Showing posts with label We're. Show all posts
Showing posts with label We're. Show all posts

Thursday, April 18, 2013

No Arrests Made as DHS Determines if Boston Bombings Were the Work of ‘Foreign or Domestic Terrorists’





What will be the next announcement from authorities as the suspense builds, foreign or domestic terrorists?


WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 18: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (C) testifies during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing, April 18, 2013 in Washington, DC. Secretary Napolitano briefly talked about the Boston Marathon bombing and the explosion in West, Texas before testifying on the FY2014 Budget Request for the Department of Homeland Security. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON, DC – APRIL 18: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (C) testifies during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing, April 18, 2013 in Washington, DC. Secretary Napolitano briefly talked about the Boston Marathon bombing and the explosion in West, Texas before testifying on the FY2014 Budget Request for the Department of Homeland Security. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)



Intellihub.com
April 18, 2013


Department of Homeland Security head, Janet Napolitano, stated to the House Homeland Security Committee that the FBI would like to talk with two men that were seen on video during the time of the bombing at the Boston Marathon. Napolitano says at this time the two men are not suspects.



Authorities are not yet sure if the Boston Marathon Bombing was the work of foreign or domestic terrorists, according to Napolitano.


As of yet no arrests have been made.


The FBI released the following statement on Wednesday, “Contrary to widespread reporting, no arrest has been made in connection with the Boston Marathon attack. Over the past day and a half, there have been a number of press reports based on information from unofficial sources that has been inaccurate. Since these stories often have unintended consequences, we ask the media, particularly at this early stage of the investigation, to exercise caution and attempt to verify information through appropriate official channels before reporting.”


A few unconfirmed reports speculate Saudi’s involved. 


 


Sources: 


^http://www.fbi.gov/boston/press-releases/2013/no-arrest-made-in-bombing-investigation


^http://rt.com/usa/images-suspects-boston-bombing-054/


^http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/04/fbi_wants_to_interview_men_see.html





Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Intellihub.com

No Arrests Made as DHS Determines if Boston Bombings Were the Work of ‘Foreign or Domestic Terrorists’

No Arrests Made as DHS Determines if Boston Bombings Were the Work of ‘Foreign or Domestic Terrorists’





What will be the next announcement from authorities as the suspense builds, foreign or domestic terrorists?


WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 18: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (C) testifies during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing, April 18, 2013 in Washington, DC. Secretary Napolitano briefly talked about the Boston Marathon bombing and the explosion in West, Texas before testifying on the FY2014 Budget Request for the Department of Homeland Security. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON, DC – APRIL 18: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (C) testifies during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing, April 18, 2013 in Washington, DC. Secretary Napolitano briefly talked about the Boston Marathon bombing and the explosion in West, Texas before testifying on the FY2014 Budget Request for the Department of Homeland Security. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)



Intellihub.com
April 18, 2013


Department of Homeland Security head, Janet Napolitano, stated to the House Homeland Security Committee that the FBI would like to talk with two men that were seen on video during the time of the bombing at the Boston Marathon. Napolitano says at this time the two men are not suspects.



Authorities are not yet sure if the Boston Marathon Bombing was the work of foreign or domestic terrorists, according to Napolitano.


As of yet no arrests have been made.


The FBI released the following statement on Wednesday, “Contrary to widespread reporting, no arrest has been made in connection with the Boston Marathon attack. Over the past day and a half, there have been a number of press reports based on information from unofficial sources that has been inaccurate. Since these stories often have unintended consequences, we ask the media, particularly at this early stage of the investigation, to exercise caution and attempt to verify information through appropriate official channels before reporting.”


A few unconfirmed reports speculate Saudi’s involved. 


 


Sources: 


^http://www.fbi.gov/boston/press-releases/2013/no-arrest-made-in-bombing-investigation


^http://rt.com/usa/images-suspects-boston-bombing-054/


^http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/04/fbi_wants_to_interview_men_see.html





Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Intellihub.com

No Arrests Made as DHS Determines if Boston Bombings Were the Work of ‘Foreign or Domestic Terrorists’

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Clarification: Family Guy Boston Disaster Clips Were From Same Episode After All


safe_cowboy.php


[Zen: OK. Let"s get this straight. Now it turns out the 2 clips in the original post of the Family Guy episode depicting the two scenes about a disaster at the Boston Marathon WERE from the same episode!!! They were just strung together out of sequence but the implication was still loud and clear. (Even if they were different episodes it"s still very telling, but they way they"ve gone after any posts of these videos now is purely Orwellian.]


