually Osama bin Laden in disguise behind the “Conspiracy Theory” who engineered the 9/11 infamy!
Does this also mean then that U.S. presidents who are still alive today, together with former presidents Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Bush, Sr. and George W. Bush, must also be “investigated”, and if found guilty, must be hanged by the neck until dead?
If not, why not? Those who violate the law must be prosecuted and punished to the “fullest extent of the law”, isn’t it?.
Tell me if for the first time in history, we will see for the first time, the hanging of presidents under Obama’s socialist regime of change … a change, indeed [and please help us understand] I know not what and where, it is leading us to.
The best venue to tackle these disturbing questions, is Freedomsphoenix.com. This is one of the freest online publications in the Internet today! It is here where we get entertained and get educated at the same time even if bucket kickers resort to name-calling so long as we hear the cracking sound of the grinding ax, like the hanging by the neck, for entertainment purposes. #
© Copyright Edwin A. Sumcad. Access FP.com, February 8, 2009.
The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment to ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Appeared in Freedomphoenix.com under the title “C’mon Baby Hang”
2/08/09 at http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=045295
with comments.
---------------------------------------------------------
Comment by: Lolo Send Email
Entered on: 2009-02-08 11:34:19
Upon review, the Author pointed out a typo error. The first line of the last paragraph you just read, should read: "The best venue to tackle these disturbing questions, is Freedomsphoenix.com." Comment by: Oyate Send Email
Entered on: 2009-02-08 12:03:25
------------
Has anyone actually made a case for hanging by public acclamation? Especially here? I mean, that sounds a little "democratic" for this crowd.
Comment by: Lolo Send Email
Entered on: 2009-02-11 07:14:16
------------
Oh, boy, you are right for this crowd … you are saying it smartly! Hope not too deep for this crowd.
Public Notice: In this Forum the materials you read may be harmful to adults…prohibited to10 years old and above, otherwise discretion of juvenile guardian ad litem 10 years old and below strongly recommended.

War Criminals: 373 Plus U.S. Presidents Still Alive Bush And Obama Himself Are To Hang

Written by Ed Sumcad
by Ed Sumcad
NWS - Columnist

Obama will fry on his own lard if he orders this ill-advised Bush investigation of alleged "war crimes".

President Obama and Speaker Pelosi’s barking Dobermans in Congress that smelled blood and now want President Bush hanged as a “war criminal” may fry in their own lard.

Let’s help them jump into their frying pan the most helpful way we can: Their legal ding-a-ling is that those accused of committing “war crimes” must be persecuted – I mean prosecuted and if found guilty must be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Since “war crimes” are high crimes punishable by death, the ultimate punishment is usually hanging by the neck until dead.

The “monster” in human clothing that recently had a terminal date with the hooded hangman fashionably dressed in black in celebration of death, was the infamous dictator of Iraq Saddam Hussein.

This war criminal head of state reached the end of the rope, and died immediately without a chance of growing his dreaded mustachio like Hitler’s, the Holocaust war criminal who took the law into his hand and ended it all.

Nose-leading blood-thirsty Dobermans in a Bush-hunting Safari in this manner, we must first call their attention to the fact that without this war on terror and the war in Iraq , there would be no “war crimes” against Bush to speak of in the first place.

Bush is currently hunted for allegedly committing “genocide” in Iraq . War crime hunters premised this rather obsessive belief that Bush is a “war criminal” on and because of what he did in Iraq [to America’s enemies in the Iraq war], and what he did to captured terrorists and those caught on the act, to protect Americans from Islamic terrorists who were surreptitiously conducting their clandestine operations right here in this land of the free.

The alleged criminal act narrows down to “waterboarding” or “torture”, which Obama’s hatchet men in black toga claim is a serious “crime against humanity”.

But this is what they forgot, or if not, are trying to ignore. Facts are facts nonetheless, and they need facts to carry in their luggage in this expedition to hunt down “war criminals” to hang.

There were 373 “war criminals” in Congress who were “Bush’s accomplices”. We are presenting this proof to them in their own language. On October 10 and October 11, 2002, Congressmen and Senators voted for the “Resolution of Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq…” -- the power they gave to Bush to commit those alleged “war crimes” in Iraq .

296 co-conspirators in the House of Representatives and 77 co-conspirators in the Senate voted for what those who voted now call “misadventure” in Iraq , seeing to it that Bush commits the “war crimes” they have authorized him to commit.

We call upon those Senators and Congressmen as witnesses to fry in their own lard. We take as evidence their statements on record that the war powers they gave to Bush are “unconstitutional, felonious and treasonous”.

Most if not all of these “war criminals” are now in Obama’s Cabinet. Obama himself is an accomplice. He voted at least 11 times since 2003 to fund “Bush’s war” … the “war of mass murder, maiming and torture.”

As Bush’s war crime accomplices, they also voted several times for several amendments of the Patriot Act that created the Military Tribunal to try terrorists, and on top of that conspiracy to commit “war crimes” they authorized by law the use of military Information Interrogation Technique [torture] to extract information from the captured enemy of the state to save millions of American lives that the discovered plots had targeted to wipe out.

The hunt for “war criminals” is vastly rich of preys to go after. It is not an “anemic” hunting game with only Bush in the rifle sight to shoot and bring home to adorn the wall as a prize trophy.

Hundreds of thousands of intelligence and homeland security officers and soldiers obeyed their Commander-In-Chief’s orders to commit “war crimes”. To me there was no doubt that they were patriots but to Obama-Pelosi Bush hunters – those were “willing participants” who actually committed Bush’s “crime against humanity”.

Many Americans have their tongues hanging out in bewilderment as to why in this time of financial scarcity and economic hardship one of the Obama administration’s priorities in uncontrollable spending spree is for the creation of armed militia in black and detention camps across the country. These are to be used in times of “emergency”.

Think of members of the U.S. Armed Forces, homeland security officers, agents of FBI, CIA and covert search-and-destroy commandos with no names, that one way or another, are going to be hunted down as Bush’s conspirators in committing these abominable “crimes against humanity”. Indeed, we have a horrifying “national emergency” if they are to confront Obama’s fully armed peacekeepers eyeball-to-eyeball. Those who blink first are going to be casualties of this civil war.

