Roberto Abraham Scaruffi

Monday, 6 June 2016

The European Union Times


Posted: 06 Jun 2016 06:11 AM PDT

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is looking to make its anthem gender-neutral for when it turns 150 in 2017 by replacing the line “true patriot love in all thy sons command” to “in all of us command.” Even though the bill is supported by most MPs, it triggered a heated debate.
The change was proposed by the Liberal MP Mauril Belanger, who was diagnosed with a fatal neurogenerative disease called amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) last fall.
“On the eve of the 150th anniversary of our federation, it is important that one of our most recognized and appreciated national symbols reflect the progress made by our country in terms of gender equality,” Belanger told the parliament on May 6.
No longer able to speak, Belanger delivered his speech via a text-to-speech app on his tablet. “This progress was slow and hard-won at times and it marked our country’s history. It should be celebrated in our national anthem.”
The bill was met with applause by many, but the Conservative Party, which voted down a similar bill in 2015 when it had a majority, was able to block an attempt to pass the bill without in-depth debate.
The Conservatives’ issue with the change is that it might open the door for more amendments in the future.
“Maybe the botanists will be in an uproar about the shape of the maple leaf on our flag and demand that it be changed,” Conservative MP Larry Maguire told the parliament last month. “Some may be upset that the almighty beaver will not stop chopping down trees, so the National Symbol of Canada Act must be amended to swap out the beaver for an animal that is far less destructive.”
However, during Wednesday’s 219-79 vote, the majority of MPs supported the change, after which MPs broke into song, spontaneously performing “O Canada.” The bill is likely to enter its third reading this fall.
A Mainstreet Research opinion poll carried out in May said that 62 percent of the 2,027 Canadians surveyed supported making the anthem gender-neutral, while 19 percent opposed the idea.
The English version of “O Canada” was written in 1906. Since then, the lyrics have been changed twice. For example, in 1913, “thou dost in us command” was changed to “in all thy sons” to honor the soldiers going off to fight in World War I.
Canada is following in the footsteps of Austria and Switzerland. Austria already changed its anthem ‘Land of Mountains’ to recognize the “great sons and daughters.” Meanwhile, Switzerland found more modern lyrics, but is yet to vote on them.
Source
        
Posted: 06 Jun 2016 05:39 AM PDT

Government has a right to regulate the Second Amendment, Hillary Clinton said in an interview on the June 5 airing of This Week With George Stephanopoulos.
Clinton contended that Americans have historically recognized the government’s “right” to regulate the bearing of arms, suggesting that it was not until District of Columbia v Heller (2008) that anyone thought otherwise.
Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you believe an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right? That it’s not linked to the service in the militia?”
Clinton responded:
I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment, until the decision by the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities, and states, and the federal government had a right–as we do with every amendment–to impose reasonable regulations.

While arguing for the government’s “right” to regulate the Second Amendment, Clinton twice refused to say the people have “a constitutional right” to keep and bear arms.
The first time Stephanopoulos asked if “an individual’s right to bear arms is constitutional” Clinton sidestepped the question, claiming instead the government’s “right” to regulate.
So Stephanopoulos repeated the question, and Clinton responded: “If it is a constitutional right, then it–like every other constitutional right–is subject to reasonable regulations.”
Source
        