Paul Joseph Watson: A scene depicting runners at the Boston Marathon being killed and another depicting two bombs being detonated are SEPARATE SCENES but they are in the SAME EPISODE.


This episode of Family Guy was broadcast 3 weeks ago.


The media is labeling this whole issue a “hoax” and Seth McFarlane is calling anyone who talks about it “abhorrent,” when he’s the guy who made a cartoon making light of killing Boston Marathon runners and detonating bombs.


Hollywood Reporter article admits they are from the same episode. “Turban Cowboy,” which premiered in the U.S. on March 17, culminates with a scene depicting Peter Griffin accidentally blowing up a bridge by dialing a terrorist’s cell phone. But in the video making the rounds online, the cell phone scene is placed immediately after an unrelated moment in the episode when Bob Costas, voicing himself, asks Peter how he won the Boston Marathon. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live…


+++


ZenGardner.com




Just Wondering – Alternative News and Opinions



Clarification: Family Guy Boston Disaster Clips Were From Same Episode After All

RT News Gerald Celente - Were Going Into An Economic 911 The System is Failing



SUBSCRIBE – WIN a Free Silver Coin Every Day http://freesilvernow.com/globalnetwork.
Video Rating: 5 / 5



RT News Gerald Celente - Were Going Into An Economic 911 The System is Failing

Thursday, April 4, 2013

Guest Post: We"re Living Through A Rare Economic Transformation


Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith via Peak Prosperity,


In 1993, management guru Peter Drucker published a short book entitled Post-Capitalist Society.  Despite the fact that the Internet was still in its pre-browser infancy, Drucker identified that developed-world economies were entering a new knowledge-based eraas opposed to the preceding industrial-based era, which represented just as big a leap from the agrarian-based one it had superseded.


Drucker used the term post-capitalist not to suggest the emergence of a new “ism” beyond the free market, but to describe a new economic order that was no longer defined by the adversarial classes of labor and the owners of capital. Now that knowledge has trumped financial capital and labor alike, the new classes are knowledge workers and service workers.


As for the role of capital, Drucker wryly points out that by Marx’s definition of socialist paradise that the workers owned the means of production (in the 19th century, that meant mines, factories and tools) America is a workers’ paradise, because a significant percentage of stocks and bonds were owned by pension funds indirectly owned by the workers.


In the two decades since 1993, privately owned and managed 401K retirement funds have added to the pool of worker-owned financial capital.


Drucker’s main point is that the role of finance and capital is not the same in a knowledge economy as it was in a capital-intensive industrial economy that needed massive sums of bank credit to expand production.


How much bank financing did Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, or Google require to expand?  Investment banks reaped huge profits in taking these fast-growing knowledge companies public, but these tech companies’ need for financial capital was met with relatively modest venture-capital investments raised from pools of individuals.


That the dominant knowledge-based corporations had little need for bank capital illustrates the diminished role for finance capital in a knowledge economy.  (This also explains the explosive rise in the 1990s and 2000s of financialization; i.e., excessive debt, risk, leverage, and moral hazard.  Commercial and investment banks needed new profit sources to exploit, as traditional commercial lending was no longer profitable enough.)


In a knowledge economy, the primary asset knowledgeis “owned” by the worker and cannot be taken from him/her.  Knowledge is a form of mobile human capital.


In Drucker’s view, knowledge, not industry or finance, is now the dominant basis of wealth creation, and this transformation requires new social structures.  The old industrial-era worldview of “labor versus capital” no longer describes the key social relations or realities of the knowledge economy.


The transition from the industrial economy to the knowledge economy is the modern-day equivalent of the Industrial Revolution, which transformed an agrarian social order to an industrial one of factories, workers, and large-scale concentrations of capital and wealth.  These major transitions are disruptive and unpredictable, as the existing social and financial orders are replaced by new, rapidly evolving arrangements.  As Drucker put it, the person coming of age at the end of the transitional period cannot imagine the life led by his/her grandparents the dominant social organizations that everyone previously took for granted have changed.


Following in the footsteps of historian Fernand Braudel, Drucker identifies four key transitions in the global economy:  in the 1300s, from a feudal, agrarian economy to modern capitalism and the nation-state; in the late 1700s and 1800s, the Industrial Revolution of steam power and factories; in the 20th century, a Productivity Revolution as management of work and processes boosted the productivity of labor, transforming the proletariat class into the middle class; and since the 1990s, the emergence of the Knowledge Economy.


