FireSociety - Latest Articles

Punishing the People

Azriel De Mortes Angelo — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:02:11 GMT

Normal 0 MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} Where is the Justice in punishing people who are trying? I know many people in this predicament. School Loans asking for as much as 25% of an family income to keep from going into default. My Question is WHY? Just because the economy takes a dip does not mean that Big Business can squeeze harder on the little guy to get more. I mean What the Heck is up with this. You fight to get through school. Then you fight to get any job you can to get experience, and then you try to get a better job so you can make enough to survive on without working multiple jobs. All the while some joker is calling you wanting more and more money and jerking up your interest rate if you miss, even though it is supposed to be “fixed” at a certain percent. Is it really necessary to punish people for trying to improve themselves? No wonder China is catching and in many ways surpassing us technologically. Here is the secret no ...

"Red Herrings" distracting from a vital issue

Mz — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:42:25 GMT

While there are many important issues on the various threads, we seem to have forgotten the issue of the New World Order (NWO), the North American Union (NAU), world banking cartel, all its appendages such as the one-sided trade deals of NAFTA, CAFTA, etc., the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC), ad infinitum. The CFR, Bilderberg, Federal Reserve, UN, and all other groups involved in the destruction of the sovereignty of the United States must be having many good laughs over our lack of staying power as they have been working on this issue for many decades. I was searching the internet regarding the new South American Union and found several websites that seem to know more about the issue and its basis than the American people are informed about. They speak openly of the North American Union being planned. The following excerpt is from http://www.infowars.com/?p=2794: "Critics of the Union of South American Nations’ efforts to establish a common currency see it as playing right into the hands of the world banking cartel . The clustering and assimilation of currencies facilitates the eventual merger into a one world currency promoted by the Council on Foreign Relations and its political puppets. They see the ...

Why Should We Hire You?

Revolutionary — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:57:46 GMT

John McCain can't handle the truth. He is still mouthing the "comprehensive immigration reform" mantra, which is really amnesty for Mexican invaders who annex American territory. His "straight talk express" is a forked tongue, epicurean delight for financial vipers, who prey on the wealth of America through compound interest. McCain's idea of "rational middle ground," is to weigh the concern of big business for Mexican slave labor, against the need for the American worker to preserve his job, standard of living, and very country. His "balance" is to find in favor of the corporations, by figuratively placing a "comprehensive amnesty" brick on the scale, in favor of big business--modeling himself like Charlton Heston did, in the film "Ten Commandments"-- for sheer theatrical effect-- as our alleged pharaoh. He then commands the American worker to make bricks without straw, money, food, a job or shelter--much less a country to live in. McCain panders for a border fence first, before allowing the floodgates wide open, with his ridiculous--and treasonous--capitulation to the corporate slave masters who utilize the Mexican reconquista to destroy America's middle class. According to an article in the Arizona Republic, July 4th, 2008: "I believe we must have comprehensive immigration ...

How Many Rights Are Democrats Willing to Forfeit?

NewMediaJournal — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 19:27:39 GMT

By Frank Salvato With the announcement that Hillary Clinton is abandoning her quest for the Oval Office the Democrat National Committee (DNC) – and specifically the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee – has effectively selected the candidate for their party. I say selected because, by construct, the decision making process was taken away from the party faithful and placed in the hands of an elitist class of party insiders. These party insiders – superdelegates and the DNC Executive Committee – have literally usurped the will of the people by marginalizing the popular vote in deference to manipulated vote worth and their own self-importance. The right to vote – the right to have our votes count – is the fundamental bedrock of our Constitutional Republic. It is through this fundamental right, this Constitutional Right, that We the People affect our control over government. Through our ballot choices we select delegates to the Electoral College who represent our amassed votes. These delegates, in turn, vote for the President of the United States. This process serves as a safeguard against mob rule and the bad choices to which emotionalism can lead. The Framers were brilliant in this respect. Party politics is a bit ...

