1,OOO,OOO NEW PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS IN FLORIDA WITHOUT SUBSIDIES, TAX BREAKS OR GIVEAWAY – PART TWO Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/1oooooo-new-private-sector-jobs-in-florida-without-subsidies-tax-breaks-or-giveaway-part-two/#U0kbWF3v02439zQt.99

1,OOO,OOO NEW PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS IN FLORIDA WITHOUT SUBSIDIES, TAX BREAKS OR GIVEAWAY – PART TWO Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/1oooooo-new-private-sector-jobs-in-florida-without-subsidies-tax-breaks-or-giveaway-part-two/#U0kbWF3v02439zQt.99

by Farid A. Khavari

Khavari Job Creation Plan, Part 2.

As governor, here’s exactly how I will create 1,000,000 good middle class jobs in Florida, without subsidies, tax incentives or other corporate socialism. It’s simple.

A governor with an economic plan is in a unique position to create jobs in Florida without subsidies, “stimulus plans”, or other forms of corporate socialism.  When you see how this goes, you will understand that it will work like magic, and you will wonder why every governor doesn’t do it.  That’s because this is common sense economics, not politics. And it involves working for the people of Florida, not the special interests.

You have heard about “Supply” and “Demand”.  Here is why corporate socialism and stimulus plans fail to create jobs:  they focus on supply. For example, Solyndra blew $535 million to create and then lose less than 2,000 jobs, and our grandchildren will still be paying the interest on that. They made a great factory to produce something that apparently no one wanted. Oops!

 

Become Inspired To Give. Watch Now.

 

Anyone but a politician can understand that a business will hire people when there is a demand for its products and services, and it will lay off people when there is no demand.  What I will do as governor, and it costs virtually nothing to do, is organizedemand.

As governor, I will represent all 19 million plus Floridians.  While we are all individuals, we have many common interests and acting together we are a huge economic force because we are a huge market. By representing all Floridians, a governor is in a unique position to drive the economy by organizing demand.   Here is one simple example.

Here’s a sample phone call from the governor’s office in January, 2015.

Governor Khavari:   Hey, Solar Panel Manufacturer, we have started a new program to solarize Florida. We have about 10 million homes, and we figure that 5,000,000 of them will get solar water heaters over the next few years. Our program is voluntary but we are promoting it because it can save people five times what it costs and we are all about reducing costs.  We are arranging special pricing with manufacturers so we can have the best deal possible for our people. We have arranged special financing so that people can get solar and pay for it through the energy savings.  We have licensed qualified plumbers and installers all over the state getting special training seminars. We need product.

Solar Panel Manufacturer:  That sounds interesting.

Governor Khavari:   We assure the manufacturers that a certain amount of their products will be sold in Florida at a pre-determined wholesale price, if they make them in Florida and hire Floridians. The pricing allows you to pay middle class wages and benefits and we need that, too.  Can you make 100,000 solar collectors per year in Florida?  How many can you promise us?  And how many jobs?

Solar Panel Manufacturer:   We can only supply 50,000 in the first year but 100,000 in the second year and onward.  We would need to hire 200 people the first year, and say 200 more the second year.  I know Florida has great roads, railroads, and ports so I’m sure we’ll find a location or two right away.  If we can sell that quantity at our current wholesale prices, we can pay better than the average wage; say around $44,000 and good benefits.

Governor Khavari:  Show up at my office on Tuesday and bring a pen.  We want this up and running within 90 days.  Our staff has arranged for representatives from cities and counties around Florida to meet with you and other manufacturers here so you can see what location makes sense for you.  One condition though, you can’t accept local tax benefits or handouts.

Solar Panel Manufacturer:   You don’t get jobs with handouts, sir; you get jobs when there is demand. What time on Tuesday?

Repeat this phone call to a few dozen manufacturers of various components of solar water heaters, and at the end of the day you have 3,000 manufacturing jobs which will grow to 7,000 within two years.  That’s nice for a number of areas who get these jobs.  But the real benefit is that this program creates over 30,000 MORE equally-well paying jobs all throughout Floridabecause every one of those systems needs to be sold, installed and maintained.

I described “SuperJobs” in the last post.  A SuperJob is a job which creates more wealth than an ordinary job, because the products or services pay for themselves and then provide permanent cost savings to the customer.  In the case of a solar water heater at the right price, the product pays for itself with energy savings, and then goes on to pay for itself four or five times over time.  Even though our “Solarize Florida” is voluntary, we will need a lottery to decide who gets these systems because demand will outstrip supply for a year or two.

We can have over 33,000 good jobs just from this little deal.  Now there is something else to consider:  33,000 good middle class jobs represent almost $2 billion per year of income. That translates into at least $10 billion per year in economic activity as that income circulates.  This added $10 billion in economic activity will create 100,000 more jobs in Florida within two years.  And those 100,000 jobs will create more. And so on.

This is just one small example of how I will create 1,000,000 good middle class jobs in Florida.  You can see how simple it is.  The special financing costs taxpayers nothing, either from local banks who want to enjoy some of the state’s banking deposits, or from my proposed SuperBank.  The manufacturers pay their own way and reap the benefits of a strong market.  They even pay for the training seminars.  The customers get a great product at the lowest possible prices. The solar companies and plumbers make a fair profit while paying the middle class wages and benefits required to participate in our program.

Next time I will explain how we can create a much larger number of SuperJobs in Florida and save billions in the state’s budget, too.

Rick Scott has promised to spend $100 million to win another term as chief lapdog of big money special interests.  (Who is paying for that, and why?) Charlie Crist has already raised millions from big donors.  There is only one way to defeat big money and the special interests pulling the strings in Florida, and that is by using social media to get the message out to every voter.  Please pass these posts to everyone you know and get the word out!

If you don’t need a job, you certainly know someone who does.  Stand up to big money! Pass it on!

Khavari for Governor, Florida 2014. A million good jobs.  Really.

 

Farid Khavari, Ph.D., economist is a candidate for Florida Governor 2014.

 

Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/1oooooo-new-private-sector-jobs-in-florida-without-subsidies-tax-breaks-or-giveaway-part-two/#U0kbWF3v02439zQt.99

Poverty In The Land Of Plently

Poverty In The Land Of Plently

The holiday season is upon us. Sadly, the big retailers are Scrooges when it comes to paying their staffs. Undergirding the sale prices is an army of workers earning the minimum wage or a fraction above it, living check to check on their meager pay and benefits. The dark secret that the retail giants like Wal-Mart don’t want you to know is that many of these workers subsist below the poverty line, and rely on programs like food stamps and Medicaid just to get by. This holiday season, though, low-wage workers from Wal-Mart to fast-food restaurants are standing up and fighting back.