In Drucker’s analysis, these fast-spreading economic revolutions trigger equally profound political and social dynamics. The dominant social structures that we take for granted labor and capital, and the nation-state are not immutable; rather, they are the modern-day equivalent of the late-1200s feudal society that seemed permanent to those who had known nothing else but that was already being dismantled and replaced by the Renaissance-era development of modern capitalism.


From this perspective, the nation-state is no longer indispensable to the knowledge economy, and as a result, Drucker foresaw the emergence of new social structures would arise and co-exist with the nation-state.


Drucker summed up the difference between what many term a post-industrial economy and what he calls a knowledge economy this way: “That knowledge has become the resource rather than a resource is what makes our society ‘post-capitalist.’  This fact changes fundamentally the structure of society.  The means of production is and will be knowledge.”


Knowledge and Management


As we might expect from an author who spent his career studying management, Drucker sees the Management Revolution that began around 1950 as a key dynamic in the knowledge economy.  The lessons in management learned from the unprecedented expansion of U.S. production in World War II were codified and applied to post-war industry, most famously in Japan.


This is the third phase of knowledge being applied to production.  In the Industrial Revolution, knowledge was applied to tools and products.  In the second phase, knowledge was applied to work flow and processes, enabling the Productivity Revolution that greatly boosted workers’ productivity and wages.  The third phase is the application of knowledge to knowledge itself, or what Drucker terms the Management Revolution, which has seen the emergence and dominance of a professional managerial class, not just in the private sector but in the non-profit and government sectors.


The nature of knowledge has changed, in Drucker’s analysis, from a luxury that afforded the Elite opportunities for self-development, to applied knowledge.  In the present era, the conventional liberal-arts university education produces generalists; i.e., a class of educated people.  In terms of generating results in the world outside the person, knowledge must be effectively organized into specialized disciplines that incorporate methodologies that can be taught and applied across a spectrum of people and tasks.


Drucker characterizes this as the movement from knowledge (generalized) to knowledges (applied, specialized).  Organizations can then focus this methodical knowledge on accomplishing a specific, defined task or mission.


Though it may seem incredulous to us, Drucker observes that the current meaning of “organization” was not listed in the authoritative Oxford dictionary of 1950. While social groups and organizations have existed for as long as humanity itself, Drucker distinguishes between the traditional “conserving institutions” of family, community, and society, and the destabilizing post-capitalist “society of organizations” that is adapted for constant change.


Organizations require management, and in the knowledge economy, that means managing change and helping the organization learn how to innovate.  Innovation can no longer be left to chance; it must be organized as a systematic process.


Without a systematic process of constant innovation, organizations will become obsolete.


Drucker takes this process of innovation one step further and concludes that this requires decentralization, as this is the only means to reach decisions quickly based on performance, and proximity to markets, technology, and the environment.


Though he doesn’t state it directly, this means that the highly centralized sectors of the economy, from finance to government, will be disrupted by a rapidly evolving, decentralized “society of organizations.”


What Work Will Be In Demand (and What Won’t) in the Future?


So if this is the nature of the new economy, what type of worker will be most in demand?


Will your current industry, job, or skill set be as relevant? Are there steps you can start taking now to defend or increase your future market value?


In Part II: Positioning Yourself to Prosper in the Post-Capitalist Economy, we examine what impact these transformational forces will have on us as individuals, households, and communities, and how we can best prepare for the fast-evolving knowledge economy.


The global economy has only experienced three major transformations in the past 1,000 years, and arguably, we are living through the fourth. Those who understand the nature of this transition and position themselves intelligently will be disproportionately better off a topic covered fully in my earlier report on The Future of Work.





    


Zero Hedge



Guest Post: We"re Living Through A Rare Economic Transformation

Guest Post: We"re Living Through A Rare Economic Transformation


Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith via Peak Prosperity,


In 1993, management guru Peter Drucker published a short book entitled Post-Capitalist Society.  Despite the fact that the Internet was still in its pre-browser infancy, Drucker identified that developed-world economies were entering a new knowledge-based eraas opposed to the preceding industrial-based era, which represented just as big a leap from the agrarian-based one it had superseded.


Drucker used the term post-capitalist not to suggest the emergence of a new “ism” beyond the free market, but to describe a new economic order that was no longer defined by the adversarial classes of labor and the owners of capital. Now that knowledge has trumped financial capital and labor alike, the new classes are knowledge workers and service workers.


