No 675 “En mi opinión”
Junio 2, 2014
“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño
Editor
Obama SNAPS when Reporter DARES to Ask a REAL Question
President Obama lost his cool with Alexis Simendinger,
a reporter with Real
Clear Politics, when
she asked him about reports of the US sending people in to help train the
rebels in Syria. He responded to her question with a glare and then saying “I’m
sorry, we’re doing a science fair- c’mon, c’mon,” before he stomped off like
some kind of petulant child.
Read more: eaglerising.com
Read more: eaglerising.com
Obama Lectures Female Reporter After She Asks About
Syria
Read more at http://minutemennews.com/2014/06/obama-snaps-reporter-dares-ask-real-question/#7VDrsDXEtqDYDWFD.99
Read more at http://minutemennews.com/2014/06/obama-snaps-reporter-dares-ask-real-question/#7VDrsDXEtqDYDWFD.99
Why Were 16 Foreign
Nations Practicing Military Drills on American Soil?
Residents
of Tampa Bay were greeted with low flying helicopters, the sounds of gun fire,
and snipers on rooftops just days ago.
The U.S.
military along with special ops forces from Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Czech
Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Jordan,
Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Poland and Thailand decided that Tampa bay was the
perfect spot to run drills that would help them prepare for chemical or
biological attacks from possible terrorist threats.
In an
effort to quell fears local residents might have had about excessive military
training, the Tampa
Tribune said:
“If you
see military helicopters flying over downtown Tampa next Tuesday, it’s not a
sign that we are under attack by the Russians, the North Koreans or the New
World Order.”
It’s
interesting that the Mainstream Media had to assure residents they were not
under attack when they saw military training exercises unfolding in the streets
of their hometown. But as the news anchor says in the clip below, “It was about
as real as it could get.”
The
training exercise was made complete by the use of pyrotechnics, helicopters,
boats, military vehicle systems, and gunfire from blank rounds.
The 16
nations represented were taking part in an elite conference known as the
International Special Operations Forces Conference where more than 84 countries
were represented in “The Global SOF Network.”
What was
the Global SOF Network preparing for you might ask?
According
to Army Lt. Gen. Joe Votel, the special operations units were preparing for the
possible threat posed to them by
ultra-conservative religious groups along with threats of biological,
chemical, radiologic or nuclear weapons.
Votel
said:
“I think
we have to be concerned about them falling into the hands of people who would
have less difficulty employing those and for me that’s why I think this is
hugely important.”
Unfortunately,
Americans are growing more accustomed to these military training exercises
taking place on their neighborhood streets.
In 2012 Miami residents were greeted by low-flying
Blackhawk helicopters conducting exercises in the dead of night.
And just
weeks ago Kentucky and Ohio residents saw the same kinds of night exercises
take place above their homes as military helicopters strafed the skies with lights
off and
blades whirling at maximum speed
Nelson Horta Reporta: Si los Ángeles Clippers se vendieron por 2 mil millones de
dólares, ¿cuánto valen los Miami Heat?
• “No estamos en contra de los Heat, pero que
paguen lo que deben”, dicen los residentes de Miami Dade
MIAMI 2 DE JUNIO DE 2014,
nhr.com—Un grupo de residentes del condado Miami Dade con que hablamos durante
una fiesta de cumpleaños este fin de semana, discutían sobre el caso de los
Miami Heat y el contrato que será ratificado mañana martes si los comisionados
aprueban la recomendación del alcalde Carlos Giménez.
Uno de los presentes preguntaba
qué ¿si los Ángeles Clippers se acaban de vender en 2 mil millones de dólares,
cuánto valen los Miami Heat?
Y otro se preguntó,
cuanto los Heat le pagan al condado Miami Dade cada año ?
Y todos quedaron perplejos cuando
se enteraron que solamente le han pagado al condado menos de $500,000 en todos
los años que han estado jugando en la Triple A Arena, pero que aún le deben
$3.3 millones de dólares que el ex Inspector General, Christopher Mazzella
encontró en una investigación llevada a cabo por su oficina y que ni siquiera
los comisionados han presionado a la administración para que obligue a los Heat
pagar lo que deben al condado.
También el ex Inspector General
Christ Mazzella sugirió en las conclusiones de su investigación que se
recuperaran $668,100, nombrado en su reporte como “cuestionables” dinero que
Miami Heat pagara a su cabildero, en comisiones, y en otros gastos, ya que era
dinero que nada tenía que ver con el contrato entre Heat y el Condado.
