I completely agree with my colleges stance on our social security problem. I am a full time college student working 20 hours a week and I am appalled at the amount I am loosing from my already pathetic paychecks for social security. This "security" that I potentially may need one day if our country cant even afford to pay current recipeints of their social security. Many Americans need this money, such as the disabled workers, and senior citizens. Unless reforms are made with the whole social security system disabled people suffer as well as the younger generation like you and I will be in a worse position than the elderly are in now.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Send our kids to college not to Iraq
The war in Iraq is a heavy issue weighed on the minds of many United States citizens and really the world over. There is no denying the United States entered Iraq in 2001 after the tragic 9/11 attack under vary different circumstances than today. We thought Iraq possessed “weapons of mass destruction”, had a strong affinity for the US among its people, and a tyrant terrorist leader, Sadaam Hussein. Some skeptics may add that Iraq’s dominance, second to Saudi Arabia, of the oil industry to the list. Today we have learned that there were no weapons of mass destruction, only a minority of Iraqi supporters of US invasion, and the elimination of Sadaam Hussein, one terrorist, would not suffice to eliminate terrorism. With the coming 2008 election we are faced with a difficult choice between staying there and continuing the fight disregarding all the new information, or get out. I strongly believe it is time to throw in the towel and get our boys and girls home.
The effects of this war have cost United States over 350 billion dollars, 3,363 citizens their lives, and has left more than 24,310 citizens wounded. At home our wounded soldiers are receiving less than adequate treatment, as the graphic pictures of the Walter Reed Hospital show. Receiving even less treatment from the government are the over one third of veterans with PTSD who often are ignored and redeployed. In my few months at ACC I have met three young veterans’ men with awful scars from the war only one of whom were actually physical. These men are modern day heroes overlooked by their own governments. In my workplace I constantly talk to mothers whose sons and daughters are fighting for their lives overseas. There is no escaping the victims of this war. Even those of us lucky enough to be too old, too young or in college can attest to the changes war in Iraq has brought about. The Protect America Act cost us our privacy by allowing spying on Americans abroad and giving the government wide powers to force communication service providers such as cell phone companies and ISPs to make their networks available to government eavesdroppers. The war has also cost Americans millions of tax dollars, terror every time we fill up at the pump, as well as clouding over other more important issues at home like health care and border control.
The effects of war in Iraq are even more horrid for the people living in Iraq who did not ask for this war or a new “democratic” form of government. Since the war began fewer and fewer Iraqi’s want us there and who can blame them. Their county is in utter upheaval and there is ocean to separate it from the fighting. About 100 Iraqis are currently being killed daily millions of others are fleeing to seek refuge in other countries. Just like we Americans have written unalienable rights, all people of the world have basic human rights regardless of their nationality or beliefs. On a daily basis Iraqis are having their human rights violated. They are not permitted to speak out freely against the US, they are not given any sort of criminal due process, and are occasionally unjustly deployed to detainee camps. It has become no secret what happens to Iraqis inside these camps. Our nation continues to tiptoe around the true definition of torture in order to legally keep employing these harsh practices including mocked drowning, electrocution, and mutations that would be absolutely protested if any American were to subject to undergo it. The United States has completely disregarded the rules set up in the Geneva Convention for treatment of captured prisoners and suspected criminals by continuing prison abuse like in Abu Ghraib. The United States is completely overwhelmed in reconstructing Iraq. Funding of reconstruction efforts began with the creation of the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund in April of 2003 managed by US agencies. Initally 2.5 million was given to Iraq for food medicine and shelters. The IRFF has not been as successful as originally hoped partially because the managing agencies changed so much and partially because all funds were given to the wrong people. Many companies with contracts with the US donated to the fund, like Halliburton, but overcharged the US government. Despite its failure, the IRFF was passed to Iraqi diplomats who have been unable to do much with the funding or even retrieve it. The United States may have also been over presumptuous in its establishment of government in Iraq. The framework of the new Iraqi government is remarkably similar to that of Great Britain except for the existence of a president who acts simply as a figure head. The new Iraq is very unstable and in turmoil over political and religious divisions that the US could not possible understand. It is important for the US at this point to let Iraqis sort out their political problems because our help is only hurting Iraq. Just like during the unstable and doubtful political beginnings of our nation Iraq is unstable for now too. If Iraqi’s are ever to achieve their sovereignty again they need to have direct control over their own future with little assistance from other nations even at times when it seems impossible. This is a requirement of any nation.