As for the role of capital, Drucker wryly points out that by Marx’s definition of socialist paradise that the workers owned the means of production (in the 19th century, that meant mines, factories and tools) America is a workers’ paradise, because a significant percentage of stocks and bonds were owned by pension funds indirectly owned by the workers.


In the two decades since 1993, privately owned and managed 401K retirement funds have added to the pool of worker-owned financial capital.


Drucker’s main point is that the role of finance and capital is not the same in a knowledge economy as it was in a capital-intensive industrial economy that needed massive sums of bank credit to expand production.


How much bank financing did Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, or Google require to expand?  Investment banks reaped huge profits in taking these fast-growing knowledge companies public, but these tech companies’ need for financial capital was met with relatively modest venture-capital investments raised from pools of individuals.


That the dominant knowledge-based corporations had little need for bank capital illustrates the diminished role for finance capital in a knowledge economy.  (This also explains the explosive rise in the 1990s and 2000s of financialization; i.e., excessive debt, risk, leverage, and moral hazard.  Commercial and investment banks needed new profit sources to exploit, as traditional commercial lending was no longer profitable enough.)


In a knowledge economy, the primary asset knowledgeis “owned” by the worker and cannot be taken from him/her.  Knowledge is a form of mobile human capital.


In Drucker’s view, knowledge, not industry or finance, is now the dominant basis of wealth creation, and this transformation requires new social structures.  The old industrial-era worldview of “labor versus capital” no longer describes the key social relations or realities of the knowledge economy.


The transition from the industrial economy to the knowledge economy is the modern-day equivalent of the Industrial Revolution, which transformed an agrarian social order to an industrial one of factories, workers, and large-scale concentrations of capital and wealth.  These major transitions are disruptive and unpredictable, as the existing social and financial orders are replaced by new, rapidly evolving arrangements.  As Drucker put it, the person coming of age at the end of the transitional period cannot imagine the life led by his/her grandparents the dominant social organizations that everyone previously took for granted have changed.


Following in the footsteps of historian Fernand Braudel, Drucker identifies four key transitions in the global economy:  in the 1300s, from a feudal, agrarian economy to modern capitalism and the nation-state; in the late 1700s and 1800s, the Industrial Revolution of steam power and factories; in the 20th century, a Productivity Revolution as management of work and processes boosted the productivity of labor, transforming the proletariat class into the middle class; and since the 1990s, the emergence of the Knowledge Economy.


In Drucker’s analysis, these fast-spreading economic revolutions trigger equally profound political and social dynamics. The dominant social structures that we take for granted labor and capital, and the nation-state are not immutable; rather, they are the modern-day equivalent of the late-1200s feudal society that seemed permanent to those who had known nothing else but that was already being dismantled and replaced by the Renaissance-era development of modern capitalism.


From this perspective, the nation-state is no longer indispensable to the knowledge economy, and as a result, Drucker foresaw the emergence of new social structures would arise and co-exist with the nation-state.


Drucker summed up the difference between what many term a post-industrial economy and what he calls a knowledge economy this way: “That knowledge has become the resource rather than a resource is what makes our society ‘post-capitalist.’  This fact changes fundamentally the structure of society.  The means of production is and will be knowledge.”


Knowledge and Management


As we might expect from an author who spent his career studying management, Drucker sees the Management Revolution that began around 1950 as a key dynamic in the knowledge economy.  The lessons in management learned from the unprecedented expansion of U.S. production in World War II were codified and applied to post-war industry, most famously in Japan.


This is the third phase of knowledge being applied to production.  In the Industrial Revolution, knowledge was applied to tools and products.  In the second phase, knowledge was applied to work flow and processes, enabling the Productivity Revolution that greatly boosted workers’ productivity and wages.  The third phase is the application of knowledge to knowledge itself, or what Drucker terms the Management Revolution, which has seen the emergence and dominance of a professional managerial class, not just in the private sector but in the non-profit and government sectors.


The nature of knowledge has changed, in Drucker’s analysis, from a luxury that afforded the Elite opportunities for self-development, to applied knowledge.  In the present era, the conventional liberal-arts university education produces generalists; i.e., a class of educated people.  In terms of generating results in the world outside the person, knowledge must be effectively organized into specialized disciplines that incorporate methodologies that can be taught and applied across a spectrum of people and tasks.


Drucker characterizes this as the movement from knowledge (generalized) to knowledges (applied, specialized).  Organizations can then focus this methodical knowledge on accomplishing a specific, defined task or mission.