But I bet that our still living presidents may not cause trouble to Obama’s covert law enforcers. They too had led wars and accused of “war crimes” and “genocide”, but I think being old now they would just go voluntarily straight to any nearby detention camp lead by Obama himself who will also be “investigated” as active participants and conspirators for the alleged commission of “war crimes”, and when tried and found guilty hanged by the neck until dead.

And if this is to become the main preoccupation of the day under the Obama administration, the rope and lariat industry will perhaps be the only businesses that will experience “an economic boom” in the midst of today’s 1920s gloom and doom.

For, indeed, there will be pervasive multiple hangings in all parts of the country. The demand for a hangman’s noose made of abaca rope and synthetic threads or materials will create a nationwide Keynesian aggregate demand that would arrest the economic downturn and trigger the much needed recovery.

Is this a pundit’s joke? Not at all if there are those who believe that the rope economic incentive is a much better alternative to this on-going trillion-dollar robbery where the people’s tax money goes to the pockets of criminals who committed egregious “economic crimes”. Their necks actually more than deserved the hangman’s rope.

But here comes the “kill joy”. In the House hearing committee, CIA director nominee Leon Panetta assured Congress that no intelligence officer would be prosecuted for “war crimes”. Only the heads of those who “ordered the war crime” are in the chopping block. They are only after Bush, the top dog of “war crimes”.

And that was the first remarkable message of Obama’s CIA director-to-be to terrorists. The Obama administration is only after Osama bin Laden, the head of terrorism, not his cutthroat assassins who did the criminal act of mass murder and wanton destruction, just as they are only after Bush, not those under him who committed the crime under his order.

It is my reason for climbing the belfry to ring the bell of alarm that every American must prepare for “dirty bombs” that could blow up Los Angeles or New York to kingdom come. Under the Obama regime, terrorists are legally free to do their worst. If arrested, they would not even be prosecuted. Panetta announced this assurance in Congress to all and sundry. They are only after Osama bin Laden who ordered the carnage.

How about this sing-along legality that those caught violating the law must be prosecuted a.k.a. persecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Well, they spit out the exception when they swallow hook and sinker what they said about the dictate of the law as a reason to tenaciously pursue the investigation of those who commit “war crimes.”

The other day, I had this terrifying scare of my life. I watched a 3-year old baby swallow a mouthful of cherries with all the seeds that almost choked the little toddler to death.

What came back to me in split seconds was that vivid picture of Saddam Hussein … turning blue and breathless while hanging and struggling at the end of the rope.

Luckily, after less than a minute or so of contorted bodily struggle which seemed to have lasted longer than eternity, the baby discharged the choking seeds from the mouth. I couldn’t forget this incredible smile of relief as if he was saying to everybody that, what he had coughed out was the exception to what he had scooped into his mouth that could not and should not be swallowed for the sake of survival.

Dying of asphyxiation by choking is, like hanging by neck at the end of the rope, not only painful but also in the eyes of God, a disgraceful way of ending one’s life. Judas hanged himself in a nearby tree. The stigma of betrayal and treachery is never looked at with favor in the afterlife.

Obama’s legal centurions who do not leave any single stone unturned in their quest for a presidential investigation to hang President Bush swallowed hook and sinker the mandate of the law that anyone who violates the law must be prosecuted to the fullest. But they are spitting out the exception. At least CIA agents that actually committed “war crimes” for Bush, will not be prosecuted.

The public loves Panetta as the cry baby who choked up with cherries. But he will survive while his boss – Obama – hangs with the rest of the presidents who were all in pari delicto in committing “war crimes”.

As a final ingredient to this menu of absurdities I just broiled to feed those joining this presidential hanging expedition, I would like to add a spice of immortality borrowed from John Wayne’s cliché -- war is tough, but it is a lot tougher to those who are deliberately stupid. #

© Copyright Edwin A. Sumcad. Access NWS February 09, 2009.

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment to ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sgThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Published also in

War Criminals: 373 Plus U.S. Presidents Still War Criminals: 373 Plus U.S.
Presidents Still Alive Bush And Obama Himself Are To Hang [Nws, 02/09/09] http://nationalwriterssyndicate.com/content/view/875/2/
http://nationalwriterssyndicate.com/ [headline]

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Written Editorials Are Opinions – Suggestion To Differentiate Is Ridiculous … Ill-Advised

To The Editor: [Freedomphoenix.com]

In your comment re, 2009-02-02 15:43:53, I find the suggestion to change the ‘title’ “Editorial” to ‘Opinion’ in editorial writing quite whimsical and capricious. Behind this unfortunate editorial advice are the following justifications that are too outlandish for me to explain:

[a] The first reason for the change was ridiculous. Of course a written editorial is a written opinion of the editor of the publication. In Freedomsphoenix.com, writers classified as “editors” write opinions for this online publication. But according to this editorial advice, an editorial written by a contributing guest editor, “… misleads readers by implying that the respected editor, Ernest Hancock, vouches for the journalistic skills and integrity of the author.” Thus it is hard to believe there is this ludicrous recommendation to rename the editorial to “unsubstantiated opinion of …” [the writer is named].

[1] What in the light of me is the connection of this editorial paranoia to opinion writing? This is the first time I hear that the Editor “vouches” or guarantees any editorial piece published in his online publication. Anyone who “implies” that the Editor “vouches” or guarantees someone’s point of view must be ignorant of the meaning of a disclaimer to any written opinion, which legally insulates the Media from liability as a matter of editorial policy. [Let us bookmark this super-doper ignorance in the practice of journalism].

[2] What is the relevance of the “journalistic skills and integrity of the author” that in this precipitous recommendation the Editor is supposed to guarantee whenever any written editorial appears in Freedomsphoenix.com? Did anyone hear or see this editorial requirement or did it just pop out of someone’s pretentious if not heavily biased mind?

