Mothers Of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice Speak Together For The First Time
Posted: 12/12/2014 9:35 pm EST Updated: 1 hour ago

The mothers of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner and Tamir Rice appeared together for the first time on CNN.

In an interview with Anderson Cooper on Friday, the mothers of the four deceased, unarmed African American males explained that if their sons were white, they would still be alive.

"I think absolutely my son's race and the color of his skin had a lot to do with why he was shot and killed," said Sybrina Fulton, Martin's mother.

Eric Garner's mother, Gwen Carr said:

"If Eric Garner was a white man in Suffolk County doing the same thing that he was doing -- even if he would have been caught selling cigarettes that day -- they would have given him a summons and he wouldn't have lost his life that day... I believe that 100 percent."

The mothers also told Cooper that white people don't quite understand what communities of color are going through, partly because they don't have to.

Fulton:

"It's not happening to them, so they don't quite get it... They don't quite understand. They think that it's a small group of African-Americans that's complaining... The people say that all the time: 'What are they complaining about now? What are they protesting about now?

Until it happens to them and in their family then they'll understand the walk. They don't understand what we're going through. They don't understand the life and they don't understand what we're fighting against. I don't even think the government quite gets it."

Martin died in 2012 in Florida when neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman shot him. Martin was seventeen years old. Zimmerman was acquitted of second degree murder and manslaughter.

Brown died in Ferguson, Mo. in an altercation with police officer Darren Wilson in August. A grand jury voted not to indict Wilson in November.

In July, Garner died after NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo placed him in a chokehold, a death the medical examiner concluded was a homicide. The incident was recorded on video. A grand jury decided not to indict Pantaleo, which sparked a new wave of protests inspired by Garner's last words, "I can't breathe."

12-year-old Tamir Rice was at a Cleveland park when a police car pulled up and shot him last month. His death was ruled a homicide according to a Cuyahoga County Medical Examiner's autopsy report.

Mothers Of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice Speak Together For The First Time

Jeb Bush sending signals that he may be getting ready for 2016 presidential run

Former Florida governor Jeb Bush on Dec. 2 in Coral Gables, Fla. Bush strategist Mike Murphy has been telling potential campaign staffers not to sign up to work for another presidential candidate and to expect Bush’s announcement soon. (J Pat Carter/AP)
By Philip Rucker and Matea Gold December 12 at 8:06 PM  Follow @PhilipRucker Follow @mateagold
Jeb Bush and his emissaries are sending increasingly strong signals that the former Florida governor is gearing up for a 2016 presidential campaign, with associates saying he could announce his intentions within a month.

Bush recently e-mailed major Republican donors asking them to, as several of them put it, “keep your powder dry.” His allies are urging would-be bundlers not to commit to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie or other potential rivals. Bush’s top strategist, Mike Murphy, has also been telling potential campaign staffers not to sign up to work for another candidate and to expect Bush’s announcement soon.

Out of public office for eight years, Bush has a thicket of business interests — including massive overseas investment funds — that he is working to untangle himself from before a campaign begins. As one confidant said, “He says he knows he has to wrap it up.”

If Bush launches a presidential exploratory committee or otherwise declares his intentions in coming weeks, he would immediately increase the pressure on potential rivals in both parties to make their own decisions quickly. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the presumed Democratic front-runner, has signaled that she could wait until spring to launch a campaign, while many Republicans have been waiting for Bush to make a move.

For Bush, allies said, waiting until spring to decide on a campaign would carry serious risks. The competition is already underway among a dozen or so ambitious Republican hopefuls to woo donors and sign talented staff.

Some senior Republicans in communication with Bush said they have concluded he is almost certain to run. His family — once averse to a campaign — is now on board with a run. Bush also has slimmed down: He is working with a new personal trainer after a knee surgery, according to the Miami Herald, and lost 15 pounds in recent weeks.

