may 2005
DOREMUS OBSERVES : MATTERS OF INTEREST
Doremus Jessup, editor of
the Fort Beulah The Daily Informer, in Sinclair
Lewis' famous book "It Can't Happen Here", at
its conclusion, "drove out saluted by the meadow
larks, and onward all day, to a hidden cabin in the
Northern Woods where quiet men awaited news of
freedom.....still Doremus goes on, into the sunrise, for
a Doremus Jessup can never die......
************************
Cover Story: Soldier
boy
http://www.pointblank-dm.com/archive/2005/mar/033105/cover.shtml
By Tim Schmitt
Colin Hadley spends most of his days after school
skateboarding or Halo II on his new X-Box with friends.
He sleeps until noon or later on weekends and rarely, if
ever, does any schoolwork outside the classroom, where he
pulls down solid C's and a few D's - just enough to get
by. He's the typical 15-year-old American boy: cocksure
in demeanor, certain the world revolves around him, and
confident that life is going to serve him well.
And he's the new "target of interest" for U.S.
military recruiters who've begun signing up boys as young
as 14 for military service, which they will be required
to begin when they turn 18.
"It's a sweet deal," says Hadley, who boasts
that he bought his X-Box with the enlistment bonus he
received after signing up last month. "I don't have
to do hardly anything for three years, but they're paying
me now." Hadley's windfall was made possible under
the Pentagon's "pre-enlistment program" that
was quietly authorized last month in an effort to ensure
the number of military troops available for combat
remains steady for at least the next few years. The
conditions of the program are simple. A young man who is
at least 14 years old and has a parent's permission can
enlist in
the U.S. military, but will not report to duty until he
reaches the legal age. The future soldier agrees to
remain "physically and mentally fit" and to
undergo annual physical examinations at the Military
Entrance and Processing Station (MEPS). In exchange, the
government provides him a $10,000
sign-on bonus that is paid in yearly installments of
$2,500 until the age of 18, at which time any remaining
balance is given to the recruit.
And while waiting to report to duty at 18, the new
recruits are paid a modest stipend and allowed access to
funds granted veterans for education. Because combat duty
is a requirement of enlistment, the program is currently
open only to young men, and it has been authorized for
only three years, so Congress will have to renew the
program again in 2008. "The program is still in the
early stages, but we're certain it will prove a valuable
tool for the U.S. military while providing future
soldiers with much-needed financial assistance so they
can start planning for the future
now," says Lt. James Pederson, a spokesman for the
U.S. Pentagon's Office of Recruitment and Retention.
With the war in Iraq still taking a toll, and potential
conflicts on the horizon in Iran, North Korea, Syria, the
Philippines and elsewhere, the U.S. military is faced
with a shortage of manpower not seen in decades. The Army
National Guard met only 56 percent of its recruiting
quota in January, and the Marine Corps fell short of its
recruiting goal that month for the first time since 1995.
The Army missed its February recruiting goal by 27
percent, and the numbers for March and April are not
expected to improve. And though the Bush administration
has explored the idea of re-instituting the draft, the
idea has been met with such widespread resistance that
doing so seems unlikely.
"More and more of our troops are choosing to leave
service when their enlistment period comes to an end, and
the number of new recruits entering military service is
at a 20-year low," says Pederson. "We've had to
become more and more creative in our efforts to fill the
ranks of departing
soldiers, and that's meant reaching out to new target
groups and making them offers they simply can't
refuse."
Currently, the National Guard is offering enlistment
bonuses of up to $15,000 for new members, who may also
receive matching funds to be used as a down payment on a
new home. In addition, the Army announced last week that
it is raising the maximum age for new recruits by five
years, up to 39. It has also increased by 33 percent the
number of recruiters on the street and has developed a
sales pitch to appeal to parents who otherwise might not
approve of their child's enrollment
"We're going to appeal to the patriotism of
parents," says Pederson. "Parents have to
understand that their children are needed in a time of
war and that sacrifices need to be made for the good of
the nation."
And once these kids sign up under this program, they are
committed to serving in a combat zone and face strict
punishment if they refuse duty when they come of age. If
any refuse to show up for duty they will be charged with
desertion in a time of war and be subject to military
court martial,
which, theoretically at least, could result in the death
penalty. Pederson says the program is a necessary step.
"Is it unfortunate that we have to recruit children
to serve in battle? Absolutely," he says. "But
most countries have had children soldiering for
centuries. We're just leveling the playing field."