[3] As a defense against liability, were those “skill” and “integrity” requirements disclosed to the public as an “Editorial Standard” to be met before a written editorial piece should be downgraded [?] from the higher category of “Editorial” down to merely an “unsubstantiated Opinion” just because the one who recommends this change has a different opinion to what has been written? If this website agrees to the recommendation and takes action, are we not looking at censorship that rears its ugly head?

[4] Such arbitrary downgrading could damage the reputation of a writer because when reclassified downward it casts aspersions to his “skill” or ability to write, as inferior, as well as attacks his “integrity” as one that is questionable.

[b] Second reason in this recommendation for an Editorial-Opinion switch: It stereotypes editorial writings with such bizarre bias as "The Unsubstantiated Opinion of _____" “Or perhaps, just "Opinion" because “ *anyone* can publish any sort of inaccurate drivel and have it billed as an "editorial."

[1] Such labeling or editorial intervention is not what the “editorial knife” intends to accomplish, and passing judgment on a written editorial as nonsense because it was written by an opponent, is pure nonsense itself, poppycock not within the purview of editorial supervision and control. That judgment belongs to the readership – for the readers to judge if a written opinion they are reading is in fact “substantiated” to be appreciated, or “unsubstantiated” to be rejected as a written nonsense. Any ignorant kibitzer has no business in interfering into an editorial policy that gives writers the right to let the readers pass judgment on their writings.

[2] How would the said editorial advice consider an editorial piece an “inaccurate drivel”?. Who says that it is “inaccurate”? Who passes judgment and on what criteria is it based, that it is a “drivel” of abominable proportion and should be condemned as such? Is it when any written view is unpopular? Or when it is an opinion that questions Libertarianism? Socialism? Capitalism, and the like? Where is this Freedomsphoenix.com’s declaration of principle, quote: “… the encouragement of alternate views being represented here on FreedomsPhoenix …”? Let’s not forget even in the heat of the moment, that FP.com is a free online publication it purports to be that encourages as its guiding principle, the publication of different and differing views of the American public.

[c] The Third reason why the editorial piece “The Idiocy of Conspiracy Theories” written and published by Mike Renzulli on February 1, 2009 in this website
should be labeled merely as “unsubstantiated Opinion” of _____ … because “This _greatly_ encourages know-nothings and the reason-impaired of all stripes to **go ahead and publish.**”

[1] Who are those “know-nothings and the reason-impaired of all stripes” editor-contributors that this suspiciously motivated editorial advice is referring to? And how – and on what standard --were they categorized that way? Are we talking of a “perfect, faultless editor-contributor” here that Ernest knows but is not telling us about his hidden flawless talent in stereotyping writers including myself that he doesn’t like and whose opinions are very much opposed to his views?

Here is the problem that I hope I can discuss with you in all honesty and good faith based on experience and from what had been learned in the academe:

The layman – anyone who has no formal education in Journalism or “newspapering” particularly in editorial writing – has this notion that editorial and opinion writings are two different things. Before the above-mentioned suggestion deserves our attention, there should have been a showing first of what is the difference between a written editorial and a written opinion that the public should know. Without this, the suggestion is misleading because in the printed press, an editorial is an opinion, a viewpoint or a position of the writer over a given issue or subject-matter under public scrutiny.

Let us not forget that Contributors of written pieces to Freedomsphoenix.com come in four categories: Participants in Political Forums, Reporters, Writers and Editors [see FP.com About Us link]. An editor writes opinions or editorials. Editors that write in FP.com are “guest editors” of FP.com whose writings are considered “guest editorials” for all intent and purposes. They joined FP.com as such. They are submitting editorial or opinion writings to, writing in, and writing for, FP.com in that category vis-à-vis other online publications. THUS TO CHANGE OR SUPPOSEDLY DOWNGRADE THE EDITOR’S WRITINGS FROM “EDITORIALS” TO “OPINIONS” IN FP.com IS SUPERPLOUS, IF NOT RIDICULOUS!

In the preparation of the “dummy” of print publications [a daily newspaper or publication is a good example] the layout [format] editor sees to it that all written opinions fall in the editorial page/s. In print publications, rarely does an editorial piece lands in the front page or elsewhere.

In online publications, this is hardly distinguishable. Websites are formatted differently, as one may see how FP.com appears to the readers. But an editorial/opinion write-up is written differently from a news report or press release. Among others, it has no 4-W-umbrella and it is not written as standard inverted pyramid news stories are.

To differentiate it from a news item, an editorial piece is comparable to a composition or an essay, although there are “styles” or techniques in editorial writing that makes the contents of say, an editorial column outstandingly different and powerfully persuasive.

p> Bottom line is, a printed story is an opinion if it is a viewpoint, point of view, perspective, standpoint, a position on issue/s, judgment, estimation, etc. of a given issue.

Lastly, may I call your attention to your approval statement of the suggested change that appears somewhat disturbing. I quote what you said: “I'll continue to review our policy about the encouragement of alternate views being represented here on FreedomsPhoenix, but I'm likely to lean towards allowing those I disagree with the ability to subject themselves to the beatings they might deserve here for my entertainment and continued education.“

You are in favor of allowing those whom you disagree with … “those with the ability to subject themselves to beatings they might deserve…” for your “entertainment and continued education.”

I have called the attention of the editorial management to those repeated wanton violations of your guideline, viz: prohibiting those who are in disagreement with the views of others from indulging in personal attacks. Mr. Renzuilli, the author, was attacked on his person, not on the issues he raised, as “someone being paid by the government” [infiltrator!], “brain dead”, “idiot”, “clown” just in one sweeping libelous paragraph [you can read those vitriolic comments to the above-mentioned written editorial].

Sumcad, another author, was also attacked in the same manner for writing views on esoteric subjects such as development economics, monetary economics and fiscal policy, which they have no capacity to understand and therefore they are very unforgiving when their shortcoming is exposed. They try to cover up this inadequacy by resorting to name-calling. But we know it doesn’t work. Their short stock of knowledge although they are abundant of hearsays easily mouthed in public as “facts” or “the truth”, are still very much exposed.

