Showing posts with label England. Show all posts
Showing posts with label England. Show all posts

Friday, May 20, 2016

ITS ONLY A SHOTGUN!

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door.
Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. 
At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way.
With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun.
You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.
In the darkness, you make out two shadows.
One holds something that looks like a crowbar.
When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire.
The blast knocks both thugs to the floor.
One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.
 As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble
In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless.
Yours was never registered.
Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died.
They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.
When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.
"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.
"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing.
"Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."
  The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. 
Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them.
Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times.
But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."
The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters.
 As the days wear on, the story takes wings.
The national media picks it up, then the international media.
The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.
Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.
 e media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past andThat you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects.
After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time.
The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.
  A few months later, you go to trial.
The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted.
When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you.
Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.
It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.
The judge sentences you to life in prison.
 This case really happened.
 On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second.
 In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term.
How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire?
It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.
This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license.
  The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms exceptShotguns. 
 Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns. 
 Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerfordmass shooting in 1987.Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.
The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions.
(The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.) 
 Nine years later, at Dunblane, Scotland, Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.
For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable, or worse, criminals.
 Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. 
Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few side arms still owned by private citizens. 
 During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun.  
Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.
Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."
All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences.
Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.
When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities.
Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law.
The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.
 Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.
How did the authorities know who had handguns?  The guns had been registered and licensed. Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?
 WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
 "...It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."--Samuel Adams
 If you think this is important, please forward to everyone you know.  
You had better wake up, because Obama is doing this very same thing, over here, if he can get it doneHillary has stated she would take away our 2nd Amendment rights.

 And there are people in Congress that will go right along with them

Friday, April 8, 2016

Plan on voting in the General Election?


Dereliction of Duty

Mar 26, 2016, at 10:r
Worth reading if you plan on voting in the General Election.
Colonel Phil "Hands" Handley is credited with the highest speed air-to-air gun kill in the history of aerial combat. He flew operationally for all but 11 months of a 26-year career, in aircraft such as the F-86 Sabre, F-15 Eagle, and the C-130A Hercules.
Additionally, he flew 275 combat missions during two tours in Southeast Asia in the F- 4D and F-4E. His awards include 21 Air Medals, 3 Distinguished Flying Crosses, and the Silver Star.
Here is what Col. Handley wrote in response to Panetta and Dempsey's claims there was no time to send help to Benghazi .
------------------------------
Betrayal in Benghazi     Phil "Hands" Handley Colonel, USAF (Ret.)
The combat code of the US Military is that we don't abandon our dead or wounded on the battlefield. In US Air Force lingo, fighter pilots don't run off and leave their wingmen. If one of our own is shot down, still alive and not yet in enemy captivity, we will either come to get him or die trying.
Among America’s fighting forces, the calm, sure knowledge that such an irrevocable bond exists is priceless. Along with individual faith and personal grit, it is a sacred trust that has often sustained hope in the face of terribly long odds.
The disgraceful abandonment of our Ambassador and those brave ex-SEALs who fought to their deaths to save others in that compound is nothing short of dereliction-of-duty.
Additionally, the patently absurd cover-up scenario that was fabricated in the aftermath was an outright lie in an attempt to shield the President and the Secretary of State from responsibility.
It has been over three years since the attack on our compound in  Benghazi. The White House strategy, with the aid of a "lap dog" press has been to run out the clock before the truth is forthcoming.
The testimonies of the three "whistle blowers" have reopened the subject and hopefully will lead to exposure and disgrace of those responsible for this embarrassing debacle. It would appear that the most recent firewall which the Administration is counting on is the contention "that there were simply no military assets that could be  brought to bear in time to make a difference" mainly due to the unavailability of tanker support for fighter aircraft.
This is simply BS, regardless how many supposed "experts" the Administration trot out to make such an assertion.
The bottom line is that even if the closest asset capable of response was half-way around the world, you don't just sit on your penguin ass and do nothing.
The fact is that the closest asset was not half-way around the world, but as near as Aviano Air Base , Italy where two squadrons of F-16Cs are based.
Consider the following scenario (all times Benghazi local): When Hicks in Tripoli receives a call at 9:40 PM from Ambassador Stevens informing him “Greg, we are under attack!" (his last words), Hicks immediately notifies all agencies and prepares for the immediate initiation of an existing Emergency Response Plan."
At AFRICON, General Carter Ham attempts to mount a rescue effort, but is told to"stand down". By 10:30 PM an unarmed drone is overhead the compound and streaming live feed to various "Command and Control Agencies" so everyone watching that feed knew damn well what was going on.
At 11:30 PM Doherty and five others leave Tripoli, arriving in Benghazi at 1:30 AM on Wednesday morning, where they hold off the attacking mob from the roof of the compound until they are killed by a direct mortar hit at 4:00 AM.
So nothing could have been done, eh? Nonsense. If one assumes that tanker support really "was not available" what about this: When at 10:00 PMAFRICON alerts the 31st TFW Command Post in Aviano Air Base, Italy of the attack, the Wing Commander orders preparation for the launch of two F-16s and advises the Command Post at NAS Sigonella to prepare for hot pit refueling and quick turn of the jets.
By 11:30 PM, two F-16Cs with drop tanks and each armed with five hundred 20 MM rounds are airborne. Flying at 0.92 Mach they will cover the 522 nautical miles directly to NAS Sigonella in 1.08 hours. While in-route, the flight lead is informed of the tactical situation, rules of engagement, and radio frequencies to use.
The jets depart Sigonella at 1:10 AM with full fuel load and cover the 377 nautical miles directly to Benghazi in 0.8 hours, arriving at1:50 AM which would be 20 minutes after the arrival of Woods, Doherty and their team.
Providing that the two F-16s initial pass over the mob, in full afterburner at 200 feet and 550 knots did not stop the attack in its tracks, a few well- placed strafing runs on targets of opportunity would assuredly do the trick.
Were the F-16s fuel state insufficient to return to Sigonelli after jettisoning their external drop tanks, they could easily do so at Tripoli International Airport, only one-half hour away.
As for those hand- wringing naysayers who would worry about IFR clearances, border crossing authority, collateral damage, landing rights, political correctness and dozens of other reasons not to act -- screw them. It is time our "leadership" get its priorities straight and put America's interests first.
The end result would be that Woods and Doherty would be alive. Dozens in the attacking rabble would be rendezvousing with "72 virgins" and a clear message would have been sent to the next worthless POS terrorist contemplating an attack on Americans that it is not really a good idea to "tug" on Superman's cape.
Of course, all this depends upon a Commander In Chief more concerned with saving the lives of those he put in harm's way than getting his crew rested for a campaign fund raising event in Las Vegas the next day. It also depends upon a Secretary of State who actually understood "What difference did it make?", and a Secretary of Defense who was watching the feed from the drone and understood what the attack consisted of instead of making an immediate response that "One of the military tenants is that you don't commit assets until you fully understand the tactical situation."
Ultimately it comes down to the question of who gave that order to stand down? Whoever that coward turns out to be should be exposed, removed from office, and face criminal charges for dereliction of duty. The combat forces of the United States of America deserve leadership that really does "have their back" when the chips are down.
FOR THOSE OF YOU HAVE ACTUALLY TAKEN THE TIME TO READ THIS, DO ONE THING FOR ME AND FORWARD IT!!
TO AVOID THIS HAPPENING AGAIN, WHOEVER GAVE THE "STAND DOWN" ORDER NEEDS TO BE EXPOSED!