Though it may seem incredulous to us, Drucker observes that the current meaning of “organization” was not listed in the authoritative Oxford dictionary of 1950. While social groups and organizations have existed for as long as humanity itself, Drucker distinguishes between the traditional “conserving institutions” of family, community, and society, and the destabilizing post-capitalist “society of organizations” that is adapted for constant change.


Organizations require management, and in the knowledge economy, that means managing change and helping the organization learn how to innovate.  Innovation can no longer be left to chance; it must be organized as a systematic process.


Without a systematic process of constant innovation, organizations will become obsolete.


Drucker takes this process of innovation one step further and concludes that this requires decentralization, as this is the only means to reach decisions quickly based on performance, and proximity to markets, technology, and the environment.


Though he doesn’t state it directly, this means that the highly centralized sectors of the economy, from finance to government, will be disrupted by a rapidly evolving, decentralized “society of organizations.”


What Work Will Be In Demand (and What Won’t) in the Future?


So if this is the nature of the new economy, what type of worker will be most in demand?


Will your current industry, job, or skill set be as relevant? Are there steps you can start taking now to defend or increase your future market value?


In Part II: Positioning Yourself to Prosper in the Post-Capitalist Economy, we examine what impact these transformational forces will have on us as individuals, households, and communities, and how we can best prepare for the fast-evolving knowledge economy.


The global economy has only experienced three major transformations in the past 1,000 years, and arguably, we are living through the fourth. Those who understand the nature of this transition and position themselves intelligently will be disproportionately better off a topic covered fully in my earlier report on The Future of Work.





    


Zero Hedge



Guest Post: We"re Living Through A Rare Economic Transformation

Thursday, March 14, 2013

We"re in for The Fight of Our Lives




On the Thursday, March 7 edition of the Alex Jones Show, guest hosts Aaron Dykes and Paul Joseph Watson discuss Rand Paul’s historic filibuster in protest of…
Video Rating: 4 / 5



We"re in for The Fight of Our Lives

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

9/11: Where Were You?


9/11: Where Were You?

On 9/11, paths converged and lives were reshaped forever; each of us has a story to tell.


www.usamericanfreedom.com This video was made to show the events of September 11th in the exact sequence in which they occurred. In loving memory of all those who lost their lives on 09/11/2001. Honors for this video: #69 — Top Favorited (This Week – 09/11/2011) — News & Politics


9/11: Where Were You?

9/11: Where Were You?


On 9/11, paths converged and lives were reshaped forever; each of us has a story to tell.


www.usamericanfreedom.com This video was made to show the events of September 11th in the exact sequence in which they occurred. In loving memory of all those who lost their lives on 09/11/2001. Honors for this video: #69 — Top Favorited (This Week – 09/11/2011) — News & Politics
Video Rating: 4 / 5


9/11: Where Were You?

Sunday, February 17, 2013

"We"re Not Going to Be Pushed Around by the Antis"

Wichita, Kansas, has been without a local abortion provider since an anti-abortion extremist murdered Dr. George Tiller in his church in May 2009. Now, one of Tiller’s former employees has bought his clinic and intends to reopen it this spring.

The Trust Women Foundation, led by former Tiller spokeswoman Julie Burkhart, purchased Tiller’s old office last September. The group has raised most of the $ 1 million it will take to reopen the clinic, and Burkhart, 46, and her staff have been busy renovating the office and recruiting doctors. Burkhart is originally from northern Oklahoma. She worked with Tiller at the clinic for seven years, and had moved away from Wichita shortly before his murder. She has since moved back to reopen the clinic, which she and her colleagues plan to call South Wind Women’s Center.

When it opens, the clinic will provide abortions only up to the 14th week, and will provide referrals for pregnancies that are farther along. It will also offer full gynecological services, like pap smears, breast exams, birth control prescriptions, and prenatal care. “We want to make it a place that’s open for all women,” Burkhart told Mother Jones. Without a clinic in town, women have been traveling more than three hours away to seek abortions at clinics in Kansas City and Oklahoma.

Of course, it’s not the pap smears that draw the anti-abortion protesters. And Wichita has had more than its share of protests. Tiller, one of the nation’s only late-term abortion providers, was a main focus of their actions. Operation Rescue moved its headquarters to Wichita to focus on the clinic. And protesters have blocked other would-be providers from opening clinics in the town in their quest to keep Wichita “abortion free.” Since Burkhart signaled her intention to reopen the clinic, anti-abortion groups have lodged complaints that the clinic didn’t have proper building permits (it did) and have started a petition drive to get the city council to rezone that part of town as residential so that the clinic can’t reopen.