In your above-quoted approval statement, you described the victims of those personal attacks in this website as those “… with the ability to subject themselves to the beatings …” for your “entertainment and continued education”.

When I read your above-quoted reply I was speechless because on record, I have always been in total agreement with the light of wisdom you share with those in the dark. But this time I disagree. And this is easy for me to explain why.

Let us assume just for a moment, that I am Renzuilli, or Sumcad, or anyone of their kind who is no doubt good in the writing trade as a chosen field of discipline, for purposes of this explanation why I disagree. We have a reputation in writing to protect … It took us many years to scratch the ground to find the name we have nurtured and cherished as a hard-earned legacy; we tiptoed the line when we chose what to write, because we saw to it that no shenanigan would throw mud and soil that treasured harvest of our labor.

As you know we are writers who responded to your published invitation to submit their intellectual contributions after working hard for each and every submission they make. In the choices you offered what any contributor would want to be if we accept the invitation, experienced editors chose the “editor” category because in writing, that’s were they are good at. Proof is, let us say, a consistent recipient of several excellence awards in journalism on record all those years.

Having said that, I don’t think their injury after being attacked with implicit approval or tacit editorial endorsement is a fair excuse for the entertainment and continued education of anyone, especially when it is at their expense.

I am now talking of Media responsibility and liability here when there is a showing of inferred approval of such wanton abuse.

I am a dye-in-the-wool defender of any editorial policy that protects anyone from scurrilous personal attacks. I am a Minute Man defending Sumcad and others like him, and now Renzuilli who is under attack because he wrote an editorial that is not to the liking of his attackers. As responsible members of the Media, I firmly believe that we should always be vigilant against any form of suppression of anyone’s right to freedom of expression.

Be that as it may, I would hate to see FP.com – the astonishing product of your long years of hard work … a treasured legacy as dear and precious as it is, similar to my own -- destroys itself when anyone is allowed even implicitly to turn it into a smear machine just for entertainment purposes.

FP.com’s classification of four kinds of participating contributors considering the nature of the writings they want to contribute, is to me, perfectly fine, wisely designed, highly preferred and recommendable.

Under this format, we the Contributors, have a given voice in choosing what we want to be in FP.com, so that we can only submit our intellectual creations as writers at our own chosen level where we can be very good at. We get the space, and FP.com gets the expertise.

This is the nature of this implied contract long observed and practiced in the Media, with the imprimatur of and sanctioned by the long standing practice existing in the Fourth Estate.

My final words to you are, if we are to remain guest editors in your site, and considering that the suggestion in question was clearly made out of spite [he didn’t like the written view of author Renzuilli because it is different from his], and considering further that the suggestion to change your format is forcing you to classify without any set of criteria and therefore grossly arbitrary, the standing of editors according to their “skill” and “integrity” which is unprecedented in the history of Media editorial management, and finally having been duly established that such change proposal is clearly ill-advised, I strongly recommend that this editorial tampering be ignored.

Sincerely,

Lolo

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Healthcare: Obama Must Stop Talkathon Go To Work And Save Dying Patients

by Edwin Sumcad [also at www.opednews.com]

Millions of Americans without health insurance or with medical insurance but with inadequate and fraudulent coverage are dying everyday. Patients not yet dead but about to die, are being victimized by overcharging vultures in the medical profession.

If a patient is without health insurance, or with insurance but the coverage is almost good for nothing, service providers are like competing barracudas on the hunt for prey. Pricing of dental services for example is out of control.

An elderly who had his fourteen teeth extracted was charged $240 per tooth, and in addition, he has to pay approximately $3,000 for his new temporary and regular lower denture. This does not include $500 for anesthesia. Upon inquiry, the explanation was [a] it was not an ordinary teeth extractions – it was a “surgery”[?!], [b] the patient was elderly and diabetic, [c] the denture was “special”, not covered by insurance.

That was more than a year ago. The patient is not even half way in paying the money he borrowed to pay for this scalping.

We know that the poor fellow had been had. But his only remedy is to go to court. He is too old and too poor to do that.

This aging patient cannot even write a letter of complaint to his insurer that happens to be part of the conspiracy to suck the patient’s blood dry to the bone.

Every time this patient would contact the insurance people who obviously are also on the take, to protest the overcharging, they would just shoo him away telling him that the denture and the dental services “specialists” had provided were outside of the provisions of his health insurance contract. It was a pocket-cost he must bear.

The victim -- and millions of his kind all over the country -- needs President Barack Hussein Obama to save him. It is time to stop those self-selling talks to get the votes he needed to become president. His non-stop oratory will not save those victims of insatiable greed for profit.

I call upon Obama to put his claim as a Messiah for Change, where his mouth is. For reference of the action he might take, Obama and his advisers must read the research-backed Dental Rip-Off I published.

The much ballyhooed “Obama Health-Care Express” is a hustle-bustle in the wind. The problem was seen by those who are viewing the precarious situation in our healthcare industry from the distance at the wrong end of the telescope.

While it is true that this nation is short of primary-care physicians, the real problem is the pricing of medical services without limit when insurance is nil or inadequate.

Look … don’t argue with me that competition in a free enterprise system will level the price the market would bear. This theory is valid only if it has a premise to stand on, and that is, provided that [a] goods sold are “elastic”, and [b] there is no monopoly, [c] there is no conspiracy among the dominant players to cabal in pricing and sharing of profits. [See J. von Neumann’s and O. Morgenstern’s “Theory Of Games” in a situation of mixed conflict and cooperation where players may cooperate to increase their joint pay-off.]

We must increase the number of service providers to meet the nation’s medical need. At the same time, we cannot countenance this bizarre incentive that in order to attract service providers into practice the few who are now serving the public is encouraged to bill patients without limit [i.e. Dental Rip-Off], putting them at the mercy of insatiable greed for profit.

This strategy does not only distort the market but also increases the number of patients dying because they cannot afford the cost of insurance that will cover their need for survival.

