by Marvin Ramirez

Marvin Ramirez

NOTE FROM THE EDITOR: The following article is from Michael Snyder, of American Dream. He caves in much of what the mainstream media ignores, that China could be a hidden enemy in the bushes getting ready to attack. This is the First of a two-part series. PART 1.

The secret document that proves China considers the United States to be a mortal enemy

by Michael Snyder
American Dream

If you believe that China is our “friend”, then you have been deceived. While U.S. politicians, the mainstream media and the U.S. military may consider China to be a “friend” and a “partner”, the Chinese see things very, very differently. As you will see below, documents produced at the highest levels of the Chinese government make it abundantly clear that China considers the United States to be a mortal enemy. Unfortunately, in the west we have naively assumed that if we opened up trade with China that they would want to be more like us. Instead, opening up trade with China has allowed them to severely damage us economically while continuing to loudly denounce “western constitutional democracy” at the same time.

The truth is that China is not like us and they never intend to be. The Chinese people do not get to choose their leaders in free elections, and the Communist Party in China never intends to allow that to happen.

The Chinese people do not have freedom of speech or freedom of religion, and the Communist Party in China never intends to give the general population those freedoms.

In most cases, Chinese families do not even have the freedom to have more than one child, and if a Chinese family tries to buck the system a mobile abortion van may show up at their front door.

The Chinese system is horribly repressive, and in many ways it continues to get even worse.

And officials in China definitely do not consider the United States to be a “partner”. Rather, they consider the United States to be a rival that needs to be vanquished.

This attitude comes through very clearly in a Chinese government memo known as “Document No. 9″ that the New York Times was recently able to get a copy of…

Communist Party cadres have filled meeting halls around China to hear a somber, secretive warning issued by senior leaders. Power could escape their grip, they have been told, unless 6the party eradicates seven subversive currents coursing through Chinese society.

These seven perils were enumerated in a memo, referred to as Document No. 9, that bears the unmistakable imprimatur of Xi Jinping, China’s new top leader. The first was “Western constitutional democracy”; others included promoting “universal values” of human rights, Western-inspired notions of media independence and civic participation, ardently pro-market “neo-liberalism,” and “nihilist” criticisms of the party’s traumatic past.

“Document No. 9″

See XKEYSTONE page 5sounds very similar to another “anti-western Communist Party document” that was reported on earlier this year in the Sunday Times by Michael Sheridan…

A hostile anti-western Communist Party document circulating among hundreds of Chinese officials has given the first proof that Xi’s leadership is set on a hard line against liberal foreign influences.

It tells officials they must “completely understand the harm of viewpoints and theories propagated by the West” and emphasises the need for China to “stand
up against the West” by becoming rich and strong.

The communist faithful are exhorted to strengthen their leadership, to be “relentless” in political guidance and to “use battlefield tactics” to defeat liberals and dissidents.

Are you starting to get the picture? China has no intention of becoming more like us. In fact, Chinese officials hate our liberties and our freedoms.

And the Chinese military actually considers the United States to be their “enemy-in-chief”. That is exactly how the U.S. is described in a recent paper which was drafted by the PLA’s deputy chief of staff…

China’s military considers the United States “enemy-in-chief” and, as it has done for decades, maintains a shroud of secrecy around the PLA’s size, capabilities, and intentions. That much is clear from a recent paper written by the PLA’s deputy chief of the general staff, the number two military man in China, for the Study Times, the official newspaper of the Communist Party School.

In addition, some top military officials in China have even advocated using nuclear weapons against the United States first in the event of a military conflict between our two countries…

Gen. Zhu Chenghu expressed willingness to abandon China’s “no first use” nuclear weapons policy, to defend its claim over Taiwan and argued that China should use nuclear weapons against the United States should its military interfere. A 2011 editorial in the Global Times (an English edition of the Communist Party of China’s official newspaper) warned that countries involved in sea disputes with China “need to prepare for the sounds of cannons.”

For now, China is content to trade with us because it benefits them. Chinese officials consider every interaction with the west to be part of a grand game of chess which is marching toward an inevitable conclusion, and they very much plan on being the victors.

And without a doubt, China is defeating the United States on a whole host of fronts right now. The following examples are from one of my previous articles entitled “40 Ways That China Is Beating America“…

NEXT WEEK SECOND PART: THE 40 WAYS.

by zerohedge.com

After a self-imposed gag order by the mainstream media on any coverage of the Fukushima disaster (ostensibly the last thing the irradiated Japanese citizens needed is reading beyond the lies of their benevolent government, and TEPCO, and finding out just how bad the reality is especially since the key driver behind Abenomics is a return in confidence at all costs), the biggest nuclear catastrophe in history is once again receiving the attention it deserves. This follows the recent admission by TEPCO of the biggest leak reported at Fukushima to date, which forced the Japanese government to raise the assessment of Fukushima from Level 1 to Level 3, even though this is merely the catalyst of what has been a long and drawn out process in which Tepco has tried everything it could to contain the fallout from the exploded NPP, and failed. And today, in a startling and realistic assessment of Fukushima two and a half years after the explosion, the WSJ finally tells the truth: “Tepco Has Lost Control.”