International Cooperation vs. Unilateralism

John Maszka — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 19:27:20 GMT

International Cooperation vs. Unilateralism 'Unilateralism’ is a pejorative term. It is the current malediction of choice in application to the Bush administration, both at home and abroad, for having conquered and occupied Iraq over the objections of France, Germany, Russia, and most other nations. -Crispin Sartwell, 2007. Terrorists should not be regarded as basic thugs or simple, uninformed gangs; rather, many are learning that the fundamentals of business are as important to their future as field stripping a Kalashnikov is today. .. they form alliances and initiate agreements. These alliances demonstrate a new dimension of the terrorism phenomena: maturity. The initial step toward maturity for these independents requires them to network with larger, like-minded organizations. Such organizations may have different ideologies, goals, adversaries, or sponsors, but they have a compelling reason to cooperate with less mature groups: growth. (Desouza & Hensgen, 2007:595). Many argue that this is exactly what the United States is not doing. Terrorist organizations are maturing, they are growing, and they are allying themselves with one another, and availing themselves of one another’s strengths, contacts and resources. The unilateral policy of the Bush administration has put the United States well below the curve in this respect. Consider ...

Talk About Being traced and monitored. Y'all ain't see nothin yet!

(Admin) Deerhunter — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 19:22:10 GMT

This was brught to my attention a few days ago and low and behold....It's fact. I am holding this person's name because I don't want his/her name being shown to the world wide web, although as far as what I am about to post will be to your amazement, if you don't already know about this: 'Behavioral Targeting' on Web Is Debated By Peter Whoriskey Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, May 22, 2008; A01 How do you find a bride these days? One of the nation's leading online tracking companies knows. Monitoring consumers at roughly 3,000 Web sites, Revenue Science identified brides by picking out bridal behavior it had seen: anyone who'd gone online to read about weddings in the news, entered "bridesmaid dresses" into a search engine or surfed fashion pages for wedding styles. The company found 40,000 such people, whom it knows by random number, not name, and sent them a tailored online ad. "A successful campaign," according to company president Jeff Hirsch. The growing practice of "behavioral targeting," or sending ads to online users based on their Internet habits, is now under scrutiny by the Federal Trade Commission , whose review could shape not only Web advertising rules ...

The State of the Union As Seen By An Ordinary Citizen

lawandorderzealot — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 19:14:20 GMT

John W. Lillpop On January 28th, George W. Bush delivered his final State of the Union address to the nation. In so doing, Bush wasted about 60 minutes of valuable time in a last ditch attempt to convince the world that he has not been the "worst president in U.S. history." Charitable historians will describe Bush's final SOU as moderate and measured. Those committed to the truth will admit that the only thing worse than Bush's performance in office are his SOU addresses. After the president mangled the English language once again, the Democrats responded, in both English and Spanish. Bilingual mangling if you will. All of the speeches were loaded with outrageous hyperbole and exaggerations, if not downright lies. The real problems facing the nation were grossly underestimated or ignored. Achievements were vastly overstated and misrepresented. For a change, politicians need to hear the State of the Union from the perspective of an ordinary American citizen. This citizen proposes the following State of the Union message: Mr. President, members of Congress: The state of this union is: In grave peril and in danger of collapse! Due to inappropriate actions and or inaction on the part of those entrusted with managing this great nation--that ...

Countering International Terrorism

John Maszka — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:27:58 GMT

Countering International Terrorism “We are today a Nation at risk to a new and changing threat. The terrorist threat to America takes many forms, has many places to hide, and is often invisible” - President George W. Bush, 16 July 2002 (reprinted in Baird, 2006:415). It may be unfair, but many critics have claimed that the only thing that’s “invisible” is the Bush administration’s clear plan to alleviate terrorism. Foreign Policy and the Center for American Progress (2006) surveyed “more than 100 of America’s top foreign policy experts” both Republicans and Democrats, and asked them if they thought America was winning the war on terror. “A bipartisan majority (84 percent) of the index’s experts say the United States is not winning the war on terror. Eighty-six percent of the index’s experts see a world today that is growing more dangerous for Americans.” The majority expressed criticism of President Bush’s policy initiatives since 9/11, specifically the detention of terrorist suspects at Guantanamo, America’s policy toward its European allies, North Korea, Iran non-proliferation, and arms control. In a discussion about President Bush’s 2007 State of the Union Address, Amy Zalman (2007) concludes that there ...