The worst part of this conspiracy is the existing collusion between caregivers and those who control the industry. The latter dictates what to cover, and the rules they also formulate for coverage are against the patients … all designed in favor of the insurance companies.

For instance, when patients appeal for a rejected coverage, it is almost 95% sure the insurer will deny the appeal. The idea is to save the money that the insurance company would otherwise spend to save the patient’s life, and later on distribute the pool of money saved, to caregivers in the form of “bonuses”.

In the graph, we may picture the financially-disadvantaged patients’ rate of survival going down while the medical vultures’ fortune is rising up. In the year 2007, fraudulent overpricing estimated within the range of $3-10 billion was lost to dental vultures [Vultures Exposed].

It is almost like opium to be addicted to Obama’s attractive oratory when he declared that healthcare is a “right” that his administration guarantees to every American.

I think he forgot that healthcare is a dire need, and victimized patients are dying. #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles here and the Internet or you may e-mail your comment at ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Shall We Hang Our Presidents For “War Crimes” -- Real Or Imagined?

It sounds sadistic but the deafening cry of the socialist Left and their radical Liberal satellites to hang the former Republican president and vice president for alleged “war crimes” is reaches far beyond Bush and Cheney themselves. The sword of anger is drawn not only to get them but also to strike down all U.S. presidents living or dead accused of genocide by foes abroad and by the enemy within.

Let us clear this confusion generated by victorious socialist Democrats who are now publicly perceived as intoxicated by their newly found power since Obama won the last presidential election.

The radical Left and their socialist Liberal colleagues are even more angry and restless now that Bush has left office because I think in his absence, they have to look for another punching bag. But if anyone thinks they have forgiven Bush of his alleged “war crimes” -- real or imagined -- that would be an embarrassing assumption.

Obama’s legal hatchet men who are in many ways declaring that vengeance is ours and sweet, argue that Bush and Cheney violated the law against “torture” and must be persecuted – I mean prosecuted -- because it is the law, and if found guilty hanged by the neck … but was not torture called “waterboarding” which they claimed is a crime against humanity justified on record under the dicta of the military tribunal also created by law?

When those apprehended terrorists detonate their dirty bombs, would anyone very much dead and buried under the ground care about violation of their human rights? A realist once copy-furnished me a copy of his e-mail addressed to what he thought were terrorist human rights coddlers in this country: Save me first by not being killed by your terrorists, before you talk to me of “torture” in violation of the terrorists’ human rights!

To prevent any emotional reactions to this very controversial issue from turning into a vitriolic word war, let’s define and confine this accusation of “war crime” only on “torture” and “who” were tortured if such is the case, for public discussion purposes. Outside of this perimeter, reactions like attacks on personalities would be irrelevant.

For example, in responding, let’s not react by simply saying that Edwin Sumcad who is bringing up this matter for public scrutiny “is in the payroll of President Bush” or “Edwin, we know who is paying your bill” kind of childish shenanigans and immature stuff that distract us from focusing on the problem.

These delinquent biases are too retarded to carry as a personal baggage into print, and will not produce any intelligent discussion in this Forum.

The problem is more serious than it is seen in the surface. Our homeland security and intelligence officers, let alone the entire U.S. Armed Forces, knowing pretty well that to obey the command orders of the President of the United States who is their Commander-In-Chief, were in fact willingly participating in committing crimes against humanity – as Bush’s accusers want the American public to believe.

Shall we round up thousands of them who actually did it, be investigated together with their Commander-In-Chief as accomplices in committing “war crimes”, and if found guilty should also be hanged by the neck until dead? Whose vengeance is sweet in this regard? We need to clear this absurdity if indeed it sounds like insanity.

One last reminder: If you think “torture” was conducted solely for the amusement of sadistic and sick individuals in the military, move over I am joining your protest against it.

If the government is doing this for fun as you think it is, the Libertarian in us although I am not a Libertarian, will find the likes of me in the forefront of the campaign against this atrocious violation of our liberty and freedom.

Unfortunately “torture” strictly for fun as a crime against humanity is not the subject of discussion.

So there we are. The perimeters within which we may debate this problem are clearly drawn. Let’s do it for the interest of the American public, and for the commonweal.

Let’s consider it a duty of every American citizen to clear up this absurdity – if indeed it is – of investigating past presidents who one way or another have been accused of “war crimes” by enemies outside of our borders that in the past we have vanquished and some of them we are still vanquishing in today’s on-going wars, together with Bush and Cheney who were accused by the enemy within of having committed not only “genocides” or crimes against humanity but against the people of the United States.

We have fought many wars the results of which had shaped up our destiny. Since in fighting those wars U.S. presidents living or dead have been accused of genocide by foes abroad and by the enemy within, this precedent that has no parallel in history about to be created and established under the Obama regime, may make the hanging of a U.S. president possible within the vortex of a promised change in the coming of an African-American Messiah. #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment at ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

Let Us Welcome New Year 2009 By Sharing Light Of Knowledge With Those In The Dark

At New Year’s Eve, it is the best time to welcome the incoming year. From STRAIGHT LIGHT to everyone: HAPPY NEW YEAR …!

Straight Light is my editorial column in this popular website --freedomsphoenix.com [FPC]. It is actually me talking to you … thanks to Ernest Hancock for sharing with me his light of knowledge when I was in the dark trying to get into Freedom Phoenix.

FPC is one of Internet’s numerous lamplighters through which the light of knowledge could be shed to those in the dark who longed to see the light.

While many of us in the world of the quill and the ink share their lights of knowledge with others, straight light is only what I could give out for others to share.

So it comes to pass that at the end of the year, I thank all the blessings that had come my way, and to take note of so many things I could learn from, and even improve where there is a need for improvement.

The most important thing to note is that the light to share always gives room for improvement. In the editorial I wrote on December 28, 2008, we need a lot of light-sharing:

Editorial • Future Predictions -- Straight Light

If you read the comments on this editorial piece at this link Abolish, the praise and pillage, not necessarily on what is written but on the person of the author, badly needs enlightenment.