“Wal-Mart was put in an uncomfortable spotlight on what should be the happiest day of the year for the retailer,” Josh Eidelson told me, reporting on the coordinated Black Friday protests. “These were the largest protests we’ve seen against Wal-Mart … you had 1,500 stores involved; you had over a hundred people arrested.” Wal-Mart is the world’s largest retailer, with 2.2 million employees, 1.3 million of whom are in the U.S. It reported close to $120 billion in gross profit for 2012. Just six members of the Walton family, whose patriarch, Sam Walton, founded the retail giant, have amassed an estimated combined fortune of between $115 billion-$144 billion. These six individuals have more wealth than the combined financial assets of the poorest 40 percent of the U.S. population.

Wal-Mart workers have been organizing under the banner of OUR Walmart, a worker initiative supported by the United Food and Commercial Workers union. Workers have taken courageous stands, protesting their employer and engaging in short-term strikes. Wal-Mart has retaliated, firing many who participated. One of those fired was Barbara Collins, who worked for eight years at the Wal-Mart in Placerville, Calif.

“I was terminated for speaking out,” Collins told us on “Democracy Now!” On Nov. 18, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that the strikes were protected worker actions. Collins, who was speaking to us from Bentonville, Ark., where she was protesting Wal-Mart at its world headquarters, told us: “The NLRB ruling is just overwhelming. We are really excited that they found that we’re telling the truth, that they broke the law, and we want to be reinstated.”

The public-policy think tank Demos issued a report, “A Higher Wage is Possible: How Walmart Can Invest in Its Workforce Without Costing Customers a Dime.” Demos analyzed a growing demand from the Wal-Mart worker movement for a guaranteed base salary for full-time workers of $25,000 per year. “We found talking to Wal-Mart workers over and over again that their wages give them just enough to meet their basic needs, and at the end of every month, they’re making critical trade-off decisions,” Catherine Ruetschlin, one of the report’s co-authors, told us. “Determining whether they’re going to get medicine or pay their school fees or put food on the table or keep their electricity on.” The report explains that “if Walmart redirected the $7.6 billion it spends annually on repurchases of its own company stock, these funds could be used to give Walmart’s low-paid workers a raise of $5.83 an hour,” meeting the salary goal of the workers.

Parallel to the Wal-Mart campaign is a drive for higher wages in the fast-food industry. In more than 100 cities, workers are organizing protests and strikes … and winning. In SeaTac, the Washington state municipality where the Seattle-Tacoma Airport is located, voters approved a local minimum wage of $15 an hour. As with Wal-Mart workers, fast-food giants like McDonald’s and Yum Brands (which owns KFC and Taco Bell) all feast from the public trough: Their workers, earning poverty wages, depend on public-assistance programs like food stamps and Medicaid, while their enormous CEObenefit packages qualify for corporate tax deductions, as reported by the Institute for Policy Studies this week.

The current federal minimum wage is $7.25, equivalent to an annual income of $15,080 for a full-time worker. If the minimum wage had kept up with inflation since 1968, it would be $10.74, enough to lift a family of three above the poverty line. If the wage had grown at the same pace as worker productivity (since each worker per hour produces much more now than in decades past), it would be $18.72 per hour. And if the minimum wage had skyrocketed at the same pace as wages for the top 1 percent, it would be $28.34. These figures from the Economic Policy Institute explain why President Barack Obama is pushing for an increase in the minimum wage.

Progress on the minimum wage, and on workers’ rights at Wal-Mart, McDonald’s and the other multinational corporations that depend on public subsidies for their workers, will come not from a stroke of the president’s pen, but from the concerted efforts of workers and their allies, from the streets to the voting booths.

Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 1,200 stations in North America. She is the co-author of “The Silenced Majority,” a New York Times best-seller.

© 2013 Amy Goodman

Distributed by King Features Syndicate

Exposé: Iran and Syria’s Nerve Gas is Made in Europe – Op-Eds – Israel National News

Nothing keeps a German or French firm – and a British, Italian or Swiss one – from making a good profit. And if it puts the Zionist state in danger, no problem.

Giulio Meotti
The writer, an Italian journalist with Il Foglio, writes a weekly column for Arutz Sheva. He is the author of the book “A New Shoah”, that researched the personal stories of Israel’s terror victims, published by Encounter. His writing has appeared in publications, such as the Wall Street Journal, Frontpage and Commentary.
► More from this writer

Syria threatens to use chemical weapons, including lethal gas and germs, against “external forces”. And the unthinkable becomes much more concrete in Israel.

The gas mask distribution centers have increased their activities in the last few days. Health authorities may start inoculation of soldiers and emergency care personnel against smallpox. Family drug kits, including antibiotics against anthrax, may be delivered door-to-door. The Education Ministry will prepare material for all students instructing them on the ABC’s of chemical and biological warfare. The message is clear: Israel should be prepared for the worst.

The Germans used chlorine gas against the Allies in World War I; in 1937, they developed nerve gas, the most deadly of all. Mustard gas was used by the Egyptians in the war with Yemen. But by far the worst were the Iraqis in the Iran-Iraq war, when nerve gas killed untold numbers. Saddam Hussein was also responsible for the gassing of thousands of Kurdish civilians in 1988.

The sarin gas attacks by the Aum Shinrikyo cult in Japan in 1994-1995, the anthrax attack in the United States in October 2001 and the chlorine attacks by al-Qaida in Iraq in 2006-2007 are a few examples that serve to remind us that the use of weapons of mass destruction can be a reality in today’s Middle East.

Already in May 2011, then US Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned about the possibility that Hizbullah is armed with chemical warheads. Syria’s stockpiles could fall into the hands of al-Qaeda, which is involved in the fighting, a military faction, or a post-Assad regime controlled by Islamists.
It’s the worst kind of nightmare.

A four milligram droplet of VX kills in under an hour. The first symptoms include drooling, sweating, difficulty breathing and the constriction of pupils to zombie pinpoints. Then come gastrointestinal spasms, vomiting, convulsions and asphyxiation. Unlike other nerve gases, such as sarin, VX evaporates slowly so winds can’t blow it away. And unlike sarin, VX penetrates the skin.

What very few people know is that European companies and scientists gave Iran, Syria, Libya and Iraq the material to attempt to kill the Jews, again.

In 1992 a 100-page report, prepared by the Paris-based Middle East Defence News, listed about 300 European firms which the centre said it believed had “played a significant role in the unconventional weapons programmes in Iran, Syria and Libya”.

Germany topped the list of suppliers with 100, the report said, then 29 French, 22 British, 13 Italian and 13 Swiss.

German companies have played a crucial role in helping Iran to build a chemical weapons industry, and have illegally supplied nerve gas precursor chemicals,” the report said. It said France had played a “crucial role…in helping Syria to develop both a chemical weapons and a biological weapons capability”.

The West German firm Degussa supplied of chemicals to Libya used to manufacture poison gas. This company also owned a 42.5 per cent share in the Degesch company, which supplied the Zyklon B gas used in the death camps. Degesch is the acronym for “Deutsche Gesellschaft fuer Schaedlingsbekaempfung”, a company for the extermination of vermin.