Asked whether he saw any reason Bush would not run, one confidant who has been in touch with the former governor said, “I don’t know of anything.” This person, who like some others interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk candidly about the conversations, said Bush sees value in taking his time before deciding.

“It’s easier to be a prospective candidate than a candidate,” this person said.

A second Bush confidant said: “He’s not playing games. He’s being very sincere and honest with folks and going through the things that really matter to him. Within a month, we’ll know.”

Bush has said previously that he would decide by the end of this year or early in 2015. Aides said that timeline has not changed.

“Governor Bush has not made a decision about whether or not he will run in 2016,” spokeswoman Kristy Campbell said. “We are not going to weigh in on the decision-making process beyond what he has said to date.”

In recent weeks, Bush has been talking with Republican leaders and strategists about how to effectively address his support for immigration reform and the education standards known as Common Core. Both positions are anathema to conservative activists, especially in Iowa, home to the nation’s first presidential caucuses.

During a recent speech at a Wall Street Journal event, Bush said anyone running for president should be prepared “to lose the primary to win the general [election] without violating your principles.”

Fred Malek, a longtime Republican fundraiser, said Bush’s remarks indicated that “he’s giving it some serious and deliberate thought.”

In preparation for a campaign, Bush is beginning to disentangle himself from some business relationships, according to two people close to him. Bush, who has worked for Lehman Brothers, Barclays and private-equity firms, also is conducting opposition research on himself to study his vulnerabilities, as Politico first reported.

“He’s not going to run for president without having an understanding of what a Hillary Clinton campaign would do ­research-wise,” one of those people said.

Bloomberg Businessweek, in a story Thursday headlined “Jeb Bush has a Mitt Romney problem,” reported on documents filed last month with the Securities and Exchange Commission listing Bush as chairman and manager of BH Global Aviation, an offshore private-equity fund that raised $61 million in September, largely from foreign investors.

Bush’s advisers said the story does not provide a full portrait of Bush’s business activities. Some GOP donors and operatives were alarmed by the report. But Bush’s advisers told allies who have asked about it that Bush is proud of his investment work and defends the free-enterprise system.

“Nothing related to Governor Bush’s business activities would hinder a run in any way, should that be what he decides to do,” Campbell said.

Bush is entrusting much of his political preparations to Murphy, who lives in California, and Sally Bradshaw, a longtime counselor in Florida. They helped Bush sharpen his pitch on the campaign trail this fall and are consulting with potential campaign staffers nationally and in key states.

Bush’s team is also trying to quiet whispers in Beltway circles that his political skills are rusty. Murphy insisted that Bush is as engaged as ever, from keeping tabs on national affairs on his iPad to regularly calling Republican lawmakers and officials.

“Anybody who knows Jeb Bush and has watched him campaign or devour public policy knows the word ‘rust’ is not in his dictionary,” Murphy said.

Even with his stealth campaign underway, Bush is avoiding overt moves that might spark unwelcome speculation.

On Monday, Bush is traveling to Columbia, S.C., to deliver the winter commencement address at the University of South Carolina. Shortly after the ceremony, the state Republican Party’s executive committee is scheduled to meet a few blocks away. Any presidential candidate would want to court these party leaders in the state that hosts the first primary in the South. But Bush is not planning to visit with them, flying in and out of the state without doing any politicking.

Judd Gregg, a former Republican senator from New Hampshire, said he is not surprised that Bush is not doing early organizing. “He’s so well-known and he already has the credibility he needs to attract an organization to him,” Gregg said.

In recent days, Romney allies have been reaching out to his former donors and staff to gauge whether they would be available to work for Romney again even if Bush runs, according to a former senior Romney campaign official.

Across the Republican firmament, the topic du jour has been, What will Jeb do? Party insiders ready to embrace Bush are dissecting his every move and statement — as well as those of his family members — for clues about his thinking.