“Todo parece ser que los
comisionados están de acuerdo con que el equipo local continúen sin pagar”,
dijo uno de los presentes que es presidente de un banco local.
De acuerdo con los récords que
nelsonhortareporta.com ha obtenido, en lugar de Micky Arison y el Miami Heat
aportarle algún dinero al condado o a la ciudad de Miami, es el condado el que
le entrega cada año un subsidio de 6.4 millones de dólares para costo de su
operación, dinero del contribuyente, que fue aprobado por el entonces alcalde
Alex Penelas, y el nuevo contrato aumentaría ese subsidio.
En el contrato, Micky Arison y
el Miami Heat estuvieron de acuerdo en entregarle al condado el 40 por ciento
de sus ganancias una vez que pasen de los $14 millones, pero casi nunca se ha
superado esa cifra.
Los ejecutivos de la arena y
sus cabilderos Jorge Luis López y Pablo Acosta están buscando extender el
contrato actual que vence en el 2029 y se le dé una extensión de otros 10 años
con el fin de invertir en mejoras para la Arena.
El único comisionado que ha presionado
a la administración para obtener un mejor contrato con los Miami Heat es Xavier
Suarez, este ha estado indagando y en las ultima horas obtuvimos documentos de
sus trámites, por ejemplo el pasado miércoles 28, la asistente del comisionado
Jannete Jay, pone al tanto al comisionado Suarez sobre su conversación con la
abogada del condado Geri Bonzon-Keenan.
“Hablé con Geri Bonzon-Keenan
(abogado del Condado), ella interpretó que la primera renovación del contrato
puede salir en cualquier momento. Las partes están obligadas a negociar de
“buena fe” (criterios) sin embargo no están obligados a llegar a un acuerdo.
También mencionó que la opción de renovar sólo está disponible hasta el 30 de
junio de 2029, y que un acuerdo tendría que llegar en 2028.
From: “Jay,
Janelle (DIST7)” <janelle@miamidade.gov>
To: “‘Xavier Suarez’” <xaviersuarez@aol.com>, “Padron, Joanne (DIST7)” <joannep@miamidade.gov>
Subject: RE: Renegotiation of Heat Arena lease – see 2.1
To: “‘Xavier Suarez’” <xaviersuarez@aol.com>, “Padron, Joanne (DIST7)” <joannep@miamidade.gov>
Subject: RE: Renegotiation of Heat Arena lease – see 2.1
I spoke with Geri Bonzon-Keenan (County
Attorney) – she interpreted that the first renewal can kick in at any time
before. The parties are obliged to negotiate in “good faith” (criteria) however
they are not required to reach an agreement. She also mentioned that the option
to renew is only available until June 30, 2029, and that an agreement would
have to be reached by 2028.
A lo que el comisionado Suarez
le responde:
“¡ Wow! Esa es una de las
disposiciones de renovación peor redactada que he leído jamás. Por favor
pongala en mi escritorio y la miraré otra vez el viernes. También, pregunte al
abogado del Condado pertinente, (1) ¿cómo interpreta el primer periodo de
renovación y (2) ¿Cuáles son los criterios para la renovación?
Xavier
From: Xavier Suarez [mailto:xaviersuarez@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 2:12 PM
To: Padron, Joanne (DIST7); Jay, Janelle (DIST7)
Subject: Re: Renegotiation of Heat Arena lease – see 2.1
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 2:12 PM
To: Padron, Joanne (DIST7); Jay, Janelle (DIST7)
Subject: Re: Renegotiation of Heat Arena lease – see 2.1
Wow!
That is one of the worst-drafted renewal provisions I have ever read.
Please put on my desk and I will look at it again Friday.
Also, ask the pertinent county attorney to interpret it as to (1) how he/she interpreted the first renewal period to kick in, and (2) what are the criteria for renewal?
Xavier
Please put on my desk and I will look at it again Friday.
Also, ask the pertinent county attorney to interpret it as to (1) how he/she interpreted the first renewal period to kick in, and (2) what are the criteria for renewal?