It developed the method of using hydrogen cyanide, Zyklon B, as an ingredient in its fumigation gas for buildings and ships. The gas it supplied to Auschwitz was used in the killing of two million Jews.

“For years, Iraqi officers had asked us how it had been with the gassing of the Jews.” said Maj. Gen. Karl-Heinz Nagler, former head of the East German Army’s chemical service, who had trained the Iraqi Army in chemical warfare for 15 years.

The manufacturing of di-fluoro – from which nerve gas is obtained – requires resistant glass components. Two German companies gave these to the Syrians.

French scientific institutes also played a role, through scientific exchanges.

In 1988, the Wall Street Journal revealed that German companies sold Saddam what he needed to perfect new types of poison gas, including manufacturing equipment for hydrogen cyanide, the active ingredient of Zyklon B, the gas used in Hitler’s crematoriums.

In 1990, members of the German parliament demanded a confidential briefing from Economics Minister Helmut Haussmann. What they heard surpassed their worst fears. Haussmann read off a list of companies believed to have supplied Iraq and Syria with the means to manufacture arms.

A German company was the chief supplier for six plants in Samarra, Iraq, that make nerve and mustard gases, gases already used against the Kurds and the Iranians. We know that some of Saddam’s chemical weapons have been moved to Syria.

In 1996, the weekly ‘Stern’ revealed the German involvement in a toxic gas facility in Aleppo, similar to that of Tarhuna in Libya.

According to Raul Hilberg, the use of pesticides in the Final Solution was no accident. In German propaganda Jews had frequently been portrayed as insects. Hans Frank, Head of the German Occupation Government in Poland, and Heinrich Himmler, head of the SS, had stated that the Jews were parasites who had to be exterminated like vermin.

Today, again, Jews are described by Islamists as sub-humans, with expressions like “pig,” “cancer,” “filth”, “microbes” or “vermin”.

Without the European chemical companies, there would be no Syrian and Iranian germs and gas’ threat to Israel.

We can be partners in the Jewish struggle against the new apocalypse. Or we can be part of it. The European companies and scientists have made their choice.

Let’s hope that one day we will not have to judge these Europeans responsible for another catastrophe, like the one facilitated with Degesch’s Zyklon B.

Tags: Germans ,chemical warfare

More on this topic

Golan Heights Residents Calm Amid Chemical War Fears
‘Israel Will Go to War if Hizbullah Gets Chemical Weapons’
Syria Warns It May Use Chemical Weapons on ‘Foreign’ Forces
Why Did a Vice Chairman of the German-Israel Association Resign?
Brit Mila and Secular Intolerance in Germany
Arab MK Zoabi Tells Germans Israel is Fascist
Muslims and Jews Join to Fight German Circumcision Ban
‘Israel in Shadow of Syria’s Chemical Weapons’
Kara: All of Assad’s Officers Were Trained in Iran
Gunter Grass Lashes Out Against Israel, Yet Again

commentSend To Friendprint
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services 5

Beware of CAIR Where is Syria’s Peace Now Movement? And Their Beinart? From Washington to Jerusalem: The Year of the Centrists
►◄

Comments (2)
Post CommentOpen All comments
1. Finally someone said it.
Sergio HaDaR Tezza, (30/7/12)
2. and these same countries own the Israeli government (n.c)
Rudy, (30/7/12)
Home page, Contact, Staff, Advertise, Israel Tours, חדשות ערוץ 7
© Arutz Sheva, All Rights Reserved
Main
Homepage Op-EdsJudaism Forecast Services CaricatureIsrael Pics
News
Send Us Breaking News News Briefs
More
Blogs
Radio
LiveRecorded ShowsJukebox
Forums
Main Favorites Personal Messages Exposé: Iran and Syria's Nerve Gas is Made in Europe – Op-Eds – Israel National News.

Sheldon Adelson and Newt Gingrich: One gained clout from friendship, the other funding – The Washington Post

The way casino magnate Sheldon Adelson remembers it, he and his wife, Miriam, met then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1995 in the majestic Capitol Rotunda as they made their way through the building while lobbying for a bill to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Nearly two decades later, Gingrich, on the campaign trail, has promised that his first executive order as president would be the embassy move, long a priority of ardent Israel supporters such as the Adelsons.

7

Comments

• Weigh In
• Corrections?

Personal Post

Graphic

Watch the latest campaign ads and track ad spending

Gallery

The former House speaker is seeking the Republican presidential nomination.

It would also be a sweet jackpot for the Adelsons, who are the biggest patrons of Gingrich’s political career.

Perhaps no other major presidential candidate in recent times has had his fortunes based so squarely on the contributions of a single donor, as Gingrich has on Adelson, who has spent millions in support of Gingrich and his causes over the past five years. In a primary season dominated by the mega-spending of super PACs, Adelson’s efforts on Gingrich’s behalf provide a window into the expanding influence of the super-rich on American politics.

After putting up the seed money and ultimately $7.7 million between 2006 and 2010 for a nonprofit group that served as a precursor to Gingrich’s presidential campaign, Adelson, 78, an irascible Las Vegas billionaire, doubled down this month, giving $5 million to a political action committee run by former close aides to Gingrich.

“My motivation for helping Newt is simple and should not be mistaken for anything other than the fact that my wife Miriam and I hold our friendship with him very dear and are doing what we can as private citizens to support his candidacy,” Adelson, who is listed by Forbes as the eighth-wealthiest American, with a net worth of $21.5 billion, said in a prepared statement e-mailed to The Washington Post. He declined interview requests.

The most recent donation to Winning Our Future, a Gingrich-linked super PAC, fueled Gingrich’s resurgence before Saturday’s primary in South Carolina and bankrolled ads and a half-hour film painting rival Mitt Romney as a job-killing corporate raider. Adelson told associates that he will consider more donations if Gingrich fares well Saturday.

For Gingrich, the check links him even more closely to Adelson (pronounced ADD-el-son), an outspoken businessman known for aggressive tactics. His net worth has increased at least ninefold in the last decade. (The FBI and Securities and Exchange Commission are investigating his company, Las Vegas Sands, in connection with allegations that Adelson ordered an executive to bribe Chinese officials by putting them on the payroll. Adelson and company officials deny the allegations, which they say were first made by a disgruntled former employee.)

Adelson said the check to Gingrich was about fidelity. “Our means of support might be more than others are able to offer,” he said, “but like most Americans, words such as friendship and loyalty still mean something to us.”

Friends said Adelson and Gingrich share views on Israel, labor and free enterprise. In December, when Gingrich was riding atop the national GOP polls, Adelson was delighted.