At a Christmas party for donors at George W. Bush’s presidential library in Dallas on Saturday, guests are expected to be abuzz about the possibility of yet another Bush in the White House. Ray Washburne, a Dallas investor who serves as finance chair of the Republican National Committee, said Jeb Bush is “the big elephant in the room.”

Mel Sembler, a former ambassador and longtime Bush family friend, said, “I think we’re going to see Jeb run.”

Robert Costa and Karen Tumulty contributed to this report.

Defense Bill Passes, Giving Sacred Native American Sites To Mining Company
Posted: 12/12/2014 7:19 pm EST Updated: 3 hours ago

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Senate passed a measure authorizing the nation’s defense programs Friday, and along with it managed to give lands sacred to Native Americans to a foreign company that owns a uranium mine with Iran.

The $585 billion National Defense Authorization Act of 2015 is one of the must-pass pieces of legislation that Congress moves every year. But like they did in attaching extraneous riders to the must-pass government funding bill, lawmakers used the defense bill as a vehicle to pass a massive public lands package.

The bill sailed through on a vote of 89 to 11.

Many of the land measures were popular. But one, the Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act, had twice failed to win support in the House of Representatives, blocked both by conservationists and conservatives.

The deal gives a subsidiary of the Australian-English mining firm Rio Tinto 2,400 acres of the Tonto National Forest in exchange for several other parcels so it can minea massive copper deposit.

The Iran connection comes from a uranium mine in Namibia, in which Tehran has owned a 15 percent stake since the days of the shah.

Rio Tinto, which removed Iran’s two members of the mine board in 2012, has argued that Iran gets no benefit from the property, that there is no active partnership, and that it has discussed the issue with the U.S. State Department to ensure that no sanctions against Iran are violated.

A State Department spokesperson confirmed that officials had discussed the site, but declined to say that they could assure there were no violations of sanctions.

“We are aware of the mine in question and have discussed relevant compliance issues with the company,” the spokesperson said.

The official also declined to say if, as might be expected, Iran would be able to benefit from the mine if Secretary of State John Kerry is successful in negotiations to limit the regime’s nuclear aspirations, and sanctions are lifted. “We are not going to speculate on any hypotheticals,” the official said. A Rio Tinto official also declined to speculate, but noted that under the current sanctions and Namibian law, it's impossible to buy out Iran's share or sever the tie.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) mounted a bid to strip the entire lands package from the bill, but secured only 18 votes in his favor.

It’s not only people concerned about any benefit Iran might get who were worried about giving American forest land to a foreign firm that has such a connection.

Native Americans, particularly the Apache tribe in the area, say digging a massive mine under their ancestral lands will destroy sacred ceremonial and burial grounds.

Rio Tinto says it will work closely with the tribes to ensure their concerns are heard, and will work with the U.S. Forest Service to protect the environment.

The measure was added into the NDAA largely thanks to the efforts of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who, along with fellow Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake, sees the project as an economic boon that will create 3,700 jobs over several decades.

Flake acknowledged that the deal never would have passed on its own, even as he lamented the process that got it through the Senate.

“It’s never good to see big packages with so many things in them -- that’s what we want to get away from,” Flake said. “But it’s been very difficult to move individual pieces of legislation over the last few years.”

In this case, the addition of the Arizona swap and the other land measures were never discussed in public, and were added during secret negotiations between the House and Senate Armed Services Committee. the deal was never publicly revealed until the House started work on passing the entire defense bill last week.

It will become law as soon as President Barack Obama signs it. Rio Tinto, though subsidiary Resolution Copper, will take possession of the land a year later. Although the land will then be private property and federal environmental reviews will no longer be enforceable, the company said in a statement after the measure passed that it would abide by such reviews. It also pledged to be a good neighbor:

“Resolution Copper Mining is pleased that the Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act passed the House of Representatives and the Senate with strong bipartisan support. Passage of the legislation means that Resolution Copper can move forward with the development of this world-class ore body which will create approximately 3,700 jobs, generate over $60 billion in economic impact and result in almost $20 billion in state and federal tax payments,” said project director Andrew Taplin.