Posted: 06 Jun 2016 05:28 AM PDT

All over the planet, global weather patterns have gone completely nuts. Just over the past few days we have seen “life threatening” heatwaves, extremely dangerous wildfires, vicious tornadoes and unprecedented flooding – and that is just in the United States.
And of course this is just the continuation of a trend that stretches back to last year, when extremely weird weather created “apocalyptic-like conditions” in many areas around the world. So why is this happening? For decades, we could count on weather patterns falling within fairly predictable parameters, but now that is completely changing all of a sudden. All over the globe we are seeing things happen that we have never seen happen before, and the weather just seems to get even more crazy with each passing month.
Just consider what has been going on the past few days. Let’s start with the “life threatening” heatwave that is currently hammering the west coast…
The West Coast is in the grip of a ‘life threatening’ triple-digit heatwave that is set to continue well into next week, raising the risk of wildfires.
The National Weather Service has issued excessive heat warnings for southeastern California, southern Nevada, western and southern Arizona, western Oregon and far southwest Washington.
From Oregon to Nevada temperatures are set to top 100F tomorrow and into Monday, with Phoenix, Arizona, predicted to top out at 116F.
These are temperatures that you might expect to see in July or August, but right now summer has not even officially begun yet.
And as the article quoted above noted, these extremely high temperatures bring with them a much higher risk of wildfires. In fact, firefighters in southern California are currently fighting a horrible fire that is raging wildly out of control and that has already forced thousands of people (including Kim Kardashian and Kanye West) out of their homes…
A massive brush fire Saturday in the Calabasas area forced mandatory evacuations as rapid flames consumed 516 acres and threatened 3,000 homes, the Los Angeles County Fire Department said.
“This is a fast-moving, dangerous fire,” Los Angeles County Fire Chief Dennis Cross said. “It’s hard for people to see where this fire is because of the dense canopy and the canyons.”
If you follow my work closely, you already know that 2015 was the worst year for wildfires in all of U.S. history.
More acres burned in the U.S. last year than we had ever seen before.
And so far this year, we are more than a million acres ahead of the pace set last year.
Meanwhile, CNN is reporting that this “is the second year in a row that Texas has been hit by 500-year floods“…
“It could just be really bad luck,” said CNN Senior Meteorologist Brandon Miller. “A 500-year flood doesn’t mean you will go 500 years between them. It just means it is such an extreme event that the odds of it happening are very low, therefore it only happens on average every 500 years.
“It just so happens that parts of Texas have seen them now in back-to-back years, and maybe even twice this year. The odds of that happening are infinitesimally small.”
In a recent article, I noted that the United States has now been hit by 10 major flooding events since the end of last September.
Never before in U.S. history have we ever seen so many major floods in such a compressed period of time.
And the hits just keep on coming. On Sunday, the east coast was bracing for a series of storms which appeared poised to produce very high winds, severe thunderstorms and even possibly some tornadoes. The following comes from the Daily Mail…
The East Coast is braced for an incoming storm that could see up to seventeen million people hit with tropical rain, thunderstorms and even tornadoes.
People from New York through North Carolina could be affected, as thunderstorms were expected to blast winds up to 55 miles per hour later on Sunday.
The Governors Ball in New York City was cancelled for safety reasons after organizers saw the forecast for lightning.
And on top of everything else, Florida is about to be hit by tropical storm Colin.
But don’t worry, because all of this is perfectly “normal”, right?
Across the Atlantic, Europe is also dealing with some extremely crazy weather. Major flooding is being reported all over the continent, and the French just experienced their wettest month since 1886…
Segments of France’s border with Belgium received six-week’s worth of rain in under 24 hours earlier this week, causing widespread flooding across the country. May has been the country’s rainiest month since 1886, Radio France Internationale says.
As a result of that rain, French meteorologists expect the already-swollen Seine in Paris to peak at 6.5 meters (21 feet) above its usual level on Friday. The Louvre is closed due to flooding concerns, and workers have been busy moving priceless works of art as a precautionary measure.
On the other side of the planet, many areas of India have been dealing with an unprecedented heatwave. On Thursday, May 19th, the all-time record for the highest temperature ever recorded in India was broken. And this was part of a crippling heatwave that pushed temperatures in northern India “above 104 degrees for weeks”…
A severe heat wave warning is in place for much of India through Saturday. Temperatures in northern India have risen above 104 degrees for weeks, the BBC reported. The weather has killed hundreds of people and destroyed crops in more than 13 states, the Associated Press reported.
If this happened where you live, you could just go inside and turn on the air conditioning.
But most of those people do not have air conditioning, and that is why hundreds of them have been dying.
At the exact same time when the crust of our planet is becoming increasingly unstable, our weather is starting to become really crazy too.
Some people are going to dismiss all of this as just a bizarre series of coincidences, others will want to blame “global warming”, and yet others will see all of this as a sign that Jesus is coming back soon.
But what is truly frightening to consider is this…
What if our weather just keeps getting crazier and crazier?
If our weather continues to spiral out of control, it is inevitable that there will be major famines, widespread riots and tremendous political unrest all over the planet.
Is our world equipped to be able to handle seven billion people going absolutely nuts all at once?
Let us hope and pray for weather patterns to begin to return to normal, because I don’t think that we are.
Source
        
Posted: 06 Jun 2016 04:40 AM PDT

“Hillary Clinton is now poised to become the Democratic nominee for president of the United States, but she simply lacks the integrity and temperament to serve in the office. From the bottom of my soul I know this to be true. So I must speak out.
I had no animosity toward the Clintons. Out of a sense of loyalty to our First Family I even secretly disposed of sordid physical evidence that might later have been used to convict the president. The blue dress wasn’t the only evidence of his misdeeds. But I could not keep from asking myself how our nation’s leaders could be so reckless, so volatile, and so dangerous to themselves and to our nation. And yes, to me and my family.
I want you to hear my story. It’s about the men and women risking their lives to protect this nation. And more important, it’s about how the Clintons must never again be allowed to put them or you and your children—at risk.”
– Gary Byrne, former secret service agent.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign is scrambling as details emerge of a shocking “tell-all” book written by an ex-Secret Service agent, Gary Byrne, who protected the Clintons during the 1990s.