• Continued
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page

• Email
• Tumblr
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon
• Digg
• Delicious

Discussion Policy | FAQ | About Discussions | About Badges

7

Comments

ramseytuell

1/27/2012 2:11 PM MST

At present we are sending 33% of our work to other countries. If we were to keep 18% of that here it would put most of that 14 million back to work. It is very important that we do it now. Workers feed our money Supply, pay taxes, and pay the wages of all those that have jobs in our government.
The President, in his state of The Union speech, addressed the fact that we are losing our skilled workers such as engineers, die makers, machinists, etc and along with them goes our ability to manufacture and build wealth in our country.
If I see any of the contenders for the Presidency, or the President and any of his staff, smiling and talking about rearranging the government offices to safe money, or shuffling papers and laws to improve the economy, I’m going to puke.

banicki

1/20/2012 1:33 PM MST

One dollar one vote.
Here is biggest problem of this years election. and no one is discussing it including the Times.
American politics is one of the few jobs where you are allowed to hunt for another job during 98% of normal working hours and continue to be paid for your present position. WE CANNOT LET THIS HAPPEN THIS TIME!
“Republicans hope Mr. Obama’s pronouncement that a full-year extension of the payroll tax cut was the last “must-do” piece of legislation for the White House will work in their favor, making them look as though they are trying to create jobs while Mr. Obama is busy campaigning.” Boehner Faces a Restive G.O.P. and New White House Attacks, Jennifer Steinhaurer, New York Times, January 14, 2011
In 2012 we have the following items that demand national attention: the presidential and congressional elections, the Afghan war, Iran building a nuclear weapon, high unemployment, a teetering economy and a national debt with no plan in place to solve it. These are just the items on the top shelf. Morehttp://goo.gl/mIWYc

Provincial

1/20/2012 9:13 AM MST

What is not mentioned in this article is the fact that Newt Gingrich did a 180 on his Israel v. Palestinians positions immediately after receiving the $1 million.
Newt sold himself to Adelson, he has been bought and paid for.

View all comments »

Add your comment | Reply to a comment | Recommend a comment | Report an offensive comment

SuperFan Badge

SuperFan badge holders consistently post smart, timely comments about Washington area sports and teams.

More about badges | Request a badge

Culture Connoisseur Badge

Culture Connoisseurs consistently offer thought-provoking, timely comments on the arts, lifestyle and entertainment.

More about badges | Request a badge

Fact Checker Badge

Fact Checkers contribute questions, information and facts to The Fact Checker.

More about badges | Request a badge

Washingtologist Badge

Washingtologists consistently post thought-provoking, timely comments on events, communities, and trends in the Washington area.

More about badges | Request a badge

Post Writer Badge

This commenter is a Washington Post editor, reporter or producer.

Post Forum Badge

Post Forum members consistently offer thought-provoking, timely comments on politics, national and international affairs.

More about badges | Request a badge

Weather Watcher Badge

Weather Watchers consistently offer thought-provoking, timely comments on climates and forecasts.

More about badges | Request a badge

World Watcher Badge

World Watchers consistently offer thought-provoking, timely comments on international affairs.

More about badges | Request a badge

Post Contributor Badge

This commenter is a Washington Post contributor. Post contributors aren’t staff, but may write articles or columns. In some cases, contributors are sources or experts quoted in a story.

More about badges | Request a badge

Post Recommended

Washington Post reporters or editors recommend this comment or reader post.

You must be logged in to report a comment.

Sign in here

You must be logged in to recommend a comment.

Sign in here

Comments our editors find particularly useful or relevant are displayed in Top Comments, as are comments by users with these badges: . Replies to those posts appear here, as well as posts by staff writers.

All comments are posted in the All Comments tab.

More about badges

Get a badge

To pause and restart automatic updates, click “Live” or “Paused”. If paused, you’ll be notified of the number of additional comments that have come in.

Comments our editors find particularly useful or relevant are displayed in Top Comments, as are comments by users with these badges: . Replies to those posts appear here, as well as posts by staff writers.

 

Sheldon Adelson and Newt Gingrich: One gained clout from friendship, the other funding – The Washington Post

What Is Europe’s Problem?

February 9, 2012 in Uncategorized by Anarchadia

‎” It starts with “thou shall not kill”, then it is “thou shall not kill your neighbor”, then  ”thou shall not kill if that person has lots of money and resources to corrupt you”… and it finishes with, “God is with us, we can go and invade Iraq!”
– Christophe Alévêque

Many of us are too busy putting up with new false ideologies, Mass Media Disinformation, as well as our own lives, to be able to discern real information from that which is false. There is also the National versus Global “problem” (Countries don’t necessarily share the same News, even though they all belong to the same companies, through advertising and financing), which technically censors non-corporate mass communication and still divides the World, between Mass Monetarism and Non-Monetarism (I assure you, it even divides China). It’s all much more subtle now, because obviously the criminals of today, have had a lot of homework to study up on… and so do we!

Europe is being divided just as America, Russia, China, and mostly every other Developed Country in the World; except in America we are one of the least educated Countries in the World, so truth easily wears thin, and debilitates public opinion to the point of supporting the most phony crooks this World has ever set eyes on. Some say Fascism regained its power when Allen Dulles (a Nazi Supporter) assassinated Kennedy, after getting fired by Kennedy. Dulles surprisingly got his job back after Kennedy was killed, was on the Commission which investigated Kennedy, and helped start the career of George W. Bush. Others will argue that Fascism never left America, since the early days of Henry Ford (a nazi supporter). I personally think that Fascism is just a tool of all Oligarchs, whether they be Monarchs or the very rich hiding behind their Corporations, Trademarks, and Monetary Opportunists. Monarchies and Corporations function the same way… they are trademarks, backed by Capital Interest. When the English people speak about their Monarchy, they glorify it as an “amazing” trademark, which is good for stability… give me a break! They are just as amazing as Nike, who exploited enslaved children for 0.30 cents a pair of shoes, to then tell the World how much money they were making. “Amazing”!

The British Monarchy as well as the Austrian Monarchy were Fascist at some point, and some of them fully supported the Nazis. Edward VIII had to abdicated because he was a strong public supporter of Hitler. But nothing was said about George VI, and his personal ideologies. We can give them the benefit of believing in their personalized stochastic versions of History, or we can maybe imagine that the U.K Monarchy had to turn against Fascism. Fascism was unpopular in the U.K as well as the U.S (maybe because the money making War Profit Machine had already started). Hitler never bombed the British Monarchy, he said it was just to scare the Monarchs, but Fascism would have been advantageous to the already rottingly corrupt Monarchy, its Aristocracy and Bourgeoisie (remember Charles Dickens?).

Unspun News On Facebook Since 2010

Maybe this sudden change in Monarchs, had more to do with the “Business plan” in America which failed in 1933, and gave force to the War Loving FDR. The U.K knew that if America ever went to War against UK Monarchist Fascism (as was the Spanish Monarchy, backed by the Vatican, and Italian Government), the Monarchy would be obliterated by historical American sentiment against the U.K Crown. Strong feelings die hard. MI6 and the CIA might state a different story, but we all know who MI6 works for, as well as the CIA: Corporate Interest (not for the little guys and girls).