Here is how the mainstream media, in this case the Wall Street Journal, catches up with a topic covered extensively in the “alternative” media for the past several years:

“This is what we have been fearing,” said Shunichi Tanaka, chair of Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority, answering questions about the leak at a news conference. “We cannot waste even a minute” to take action.

Behind the leak is a more serious problem: During the past few months it has become clear that Tepco has lost control over the flow of water at the plant and that the problem is escalating, nuclear experts say.

Every day, the utility has to find a place to store around 400 tons of contaminated water that it pumps out of the radioactive reactor buildings, and Wednesday it warned that it is fast running out of space. Storage tanks set up on the fly during plant emergencies have started springing leaks, and Tepco can’t replace them with sturdier ones fast enough. Groundwater-contamination levels are spiking at the seaward side of the plant, and water is flowing into the ocean past a series of walls, plugs and barriers that have been flung up to impede its passage.

What does “losing control” mean in practical terms?

That lack of control is a big liability, said Kathryn Higley, a specialist in the spread of radiation and head of the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Health Physics at Oregon State University, who spent a week in Fukushima earlier this year.

So far, the levels of radioactivity that have escaped to the outside remain relatively low, but some experts warn they may not stay that was-particularly as equipment ages and the heavy-duty work of dismantling the damaged buildings and removing the melted fuel rods proceeds. The radioactivity of the water in the most recent leak was so high that workers couldn’t get close enough to search for the cause until the remaining fluid in the tank was removed.

Tepco said it doesn’t think that water has flowed into the sea but can’t say for sure. Some of the flooded reactor basements are similarly too hot to approach, and it is still not clear where the melted fuel cores are, or in what state.

“In the future there might be even more heavily contaminated water coming through,” said Atsunao Marui, head of the groundwater research group at Japan’s National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology and a member of a blue-ribbon panel set up in May to figure out ways of managing the radioactive water. “It’s important to think of the worst-case scenario.”

Indeed the “worst-case scenario” is an appropriate topic because as covered here over the weekend, it involves the potential death of millions of largely oblivious Japanese citizens.

Mr. Marui and others say the biggest reason for the scramble now is that Tepco—and the government bodies that oversee it—weren’t planning far enough ahead and waited too long to respond to problems they should have seen coming long ago.

The concerns are piling up. Earlier today Reuters reported that TEPCO “admitted to new spots of high radiation had been found near storage tanks holding highly contaminated water, raising fear of fresh leaks as the disaster goes from bad to worse.”

The bottom line, and what has become painfully clear, is that Japan simply can’t fix the problem. Even China has now figured it out. China said it was “shocked” to hear contaminated water was still leaking from the plant, and urged Japan to provide information “in a timely, thorough and accurate way”. What is strangest of all is that the Japanese people are far less concerned about the government’s cover up.

Oh well: they have their distractions – like a plunging currency, and (transitorily) soaring stock market, in nominal terms of course. Finally the following four charts from the WSJ provide a full breakdown of the current state of play at the devastated nuclear power plant.

by Marvin Ramirez

Marvin Ramirez

NOTE FROM THE EDITOR: As we continue being mind-controlled via the television with pornographically programming and lies by mainstream media, we are also being bombarded with content that encourages immorality and violence, and at the same time, removing our traditional believes in God from society and our school system, to the point that being Christian, is a political sin. The following article, written by Michael Snyder, of American Dream, brings us a very detailed evaluation of this issue. This is Part 2 and last.

The Name of Jesus has become a dirty word in politically correct America

by Michael Snyder
American Dream

And one of the biggest battlegrounds for religious freedom in America at the moment is the U.S. military.

Right now, there are some very powerful forces that are trying to eradicate all expressions of the Christian faith from the U.S. military. It has gotten so bad that a 23 year Air Force veteran was recently ordered to remove his Bible from his desk, and the Air Force recently came out and announced that service members are only allowed to talk about their faith if it “does not make others uncomfortable“.

The U.S. military is a far different institution than it once was. Today, political correctness rules the U.S. military.