The consequences of war in Iraq are easy to list and easy to dislike, but the important thing to consider is where we go next. Recently I went over all 18 potential presidential candidates, both republicans and democrats, stances on what to do about Iraq. All democrats voted that knowing what they know now about Iraq they would vote not to invade. On the republican end only one candidate, Ron Paul voted no to Iraq. In the end it doesn’t really matter where the candidates stand on invasion but what they plan to do next. Ten out of 18 candidates, mostly democrats, voted against a troop increase a very important first step in ending the war. Most democratic candidates are currently supporting “phased withdrawal”. Only John Edwards was willing to give his withdraw plan a timeline of 18 months and a cap on spending while Mike Gravel voted to withdraw now. Democrat Dennis Kucinich boldly voted to cut all funding immediately and begin withdraws. All republican candidates voted the same way in regards to leaving Iraq, to gradually transfer power to the Iraqi governments and maintaining troop levels. It is important for the general public to know where their candidate stands on Iraq and vote accordingly because something has to be done before the climate in Iraq escalates even more.
It is easy to see for anyone to see that the war in Iraq is flawed even if you support it. It is my opinion that we have done far too much damage to our own citizens and Iraqis, wasted far too much capital that could have been better spent on interior programs, and lost credibility among the worlds leading powers. I strongly believe the war must end soon and must be ended in a peaceful way. To me, John Edwards plan for Iraq is the most plausible. To continue to fight is Iraq as many republicans seek to do would just add fuel to the fire. We have been fighting for too long with too little reward. A gradual troop withdraw from Iraq is best, especially when the word ‘gradual’ is actually defined, is best bet for our citizens and Iraqis. Cutting funding or capping it off is the only way to begin ending the war. We cannot keep funding something we say we want to end. If you have an opinion about the war and are eightteen or older, the election of 2008 is the place to assert it.
*all statistical data and candidate polls were gathered from www.newyorktimes.com
The effects of this war have cost United States over 350 billion dollars, 3,363 citizens their lives, and has left more than 24,310 citizens wounded. At home our wounded soldiers are receiving less than adequate treatment, as the graphic pictures of the Walter Reed Hospital show. Receiving even less treatment from the government are the over one third of veterans with PTSD who often are ignored and redeployed. In my few months at ACC I have met three young veterans’ men with awful scars from the war only one of whom were actually physical. These men are modern day heroes overlooked by their own governments. In my workplace I constantly talk to mothers whose sons and daughters are fighting for their lives overseas. There is no escaping the victims of this war. Even those of us lucky enough to be too old, too young or in college can attest to the changes war in Iraq has brought about. The Protect America Act cost us our privacy by allowing spying on Americans abroad and giving the government wide powers to force communication service providers such as cell phone companies and ISPs to make their networks available to government eavesdroppers. The war has also cost Americans millions of tax dollars, terror every time we fill up at the pump, as well as clouding over other more important issues at home like health care and border control.