Saturday, March 26, 2016

PLAY TIME IS OVER...

Time for the grown-ups to take charge
Most people in the English-speaking parts of the world missed Putin’s speech at the Valdai conference in Sochi a few days ago, and, chances are, those who have heard of the speech didn’t get a chance to read it, and missed its importance.
Western media did their best to ignore it or to twist its meaning. Regardless of what you think or don’t think of Putin (like the sun and the moon, he does not exist for you to cultivate an opinion) this is probably the most important political speech since Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech of March 5, 1946.
In this speech, Putin abruptly changed the rules of the game. Previously, the game of international politics was played as follows: politicians made public pronouncements, for the sake of maintaining a pleasant fiction of national sovereignty, but they were strictly for show and had nothing to do with the substance of international politics; in the meantime, they engaged in secret back-room negotiations, in which the actual deals were hammered out.
Previously, Putin tried to play this game, expecting only that Russia be treated as an equal. But these hopes have been dashed, and at this conference he declared the game to be over, explicitly violating Western taboo by speaking directly to the people over the heads of elite clans and political leaders.
1. Russia will no longer play games and engage in back-room negotiations over trifles. But Russia is prepared for serious conversations and agreements, if these are conducive to collective security, are based on fairness and take into account the interests of each side.
2. All systems of global collective security now lie in ruins. There are no longer any international security guarantees at all. And the entity that destroyed them has a name: The United States of America.
3. The builders of the New World Order have failed, having built a sand castle. Whether or not a new world order of any sort is to be built is not just Russia’s decision, but it is a decision that will not be made without Russia.
4. Russia favors a conservative approach to introducing innovations into the social order, but is not opposed to investigating and discussing such innovations, to see if introducing any of them might be justified.
5. Russia has no intention of going fishing in the murky waters created by America’s ever-expanding “empire of chaos,” and has no interest in building a new empire of her own (this is unnecessary; Russia’s challenges lie in developing her already vast territory). Neither is Russia willing to act as a savior of the world, as she had in the past.
6. Russia will not attempt to reformat the world in her own image, but neither will she allow anyone to reformat her in their image. Russia will not close herself off from the world, but anyone who tries to close her off from the world will be sure to reap a whirlwind.
7. Russia does not wish for the chaos to spread, does not want war, and has no intention of starting one. However, today Russia sees the outbreak of global war as almost inevitable, is prepared for it, and is continuing to prepare for it. Russia does not war—nor does she fear it.
8. Russia does not intend to take an active role in thwarting those who are still attempting to construct their New World Order—until their efforts start to impinge on Russia’s key interests. Russia would prefer to stand by and watch them give themselves as many lumps as their poor heads can take. But those who manage to drag Russia into this process, through disregard for her interestswill be taught the true meaning of pain.
9. In her external, and, even more so, internal politics, Russia’s power will rely not on the elites and their back-room dealing, but on the will of the people.
To these nine points I would like to add a tenth:
10. There is still a chance to construct a new world order that will avoid a world war. This new world order must of necessity include the United States—but can only do so on the same terms as everyone else: subject to international law and international agreements; refraining from all unilateral action; in full respect of the sovereignty of other nations.
To sum it all up: play-time is over. Children, put away your toys. Now is the time for the adults to make decisions. Russia is ready for this; is the world