I talked to Burkhart last week about her plans for South Wind Women’s Center.

Mother Jones: How did you come to the decision to reopen Dr. Tiller’s Clinic?

Julie Burkhart: This was something that a lot of us thought about almost immediately after Dr. Tiller’s murder in ’09. It was on our minds, but a lot of us just didn’t feel that we were emotionally able to go down that path and pass through those hoops in order to make this happen. I kept coming back to it, and other people I worked with kept coming back to it, that this was just the right thing to do. A year and a half after we lost Dr. Tiller, we were really able to say, “Okay, this is going to be hard, this is going to be challenging—probably the biggest challenge of our lives—but we’re going to get this done.”

MJ: How did you overcome that apprehension and decide you needed to do it, even if it was going to be hard?

JB: I kept thinking that somebody else was going to do this. There were some other very well intentioned people who wanted to do this, and it just didn’t seem to work out for one reason or another. Here we live in a pretty good-sized city, Wichita, with a metropolitan area of around 650,000 people. It’s like really, come on. We’re a town that used to have three abortion clinics. Shouldn’t we be able to have at least one ob-gyn practice that offers abortion care? We realized we just needed to pick up the torch and do it.

MJ: Wichita has been the subject of so much attention from both anti- and pro-choice activists. What is the significance of reopening the clinic?

JB: First and foremost, we want to make sure that women who need to see us, want to come see us, are able to access care. We’re looking at a few thousand women who now have to travel outside the area each year. Secondly, what it says is that no matter where you live in the United States of America, women will have access to reproductive health care. This community has just been so embroiled in the abortion…I hate to say the abortion “debate,” but just the turmoil. Some people would say, “Just leave it alone and let it go.” However, we can’t really have true freedom in this country until everyone can access that right.

Why, just because we live in Kansas, in the middle of the country, should women be faced with more hardship? Why should it just be women on the coast where the laws are typically more liberal that have access to abortion care? I hope that’s what people get out of this—that no matter where you are as a woman, you’re entitled to that right.

MJ: Given the atmosphere in Wichita, were there any concerns about coming back there?

JB: Our concerns are about security, and making sure it’s peaceful at our clinic and things are peaceful at our homes. I feel that there’s a bit of a different attitude here now. The community in general really gets and understands that a medical facility like ours is needed in this community. Frankly, the only people we get the pushback from by and large are the antis. They’re good bullies. But people in this community are speaking out maybe a little bit more. There’s a little bit more understanding. We want people to understand that this is a new day; this is a new clinic. We’re working on a different model of health care for women. And we’re not going to be pushed around by the antis.

MJ: We just marked the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade a few weeks ago. Where do you think we are as a country on abortion access, and where are we heading?

JB: Well, I’m hoping that we’re coming to a turning point in our society where we can address this issue and this need instead of trying to hide from it, and can have a more honest dialogue. Frankly, I’m guilty of the same thing, because I went through a period of time where it was commonplace to not say the A-word, to try to dance around the issue. Looking back, I’m not sure that was the best strategy for us.

I’m hoping that we’re coming to a point where we can just be more honest, where we can lay things on the table and have those discussions. Because this is what I feel about abortion care: I think abortion is about motherhood. Abortion is about motherhood because by and large women coming in to have abortions are concerned about the kind of life and the future for their children. Women are thinking in a very responsible manner when choosing that. The anti-choice groups often portray women as irresponsible and making these whimsical decisions. But in truth these are very well thought out decisions women are making. They’re taking responsibility for their lives and the lives of their future families.


Politics | Mother Jones


"We"re Not Going to Be Pushed Around by the Antis"

Saturday, February 16, 2013

Shock Study Suggests We"re Living in the Matrix


Paul Joseph Watson interviews Jon Rappoport on new scientific research which appears to bolster the theory that the universe is a computer simulation. infowars.com Are we all living inside a virtual simulation? – http Cosmic rays offer clue our universe could be a computer simulation – www.wired.co.uk Is the Universe a Computer Simulation? – www.youtube.com


Will the secretive Bilderberg Group meet in the United States for an unprecedented second year running or is Europe their most likely destination? Bilderberg May Meet in Virginia, Again – americanfreepress.net Bilderberg Elite Angry Over “Constant Exposure” – www.infowars.com List of Bilderberg Meetings – en.wikipedia.org
Video Rating: 4 / 5


Shock Study Suggests We"re Living in the Matrix