The effects of war in Iraq are even more horrid for the people living in Iraq who did not ask for this war or a new “democratic” form of government. Since the war began fewer and fewer Iraqi’s want us there and who can blame them. Their county is in utter upheaval and there is ocean to separate it from the fighting. About 100 Iraqis are currently being killed daily millions of others are fleeing to seek refuge in other countries. Just like we Americans have written unalienable rights, all people of the world have basic human rights regardless of their nationality or beliefs. On a daily basis Iraqis are having their human rights violated. They are not permitted to speak out freely against the US, they are not given any sort of criminal due process, and are occasionally unjustly deployed to detainee camps. It has become no secret what happens to Iraqis inside these camps. Our nation continues to tiptoe around the true definition of torture in order to legally keep employing these harsh practices including mocked drowning, electrocution, and mutations that would be absolutely protested if any American were to subject to undergo it. The United States has completely disregarded the rules set up in the Geneva Convention for treatment of captured prisoners and suspected criminals by continuing prison abuse like in Abu Ghraib. The United States is completely overwhelmed in reconstructing Iraq. Funding of reconstruction efforts began with the creation of the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund in April of 2003 managed by US agencies. Initally 2.5 million was given to Iraq for food medicine and shelters. The IRFF has not been as successful as originally hoped partially because the managing agencies changed so much and partially because all funds were given to the wrong people. Many companies with contracts with the US donated to the fund, like Halliburton, but overcharged the US government. Despite its failure, the IRFF was passed to Iraqi diplomats who have been unable to do much with the funding or even retrieve it. The United States may have also been over presumptuous in its establishment of government in Iraq. The framework of the new Iraqi government is remarkably similar to that of Great Britain except for the existence of a president who acts simply as a figure head. The new Iraq is very unstable and in turmoil over political and religious divisions that the US could not possible understand. It is important for the US at this point to let Iraqis sort out their political problems because our help is only hurting Iraq. Just like during the unstable and doubtful political beginnings of our nation Iraq is unstable for now too. If Iraqi’s are ever to achieve their sovereignty again they need to have direct control over their own future with little assistance from other nations even at times when it seems impossible. This is a requirement of any nation.
The consequences of war in Iraq are easy to list and easy to dislike, but the important thing to consider is where we go next. Recently I went over all 18 potential presidential candidates, both republicans and democrats, stances on what to do about Iraq. All democrats voted that knowing what they know now about Iraq they would vote not to invade. On the republican end only one candidate, Ron Paul voted no to Iraq. In the end it doesn’t really matter where the candidates stand on invasion but what they plan to do next. Ten out of 18 candidates, mostly democrats, voted against a troop increase a very important first step in ending the war. Most democratic candidates are currently supporting “phased withdrawal”. Only John Edwards was willing to give his withdraw plan a timeline of 18 months and a cap on spending while Mike Gravel voted to withdraw now. Democrat Dennis Kucinich boldly voted to cut all funding immediately and begin withdraws. All republican candidates voted the same way in regards to leaving Iraq, to gradually transfer power to the Iraqi governments and maintaining troop levels. It is important for the general public to know where their candidate stands on Iraq and vote accordingly because something has to be done before the climate in Iraq escalates even more.
It is easy to see for anyone to see that the war in Iraq is flawed even if you support it. It is my opinion that we have done far too much damage to our own citizens and Iraqis, wasted far too much capital that could have been better spent on interior programs, and lost credibility among the worlds leading powers. I strongly believe the war must end soon and must be ended in a peaceful way. To me, John Edwards plan for Iraq is the most plausible. To continue to fight is Iraq as many republicans seek to do would just add fuel to the fire. We have been fighting for too long with too little reward. A gradual troop withdraw from Iraq is best, especially when the word ‘gradual’ is actually defined, is best bet for our citizens and Iraqis. Cutting funding or capping it off is the only way to begin ending the war. We cannot keep funding something we say we want to end. If you have an opinion about the war and are eightteen or older, the election of 2008 is the place to assert it.
