Category Archives: Politics

The International Criminal Court – Fact of Fiction

The International Criminal Court – Fact of Fiction

Currently, Palestine has before the International Criminal Court, a complaint filed on behalf of the Palestinian people, against the State of Israel for war crimes committed during last years war on the people of Gaza. Having been an eye-witness to this war remotely through distributed real-time streaming video cameras throughout the conflict zone I strongly feel it is justified.

The question here is not about Palestine, or Israel, or the definition of war crimes, it goes more to the credibility of the International Court, to bring about meaningful justice to those found guilty. Israel is not a member of the ICC, nor is the United States, who by all rights and purposes, is as well complicit in these crimes, as they willfully supported the war with weapons, support and financial aid. Other nations may also be at risk complicity, for doing the same, who may or may not be a signatory member of the Rome Statute that created the ICC.

This of course brings to bear the question of outside pressure being born to the ICC to facilitate stifling whatever agenda, outside of International law, demands. Including subversive tactics to prevent the legal wheel from turning. This then becomes the focal point of this concern. How can we insure the ICC is a viable and credible source to seek justice on the International stage. How do we prevent any outside interference from non-member states from influencing the Court?

The picture shown is of the UN school in Gaza being bombed by Israel with white phosphor weapons. The effect was devastating and killed many innocents sheltered within from the war. There is no question the rule of law was broken. How to enforce same is problematic. This becomes a serious question as to what exactly the ICC can do when non-member states refuse any legal action by the ICC. Without an enforcement unit to see that justice is carried out regardless, it then begs the question as to it’s viability as a world court.

Pressure on the United Nations to address this issue falls into the same situation with the veto power of non-member states and their proxies sitting on the UN Security Council. Again we encounter the credibility of the UN to prevent further crimes against a member state who is engaged in internationally recognized criminal activity. This is an enormous failure on the world body to prevent unjustified humanitarian grief for which it was originally charted to do when formed.

If the UN and the ICC are to remain legitimate entities to solve world issues by the rule of law, things must change drastically. or what’s the point. There would be absolutely no recourse but war. A war no one wants, and could be prevented from, if the UN and ICC were capable of performing their chartered duties uninfected by negative agendas. If the actors are not held accountable for their actions before a court of law the recourse is war or capitulation, and neither of those is acceptable in the 21st century.


Religion vs. State – Why?


There is a case before SCOTUS that is of considerable interest to the tired claim of State separation from religion. This particular case focuses on opening prayers at Government institutions. Atheists and Jews are against it as it is a violation of First Amendment Rights. Thirty years ago SCOTUS had a similar case and pretty much closed the door on the argument as being not founded in the 1st and rather has been the country’s policy for over 200 years, and they saw no reason to over rule the practice.


The atheists argue that it impedes their freedom of not being subjected to a ritual they wish no part of. The Jews argue because it is a Christian prayer through Christ that they are forced to bow and pray to someone they wish not to and do not like being told what to do by a Christian Minister (stand and bow their head). Both arguments are senseless because the counter argument is simple. Don’t like it, tough. Minority does not dictate to the majority in this country. Never will. Special disposition for minority opinions has always been accepted and certain conveyances have been put in place to appease. That is what freedom is all about. Hear all, but the majority rules the day.


The Atheist argument becomes invalid for any number of reasons, the first and foremost is what harm does it do? It does no harm but does start the proceeding on a high note of morality, purpose, truth and fellowship. Atheists evidently find that sort of thing repulsive. So did Satan. Another point is it ignores the fact that atheism is in of itself a religion. A religion of no God exists, is a belief system, in as much as being Christian, is a belief system of a God that does exist. Someone should explain that to the atheists sometime so that they get it right. The other strong point and probably the most important is that the USA is a Christian nation and the majority of the population by an overwhelming margin are Christian believers. what that says in my book of rules.. go find another country if you don’t like the way this one prays as you have no standing in the majority. The one filing this case claims she is embarrassed because all stand, she doesn’t and sticks out like a sore thumb. Evidently she has more mouth than substance as a believer of her faith, a serious problem with convictions of her non-believer status.


The Jewish argument is also ambiguous as her claim of exclusion is invalid. Rabbis are asked to participate, they tend to not choose to do so. Clergy that do, tend to keep the prayers very non denominational and generic to God, who is recognized by all faiths. Why a Jew finds that repugnant is way beyond my understanding of being faithful to God and not just a particular practice. If you can’t pray to a God that you believe in what does that make you? In my book of rules .. faithless and a heretic to Old Testament teachings and commandments.