"There is much more work to be done before commercial mining can begin and Resolution Copper looks forward to working with all stakeholders as we continue to progress through the regulatory review process toward responsible development and operation of a world-class copper mine that will safely produce over 25 percent of the current annual demand for copper in the United States.”

Once the legislation is signed into law by President Obama, Resolution Copper will focus on the comprehensive environmental and regulatory review under NEPA, where there will be broad public consultation, government-to-government consultation with Arizona Native American tribes and a comprehensive valuation appraisal of the copper deposit as required by Congress.

Resolution Copper plans to work to expand existing partnerships and create new ones with neighboring communities and Native American Tribes. The company will endeavor to hire locally and regionally whenever possible.

The heart of the legislation is the exchange of 2,400 acres of federally owned land above the copper deposit for 5,300 acres of land owned by Resolution Copper composed of valuable recreational, conservation and culturally significant land throughout Arizona. Congressional leaders made significant improvements to the legislation to address community, environmental and tribal concerns. These changes include provisions for completion of a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prior to the exchange of title, extraordinary protections for historic Apache Leap, and safe access to the Oak Flat Campground after the exchange has been completed.

Defense Bill Passes, Giving Sacred Native American Sites To Mining Company

Martin Armstrong Warns Civil Unrest Is Rising Everywhere (And Government Is Digging In Its Heels)

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/12/2014 15:54 -0500

• Corruption
• Illinois
• Martin Armstrong
• Switzerland
• Unemployment

 
Submitted by Martin Armstrong via Armstrong Economics blog,

I have warned that governments always turn against the people.

• Illinois just made it a felony to film police abuse in the USA.
• The Spanish government has followed the same course.

Despite protests from political, judicial and population, the politicians who are becoming ruthless elite dictators rather than democratic representatives of the people, passed a law which provides extensive fines for protesters who dare to film the abuse of police. They have the audacity to claim filming police  is an “offense against public safety” with fines of up to 600,000 euros. It is the police who protect government – not the people.

So let’s get this straight. “public safety” has become a code word for “government safety” that no longer gives two shits about the people.

Switzerland enacted laws requiring registration of all guns in the country for the first time when. Why? There have not been any incidents of “public safety”.

They too realize that the people are starting to wake up against the abuse of government everywhere. The people have caused this.

As a whole, people watch sports, buy clothes, and go to dinner. Generally at best half even bother to vote. That has sent the signal to government elites the people do not care so corruption has run wild. But now with taxes rising, unemployment rising, pensions vanishing into thin air, and living standards declining, people want real change no words.

Even in the USA, the Republicans wrongly believe their ideas are what the people want. They too raise taxes. This funding bill allowing the banks to repeal Dodd Frank is an example of the corruption behind the scenes. They votes for Republicans because who is ever in power is being tossed out. Come 2016, it will be the Republican’s turn as we see a rise in third-party activity. This repeal of Dodd Frank is a John Andrew Boehner special that goes against the conservative T-Party Republicans.

Politicians will be politicians. What is left to say?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-12/martin-armstrong-warns-civil-unrest-rising-everywhere-and-government-digging-its-hee

Do you know what a constitutional republic is? We used to have one. That's what this country was founded on way back in the day, by men who are now referred to as domestic terrorists. We used to have a Constitution and even more importantly, a Bill of Rights. This was a document that laid out our inalienable rights. That means God given rights. It simply stated that these were rights that we were born with. They were not granted to us by any man made government.

Now, in some schools, children as young as seven are being taught that these rights are now privileges conferred by the government, inferring that what the government gives, it can take away if we don't toe the mark. This must have been going on for some time. A young local doctor told me not long ago that the Constitution is just an antiquated piece of paper. He was so sorry he'd brought the subject up. But how do people like him, supposedly educated, arrive at such an opinion? I've always thought, that with few exceptions, the more higher learning someone attains, the less common sense they have. And sadly our teachers, especially at the college level, reflect that.