Friday, February 12, 2016

TOO GOOD NOT TO PASS ON...

Railroad tracks.
 
The U.S. Standard railroad gauge (distance  between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number.
 
Why was that gauge used? Because that's the way they built them in England , and English expatriates designed the U.S. Railroads.
 
Why did the English build them like that? Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used.
 
Why did 'they' use that gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they had used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.
 
Why did the wagons have that particular Odd wheel spacing?
 
Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads in England , because that's the spacing of the wheel ruts.
 
 
So, who built those old rutted roads?
 
Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (including England ) for their legions. Those roads have been used ever since.
 
And the ruts in the roads? Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels.
 
 
Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome , they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing. Therefore, the United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot. In other words, bureaucracies live forever.
 
So the next time you are handed a specification, procedure, or process, and wonder, 'What horse's ass came up with this?' , you may be exactly right.  Imperial Roman army chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the rear ends of two war horses .
 
Now, the twist to the story:
 
When you saw a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, you will notice that there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah.
 
The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit larger, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains and the SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses' behinds.
 
So, a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse's ass.  And you thought being a horse's ass wasn't important!

Now you know, Horses' Asses control almost everything.
 
Explains a whole lot of stuff, doesn't it?

Friday, August 28, 2015

What if they left?


WHAT IF THEY LEFT?
 