Montana Lawmakers reject
the Patriot Act
Montana House
Condemns Patriot Act
By Jennifer McKee
Billings Gazette State Bureau
4-3-5
www.rense.com
HELENA - Montana lawmakers overwhelmingly passed what its
sponsor called the nation's most strongly worded
criticism of the federal Patriot Act on Friday, uniting
politicians of all stripes.
The resolution, which already galloped through the Senate
and passed the House 88-12 Friday, must survive a final
vote before it officially passes.
Senate Joint Resolution 19, sponsored by Sen. Jim
Elliott, D-Trout Creek, says that while the 2005
Legislature supports the federal government's fight
against terrorism, the so-called Patriot Act of 2001
granted authorities sweeping powers that violate
citizens' rights enshrined in both the U.S. and Montanan
constitutions.
The resolution, which does not carry the weight of a law
but expresses the Legislature's opinion, encourages
Montana law enforcement agencies not to participate in
investigations authorized under the Patriot Act that
violate Montanans' constitutional rights. It requests all
libraries in the state to post a sign warning citizens
that under the Patriot Act, federal agents may force
librarians to turn over a record of books a person has
checked out and never inform that citizen of the request.
The resolution asks Montana's attorney general to review
any state intelligence information and destroy it if is
not tied directly to suspected criminals. It also asks
the attorney general to find out how many Montanans have
been arrested under the Patriot Act and how many people
have been subject to so-called "sneak and
peaks," or government searches of a person's
property without the person's knowledge.
Elliott, a Democrat and rancher from northwestern
Montana, sponsored the resolution, but it garnered
support from Republicans on the far right of the
political spectrum.
"Sometimes we just take liberty for granted in the
country," said Rep. Roger Koopman, R-Bozeman, who
keeps a plant called "the Liberty Tree" on his
legislative desk.
Koopman said his Liberty Tree was "blooming for this
bill."
"Frankly, what it says to me is that civil liberties
are a bipartisan issue in Montana," said Rep. Rick
Maejde, R-Trout Creek, who led the House debate for the
resolution.
Elliott said he was "very, very pleased" the
resolution had such support.
"Montana isn't the first state that passed a
resolution, but this resolution is the strongest
statement against the constitutional violations of the
Patriot Act of any state and almost every city or
county," he said.
Twelve representatives - all Republicans - voted against
the measure, including Rep. Bob Lake, R-Hamilton.
"I don't like resolutions because they do absolutely
nothing," he said in an interview after the vote. He
also said the resolution was too vague. Is it a sacrifice
of personal liberty to not be able to take a gun on an
airplane? he asked. Is that the kind of thing this
resolution objects to?
"So, they're going to get this thing back in D.C.
and say, 'O.K., Montana doesn't like what we're doing. So
what?,' " he said. "It has no meaning to
it."
Copyright © The Billings Gazette, a division of Lee
Enterprises.
Thanks to Bill Richer for this
information about the Montana Legislature's actions on
the USA Patriot Act. Provisions
of the USA Patriot Act are up for review in
Congress. The United States Attorney General is
pressing for the retention of all current provisions and
many new ones. This act should not be renewed or
expanded but should be rescinded.
The Independent American Party has submitted a Bill to
Congress to rescind the USA Patriot Act. It can be
accessed at: http://www.usiap.org/ActionItems/PatriotBill/PatriotBillText.html
The USA Patriot Act should be
rescinded for the following reasons:
1. The Representatives and
Senators who voted for it had not read nor understood it
before voting. 2.
Provisions in the USA Patriot Act trample on the right of
American citizens to be free from unreasonable search and
seizure. Since this God-given right is guaranteed
by the Constitution and abrogated by the USA Patriot Act,
the USA Patriot Act is in itself unconstitutional.
3. The USA Patriot Act
increases the power of the Executive branch far beyond
the limits envisioned and enumerated by the Founding
Fathers. Montana is the
fifth state to pass a resolution against the USA Patriot
Act. Montana's resolution is also the
strongest. There are 373 states, counties and
municipalities who have passed resolutions against the
USA Patriot Act. There is a groundswell of public
opinion against this act. We ask you to join the
groundswell by taking the following actions.
1. Print or copy the Patriot Act
Recision Bill at: http://www.usiap.org/ActionItems/PatriotBill/PatriotBillText.html
and send it to both of your Senators
and your Representative asking them to sponsor this bill.