If you doubt this, just check out this example…

Lt. Col. Kenneth Reyes is a Christian chaplain currently serving in the U.S. Air Force. He is stationed at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska. As an ordained clergyman whose duties are to provide religious instruction and spiritual counseling, he has a page on the base’s website called “Chaplain’s Corner.”

Reyes recently wrote an essay entitled, “No Atheists in Foxholes: Chaplains Gave All in World War II.” This common saying is attributed to a Catholic priest in World War II, made famous when President Dwight D. Eisenhower said during a 1954 speech: “I am delighted that our veterans are sponsoring a movement to increase our awareness of God in our daily lives. In battle, they learned a great truth that there are no atheists in the foxholes.”

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation was absolutely outraged when they heard about this. They demanded that the commander of the base, Col. Brian Duffy, do something about the “anti-secular diatribe” that Reyes had authored.

In the old days, a  base commander would have had a good chuckle and then would have told the MRFF where to stick their complaint, but the old days are gone.

These days, base commanders cower subserviently before politically correct organizations such as the MRFF. Just check out what happened next…

Nonetheless, only five hours after MRFF’s complaint, the essay was removed from the website. Duffy has profusely apologized to MRFF for not stopping this religious leader from sharing religious thoughts.

But this response—which again appears to be a violation of Reyes’s First Amendment rights—is insufficient for MRFF. They said, “Faith based hate, is hate all the same,” and, “Lt. Col. Reyes must be appropriately punished.” (Emphasis added).

And thanks to the MRFF, special edition Bibles for service members have been banned from being sold on military bases…

Bowing to a complaint from a religious watchdog group, the Pentagon will no longer give consent for a publisher to use the official emblems of the military services on a line of Bibles sold on base exchanges.

The group claimed victory, but an association of former military chaplains is demanding that Congress overturn the Defense Department’s decision.

The Bibles, branded for each of four services as “The Soldier’s Bible,” “The Sailor’s Bible” and so on, are published by Life- Way Christian Resources’ Holman Bible Publishers, a subsidiary of the Southern Baptist Bible Convention, said Chris Rodda, the senior research director for the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. The MRFF is a very insidious organization.

It is headed up by a man named Mikey Weinstein. He has called Christians “human monsters” and “enemies of the United States Constitution“. Weinstein is convinced that sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ while in the military is “sedition and treason” and should be punished as such.

You would think that people like Weinstein would be dismissed as lunatics, but unfortunately under the Obama administration he has been brought in as a special adviser to the Pentagon.

What a crazy world that we live in.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama himself has remained completely silent as a totally innocent American citizen is being tortured in an Iranian prison. If that prisoner was a liberal activist, Obama would be moving heaven and earth to get him released. But because he is a Christian, we haven’t heard a peep out of Obama, and many Christian leaders want an explanation…

One of the nation’s most prominent evangelical leaders wants to know why President Obama has remained silent as Iran tortures an American pastor held captive in one of the Islamic republic’s most notorious prisons.

Franklin Graham, the president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse, told Fox News the imprisonment and torture of Pastor Saeed Abedini is a blatant example of “religious intolerance.”

“Many in the international community are expressing outrage over this blatant example of religious intolerance,” Graham said.

“I ask that our government do the same and demand that Pastor Saeed Abedini be released and allowed to return home to his wife and family in the United States.”

We are rapidly moving toward a time when followers of Jesus will be treated as second class citizens in America. The following are some other examples of this trend…

• A War Games scenario at Fort Leavenworth that identified Christian groups and Evangelical groups as being potential threats;

• A 2009 Dept. of Homeland Security memorandum that identified future threats to national security coming from Evangelicals and pro-life groups;

• A West Point study released by the U.S. Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center that linked pro-lifers to terrorism;

• Evangelical leader Franklin Graham was uninvited from the Pentagon’s National Day of Prayer service because of his comments about Islam;

• Christian prayers were banned at the funeral services for veterans at Houston’s National Cemetery;

• Bibles were banned at Walter Reed Army Medical Center – a decision that was later rescinded;

• Christian crosses and a steeple were removed from a chapel in Afghanistan because the military said the icons disrespected other religions.

For much more on all of this, please see my previous article entitled “All Over America Evangelical Christians Are Being Labeled As Extremists And Hate Groups“.

This is not what America is supposed to be about.

How quickly we have turned our backs on the values of our founders.

In a recent article, Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin tried to remind us of how far we have drifted from what our founders intended…

It’s a good thing that George Washington is dead and military history effectively banished from our campuses. Otherwise, we might remember the general order Washington issued upon taking command of the embattled Continental Army–and in Boston, no less. The general “requires and expects of all officers and soldiers a punctual attendance at Divine services, to implore the blessing of Heaven upon the means used for our safety and defense.” In the same way, any assistant professor of government hoping to achieve tenure will likely skim over certain sections of the first president’s Farewell Address, which reads: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports.”