So in all this there is a trend, and even if we cannot prove it through judicial paper work (since America invented the paper shredder), maybe we can at least admit that the wealthy have been systemically greedy, as some public schools used to teach our kids (with Buddha, Robin Hood and Charles Dickens… the big movie studios are even going to capitalize on Dickens again, as did Sir. Charles for this year’s Charles Dickens anniversary).

Just keep in mind that Fascism resurfaced right after WWII, with the CIA backing Right-Wing Movements, while discrediting those on the Left (Hitler had done the exact same thing, when he won the elections of 1933). Here specialists will iterate the Communist Threat, except that Hitler was just as much against Communism as America was before/after World War II. What is the primordial difference between Fascism and Communism? None. Both were populist fronts used to sell weapons and make War. These Governments might have supported a few good ideas we can learn from, but they were just as murderous and opportunistic when it came to money as the Fascists were. In principle, Socialism/Christianity was for equality, and against monetary inequality, while Fascism is very much like Anarcho-Capitalism aspires to be today (the rich do as they please, which has been the case of Socialist Governments as well as Christian Institutions, the same can be said about Islam or any other Religion; they were all corrupted at some point or another by Capitalism).

Propaganda Due which existed from 1945-1976 helped Italy’s Right Wing pulverize the Left from 1976 to 1981, Propaganda Due implicates three international celebrities: Berlusconi, Sarcozy (who was his Lawyer), and Putin, who just like George Bush, must have been CIA assets, or at least on the same side (that of Fascism ever since Dulles, and maybe even before). The CIA also backed Right-Wing Coups with the Hollywood style Italian Elections of 1948.

Anyway let us skip forward to today. What do Merkel, Sarcozy, Berlusconi, Obama, George Bush, Margaret Thatcher, Reagan, etc… all share in common? They support the Right Wing, and are simply Centrist Populist Opportunists, who work for the Corporations, who in turn, work for the very rich (who puppeteer us all, it is the case of saying it, just look how old the British Monarchy’s Family Lineage is, these folks had to lie out of their asses ). Never forget that the Austrian Monarchy taught the U.K Monarchy not to go too far in the age of popular votes. The U.K Fascists had learned from their Ancestors mistakes, and were in full throttle to export it to America.

Angela Merkel and Sarcozy have been floating around together these last few months, on televisions saying the same thing: “More Austerity, cut public sector jobs”. They state that they are even ready to kick out Greece and Portugal from the E.U because of their own Fascism. And if anyone criticizes them, they say they are being affronted by the threats of Nationalist/Fascists. Maybe on TV those repeated lies work, but not near any critical-thinking minority (not all people have the time to identify when they are being lead into Fascism, no matter how rich and innocent they are, because Fascists talked about the poor all of the time, only to tax them more like they want to do on us today), enslave them, kill, ex-propriate and famish others. You know the drill! Its a natural recurrence in man, its Fascism!

Therefore when these Countries talk about Greece and Portugal’s debt (behind their backs on Mainstream Corporate Networks), the Fascists want to kick out Countries who refuse to remove more of their Public Sector. They always have wanted to replace Public Services with privatization and Big Chain Hotels, which will impoverish them. America used those policies these past 40 years and look at use we are the most indebted Countri in the World). While the E.U is ready to allow Countries like Croatia (which is an expensive tourist trap compared to Greece), into its Fascist Union. The European Bank is Centralized just like the FED, and even if these Unions broke up, it would actually make prices cheaper, while expanding the Black and Grey Market profits for those who can invest in them. It is common knowledge that those who invest in War get very rich.

And to conclude this rather long debacle I would like to speak of my opinion about France, since many Countries in Europe, Eurasia, South America, and Africa are facing the same threat:

The only reason Sarcozy is even credited as a good candidate, is because his only “real” competition is the Fascist Party itself. Same in Russia against Putin, America with Rand Paul/Ron Paul (currently Obama but he doesn’t have the popular support anymore), and et cetera. Anarchists all over the World are censored, even for what they have to say. Simply because true Anarchism in not for profit, it is a revolutionary evolution within the psyche of man, and has been around for thousands of years… which is a very different image from what most History books state. Anarchists are simply minorities who speak out not behind an ideology, but against oppression they themselves felt. Most Anarchists are pacifists, and are much more patient and peaceful than any of your Government Leaders or their Bankers. Truth is not that difficult to find, unless you have Julius Caesar types who think they can redominate this World, with “divide and conquer”. Divide and conquer works, but it needs War to kill competition, or else it is quickly attacked as a deceitful lie. And people in this World are sick and tired of seeing people dying and hungry, just so that a few assholes can take the credit for everything their billions of slaves have made.

‎” Religion is like any elite. You have the pope, who declares something. The Apostles listen and go out repeating the declaration of the pope, which they memorized. Then you have what is called the people of the church, who interpret what the Apostles told them, but still it is always memorized. Finally you have the “believers” (who ironically believe not what they have to say, but what they themselves memorized, courtesy of the church), who go out and indoctrinate people who have no means to think, like most of us (only because we are worked so much we are stupid and lower class, and must have nothing better to do). So then these stupid people are convinced that it is wise to repeat what they heard from “believers”. Those same “believers”, who had memorized what the Apostles said, who in turn had to memorize what the Pope declared. ”
– Christophe Alévêque

← Panetta Confirms War With Iran

Lulzsec is CIA →

Leave a reply

 

 

 

 

What Is Europe’s Problem?.

How To Find An American Police State

This article originally appeared at TomDispatch.com. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com. Click here to catch Timothy MacBain’s latest Tomcast audio interview in which Salisbury discusses post-9/11 police “mission creep” in this country, or download it to your iPod here.   At the height of the Occupy Wall Street evictions, it seemed as though some diminutive version of “shock and awe” had stumbled from Baghdad, Iraq, to Oakland, California. American police forces had been “militarized,” many commentators worried, as though the firepower and callous tactics on display were anomalies, surprises bursting upon us from nowhere.

About the Author

Stephan Salisbury

  Stephan Salisbury is cultural writer for the Philadelphia  Inquirer. His most recent book is Mohamed’s  Ghosts:…

Also by the Author

Islam-Baiting Doesn’t Work(US Politics, Race and Religion, Politics)

Far from winning votes, “Muslim-bashing” alienates large swaths of the electorate—even as it hardens an already hard core on the right.

Stephan Salisbury

1 comment

 

 

Extremist Killing is as American as Apple Pie(Guns and Gun Control, Conservatives and the American Right, Media)

Gunned down in Tucson, shot to death at the Pentagon and blown away at the Holocaust Museum, as well as in Wichita, Knoxville, Pittsburgh, Brockton and Okaloosa County, Florida, the landscape of America is littered with bodies.