I am an Interfaith Minister in that my belief system is founded on one principle. Service to God/Allah/Jehovah/ and the other 25 or 30 names God goes by. I also teach the wisdom of Christ and all of the Prophets including Mohammad (PBUH) and Moses. These are Holy Men from times long ago who spoke only goodness and taught the ways of leading ones life on the path of righteousness. What ill will towards humanity is this? None. So why not teach it all? Exclusion is ignorance. Exclusion is intolerance, and quite frankly agenda driven foolishness I will not allow in my Church.


The case can be made that religion is the cause for wars and divisions within humanity and therefore has no place in the political machine through influence. I would agree to that if this was 2000 years ago and democracy was non-existent. Back then Popes could influence Kings. Popes called for Crusades and war and wished to control the world through force. For a time they succeeded and sent many of humanity to an early grave, all in the name of God. The problem then was not of religion, but of church corruption. Because a man wears the cloth of sanctity does not mean he is sanctified. Actions of the man speak of his sanctity not his clothes. I should point out that wars in modern times were not started by religion. World War 1 was started by an atheist. World War 2 was started by another atheist. The Korean War was started by Communists who are anything but believers in God and Vietnam were started also by Communists and agenda driven mad men. The Iraq war was started by another mad man who forsakes his Muslim religion and desired conquest for profit not religion. Sectarian violence or “the cleansing of Islam” is attributed to agenda driven mad men that totally ignore the religion they claim to be leaders of. Other lesser conflicts in this world are not caused by religion but are supposedly fought in the name of God to rid the planet of the infidels by men that denounce God by their very actions. That is not very hard to see or understand, that this in of itself bespeaks of faith corruption by man and not God or the Prophets teachings on righteousness. The mess in Israel and Palestine continues as a conflict of corruption by man of God’s will. We as a race of beings will never advance our goals if we continue to allow the despots within humanity to invoke corruption of the teachings of God, in the name of God, and are not exposed and denounced by the leaders of all the faiths.


Presidents are sworn into office with their hand on the Bible. The reason this is done is simple. It humbles the man or woman taking the oath. He or she is made aware by this action that there is one far more powerful and that the oath they take is under the watchful eyes of God who wishes you to lead through righteousness and truth. How is this a bad thing I ask? I can make the argument that reminding a guy or gal with a nuclear trigger in their hand that One with a snap of His finger can destroy all of humanity in a brief moment, and your nuclear toys are nothing compared to His wrath. It is not a matter of religion this takes place, this is a matter of humanities propensity to get to big for its britches which is not a good thing and has consequences. Real or perceived matters not. The matter is left to the individual to cause reflection on purpose. Not a bad idea in my book as humans have a tendency to easily forget it’s purpose for momentary glory not eternal glory.


Religion has been taken out of schools and the courts. Through legal actions. Morality cannot be taught in school systems, but we are allowed to teach them about non marital sex and how to avoid sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. Genius no? No. It is OK to teach immorality, but not morality. This advances humanity how? This makes sense in what manner I ask? Look at the pregnancy rate by children and tell me that message of immorality taught in schools is a good thing. Yes. Teach them about sex and abstinence but also teach them morality and leading ones life the proper way. How is this not a good thing I ask? Should prayer be allowed in public schools? I think not. I think the concepts of religion, the teachings of religion, and its history should be however. Prayer should be left to the individual and not dictated to the mass’ assembled in a learning environment. Save the prayers for the faithful in a church surrounding, not in an educational institution. To not teach religious history is to ignore the richness of the human history on this planet. How does this benefit those that seek to become educated in man’s existence? Like it or not, religion is and always has been, entwined with human history since the beginning of the written word. To ignore, denounce or prevent its teaching in schools is not to me a benefit to those that seek education. To me it is a failure to educate. To what means does the end result? Intolerance and ignorance of a history rich in the cultural foundations of belief and morality of human kind. This serves Satan and not humanity. It fails in that the ignorances of cultures and the tolerances of others are not taught to the young who are left to interpret others without a foundation of knowledge to support an opinion that could be very prejudicial to all. Who in their right mind could possibly think for a moment that this benefits humanity. I certainly can’t.