The author was called unprintable names. Just because in this editorial piece I mentioned outgoing president George W. Bush who was leaving a legacy of his own -- a bequest that changed the political dynamics of the Middle East and that he had embarrassed the radical Left by putting Al Qaeda terrorists on the run since 9/11 – to be judged by history, a resentful bucket kicker thought I am probably on the payroll of President Bush!

The first thought that comes to mind: Does this also mean that this angry guy who hates Bush is in the payroll of Obama and Bill Ayers, the rich socialist American bomber who wants to change America?

As we can clearly see, the logic comes from another planet. It is dark and apparently, retarded. It needs light, and as written in a song, in summer the roses need rain to bloom.

This hostile attitude is jumping on stage only recently. The public had a bad impression of the Media that the Left had taken over in the last election. It trumped objectivity and supported a change for America to take the road towards a socialist democracy.

But not all free journalists were routed in this tsunami of political bias towards ideological change generally believed to be good for the country, although it may be only delusional. Although they may be few, still there are journalist who are holding the forth of free journalism. I share the flak for being one of them throughout the years [more than 45 years]. In this regard, I don’t blame those in limbo who are swinging their swords of hostility in the dart pit of ignorance. The reading public can see this in the comment posted in this link Abolish.

This Straight Light to share is never so critically needed before than it is now, as in this case while we close the year with so much lessons to learn from.

In the comments [again click on Abolish] Lolo ably defended the definition MV = PQ out of Fisher Equation’s MV = PT against the attacks of those who are obviously pretending to be learned economists in this perplexing subject of economics. It is hard to deny that only genuine economists that specialize on fiscal and monetary policies are able to do this.

I noticed that those who were commenting negatively on the editorial I wrote with anger written between the lines, are clearly in the dark on this subject. When they resort to name-calling, we know how and what they complement their argument with, when they ran short of what to say. In this sense, I do not hold them entirely blameworthy for the simplest of all reasons that they actually need help.

My old man once made it clear to me when I was starting college, that when someone falls in a snake pit, the snakes will always fight to get the first bite. That wisdom brings into focus when the author becomes a prey to a feeding frenzy.

But I am here to share a straight light, not to talk about snakes especially when they refer to people outside the art of euphemism and cordiality. I do not welcome the New Year this way.

In the comment box, Lolo already projected what I have learned as a development economist-cum-journalist. The onus of proving it is now on me. Before the bar of public opinion, I am pretty much obliged.

I would like to share what I learned by demonstrating how Quantity Theory of Money works with Ag. D. [the symbol I used in graduate school] as key determinant. This may be denominated as a “Classical Economic Equation of Exchange”. This equation is MV=PQ.

M =Money in the hands of the public. V = Income velocity of money. This is commonly mistaken as “velocity of money” which is not accurate. P = Average price level of output, and Q = Total output of goods and services.

If we want to find V [how many times a $1 component is spent in a year], then we have V=PQ/M. In figures, this is how it looks like:

Suppose we have the following data as an example [B=Billion]:

[1] Q = $10 billion (10B) units of output purchased in the economy.

[2] P= $2 average price per unit.

[3] Thus PQ= $20 billion (20B) [total spending Ag.D]

[4] If M= $5 billion (5B) [money supply], then we arrive at:

[5] V=PQ/M or in figure, 20B/5B = 4B. It means then that we know that the $1 component of the average price per unit was spent 4B times in a year. This is how you find V.

Suppose we want to know M = money in the hands of the public.

Then the definition is: M = PQ/V or = 20B/4B = $5 billion (5B). [It checks out par. [4] above.]

Suppose instead we want to know PQ = Total Ag.D. Then we have this formula: PQ = V x M or 4B x $5 billion (5B) = $20 billion (20B). [It checks out par. [3] above.]

To summarize: PQ = P x Q; Total spending is PQ = V x M; V =PQ/M; and M = PQ/V. #

Thanks for knowledge-sharing.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment direct to ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

II. Federal Reserve And I.O.Us.: Let’s Not Be Extravagant In Exposing What We Hardly Know

There is always a self-styled “guru” attracted to our financial debacle so generous in giving public statements of “facts” in monetary economics. Hardly are those established as facts but only theoretical assumptions!

It started with Joe the Plumber. It is only proper that we respect his negative opinion on President Barack Hussein Obama’s wealth distribution plan. However, Joe tips those prone to go over the edge with nothing to contribute but mistaken assumptions. A carpenter or auto mechanic mistakes the “given” as hard fact or assumes that his personal conclusions are “facts”.

For example, it is proclaimed with so much bravado, that the Federal Reserve is at liberty to “print money to destroy the economy”. This is not a statement of “facts”. It is an intentional “misdeclaration” of assumption, probably to air out a personal grievance or to incite the public to stage a general protest against some Treasury and Fed officials or even against anyone or anything only God knows.

First, it is the Department of Treasury that prints money, not the Fed. The Fed “creates” money. Unlike the Treasury, the Fed does not use a printing machine – it uses the computer. The Fed buys a “bond or mortgage-backed security” from banks. In return, the Fed issues a “credit” to the banks’ accounts. The banks would then lend this Fed-backed credit to generate more money!

In effect, money is created in the form of credit. This is all done through a computerized network of financial transactions.
Second, the National Treasury prints money when new money is required by the government, i.e., to replace old notes and to stabilize the financial system, while at the same time the Fed sees to it that the functions to print, create and use money do not destabilize the system and destroy the economy.

The Federal Reserve is a private institution, comes another declaration with so much audacity based on perception. It is supposedly owned by the 12 regional Federal Reserve banks, which “each in turn owned by a combination of regional banks, commercial banks, foreign banks, and miscellaneous individuals …” This is fiction, not “facts”. It is rather a convoluted presentation of facts if at all.

The facts: Fed is the Federal Government AND the participating private banks. The Federal Government [the Fed] is a composite of the Executive branch of government and Congress. The American people dictate the operation of the Fed through their representation in Congress and the president they elected to office that decide on what banking policies to formulate and implement. They all act through the Board of Governors.