Stephan Salisbury

1 comment

 

Related Topics

EntertainmentHuman InterestNew York CityTechnologyWar

There should have been no surprise. Those flash grenades exploding in Oakland and the sound cannons on New York’s streets simply opened small windows onto a national policing landscape long in the process of militarization—a bleak domestic no man’s land marked by tanks and drones, robot bomb detectors, grenade launchers, tasers and most of all, interlinked video surveillance cameras and information databases growing quietly on unobtrusive server farms everywhere.

The ubiquitous fantasy of “homeland security,” pushed hard by the federal government in the wake of 9/11, has been widely embraced by the public. It has also excited intense weapons- and techno-envy among police departments and municipalities vying for the latest in armor and spy equipment.

In such a world, deadly gadgetry is just a grant request away, so why shouldn’t the 14,000 at-risk souls in Scottsbluff, Nebraska, have a closed-circuit-digital-camera-and-monitor system (cost: $180,000, courtesy of the Homeland Security Department) identical to the one up and running in New York’s Times Square?

So much money has gone into armoring and arming local law-enforcement since 9/11 that the federal government could have rebuilt post-Katrina New Orleans five times over and had enough money left in the kitty to provide job training and housing for every one of the record 41,000-plus homeless people in New York City. It could have added in the growing population of 15,000 homeless in Philadelphia, my hometown, and still have had money to spare. Add disintegrating Detroit, Newark and Camden to the list. Throw in some crumbling bridges and roads, too.

But why drone on? We all know that addressing acute social and economic issues here in the homeland was the road not taken. Since 9/11, the Department of Homeland Security alone has doled out somewhere between $30 billion and $40 billion in direct grants to state and local law enforcement, as well as other first responders. At the same time, defense contractors have proven endlessly inventive in adapting sales pitches originally honed for the military on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan to the desires of police on the streets of San Francisco and Lower Manhattan. Oakland may not be Basra but (as former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld liked to say) there are always the unknown unknowns: best be prepared.

All told, the federal government has appropriated about $635 billion, accounting for inflation, for homeland security–related activities and equipment since the 9/11 attacks. To conclude, though, that “the police” have become increasingly militarized casts too narrow a net. The truth is that virtually the entire apparatus of government has been mobilized and militarized right down to the university campus.

Perhaps the pepper spray used on Occupy demonstrators last November at University of California–Davis wasn’t directly paid for by the federal government. But those who used it work closely with Homeland Security and the FBI “in developing prevention strategies that threaten campus life, property, and environments,” as UC Davis’s Comprehensive Emergency and Continuity Management Plan puts it.

Government budgets at every level now include allocations aimed at fighting an ephemeral “War on Terror” in the United States. A vast surveillance and military buildup has taken place nationwide to conduct a pseudo-war against what can be imagined, not what we actually face. The costs of this effort, started by the Bush administration and promoted faithfully by the Obama administration, have been, and continue to be, virtually incalculable. In the process, public service and the public imagination have been weaponized.

Farewell to Peaceful Private Life

We’re not just talking money eagerly squandered. That may prove the least of it. More importantly, the fundamental values of American democracy—particularly the right to lead an autonomous private life—have been compromised with grim efficiency. The weaponry and tactics now routinely employed by police are visible evidence of this.

Yes, it’s true that Montgomery County, Texas, has purchased a weapons-capable drone. (They say they’ll only arm it with tasers, if necessary.) Yes, it’s true that the Tampa police have beefed up the force with an eight-ton armored personnel carrier, augmenting two older tanks the department already owns. Yes, the Fargo police are ready with bomb detection robots and Chicago boasts a network of at least 15,000 interlinked surveillance cameras.

New York City’s 34,000-member police force is now the ground zero of a growing outcry over rampant secret spying on Muslim students and communities up and down the East Coast. It has been a big beneficiary of federal security largesse. Between 2003 and 2010, the city received more than $1.1 billion through Homeland Security’s Urban Areas Security Initiative grant program. And that’s only one of the grant programs funneling such money to New York.

The Obama White House itself has directly funded part of the New York Police Department’s anti-Muslim surveillance program. Top officials of New York’s finest have, however, repeatedly refused to disclose just how much anti-terrorism money it has been spending, citing, of course, security.

Can New York City ever be “secure”? Mayor Michael Bloomberg boasted recently with obvious satisfaction: “I have my own army in the NYPD, which is the seventh-largest army in the world.” That would be the Vietnamese army actually, but accuracy isn’t the point. The smugness of the boast is. And meanwhile the money keeps pouring in and the “security” activities only multiply.

Why, for instance, are New York cops traveling to Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, and Newark, New Jersey, to spy on ordinary Muslim citizens, who have nothing to do with New York and are not suspected of doing anything? For what conceivable purpose does Tampa want an eight-ton armored vehicle? Why do Texas sheriffs north of Houston believe one drone—or a dozen, for that matter—will make Montgomery County a better place? What manner of thinking conjures up a future that requires such hardware? We have entered a dark world that demands an inescapable battery of closed-circuit, networked video cameras trained on ordinary citizens strolling Michigan Avenue.

This is not simply a police issue. Law enforcement agencies may acquire the equipment and deploy it, but city legislators and executives must approve the expenditures and the uses. State legislators and bureaucrats refine the local grant requests. Federal officials, with endless input from national security and defense vendors and lobbyists, appropriate the funds.

Doubters are simply swept aside (while legions of security and terrorism pundits spin dread-inducing fantasies), and ultimately, the American people accept and live with the results. We get what we pay for—Mayor Bloomberg’s “army,” replicated coast to coast.

Budgets Tell the Story

Militarized thinking is made manifest through budgets, which daily reshape political and bureaucratic life in large and small ways. Not long after the 9/11 attacks, then–Attorney General John Ashcroft, appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, used this formula to define the new American environment and so the thinking that went with it: “Terrorist operatives infiltrate our communities—plotting, planning, and waiting to kill again.” To counter that, the government had urgently embarked on “a wartime reorganization,” he said, and was “forging new relationships of cooperation with state and local law enforcement.”

While such visionary Ashcroftian rhetoric has cooled in recent years, the relationships and funding he touted a decade ago have been institutionalized throughout government—federal, state, and local—as well as civil society. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security, with a total 2012 budget of about $57 billion, is the most obvious example of this.

That budget only hints at what’s being doled out for homeland security at the federal level. Such moneys flow not just from Homeland Security, but from the Justice Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Commerce Department, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Defense.

In 2010, the Office of Management and Budget reckoned that thirty-one separate federal agencies were involved in homeland security-related funding that year to the tune of more than $65 billion. The Census Bureau, which has itself been compromised by War on Terror activities—mapping Middle Eastern and Muslim communities for counter-terrorism officials—estimated that federal homeland security funding topped $70 billion in 2010. But government officials acknowledge that much funding is not included in that compilation. (Grants made through the $5.6 billion Project BioShield, to offer but one example, an exotic vaccination and medical program launched in 2004, are absent from the total.)