In the court system taking an oath to speak the truth was seriously compromised when swearing before God became a defacto no. I ask one simple question. Taking away the possibility of eternal damnation to a place one does not wish to go for lying before God was removed as the impetus for making one speak truth. This benefits who? The liar. This is a good thing? I fail to see how. The liar prevails under the guise of political protection and therefore has no motivational reason to speak the truth. Therefore, the court of absolute truth becomes a mockery to support agenda driven individuals desires to codify evil. Relying on one’s honor to be the impetus is ludicrous as an honorable man or woman would not be in a situation where they must be sworn to tell the truth. It is the dishonorable that are on trial and therefore suffer not for lying. How did humanity fall into such a ridiculous abyss I ask?


Before the Supreme Court is a case that has a far-reaching impact towards tolerance and acceptance of the 1st Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion and acceptance of public prayer during assembly in this country. Liberalization is a word with the root of liberty as the basis. Does this mean minority factions will prevail over the majority desires? Does this mean to appease the few we will ignore the many? Does this mean a simple act of prayer which could very well be ignored by the dissenters needs to be put into law as an intolerable act? What will we become if we legislate intolerance as an acceptable standard in the land? Will we also legislate intolerance to those that are over weight? Wearing perfumes in restaurants that destroy the senses of smell and taste through powerful odors? Where does intolerance stop? This case has no merit because no one holds a gun to ones head to pray in this country. No one. If you have the conviction of a non religious life then so be it, don’t pray, you’re not required to do so. You have the alternative to not participate as it is your right to not do so. But those of us that do also have the right that it should be allowed and accepted by law. In this case it is a personal desire to not stand out in the crowd like a baboon at a gathering of cats. That is a personal lack of commitment to ones convictions and should not be put upon the mass’ who are not baboons. The Supreme Court should toss this thing back into the bin of irrelevance and agenda driven lunacy and make it plainly clear that starting a political meeting with an uplifting and morally based message is a good thing and not some evil subversive speech to control the proceedings or anyone at one.


I am reminded of a personal moment of this separation question at one of our local parks. I had a small gathering of homeless folks sitting around me listening to some of my teachings on Bible history and the foundations of belief. I had a Bible on my lap and was reading to them some scripture to emphasize a point on why we should help one another in our great time of need. Not a bad idea considering the many struggles homeless folks face daily. I was interrupted by the park police. Told that we couldn’t do this sort of thing in a public park, and we were breaking the law and needed to move along. Yeah, that was not a very smart thing to say to an American who understands the law and fought in foreign lands to protect the Constitution of the United States with his life. I pointed out to the officer that we are the public and we the public are exercising our legal and Constitutional right to assemble and be free to discuss religion on property obtained with our tax dollars which therefore by rights makes US the land owner and not the government legislature which has erred in passing a really bad law that he is trying to enforce on publicly owned land. I also pointed out to him that a city class action lawsuit involving a civil rights issue as well as a Constitutional guarantee violation by some 15 million of the faithful would collapse the city wallet to oblivion and he could quite possibly be looking for work in some other city capable of paying his salary if he wanted to pursue the matter. Eyes went dim, uncertainty of position and perhaps a revelation of not pressing the issue with someone wearing a collar prevailed, and he simply walked away. A minor victory. I wish to test this law however and see it expunged from the books as it is bad law. That day will come, and we will prevail. Amen



Whose War – Syria’s or Obama’s


= Free Syrian Army Fighters =

War with Syria in my view is an exercise in failure. An announced “punishment” of a few days of cruise missile and Tomahawk strikes without an agenda of regime change smacks of “no one likes what you did, but your going to get away with it regardless” approach to doing something no one else cares to do. No one wants to foot the bill, and it appears all the rhetoric is just that .. rhetoric. So send Assad an email Mr. President it’s about as effective and costs me JoeTaxPayer nothing. I would appreciate that.

Retired military guys are saying the US should at least balance the playing field and destroy Assad’s ability to wage war from the skies. Wipe out his planes, tanks and helicopters, deny the use of airports and landing strips and you might help the opposition reach their goal. Good idea, shows a decisive reaction, not a knee jerk slap in the head. Announcing to the world you are a man of substance and commitment to the idea that treaties and accords made by the world indeed have a meaning. Follow them or get your butt blown up. But alas, that takes strong leadership and will. Unfortunately,the President is not of the same caliber as John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan. Not even close.