 
Considering the Denver Post is a very liberal paper I'm surprised they published this.  This really shows how the hiring of illegals is false economic practice. 
Tina Griego is a Free-Lance reporter for the Denver Post.  She writes some really good stuff and she is a strong advocate for LEGAL immigration Homework on issues is part of her make-up and fabric ...
What if they left?
Somebody really did their homework on this one.  Best on the subject to date.  It does not have a political slant to it, it’s just the facts:  Not Democratic, not Republican, not liberal and not conservative.
What if 20 Million Illegal Aliens Vacated America?
  I, Tina Griego, journalist for the Denver Rocky Mountain News wrote a column titled, "Mexican Visitor's Lament."
  I interviewed Mexican journalist Evangelina Hernandez while visiting Denver last week.  Hernandez said, "Illegal aliens pay rent, buy groceries, buy clothes.  What happens to your country's economy if 20 million people go away?"
Hmmm, I thought, what would happen?
So I did my due diligence, buried my nose as a reporter into the FACTS I found below.
It's a good question... it deserves an honest answer.  Over 80% of Americans demand secured borders and illegal migration stopped.  But what would happen if all 20 million or more vacated America?  The answers I found may surprise you!
In California, if 3.5 million illegal aliens moved back to Mexico, it would leave an extra $10.2 billion to spend on overloaded school systems, bankrupt hospitals and overrun prisons.  It would leave highways cleaner, safer and less congested.  Everyone could understand one another as English became the dominant language again.
In Colorado, 500,000 illegal migrants, plus their 300,000 kids and grandchildren would move back "home," mostly to Mexico. That would save Colorado an estimated $2 billion (other experts say $7 billion) annually in taxes that pay for schooling, medical, social-services and incarceration costs.
It means 12,000 gang members would vanish out of Denver alone.
Colorado would save more than $20 million in prison costs, and the terror that those 7,300 alien criminals set upon local citizens.  Denver Officer Don Young and hundreds of Colorado victims would not have suffered death, accidents, rapes and other crimes by illegals.
Denver Public Schools would not suffer a 67% dropout/flunk rate because of thousands of illegal alien students speaking 41 different languages.  At least200,000 vehicles would vanish from our gridlocked cities in Colorado.  Denver's 4% unemployment rate would vanish as our working poor would gain jobs at a living wage.
In Florida, 1.5 million illegals would return the Sunshine State back to America, the rule of law, and English.
In Chicago, Illinois, 2.1 million illegals would free up hospitals, schools, prisons and highways for  safer, cleaner and more crime-free experience.
If 20 million illegal aliens returned 'home,' the U.S. economy would return to the rule of law.  Employers would hire legal American citizens at a living wage. Everyone would pay their fair share of taxes because they wouldn't be working off the books.  That would result in an additional $401 billion in IRS income taxes collected annually, and an equal amount for local, state and city coffers.
No more push '1' for Spanish or '2' for English.  No more confusion in American schools that now must contend with over 100 languages that degrade the educational system for American kids.  Our overcrowded schools would lose more than two million illegal alien kids at a cost of billions in ESL and free breakfasts and lunches.
We would lose 500,000 illegal criminal alien inmates at a cost of more than $1.6 billion annually.  That includes 15,000 MS-13 gang members who distribute $130 billion in drugs annually would vacate our country.
In cities like L.A., 20,000 members of the ' 18th Street Gang' would vanish from our nation.  No more Mexican forgery gangs for ID theft from Americans! No more foreign rapists and child molesters!
Losing more than 20 million people would clear up our crowded highways and gridlock.  Cleaner air and less drinking and driving American deaths by illegal aliens!
America's economy is drained.  Taxpayers are harmed.  Employers get rich.  Over $80 billion annually wouldn't return to the aliens' home countries by cash transfers.  Illegal migrants earned half that money untaxed, which further drains America's economy which currently suffers a $20 trillion debt.  $20 trillion debt!!!
At least 400,000 anchor babies would not be born in our country, costing us $109 billion per year per cycle.  At least 86 hospitals in California, Georgia and Florida would still be operating instead of being bankrupt out of existence because illegals pay nothing via the EMTOLA Act.
Americans wouldn't suffer thousands of TB and hepatitis cases rampant in our country - brought in by illegals unscreened at our borders.
Our cities would see 20 million less people driving, polluting and grid locking our cities.  It would also put the 'progressives' on the horns of a dilemma; illegal aliens and their families cause 11% of our greenhouse gases.
Over one million of Mexico's poorest citizens now live inside and along our border from Brownsville, Texas, to San Diego, California, in what the New York Times called, 'colonias' or new neighborhoods.  Trouble is, those living areas resemble Bombay and Calcutta where grinding poverty, filth, diseases, drugs, crimes, no sanitation and worse.  They live without sewage, clean water, streets, roads, electricity, or any kind of sanitation.
The New York Times reported them to be America's new ' Third World ' inside our own country.  Within 20 years, at their current growth rate, they expect 20 million residents of those colonias.  (I've seen them personally in Texas and Arizona; it's sickening beyond anything you can imagine.)
By enforcing our laws, we could repatriate them back to Mexico.  We should invite 20 million aliens to go home, fix their own countries and/or make a better life in Mexico.  We already invite a million people into our country legally annually, more than all other countries combined.  We cannot and must not allow anarchy at our borders, more anarchy within our borders and growing lawlessness at every level in our nation.
It's time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life. Interesting Statistics!
Here are 14 reasons illegal aliens should vacate America, and I hope they are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them:
1.  $14 billion to $22 billion dollars are spent each year on welfare to illegal aliens (that's Billion with a 'B')
3.  $7.5 billion dollars are spent each year on Medicaid for illegal aliens. 
4.  $12 billion dollars are spent each year on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they still cannot speak a word of English
5.  $27 billion dollars are spent each year for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
6.  $3 Million Dollars 'PER DAY' is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.  That's $1.2 Billion a year.
7.  28% percent of all federal prison inmates are illegal aliens.
8.  $190 billion dollars are spent each year on illegal aliens for welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.  <http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANscriptS/0610/29/ldt.01.html >
9.  $200 billion dollars per year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
10.  The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens.  In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.
11.  During the year 2005, there were 8 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our southern border with as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from other terrorist countries.  Over 10,000 of those were middle-eastern terrorists.  Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin, crack, guns, and marijuana crossed into the U.S. from the southern border. 
12.  The National Policy Institute, estimates that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion, or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.   
13.  In 2006, illegal aliens sent home $65 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin, to their families and friends.
14.  The dark side of illegal immigration:  Nearly one million sex crimes are committed by illegal immigrants in the United States!
Total cost a whopping $538.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!
If this doesn't bother YOU, then just delete the message.  Otherwise, forward this to everyone YOU know!