Even though the Constitution gives Congress the right to legislate and amend laws, it clearly stated at the beginning of the Bill of Rights, that “Congress shall make no laws...” for a reason. The Founding Fathers, especially Jefferson, were worried that future law makers would find too many loop holes that would allow them to water down the Constitution.

“On every question of construction [let us] carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” Thomas Jefferson

“In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” Thomas Jefferson

The people in power do not want a nation of critical thinkers. They want a nation of compliant, obedient sheep who won't question them or the things they do. The people in government keep telling us that we live in a democracy. And while a democracy is far better than a totalitarian regime, still it is mob rule. The majority get to impose their will on a minority who don't agree with them. And because the majority of people lack the ability to think critically, they think we are a democracy. They have forgotten, if they ever knew, that we are supposed to be a representative republic. We the People choose those who represent us at various levels of government. At least we used to. They have forgotten, if they ever knew, what some of the worst dictators in history said of democracy.

“Democracy is indispensable to Socialism.” Vladimir Lenin

And that democracy is a stepping stone to socialism, which is a further stepping stone toward Communism. Karl Marx

Why is that? Because someone who can tell you with a straight face that they believe in socialistic government that says on paper that the people own everything, knowing full well that the end result will be a government controlling every aspect of the people's life is either lying or an idiot.

Both Marx and Lenin referred to peace as, “The end of all opposition to socialism.”

So why were Marx and Lenin so enthusiastic about installing socialism as the de facto government in Russia and eventually the world? If you understand their thinking correctly, the answer jumps out at you. My dictionary defines socialism as:

“a system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of industry, capital, land, etc. by the community as a whole. In Marxist theory, socialism is the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism. And in communism, the state will control everything, not the people. By the time that people wake up and realize they've been had, it is too late to turn back the tide of totalitarian rule.

Liberalism, as defined by John Locke, promoted the rights of the individual just as our Constitution and Bill of Rights do. Life, liberty and property. It was Locke's theory of classical liberalism and the concept of natural law and the social contract theory, which defined the relationship between the governed and the government. Government should derive it's power from the people. However, today's post-modern liberalism is a complete redefinition and does not advance the rights of the individual but rather focuses on the manipulation of collective groups.

Our Constitution declares that individuals have rights. Collective groups or communities are granted no such rights. A republic, such as ours, is defined as limited government, with fiscal responsibility, individual sovereignty, a free market and a strong national defense. Today these are looked upon as extremists views by those who promote socialist/communist ideas.

American author Upton Sinclair said, “The American people will take Socialism, but they won't take the label...There is no use attacking their government by a frontal attack, it is much better to outflank them.”

This is exactly what's been happening in towns and cities across this nation. A country founded on Christian principles now finds itself under attack for praying before games; for having a moment of silence before a meal; for displaying the Ten Commandments in public buildings. I am not a religious person but a reading of the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the personal papers of the Founding Fathers leaves no doubt that this country was founded on Christian principles. But it was also founded on religious freedom, prompting many religious organizations to flee the Old World and settle in America where they could practice their faith unmolested. Most were able to do that.

Many of what I would call fringe religions, bordering on cults came to this country and seemed able to live among the rest of us with no problems, except for the Mormons. The Quakers, Mennonites, the Amish, even Jehovah's Witnesses, all of which tend to be cults in the respect that they can live and work among us but are pretty closed otherwise, seemed to have little trouble living among the rest of us. There are probably others besides the ones I mentioned. But I noticed that unlike the others mentioned, the Mormons were run out of just about everywhere they tried to settle until they finally wound up in Utah. I couldn't understand why. I've worked with several and they were pretty nice people. Then I read “Nightfall at Nauvoo” and “A History of Hancock County” and I understood.