The situation in Syria is extreme. The desire is strong to help the opposition get rid of a despot, help the opposition in some way that benefits that goal. Unfortunately,the opposition get’s redefined on a daily basis due to the influx of jihadists and renegade outlaws hell bent on destabilizing the ME theater. The UK, our strongest ally has decided not to do anything. France has decided to do something, just not sure what. I suggest they go home and make croissants. So Obama is faced with a “go it alone” decision facing a country that doesn’t agree we should do that. We are tired of war. We are tired of putting out these little fires of despotism to the point of exasperation. Does the world really want America to be exasperated? Is that the goal of the crazies with guns killing all in the name of God?

Try this on for size. Obama has nothing to lose. Obama is going down in history as one of the worse leaders this nation has ever had. Nice enough guy but should have stayed a Congressman. Just not the right stuff for a world on fire with extremism. Sorry Mr. President you got the job based on your skin, not on your talents for leadership in this turmoil filled world. That folks is the danger. He has nothing to lose. He has all to gain by a decisive show of strength, commitment and purpose. He can make a final statement about his presidential leadership to history by destroying Assad’s ability to wage war on his own people. Unfortunately, he blew the chance. He pulled the old tired wannabe tough guy act and announced he was going to kick butt and take notes routine. Yallah Mr. President, yeah yeah .. heard that before .. on the playground. Forget about it.

My thoughts on Syria, unless things change radically, are the US does nothing. Eventually Assad will regain his rule over the people and the jihadists will go home to wherever in Hell the cave they came from is. They lose the purpose of being there. So they will leave. The beards of course will smile and clap at defeating the world giant once again. Yay. Go team. They are idiots and will die out because they have no basics for survival. So they take over a country. This is the end game I assume. Then what? No one is going to deal with them. The world operates on trade, No one is going to sell you anything in support of your existence. That’s the reality of their goal.

So what then should Obama do? Difficult question considering the circumstances. What I would do is retract my forces to the outskirts of the war zones and sit. Tell the world there are only 2 things the US will involve itself in. The Straights and the Suez. Mess with either, you get destroyed. Doesn’t matter who or where you come from. Mess with the stability of the world, you die and so does everyone else in the place you come from. This puts on notice countries that allow and provide safe harbor for these criminals with guns, the price one will pay for it is high. Yes, that is an extreme position to take. When dealing with extremists, extreme actions are necessary as they do not understand diplomacy or the rules of society at large. They wish to die in the name of God. I know of no God that would accept them into Heaven. So they get sent to Hell.

The President is in a mess, not of his own making. Really feel sorry for the guy actually. He got handed 2 wars the day he took office and a world full of crazy bastards hell bent on dying for God. How does one deal with such an impossible situation where your damned if you do and your damned if you don’t? What does one do when backed into a corner? That’s the position the US is in now. So if you all pushing for US intervention in Syria, instead of lip flapping the anti-American rhetoric continually, come up with a solution on how to deal with this disaster I will forward any legit idea to the President. He needs help, so help, not hinder. Those that oppose US intervention, great, send along the suggestion on how you will deal with Assad the next time he uses gas on his people. He will you know. Oh and hey, if anyone doubts he did still .. maybe you want to think about how the US knows exactly what army unit did the firing. One should not wear unit insignia clearly visible from the sky to the worlds most powerful camera when one commits an atrocity.

Now the Russians are in, and the UN is meeting on what to do next. Yay, it’s like watching paint dry. Sooner or later it will. Sooner or later the UN will declare something and Russia will denounce it as US political maneuvering. The war and struggle will continue while everyone looks on hopelessly once again. In the meantime Russia got to kick Obama around the G20, made him look weak and silly. This is more important to Russia then it is to the Syrian dead. Something they tend to over look on grounds of political gain.

Stay tuned, this fiasco is warming up to a complete stalemate or as I like to phrase a Mexican Standoff. Everybody loses but Putin .. what a guy.

1 Comment

Posted by on September 27, 2013 in Opinion, Politics, War


Palestine, Israel, Gingrich

Wow. Now there is a trio of words that could create volumes of conversations, and, quite possibly, a war. Where to begin? Let’s start with Newt. Past couple of days for Newt have not been all that great, regardless of his marketing guys. Newt spoke out about the Palestinian people. According to Newt these are made up people. Palestine never existed according to Newt until the Ottoman Empire made it so. Man’s a genius no? Unfortunately .. no. His history teacher failed him and so did his school system and I guess he’s never been near a Bible, Tora, Quron in his life. Or. He’s one ignorant son of a bitch. I’ll just let you decide on that one.