Friday, June 19, 2015

ICELAND JAILED ITS BANKERS...

Iceland Recovering Fastest in Europe After Jailing Bankers Instead of Bailing them Out


Claire Bernish
June 11, 2015
(ANTIMEDIAAfter Iceland suffered a heavy hit in the 2008-2009 financial crisis, which famously resulted in convictions and jail terms for a number of top banking executives, the IMF now says the country has managed to achieve economic recovery—“without compromising its welfare model,” which includes universal healthcare and education. In fact, Iceland is on track to become the first European country that suffered in the financial meltdown to “surpass its pre-crisis peak of economic output”—essentially proving to the U.S. that bailing out “too big to fail” banks wasn’t the way to go.
Iceland is beautifully, yet unfortunately, unique in how it chose to handle the disaster. It simply let the banks fail, which resulted in defaults totaling $85 billion—lending ample justification for the prosecution and conviction of bank executives for various fraud-related charges. The decision seemed shocking at the time, but the gamble has obviously paid off. Choosing a different route, the U.S. bailed out the banks and let executives off the hook by levying fines that ultimately ended up being paid by the corporations—meaning the executives ostensibly responsible for the mess got off scot-free.
“Why should we have a part of our society that is not being policed or without responsibility?” special prosecutor Olafur Hauksson said after Iceland’s Supreme Court upheld the convictions for three bankers—and sentenced them to between four and five and a half years each. “It is dangerous that someone is too big to investigate—it gives a sense there is a safe haven.”
Hauksson, a police officer from a small fishing village, ended up taking the role of special prosecutor after being urged to do so when the first announcement to fill the position drew no applicants. The Icelandic Parliament even aided the prosecution’s effort by loosening secrecy laws to allow investigation without the hindrance of requiring court orders.
Six of the seven convictions that ended up in Iceland’s Supreme Court have been upheld, and five cases were scheduled for the top court as of February. An additional fourteen cases appear likely to be prosecuted. By contrast, the animosity Americans felt toward their largest financial institutions after the bailout has grown bitter. After the banks plead guilty in May for manipulating global currency and interest rates, the court imposed a paltry fine of $5.7 billion—which won’t even go to the people most affected by the fraud. Iceland’s successful prosecutions and economic recovery remain the subject of envy for Americans.
Shortly, however, Iceland’s economic health will be put to the test.
Strict capital controls that were applied when banks were circling the drain six years ago will now be loosened, allowing foreign investors—whose assets have essentially been frozen since then—to take their business elsewhere. To prevent a possible repeat crisis, the finance minister announced a 39% tax for anyone choosing to do so. “The danger is capital flight and a consequent fall in the value of the krona,” explained University of Iceland economics professor, Thorolfur Matthiasson. “That would be tantamount to October 2008, bringing back bad memories for ordinary people and possibly making most businesses unsustainable due to balance-sheet problems.”
Though many are nervous, there is still cautionary optimism since Iceland has certainly weathered the storm before.

This article (Iceland’s Economy Recovering Fastest in Europe After Jailing Bankers Instead of Bailouts) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and TheAntiMedia.org. Tune in! The Anti-Media radio showairs Monday through Friday @ 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit:Javier Soriano. Help us fix our typos: edits@theantimedia.org.

Friday, May 1, 2015

ATTENTION WELFARE PRECIPITANTS...

Only 49 more states, 10 Provinces and 3 Territories to go!

I-95 and I-75 will likely be jammed for the next month or so with druggies and deadbeats heading north out of Florida, because this is the first state in the North America to require drug testing to receive welfare!

Hooray for Florida!  In signing the new law, Republican Gov. Rick Scott said, "If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free."

Applicants must pay for the drug test, but are reimbursed if they test drug-free.  Applicants who test positive for illicit substances, won't be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment.  Those who fail a second time will be banned from receiving funds for three years!

Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional.

How is this unconstitutional?  It's a legal requirement that persons applying for a number of government jobs have to pass drug tests in order to get the job, so why not those who receive welfare from the government?
       

Forward this if you agree!


Let's get welfare back to the ones who need it, not to those who won't get a job.


I AGREE.  DO YOU?