*all statistical data and candidate polls were gathered from www.newyorktimes.com
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Hidden Iraq Killings
A recent article published in the Austin American Statesman on October 2, 2007 by John M. Broder of the New York Times was a report that officials hid Iraq killings. The state department paid 832 million plus to three companies for security services, Blackwater USA, Dyn Corp. International, and Triple Canopy. Of these three companies Blackwater USA reported more shootings and two times more troops than the other two. On Sept. 16th Blackwater employees were involved in a shooting that killed eight Iraqis considered by Iraq officials to be murder. In two of the cases the State Department approved Blackwater to pay off two of the victims families to keep the shootings quiet. Both the State Department and Blackwater declined to comment. A report by Democratic Majority staff of the House Committee gave weight to Iraqi complaints and was critical of the State Department for not restraining or supervising the private security companies 861employees. Currently the state department is conducting three investigations of the incident and the FBI plans to send a team to compile evidence. A Congressional staff report called Blackwater’s use of force as frequent and extensive. Blackwater has a history of corruption. In the last three years it dismissed 122 of its employees for weapons offences, drug use, lewd conduct, and also terminated workers for failure to report incidents. One of the employees was dismissed for posttraumatic stress disorder. This is an important article to me for several reasons. I may be ignorant but I never imagined the government had hired corporations to deal with the war in Iraq instead of using our own troops. It is shocking to hear what our State Department is doing and that it approved the payments to victims of shootings in Iraq. It makes me wonder what is really going on over there. Also the question is raised of what is to be done to the shooters. I think our government needs to be more involved and is doing a terrible job of listening to the people here and those in Iraq and if we are ever going to reach peace this needs to be done. This is a very important article to me. If we in America were to lose eight citizens to a corporate planned shooting we would call it terrorism and probably go to war, but because the shooting was in Iraq officials there can really do nothing about it and that is unfair. Here we are fighting to give them a democratic form of government but doing nothing the give the people their rights as democratic citizens or even as just plain humans.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Bush Asks Congress To Extend NSA Prgram
A recent article in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dun/content/article/2007/09/19/AR2007091901111.html) describing a proposal that would make the Warrentless Wiretapping Law, set to expire in February, permanent.
The Warentless Wiretapping Law was passed in August when the Bush administration pointed to intelligence reports that that the US was in a “heightened threat environment”. This law gave the government complete authority to eavesdrop without a proper warrant, on phone calls, e-mails, and other forms of communication, between US. Citizens and “suspected” terrorists abroad.
President Bush recently called on Congress to extent the law on the grounds that “it is the job of Congress to give the professionals the tools they need to do their work as effectively as possible”. After harsh criticism the program received the Bush administration launched an attempt to sway Democratic lawmakers into believing the law would not cause domestic surveillance on physical home searches, domestic mail, or computers. Even after, Democratic leaders still wanted to rework the law to limit the president’s authority and provide more oversight. President Bush obviously did not at all agree.
To me this article is very significant. I strongly believe it abuses our rights as citizens to due process of law, free speech, and equality. President Bush has misled the public many times throughout the mess of his eight year term. We are in a war with an unknown terrorist enemy, who many just call Muslims. This puts a terrible situation at home for US citizens who are Islamic especially those who still have family members in their home countries. Who are these “suspected terrorists” abroad anyway? When I call my grandmother in England as a Caucasian female I probably won’t be tapped. So is it fair that a US citizen just like me who has a higher chance of be tapped just because they call a place where the “suspected Islamic terrorists must live”. I think this article should definitely be read especially with an upcoming election. It is our responsibility to look in to all the candidates to make sure we end up with a new president that has a real plan to end this mess before we lose more of our rights.
The Warentless Wiretapping Law was passed in August when the Bush administration pointed to intelligence reports that that the US was in a “heightened threat environment”. This law gave the government complete authority to eavesdrop without a proper warrant, on phone calls, e-mails, and other forms of communication, between US. Citizens and “suspected” terrorists abroad.
President Bush recently called on Congress to extent the law on the grounds that “it is the job of Congress to give the professionals the tools they need to do their work as effectively as possible”. After harsh criticism the program received the Bush administration launched an attempt to sway Democratic lawmakers into believing the law would not cause domestic surveillance on physical home searches, domestic mail, or computers. Even after, Democratic leaders still wanted to rework the law to limit the president’s authority and provide more oversight. President Bush obviously did not at all agree.
To me this article is very significant. I strongly believe it abuses our rights as citizens to due process of law, free speech, and equality. President Bush has misled the public many times throughout the mess of his eight year term. We are in a war with an unknown terrorist enemy, who many just call Muslims. This puts a terrible situation at home for US citizens who are Islamic especially those who still have family members in their home countries. Who are these “suspected terrorists” abroad anyway? When I call my grandmother in England as a Caucasian female I probably won’t be tapped. So is it fair that a US citizen just like me who has a higher chance of be tapped just because they call a place where the “suspected Islamic terrorists must live”. I think this article should definitely be read especially with an upcoming election. It is our responsibility to look in to all the candidates to make sure we end up with a new president that has a real plan to end this mess before we lose more of our rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)