One of the pleasures I have had over the past 30-35 years is studying the history of the Middle East and it’s tumultuous past. Since the beginning times of the Palestinian history somewhere around 4000-3300BC (Hey Newt, that’s 4000 years before Christ so pay attention.) Somewhere around the 3300-1000 BC timeline the Canaanites came to rule. Not a good time for the Palestinian people since they were now ruled by a foreign state (Egypt to you there Newt). A whole bunch of folks came to visit the area for quite some time until the Romans came to town. Being swallowed up by the Roman Empire was never a good deal and both the Palestinian and Jew suffered greatly under Roman rule. Both peoples rose up in arms and regained their land, together and it became known as Syria Palaestina. Emperor Haydrian at this point decided that there should be a separation between the Jewish rebels and the area.
Now we come to the good bits of history that have confounded my logical thought process regarding Israel and Palestine.

Around 1000 – 732 BC referred to as the Israelite Period the land regained from the Canaanites through wars fought by Israelite and Palestinian peoples (with a little help from God I’m told) became The Kingdom of Israel. In 928BC the Kingdom was split in two with the Northern half Israel and the Southern half Judah. Both halves being inhabited by the same peoples. History marches on in the area, rulers change, wars are fought and it appears at this point, this sea bed of conflict over thousands of years will never settle into peace.

In 539 – 332 BC (Hey Newt – Persian Empire not Ottoman) the first use of the word describing the area is called Eber-Nari / Palestina Region. One could speculate that Palestina did not contain any Palestinians. Not to be negative but that person would have to be an alumni of The Idiots and Dimwits College.

In comes a time of rebuilding, 324 – 638 brought The Byzantine period to the area now named Palaestina I and II. Christianity become predominant and in Bethlehem and Jerusalem, temples were erected as the foundation of Christian belief. Well done for all the peoples in the area, both Palestinian and Jew. That is until 638 – 1099 and the Islamic Empire invasion once again threw the area into turmoil. I should point out to the followers of Newt that this is the exact point in history where the relationship between the Arab world and the Christian world began to degrade. This is the point in my departure from the historical record bits to grasp the current modern day arguments between Palestine and Israel which are so claimed to be founded in history. Not seeing that here in my years of research.

This then becomes a problematic but fully understandable conflict between these two ancient peoples that have been warring through their entire existence. Not between themselves, but to the outsiders of the region. Together they fought side by side against the worlds invaders and together they shed their blood for their land. This blood bond seems to have been forgotten. It should not be. It is the most sacred of all bonds between peoples. It should not be subject to question and it should never become a wedge driven by religious belief.

Where this all goes wrong is in the semantics of the languages used to describe the conflict. First off let’s be clear that there has never been in the history of Palestine a Palestinian State. It has always been known as an “area”. Israel until the UN said so in 1947 was never a State. It, until that time was always termed a “kingdom” at least by any work of note. The root of this whole issue is simple. It is the same root that corrupted Christianity, Judaism and Islam. It is the very same root that is now corrupting all the peoples and religions of the world at this very moment. I call it “I’m in charge and your not” syndrome.

You heard me right. Everybody wants to be in charge and they will do anything they can to stay in charge. Unfortunately this is what is holding up the Palestinian State and the reluctance of NATO to recognize the Palestinian people as autonomous and capable of running their own show. Israel is not in charge of such a thing and I do not believe the Jewish people are against a Palestinian state. It’s the governments that seem unwilling to give up the “being in charge” bits. It’s also radicalism within factions touting the “we were here first” nonsense. Guess what .. all involved parties showed up on the scene at the same time, no one was first as far as history is concerned.

This then comes down to solving the problem so that Israel and Palestine can go about there own business and get along with each other again, like in the old days, when you both died on the battlefields side by side to drive out foreign invaders. There is only one way I can see to do this. Eliminate all the people that want to be in charge from the equation. No Hamas, no PLO/PLF, no Kismet, no Congress, no Islamic extremists and especially no clowns like Newt need to get involved here. This matter is not all that complicated, it just needs to be logically considered and acted upon by NATO with the very same type of declaration as they made to establish the State of Israel. There cannot be any other resolution to this matter because the bickering parties are not willing to change positions.

Palestine needs to become a State. The people of Palestine and Palestinian history deserve it and it is required by the great texts of both peoples involved in this conflict. If we are to ignore the teachings of Mohammed, Jesus, Paul, John and the rest of the great prophets of humanity, then we fail ourselves. We fail together and we fail to achieve that is what is most important to Allah and God. Peace, goodwill and love for our brothers, neighbors and enemies. This is a much higher goal, making Palestine a free and open state is but a small step for us to achieve, failure at this level is not an option, failure at this level paints a black picture for the future of humanity. Failure at this level will only prove humanity is in very deep trouble and is ignoring it’s very foundation of existence.