Not only are they more for the community rather then for the individual, (so are the others.) But if the Prophet tells them to do something, that is Gospel. Any Mormon that wants to refute that with me, read those two books and send me an email. Show me where I'm wrong. In Nauvoo, besides beginning to practice polygamy and helping themselves to whatever they wanted no matter who it belonged to, they also tried to secede from the United States, built their own army and coined their own currency. In other words, some of the things they were doing was imposing their beliefs on others through their actions towards them.

But my main point for this article is any group that tries to instill rules in opposition to our Constitution and Bill of Rights is asking for trouble. Groups that promote communitarianism must feel right at home in this new era of Agenda 21. The individual no longer has rights or only those granted by the government. Every false flag event is followed by a further erosion of our freedoms. In a socialist regime, the government, at whatever level, will decide where you live, what kind of work you will do, what kind of education you will receive, what you can do with your property or even if you can own property. Don't think for a moment that isn't where we are heading if we don't put a stop to it.

None of this by a frontal attack of course. That might alert the sheeple that all is not well. But by the backdoor by placing their chosen people in political positions and instituting laws to ensnare our nation and in turn affect the entire political landscape. By attacking religion and the family unit; by watering down our educational system. If we let them.

I believe in religious and political freedom but people need to remember that their rights end where the other persons begins. The important role of political and religious freedom is the cornerstone of our constitutional freedoms. The ability to freely worship and act in accordance with a particular faith without fear of government reprisal is essential to civil society. Religious freedom protects our ability to live according to our deepest beliefs. The same can be said for political freedom. If I'm so weak-minded that I can't listen to a Neo-Nazi speech or read a pamphlet by a socialist and realize that that isn't how I want to live, I deserve the FEMA camp.

It doesn't bother me in the least that the KKK march and spew their hate rants. They should have that freedom because the only people they are going to attract are people who think the same way. Their actions are another thing however. But freedom to speak our mind is guaranteed by our Bill of Rights.

That Bill of Rights means we don't have to hide who we are and what we stand for. It's a freedom recognized as essential by the Founding Fathers and defended by policy makers, citizens and religious leaders alike in the past. However, that freedom to practice our religious beliefs also guarantees freedom from religion if we so choose. That means any law or rule passed by an religious organization or political group to move a community in general toward communitarianism or collectivism and away from individual rights (all forms of socialism) is a violation of the rights of others.

Laws and rules within a religious, political or social organization that everyone agrees to and embraces is one thing. If it's a religious or social organization and people don't like it, they can walk away. Laws that affect everyone in a city, county, state or nation is something else. I would remind everyone with that communitarian mindset that our Bill of Rights begins with, “Congress shall make no laws...” and goes on to list the various freedoms that even Congress shall not alter or infringe upon.

And I would remind the socialists who are trying to use Agenda 21 policies to turn this country into a socialist dictatorship, that there are far more of us than there are of you. More are waking up every day. And you can only push the American people just so far before they begin to rebel.

People need to carefully watch the changes that are made at every level of government. Understand that every law, ruling, ordinance, etc that gives more power to the state and/or the collective, takes away power and freedom from the individual. That is not an accident. I got cold chills down my back recently watching a movie called,”The Giver” about a society based on the rights of the community instead of individual freedom. The cold chills came from realizing how far down that road we've already traveled.

To those who say we no longer have a Constitution or Bill of Rights because of all of the laws and rulings passed over the years that watered them down, I would point out these rulings.

“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137,174,176. (1803)

“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.” Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491

“An unconstitutional act is not law, it confers no rights, it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” Norton vs. Shelby 118 US 425 p. 442

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.

“No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256

To me that means that every attempt, whether by religious organizations, political parties, Congress or even our Supreme Fossils to water down our Constitution isn't worth the paper it's written on. Any move by any branch of government to do so should be viewed as an act of treason. It will be up to We the People to decide when we've had enough.

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance” Thomas Jefferson