Even the estimate of more than $635 billion in such expenditures does not tell the full spending story. That figure does not include the national intelligence or military intelligence budgets for which the Obama administration is seeking $52.6 billion and $19.6 billion respectively in 2013, or secret parts of the national security budget, the so-called black budget.

Local funding is also unaccounted for. New York’s Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly claims total national homeland security spending could easily be near a trillion dollars. Money well spent, he says—New York needs that anti-terror army, the thousands of surveillance cameras, those sophisticated new weapons and, naturally, a navy that now includes six drone submarines (thanks to $540,000 in Homeland Security cash) to keep an eye on the terrorist threat beneath the waves.

And even that’s not enough.

“We have a new boat on order,” Kelly said recently, alluding to a bullet-proof vessel paid for by, yes, Homeland Security (cost unspecified). “We envision a situation where we may have to get to an island or across water quickly, so we’re able to transport our heavy weapons officers rapidly. We have to do things differently. We know that this is where terrorists want to come.”

With submarines available to those who protect and serve (and grab the grant money), a simple armored SWAT carrier should hardly raise an eyebrow. The Tampa police will get one as part of their security buildup before the city hosts the Republican convention this summer. Tampa and Charlotte, which will host the Democratic convention, each received special $50 million security allocations from Congress to “harden” the cities.

Marc Hamlin, Tampa’s assistant police chief, told the Tampa city council that two old tanks, already owned and operated by the police, were simply not enough. They were just too unreliable. “Thank God we have two, because one seems to break down every week,” he lamented.

Not everyone on the council seemed convinced Tampa needed a truck sheathed in 1.5-inch high-grade steel, and featuring ballistic glass panels, blast shields and powered turrets. City Council Vice Chairwoman Mary Mulhern claimed she found the purchase “kind of troubling,” a sign that Tampa is becoming “militarized.” Then she voted to approve it anyway, along with the other council members. Hamlin was pleased. “It’s one of those things where you prepare for the worst, and you hope for the best,” he explained.

When Mulhern suggested that some of the windfall $50 million might be used to help the city’s growing homeless population, Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn set her straight. “We can’t be diverted from what the appropriate use of that money is, and that is to provide a safe environment for the convention. It’s not to be used for pet projects or things totally unrelated to security.”

Tampa will also be spending more than $1 million for state of the art digital video uplinks to surveillance helicopters. (“Analog technology is almost Stone Age,” commented one approving council member.) Another $2 million will go to install sixty surveillance cameras on city streets. That represents an uncharacteristic pullback from the city’s initial plan to acquire more than 230 cameras as well as two drones at a cost of about $5 million. Even the police deemed that too expensive—for the moment.

All of this hardware will remain in Tampa after the Republicans and any protestors are long gone. What use will it serve then? In the Tampa area, the armored truck will join the armored fleet, police officials said, ferrying SWAT teams on calls and protecting police serving search warrants. In the past, Hamlin claimed, Tampa’s tanks have been shot at. He did not mention that crime rates in Tampa and across Florida are at four-decade lows.

The video surveillance cameras will, of course, also stay in place, streaming digitized images to an ever-growing database, where they will be stored waiting for the day when facial recognition software is employed to mix and match. This strategy is being followed all over the country, including in Chicago, with its huge video surveillance network, and New York City, where all of Lower Manhattan is now on camera.

Tampa has already been down this road once in the post-9/11 era. The city was home to a much-watched experiment in using such software. Images taken by cameras installed on the street were to be matched with photographs in a database of suspects. The system failed completely and was scrapped in 2003. On the other hand, sheriffs in the Tampa Bay area are currently using facial recognition software to match photographs snapped by police on the street with a database of suspects with outstanding warrants. Police are excited by that program and look forward to its future expansion.

The Rise of the Fusion Centers

Homeland Security has played a big role in creating one particularly potent element in the nation’s expanding database network. Working with the Department of Justice in the wake of 9/11, it launched what has grown into seventy-two interlinked state “fusion centers”—repositories for everything from Immigration Customs Enforcement data and photographs to local police reports and even gossip. “Suspicious Activity Reports” gathered from public tipsters—thanks to Homeland Security’s “if you see something, say something” program—are now flowing into state centers. Those fusion centers are possibly the greatest facilitators of dish in history and have vast potential for disseminating dubious information and stigmatizing purely political activity. And most Americans have never even heard of them.

Yet fusion centers now operate in every state, centralizing intelligence gathering and facilitating dissemination of material of every sort across the country. Here is where information gathered by cops and citizens, FBI agents and immigration officers goes to fester. It is a staggering load of data, unevenly and sometimes questionably vetted, and it is ultimately available to any state or local law-enforcement officer, any immigration agent or official, any intelligence or security bureaucrat with a computer and network access.

The idea for these centers grew from the notion that agencies needed to share what they knew in an “unfettered” environment. How comforting to know that the walls between intelligence and law enforcement are breached in an essentially unregulated fashion.

Many other states have monitored antiwar activists, gathering and storing names and information. Texas and other states have stored “intelligence” on Muslims. Pennsylvania gathered reports on opponents of natural gas drilling. Florida has scrutinized supporters of presidential candidate Ron Paul. The list of such questionable activities is very long. We have no idea how much dubious data has been squirreled away by authorities and remains within the networked system. But we do know that information pours into it with relative ease and spreads like an oil slick. Cleaning up and removing the mess is another story entirely.

Anyone who wants to learn something about fusion center funding will also find it maddeningly difficult to track. Not even the Homeland Security Department can say with certainty how much of its own money has gone into these data nests over the last decade. The amounts are staggering, however. From 2004 to 2009 alone, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that states used about $426 million in Homeland Security Department grants to fund fusion-related activities nationally. The centers also receive state and local funds, as well as funds from other federal agencies. How much? We don’t know, although GAO data suggest state and local funding at least equals the Homeland Security share.

Yet, as Tampa, New York City and other urban areas bulk up with high-tech anti-terrorism equipment and fusion centers have proliferated, the number of even remotely “terror-related” incidents has declined. The equipment acquired and projects inaugurated to fend off largely imaginary threats is instead increasingly deployed to address ordinary criminal activity, perceived political disruptions and the tracking and surveillance of American Muslims. The Transportation Safety Administration is now even patrolling highways. It could be called a case of mission creep, but the more accurate description might be bait-and-switch.

The chances of an American dying in a terrorist incident in a given year are one in 3.5 million. To reduce that risk, to make something minuscule even more minuscule, what has the nation spent? What has it cost us? Instead of rebuilding a ravaged American city in a timely fashion or making Americans more secure in their “underwater” homes and their disappearing jobs, we have created militarized police forces, visible evidence of police-state-style funding.