Xavier
Se espera que mañana martes los
comisionados de Miami Dade aprueben o rechacen la recomendación hecha por el
alcalde Carlos Giménez de aprobar el contrato de extensión a los Miami Heat,
donde de nuevo el condado lejos de obtener las ganancias debidas, permitirá al
propietario de los Heat obtener ganancias y subsidios millonarios que los
residentes de Miami Dade continuaran pagándole a Micky Arison y su equipo,
entre el grupo de amigos de la fiesta volvió a surgir la pregunta inicial, “¿Si Los Ángeles Clippers se
vendieron en $2 mil millones de dólares, cuando costaran los Miami Heat
ganadores de tres campeonatos y pudiera el cuarto estar al doblar de la
esquina? ”, y si Arison algún día vendiera sus Miami Heat, el condado Miami
Dade recibiría alguna ganancia?.
Nota: EL DESCARO PERMANENTE DEL
ALCALDE DEL CONDADO ES LA POLITICA OFICIAL DE ESTA ADMINISTRACION AL IGUAL QUE
LO FUE EL GOBIERNO DE Carlos Alvarez (Sacado deshonrosamente por un revocatorio
que tuve el honor de iniciar) El de medio kilo Penelas, otro buen descarado, y
ahora por el no menos descarado Carlos Gimenes que debía ser sacado por otro
revocatorio por las porquerías que está haciendo sin parar. Como el túnel
innecesario del puerto, el estadium de los marlín, la arena de Miami y el
encubrimiento de todas las porquerías del condado, los alcantarillado, Los
Marlins, El hit y miles de cosas que no caben aquí. Y como siempre usytedes los votantes con la
lengua metida en el c… Lazaro R Gonzalez Mino “En mi opinión”
Harry Reid’s Crusade Against the Koch Brothers Threatens Your Free Speech
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has promised the Senate will take up a proposed constitutional amendment this year that would radically alter the First Amendment.
The Senate resolution would allow Congress to limit fundraising and spending
on election campaigns and independent political speech. Reid and others insist
restricting the amount of money that may be raised and spent on political
speech is not the
same as limiting speech. That’s like saying that limiting the amount of
newsprint a newspaper can buy does not limit its speech.
Having lost the battle at the Supreme Court, Reid and
his cohorts are now pushing this constitutional amendment to reverse
decisions—including Citizens United v. FEC andMcCutcheon v. FEC—that protect the
rights of Americans to speak their minds about elected officials and candidates
and to engage in the political process.
Shutting down conservative speech certainly appears to
be a motivating factor behind this push to amend the First Amendment. Reid has
given many interviews and speeches on the Senate floor demonizing the Charles
and David Koch for “dumping unseemly
amounts of money” into politics, “rigg[ing] the system” and “trying to buy the
country.” Of course, he never mentions efforts by big
Democratic contributors, such as George Soros and the SEIU. Imagine the
audacity of those “un-American” and “shrewd businessmen” (Reid’s words) who would back
candidates and causes they believe will make America better.
Champions of the proposed constitutional amendment
claim it will “level the playing field” in elections. But that’s wrong for two
reasons.
1) The amendment
expressly exempts the press. The New York
Times and MSNBC may continue to spend as much money, newsprint and airtime as
they want to support their preferred candidates (or attack those they oppose),
but the Kochs and other Americans would be severely restricted in their
political activity and speech.
2) This proposed
constitutional amendment would protect incumbent politicians.Allowing Congress
to regulate the raising and spending of money in campaigns will tie the hands
of candidates seeking to unseat them, which is already a long shot. Incumbents
are able to amass war chests over the years. As Rick Manning of Americans for
Limited Government has pointed out, even if a challenger “run[s] a flawless race,” the
incumbent has “a dramatic advantage in issue knowledge, local media contacts
and relationships.”
Tomorrow, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on this proposed constitutional amendment. It’s not
easy to amend the Constitution (of more than 11,500 proposed amendments, only
27 have been ratified by the states), so S.J. Res. 19 is likely to end up as a
talking point used to rile up the anti-Citizens United base in advance of the 2014 election.
Heritage will hold an event today at 2 p.m. that will feature a panel of campaign finance experts.
Bobby Burchfield, who argued McCutcheon v. FEC, Don McGahn, the former chairman of
the Federal Election Commission, and Heritage scholar Hans von Spakovsky will
discuss this attempt to silence free speech by amending the Constitution.
ROBERTO DIAZ: Shalom Hermanos
!!!Estemos atentos,Y por favor vea la definicion de INFIEL
¿Qué significa ser INFIEL para los musulmanes?
Aquí
cabe también un par de preguntas, relacionadas con un libro que leí hace
poco:
¿EN
QUE CREEN LOS QUE NO CREEN? o podría ser la contraparte: ¿EN QUE CREEN
LOS QUE SICREEN?
|
No comments:
Post a Comment