Will America be able to stand if we continue to try to push every shred of the Christian faith out of public life?

What do you think?

I am sure that a lot of people out there have some very strong opinions about all of this.

by Stephen Pitti
New America Media

As the Southern California harvest season came to a close in 1946, a young Mexican immigrant named Robert García paid tribute to the young women he had seen in the nearby town of Cucamonga:

Your beautiful women like flowers are just like the women of my people they show their love and deserve respect on the street and at home

His verse, published by a local Spanish-language newspaper, provided readers a rare glimpse into the emotional world of the thousands of imported laborers who had worked in local fields since the first months of World War II. Mexican “braceros” were much talked about but little understood in the United States of the 1940s. They had been celebrated for saving the crops and assuring an Allied victory prior to V-J Day, extolled for their efficiency and commitment to their jobs, and sometimes praised for showing remarkable, “natural” skills as farm laborers. But in the face of such rhetoric Robert García wrote about other matters: love, emotional attachment, and longing. In so doing he opened up a window into the dreams of migrants and immigrants that policymakers then and now have often preferred to keep shuttered.

This week marks an important moment for considering such perspectives. While young Dream activists sit in detention in Arizona for challenging policies that deny them and their family members in Mexico the ability to travel to see one another, elected officials continue to debate policy proposals for overhauling the current immigration system and increasing spending on border enforcement.

Some of these issues date to Robert García’s time. Just over sixty years ago, on August 4, 1942, the United States and Mexican governments signed the international labor agreement, known as the Bracero Program, that would bring him and more than a million others to the U.S. as agricultural workers. It was the expectation of official negotiators that contracted braceros would never be given the chance to put down roots in the United States: The program was designed only for men, and it was meant to allow sons and husbands to leave their kin for a limited number of weeks with the promise that they would return home at the conclusion of the harvest.

Braceros were idealized as laborers with strong arms (“brazos” means “arms” in Spanish), and little thought was given to their ambitions. But because participants like García showed more flexibility and more heart than policymakers had anticipated, developing new desires and friendships, and sometimes new permanent homes, in places like Cucamonga, braceros soon reshaped communities in both the United States and Mexico.

In ways that policymakers never anticipated, these migrants fell in and out of love from Arkansas to Zacatecas after 1942, maintaining relationships with family and friends on both sides of the border. Few policymakers recognized these dynamics, insisting instead on understanding workers as little more than game pieces on a North American board, one defined by nation-states and labor demands, and one that government officials could control with real confidence.

Blind to love, they saw the Bracero Program as a handy system of ladders and chutes, guaranteeing that contracted men would move from one identifiable square to another, at the appropriate time, and that they would then transition back down the board at the end of the game, sliding home to Mexico once their work contracts ended.

García and his peers were never passive pawns playing this type of game, nor were they guided only by economic calculations or government directives. Like so many others in American history, they often followed their hearts, and some braceros anticipated establishing new families in the United States from the start. A popular Spanish-language song recorded in Los Angeles in 1948 entitled “El Bracero y La Pachuca,” for example, celebrated the dashing, romantic young migrant worker aiming to settle down despite the Bracero Program’s restrictions on their permanent residency in the U.S. In flowery verse, he recited love poems to a young Mexican American woman, his “linda princesa encantada (beautiful enchanted princess),” to no avail.

The history of braceros and other migrants in the United States reminds us that love and romance have clashed with government policies in many civil rights struggles, and that love’s challenge to the legal order has often made our democracy more expansive and responsive. Even when denied permanent residency, valued only as temporary workers and not as citizens in the making, as in the case of imported laborers at midcentury, immigrants formed and reaffirmed loving relationships that were both intensely local – based in workplaces, neighborhoods, and schools – and insistently transnational – with children, siblings, extended family living abroad, across increasingly militarized borders.

Forged over decades, these bonds have certainly changed the United States for the better, creating millions of families of mixed immigration status today, and assuring that churches and most local institutions from coast to coast now include both immigrants and the U.S.-born. These realities have challenged our policymakers, of course.

But with so much at stake, the U.S. must legally recognize the ties of love that continue to bind our residents to one another. Immigrants’ courageous efforts to remain connected with their kin, to support and stay faithful to them, should remind us of the core values that we claim to uphold as a nation. Stephen Pitti is a professor of History and American Studies at Yale University and director of the Ethnicity, Race, and Migration Program. He is author of the books, “The Devil in Silicon Valley: Race, Mexicans, and Northern California” (2003) and “American Latinos and the Making of the United States.” (2012)