[Note on Sources and Further Reading: The following documents can all be found in pdf format by clicking on “here”: the UC Davis Comprehensive Emergency Management plan here, Census Bureau figures on Homeland Security spending here, a report on questionable fusion center actions here, the GAO report on fusion centers here, a report on the decline in the terrorist threat here and Congressional testimony favoring counterterrorism “mission creep” here.]

Stephan Salisbury

March 5, 2012       

On The Triple Evils Racism, Ecploitation Of Labor, And War

Martin Luther King Jr. His Time And Story

 

Martin Luther King, Jr., (January 15, 1929-April 4, 1968) was born Michael Luther King, Jr., but later had his name changed to Martin. His grandfather began the family’s long tenure as pastors of the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, serving from 1914 to 1931; his father has served from then until the present, and from 1960 until his death Martin Luther acted as co-pastor. Martin Luther attended segregated public schools in Georgia, graduating from high school at the age of fifteen; he received the B. A. degree in 1948 from Morehouse College, a distinguished Negro institution of Atlanta from which both his father and grandfather had graduated. After three years of theological study at Crozer Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania where he was elected president of a predominantly white senior class, he was awarded the B.D. in 1951. With a fellowship won at Crozer, he enrolled in graduate studies at Boston University, completing his residence for the doctorate in 1953 and receiving the degree in 1955. In Boston he met and married Coretta Scott, a young woman of uncommon intellectual and artistic attainments. Two sons and two daughters were born into the family.

In 1954, Martin Luther King became pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama. Always a strong worker for civil rights for members of his race, King was, by this time, a member of the executive committee of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the leading organization of its kind in the nation. He was ready, then, early in December, 1955, to accept the leadership of the first great Negro nonviolent demonstration of contemporary times in the United States, the bus boycott described by Gunnar Jahn in his presentation speech in honor of the laureate. The boycott lasted 382 days. On December 21, 1956, after the Supreme Court of the United States had declared unconstitutional the laws requiring segregation on buses, Negroes and whites rode the buses as equals. During these days of boycott, King was arrested, his home was bombed, he was subjected to personal abuse, but at the same time he emerged as a Negro leader of the first rank.

In 1957 he was elected president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization formed to provide new leadership for the now burgeoning civil rights movement. The ideals for this organization he took from Christianity; its operational techniques from Gandhi. In the eleven-year period between 1957 and 1968, King traveled over six million miles and spoke over twenty-five hundred times, appearing wherever there was injustice, protest, and action; and meanwhile he wrote five books as well as numerous articles. In these years, he led a massive protest in Birmingham, Alabama, that caught the attention of the entire world, providing what he called a coalition of conscience. and inspiring his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, a manifesto of the Negro revolution; he planned the drives in Alabama for the registration of Negroes as voters; he directed the peaceful march on Washington, D.C., of 250,000 people to whom he delivered his address, “l Have a Dream”, he conferred with President John F. Kennedy and campaigned for President Lyndon B. Johnson; he was arrested upwards of twenty times and assaulted at least four times; he was awarded five honorary degrees; was named Man of the Year by Time magazine in 1963; and became not only the symbolic leader of American blacks but also a world figure.

At the age of thirty-five, Martin Luther King, Jr., was the youngest man to have received the Nobel Peace Prize. When notified of his selection, he announced that he would turn over the prize money of $54,123 to the furtherance of the civil rights movement.

On the evening of April 4, 1968, while standing on the balcony of his motel room in Memphis, Tennessee, where he was to lead a protest march in sympathy with striking garbage workers of that city, he was assassinated.

 
 

Selected Bibliography

Adams, Russell, Great Negroes Past and Present, pp. 106-107. Chicago, Afro-Am Publishing Co., 1963.

Bennett, Lerone, Jr., What Manner of Man: A Biography of Martin Luther King, Jr. Chicago, Johnson, 1964.

I Have a Dream: The Story of Martin Luther King in Text and Pictures. New York, Time Life Books, 1968.

King, Martin Luther, Jr., The Measure of a Man. Philadelphia. The Christian Education Press, 1959. Two devotional addresses.

King, Martin Luther, Jr., Strength to Love. New York, Harper & Row, 1963. Sixteen sermons and one essay entitled “Pilgrimage to Nonviolence.”

King, Martin Luther, Jr., Stride toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story. New York, Harper, 1958.

King, Martin Luther, Jr., The Trumpet of Conscience. New York, Harper & Row, 1968.

King, Martin Luther, Jr., Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? New York, Harper & Row, 1967.

King, Martin Luther, Jr., Why We Can’t Wait. New York, Harper & Row, 1963.

“Man of the Year”, Time, 83 (January 3, 1964) 13-16; 25-27.

“Martin Luther King, Jr.”, in Current Biography Yearbook 1965, ed. by Charles Moritz, pp. 220-223. New York, H.W. Wilson.

Reddick, Lawrence D., Crusader without Violence: A Biography of Martin Luther King, Jr. New York, Harper, 1959.

From Nobel Lectures, Peace 1951-1970, Editor Frederick W. Haberman, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1972

This autobiography/biography was written at the time of the award and first published in the book series Les Prix Nobel. It was later edited and republished in Nobel Lectures. To cite this document, always state the source as shown above.

 
 

* Editor’s note: This biography uses the word “Negro”. Even though this word today is considered inappropriate, we have chosen not to change the original text to adhere to the copyright owner’s wish to keep the original version as a historical document.

 
 

Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1964

TO CITE THIS PAGE:
MLA style: “Martin Luther King – Biography”. Nobelprize.org. 17 Jan 2012 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html

EDUCATIONAL

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

Democracies in the World

How many countries in the world are democracies?

 

FACTS AND LISTS

NOBEL PRIZES

Who Are the 2011 Nobel Laureates?

See a list of the thirteen Nobel Laureates of 2011

 

VIDEO

2011 NOBEL PRIZES

Meet the 2011 Nobel Laureates

Watch the the inspiring stories of the men and women awarded the 2011 Nobel Prizes

 

FOLLOW US

Youtube
Facebook
Twitter
Nobelprize.org Monthly
RSS

 

 

 

Watch the Viedo:

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=b80Bsw0UG-U

Ron Paul’s Eye-Opening Ad on our Wars. This Ad Needs to go Viral.

The ad is brutally effective in fixing many of our misconceptions about the current so called war on terror. And I think it absolutely needs to go viral. It needs to be posted on forums, political blogs (both republican and democratic blogs alike) and Facebook pages everywhere. This is not about getting Ron Paul elected, because republicans absolutely hate him and will never give him the nomination. This is about opening as many eyes to the truth of what we’re doing, as possible before 2012.

In reply to the comments below, I want to reiterate, this is about the message, not the messenger. The message in the ad resonates and just because this message comes from someone we disagree with on several issues, doesn’t make it any less valid or any less important to get out there.

Ignoring this ad just because you disagree with the messenger on other issues, would be akin to ignoring Barack Obama’s message on the plight of the middle class just because you disagree with his stance on marijuana.