S968- Blacklist Bill or Protect IP Act 2011

in its entirety –

This bill, which has been floundering around the halls of Congress since last May is on the Senate floor after being ripped apart and added to in the Judiciary committee. The original bill was intended to stop the commercial fraud artists on the net from doing business in the US. Mr. Leahy had good intentions to protect the consumers in the US unfortunately what came out of the Committee on the Judiciary was 3 times larger with a good deal of nonsense involved.

H.R. 3261 – Is the House bill of similar content as the Senate bill with the added caveat that legal proceedings get tossed out the window. It in its entirety, is something that will not get through the first vote.

How do I know this one may ask. Well the simple fact of the matter is the 1% are against it, and, the Senate version. Both bills are doomed because of excess. Not to mention the public outcry against both bills. Mr. Obama who is gung-ho for a free and open Internet would look like an idiot if he signed such a thing considering his recent speech on countries suppressing the Internet. But, he plays golf while the country burns down .. anything is possible with that guy.

It is obvious that the Internet folks are hand wringing over the whole thing judging from the amount of text floating around on the sea. I fail to see why the panic. But then again, I know things you don’t .. heh.

We see already the push back to a government request to Firefox to eliminate the MafiaAFire Re-Director. Firefox pretty much said “Stuff it” Go figure open source guys .. gotta love em. Any suppression of open source programming by anyone get’s these guys riled up. A riled up programmer is what we want. They tend to get quite creative when that happens. Something the government seriously overlooks.

The focus in both bills is in the controlling of name servers. Cute little servers that translate your to it’s real IP. Pesky little devils if not nuclear hardened to ISP’s. The thing about DNS servers is they are easily fooled. Which makes the whole exercise in control of them uninspired. So you kill, 10 minutes later comes to life or one of its many mirror sites, if your clever enough. I know of one site that has been shut down probably 300 times since I have been aware of it. Usually it is only down for the time it takes to re-propagate the dns servers.

Currently in the open-source world of things a new technology other than DNS is under development. It has a lot of promise and I expect a finalization of the technology scheme in the coming months. Neither bill can prevent this from happening as such a scheme is the next generation of server protocols for the Internet. That cannot be legislated as it would break many laws already in effect that promotes Internet growth and development.

The other big obstacle facing this trash to be put into law is in the policing duties. That is being thrown onto the ISP’s shoulders. That costs money. The 1% that own such things will not want the bottom line disrupted. Hence .. more lawsuits impending.

To sum all this mess up and try to alleviate the hand wringing going on, Pirate Bay will not be shuttered nor will Firefox fold under pressure. These things are not law .. yet. If they do become law the courts will have it tied up for quite sometime.

In the event this trash does becomes an implemented law rest assured, the underground of the Internet will counter it in some manner. The Internet will always be open and free, even to the morons selling phony shit to unsuspecting idiots. It is up to all of us to police the net from such websites. We don’t need a law to do it and we don’t need an ISP to interfere with our choices of where we want to go on the net either.

You get ripped off by a website selling phony crap or drugs (very big these days) then you didn’t learn your Internet lessons from us. Never buy anything you cannot touch and feel from an untrusted website. Do the homework on the site. If they ripping folks off, someone will have a blog about it. If all else fails .. we are on Twitter. Tell us. We don’t play with silly DNS servers.

We are the Ships Captains. We run silent and deep. Respect us or expect us.



Vatican calls for global authority on economy, raps “idolatry of the market”

The Vatican called on Monday for the establishment of a “global public authority” and a “central world bank” to rule over financial institutions that have become outdated and often ineffective in dealing fairly with crises. The document from the Vatican’s Justice and Peace department should please the “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrators and similar movements around the world who have protested against the economic downturn.

“Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of a Global Public Authority,” was at times very specific, calling, for example, for taxation measures on financial transactions. “The economic and financial crisis which the world is going through calls everyone, individuals and people’s, to examine in-depth the principles and the cultural and moral values at the basis of social coexistence,” it said.



Editors Notes:

I’m thinking the last folks I want handling my money is folks that continually deny truth, manipulate law and basically are morally corrupt. Might as well give your money to Satan.



Tags: , ,