The 12 regional banks do not own the Fed. The law does not say so. Rather these are the Fed’s regional arms. The Fed performs a governmental function, not a private function, and the participating bankers in the region are not there to enrich themselves in any way they want and anytime they like.

When a nosey face diagnosed the ills of our financial system at an arm’s length and faulted them all on the Federal Reserve, it presents a problem because hardly out of the "facts" discussed by "street experts" so far, were relevant to central banking, much more related to the role of the United States Federal Reserve in the national economy.

The problem here is that it reminds us of this old adage that “little knowledge is dangerous”. There is no space to explain this in details to those who need to know. The uninitiated has no fear of contradiction and will invade any territory of knowledge to cover up the absence of knowledge. Just like when the blind is fearless when crossing a busy street.

The blind can only feel but cannot see the danger ahead. If you believe the blind who tells you that he sees no danger ahead every time he crosses a busy street, you just missed the point -- the guy is blind!

Another reality check: Our gargantuan debts will continue to increase and will just remain I.O.Us. as the years go by, for as long as the United States of America continues to grow and grow. In this capitalist free enterprise society, the opportunity to grow is limitless … in Genesis, it ends at Alpha X [the beginning of infinity].

And why some people are shocked by the immensity of our national debt? It is because the educated guess of how “big” is this existing I.O.Us. is usually exaggerated. The conclusions derived from those exaggerations are viewed in a distant time at the wrong end of the telescope.

Even prices in a certain basket of goods and services that are centennial old, are compared to today’s CPIs to drop one’s jaw and create an alarming distress among the worrying segment of the population – our propensity to spend “beyond our means” is going out of control and we are navigating our future down the road to perdition!

We need to be disciplined, no doubt about that … to be frugal and parsimonious in the way we live our Starwar lives. But we must not also be extravagant in exposing that which we hardly know. It is obviously ludicrous if not appalling for limelight-huggers to mislead the public how bad we Americans had become – a conclusion which when compared to grandma’s gritting teeth is definitely neither normal nor true!

Those I.O.Us. are the material and social capital cost of what the United States of America had become to this day – the approximate worth of this wealthiest, mightiest and greatest nation ever seen on the planet at any given time.

In monetary measurement, the United States of America is now worth $63 trillion of consumer “investable” assets and/or total assets alone. Total wealth in the United States is published by the Federal Reserve in a report titled, Flow of Funds.[81] At the end of fiscal year 2007, total wealth of all U.S. households and non-profit organizations was $57.718 trillion.

This neither includes intangibles and limitless potential callable capital resources that jump out of the book of accounting, nor does it include immeasurable natural endowments that are untapped on the surface and those that lie beneath.

There will be no collapse of the economy that toothless tigers pictured as worse than that of the 1920s. This gigantic U.S. economy is “unsinkable”, given what we have already gone through.

This preposterous claim that the national economy will go under may be categorized as a fantasy, a science fiction that if it persists to grind in the rumor mill may be filmed and nominated for this year's Academy Award! #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment at ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

Federal Reserve And The National Debt: Caretakers Of Doom Bury Them In The Graveyard Of Cynicism

When the Fed and the national debt are pictured as a terrifying bogeyman, the kids among us are so fearful they tend to wet their chinos and security blankets. But it is not really what one may think it is.

There is this accusation that the Federal Reserve “abuses” its power to print money. The use of the term “abuse” may be delusional. That the Fed’s purpose of printing “fiat” money is to satiate greed for self-enrichment, instead of say, bailing out the economy in trouble, may just be an imaginary conclusion that torments a disquieted mind.

I understand the anguish behind all these, and the need to share the light so that those in the dark could see has indeed become more compelling.

Printing a “fiat” money is not always objectionable as it may appear to the uninitiated. In the past, our cash-strapped revolutionary colonies would not have won the revolution had they not printed paper money with hardly any equivalent gold or silver reserves to back it up. This was done to facilitate trade and enhance commerce as well as to finance and continue the struggle for independence against the Crown of England. In short, it is “fiat money” that brought us to where we are now.

The hard-pressed colonies then did what the Bank of England did, like what today’s Federal Reserve had done and still doing. The Fed is just exercising the power that the American people had delegated to it through Congress … it is the people’s power to print paper money to spend for development and to revive the economy from a devastating financial crunch and economic meltdown created by conspiracies of events, unlikable virtues such as selfishness and greed and/or similar human weaknesses, if not so designed by intervening natural causes.

That power of the people to print their own money which was delegated to and exercised by the Fed is what made this nation the greatest on the planet!

Is the delegation of such power unconstitutional? It is not and has never been and will never be. People who think it is, tells a funny joke that even the ignorant are deprived of the opportunity to laugh at because the insinuation angered them. The best proof that this doubt is foolish as Don Quixote, Literature’s public clown, is that the Fed is still around since its creation in 1913, and it is here to stay.

Since the printing of money represents debt of the national treasury, “government borrowing” in this sense is not like Medusa's head that turns everyone to stone!

In this regard, for becoming too judgmental, only those who make rush conclusions with undefined intentions if not total ignorance, bang their head and break their neck when they jump into an empty swimming pool without looking.

Is there a downside to this exercise of delegated power to print more of our national currency like what the colonies did of their “colonial script” – “to borrow” to finance our wars for freedom and liberty far across the ocean and historically reaching the four corners of the globe, to build our biggest airports in the world and to construct our modern air travel infrastructure, to put up our great railways and expand our incomparable highways linking all states in the country, to erect our tallest skyscrapers and create our multibillion-dollar institutional infrastructures, and now to keep our beleaguered economy from tilting over the edge, etc. … in short for the good of the commonweal and to see to it how this nation would look like today – is there really something here we have left to be desired or something that botched us off to a permanent ruin? This is what cynics think of the Fed and our national debt which in their aching mind threatens our future.

Let’s start from what “they” think of the Fed. Of course there is always a downside to this delegated power to print our monetary medium of exchange to the Fed … a part of the over-all material and social capital costs of all what we have today. Every exercise of such power has a negative aspect, a snag if you may.