2. Contact your state
legislators and have them sponsor a resolution patterned
after the resolution in Montana. http://data.opi.state.mt.us/bills/2005/billhtml/SJ0019.htm
3. Write a letter to the Editor
urging Congress to rescind this Act and urging your
state legislature to pass a resolution urging Congress to
rescind this Act.
4.Study information on the USA Patriot
Act at: http://www.bordc.org/index.html
5. Study your Constitutional
rights at: http://stores.ebay.com/Independent-American-Books_
W0QQsspagenameZMEQ3aFQ3aSTQQtZkm
For Freedom, Will Christensen National Vice Chair
Independent American Party http://www.usiap.org/
The Independent American Party will hold a convention the 15th & 16th of April in Salt Lake City. Details are at:
http://www.usiap.org/Events/EventsIndex.html
Those who are interested in retrieving our government from the Insiders are invited to attend.
Woman Sentenced
For 'Anti-Semitic' Comments
4-16-5
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- An Orange County judge handed down
an unusual sentence for a woman accused of yelling
anti-Semitic comments at her Jewish neighbor.
Geraldine Ballard wasn't charged with a crime. What
happened in court Thursday will not show up on her record
unless she violates the conditions of her probation.
Orange County judge Mike Murphy handled the sensitive
case by drafting a creative sentence for Ballard. Ballard
is accused of threatening Lisa Green and her children by
shouting derogatory remarks at them as they walked in
front of her property on their way to the Jewish
Community Center in Maitland.
"I truly have to say, the system worked, it really
worked," said Green.
The judge sentenced Ballard to 180 days of probation with
the condition she either serve 50 hours of community
service or visit one of three holocaust museums in
Washington DC, St. Petersburg or the Jewish Community
Center located in her own neighborhood.
Ballard has denied the accusations against her all along
and Thursday she refused to talk about the conditions of
her probation.
Ballard must also undergo a mental health evaluation. If
she fails to comply, she'll be back in court where she
could be criminally charged.
Ballard will have to pay $250 in court costs and she
cannot have any contact with Green and her family.
http://www.wftv.com/news/4379642/detail.html
Congressman
Ron Paul rejects World Trade Organisation
February 28, 2005
The World Trade Organization, which the United States joined in 1994, has been disastrous for American sovereignty. A tax bill passed last year provides a vivid example of just how blatantly Congress is surrendering our sovereignty to quasi-governmental bodies like the WTO. For years, high-tax Europe has objected to how we tax American companies on their overseas earnings. The EU took its dispute to the WTO grievance board, which voted in favor of the Europeans. The WTO ruling was clear: Congress must change American law to comply with European rules.
Make no mistake about it: WTO ministers tell Congress to change American laws, and Congress complies. In fact, congressional leaders obediently scrambled to make sure the corporate tax bill passed before a WTO deadline. Thousands and thousands of bills languish in committees, yet a bill ordered by the WTO was pushed to the front of the line.
Americans should expect to see more of the laws we live under being dictated by international bodies. Later this year, all European Union countries will unify their food supplement laws to conform with rules established by a United Nations commission. This commission, called Codex Alimentarius, calls for strict control of dietary supplements. Under the Codex rules, Europeans will need a doctor's prescription to obtain even basic vitamins. Thanks to the WTO, Americans may find their supplements similarly restricted in an attempt to harmonize the regulatory playing field between the U.S. and Europe. After all, this is the new reality in the WTO era: no nation may enjoy an "unfair" trade or regulatory environment.
This affront to our national sovereignty was of course predictable when we joined the WTO. A Congressional Research Service report was quite clear about the consequences of our membership: "As a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multi-lateral body. It is legally obligated to insure that national laws do not conflict with WTO rules."
Our membership in the WTO is unconstitutional, which is to say illegal. The Constitution grants Congress, and Congress alone, the authority to regulate trade. Congress cannot cede that authority to the WTO or any other international body, nor can the President legally sign any treaty that purports to do so. When Congress in essence transfers its authority over trade matters to the WTO, it acts illegally.
Fortunately, Congress has an opportunity this year to withdraw our membership in the WTO. When the U.S. first joined the organization in 1994, a rushed lame-duck Congress inserted a 5 year review clause to garner some last-minute votes. This clause allows members of Congress to bring a resolution every 5 years calling for a vote on our continued membership. I plan to join with other House colleagues this year in demanding withdrawal from the WTO. Our sovereignty is a precious national asset, and the American people are tired of watching Congress sell out one constitutional principle after another.
Norman Kirk Singleton
Legislative Director
Congressman Ron Paul
203 Cannon
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-2831