The delegated power to print/mint money emanates from one of the major responsibilities of the Fed to regulate the supply of currency and coins in order to run a stable economy. Too much of it would blow up the economy, too little of it would ground the economy. Either way, it is 9/11 the Fed guards against, just like how we look over our shoulders to spot an economic saboteur about to blow up our economy to kingdom come! It is not what the Fed would do out of vanity for “bankers” to get rich as ill-willed cynics would want the public to believe.

The Fed also administers relief to unavoidable economic foul-ups. The organization is run by less than perfect human beings. For instance, take judicial notice of the fact that corruption thrives in honesty, just as in corruption there can be also an exceptional honesty. But the system’s check and balance structure make the function of the Fed almost ideally perfect for all intents and purposes. So that operationally, it is more real than just apparent that there is nothing left to be desired when the Fed is viewed in its rightful place.

Any curious but neutral monetary specialist that studied the U.S. Federal Reserve from the academe who have no ax to grind would admit and say the way I do without any second thought. Count out politicians and followers whose delusional economics is based on hugging the limelight for political expediency. We are all in for a public debate over the importance or irrelevance of the U.S. Federal Reserve to our national economy, but not to encourage a public lie against it to foment a revolution so that a precipitous politician can rise from the ashes.

Notice carefully that the complaint of the people at the edge of their wit is louder in the outback. When the economy is sick, the remedial pill the Fed prescribes is always bitter to swallow they would rather be sick than take it. But let's live in the real world, not in the world of the Wizard of Oz.

First, too much printing of money is too much if it is indeed too much and that is when it is beyond what is necessary. But who has the expertise to decide when is it too much, or what is the right amount that is needed? Don’t say it is the complaining taxi driver and the angry gravedigger who incited to join a mass protest suddenly turned themselves into monetary experts and believed that indeed they are! It is this nation – the people themselves who thought it was the Fed that has that expertise when they collectively said so through the act of Congress … and to no one else.

Second, now what is the Fed? Is the Fed not the bankers AND the government? It is the people’s government acting through the President they elect, and Congress representing them – these are the structural components of this entity called the “Federal Reserve of the United States”.

Third, who makes the policy? It is the people themselves through Congress and the President they elected to office. By law this function goes to the Federal Open Market Committee of the Fed that directs the nation's monetary policy. Only those with insuperable doubts and precipitous intentions would say that it is the banker-party-component alone that decides to print money to satisfy their greed for wealth.

It is “they” – the people [the Fed, the Executive branch of government & Congress, not just the banker component] who decide to print the amount of money that is critically needed, acting through the Fed’s Board of Governors, thus the Fed performs a “governmental function”, not a “private” function as erroneously perceived. But the fired-up/misled angry gravediggers would want the public to believe that bankers conspire in private and decide on their own how to get filthy rich by printing a lot of useless money and lend it to brainless pigeons from whom they pirate a truckload of revenue in the form of interests! That perception of reality about the Fed is Alice in Wonderland!

In this metaphorical portrayal, the readers can see clearly that the gravediggers are cited merely as an example to represent our society’s economically disadvantaged. The sympathy to hear their grievance and to act accordingly to save them from their misery – real or imagined -- has a stronger appeal than the lie that they wittingly or unwittingly were made to believe, which in turn made them active advocates against the Fed.

At a certain point, they were even convinced that the Fed is a private institution run by “thieves”! That’s how distant the lie drew them out of reality.

Fourth, because these printed monies are “borrowing”, the quantified debt owed is definitely mind-boggling. Why? It is because the national debt owed has been translated to a staggering amount of wealth that made this nation the greatest, the wealthiest and the mightiest on the planet!

Fifth, the cynics would do a mathematical calculation to present a scenario of doom, i.e., generations to come have no future; they would be the ones to pay that mind-blowing size of existing I.O.Us which as of today reaches more than $10 trillion. It sounds serious, but this is just more apparent than real … such burden of payment will never occur. It will just remain in its nominal infamy – a “burden”.

Again notice carefully that you and I were the future generations of the debt-fear-mongers about a century ago who opposed the building of America to what it is today because in doing so it required an enormous budget available revenues could ill-afford. The alternative to budgetary shortfalls was a massive financial program of “borrowing” that could only be paid by future generations … today that’s you and me …!!

Again back to the giant projects of constructing national highways and freeways that connected America from coasts-to-coasts which resulted in fantastic economic growth never imagined before, that were supposed to “burden” this present generation when viewed from that distant past.

Did your life and mine become worse today than it was many decades ago because it was supposed to have been “burdened” by “debts” [the “borrowed” cost of development]? Compare yourself to those who lived life in the past riding on horseback because our present transportation infrastructure then was just a figment of the imagination. Did this so-called “burden” turn us into fish on dry land as cynics would want us to believe?

Or on the contrary, did life not even become better now than it was before? We must be realistic to admit that cynics could be deadly wrong as their ancestors have been in such a grave error when they propagated the “truth” out of a lie that the world was flat. #

The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment at ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg

The Light To Share

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Immigration Bullyrag

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Part III. Economic Recovery By Hanging

II. War Criminals To Hang: The Choking Cerries

Part I. War Criminals To Hang: Those Hunting Them Fry On Their Own Lard

Hanging By Public Acclamation: Are We To Hang All Our Presidents?

War Criminals: 373 Plus U.S. Presidents Still Alive Bush And Obama Himself Are To Hang

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Written Editorials Are Opinions – Suggestion To Differentiate Is Ridiculous … Ill-Advised

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Healthcare: Obama Must Stop Talkathon Go To Work And Save Dying Patients

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Shall We Hang Our Presidents For “War Crimes” -- Real Or Imagined?

Let Us Welcome New Year 2009 By Sharing Light Of Knowledge With Those In The Dark

II. Federal Reserve And I.O.Us.: Let’s Not Be Extravagant In Exposing What We Hardly Know

Federal Reserve And The National Debt: Caretakers Of Doom Bury Them In The Graveyard Of Cynicism

Followers

About Me

Blog Archive