Former secret service agent Gary Byrne was posted outside Bill Clinton’s Oval Office in the 1990s, and has decided that since “the Clintons must never again be allowed to put your children at risk“, to write a tell all book titled “Crisis of Character”, exposing the Clintons’ dirty laundry.
As Drudge Report notes (whose article has shot the book to the top spot of all Amazon book sales), the secret project is causing deep concern inside of Clinton’s campaign. Specific details of the agent’s confessional are being held under tight embargo, although numerous pages have been disclosed in the promo to the book (see below).
“What I saw in the 1990s sickend me,” Byrne explains. “I want you to hear my story.”
His expose, scheduled to be published on June 26, just weeks before the Democratic primary, is set to rock the Clinton’s campaign and comes as Hillary finds herself within touching distance of securing the Democratic nomination.
Because I was there – in the spotlight, in the crosshairs — I realize better than most Americans that we have pretty much forgotten what an amateur-night, three-ring circus the Clinton White House was.
In the book, Byrne provides a firsthand account of the scandals – known and unknown – and daily trials ranging from the minor to national in scale.
“Having witnessed the personal and political dysfunction of the Clinton White House – so consumed by scandal and destroying their enemies, real and imagined – Byrne came to understand that, to the Clintons, governing was an afterthought.
He now tells this story – before voters go to the polls – in the hopes that Clinton supporters will understand the real Hillary Clinton.
The book titled Crisis of Character: A White House Secret Service Officer Discloses His Firsthand Experience with Hillary, Bill, and How They Operate is set to hit shelves on June 28. The Democratic convention, where Hillary could be confirmed as the nominee, will take place a month later.
I have not written a word of this book with a political agenda. Whether the Clintons were Democrats or Republicans, I saw what I saw; I heard what I heard. Politics do not change unpleasant truths. Politicians only think they do.
Many of the most shocking revelations are being withheld but below are some of the key excerpts released so far:
I witnessed firsthand the Clintons’ personal and professional dysfunction: So consumed were they by scandal, so intent on destroying their real or imagined enemies, that governing became an afterthought. The First Couple wasted days obsessing over how to “kill” a forthcoming book (one alleging that Bill Clinton’s mother ran a brothel) or in squashing yet another tabloid revelation. Their machinations and their constant damage control diverted them from the nation’s real business. Good people like Leon Panetta, Betty Currie, and Evelyn Lieberman had to pick up the slack and bear it for as long as they could.
I saw how the Clinton Machine’s appalling leadership style endangered law enforcement officers, the military, and the American people in general. And with Hillary Clinton’s latest rise, I realize that her own leadership style—volcanic, impulsive, enabled by sycophants, and disdainful of the rules set for everyone else hasn’t changed a bit.
…
Though portrayed as the long-suffering spouse of an unfaithful husband, whose infidelities I personally observed or knew to be true, the Hillary Clinton I saw was anything but a sympathetic victim. Those loyal to her kept coming back for her volcanic eruptions.
Or when Byrne “disposed of sordid physical evidence” (because the “blue dress wasn’t the only evidence of his misdeeds”) to help keep Bill’s job:
I had no animosity toward the Clintons. Out of a sense of loyalty to our First Family I even secretly disposed of sordid physical evidence that might later have been used to convict the president. The blue dress wasn’t the only evidence of his misdeeds. But I could not keep from asking myself how our nation’s leaders could be so reckless, so volatile, and so dangerous to themselves and to our nation.
And yes, to me and my family. Only under federal subpoena—and later a ruling by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist—did I reveal to Ken Starr’s prosecutors the true story of President Bill Clinton’s false testimony and misstatements.
Or when Hillary gave Bill a black-eye:
One morning in late summer 1995, I entered the White House to assume my post just outside the Oval Office officially Secret Service Post E-6. Things were stirring, and I wanted to know why.
Everyone on post that night, Secret Service agents (SAs), Secret Service Uniformed Division (UD) officers like myself, the houseman, and the ushers couldn’t help but hear the First Couple arguing as sounds from their fracases traveled through the old building. Mrs. Clinton had a booming voice, and their yelling matches easily traversed the living quarters’ private elevator, vents, and staircase. Many housemen eased away, but the SAs and UD couldn’t leave their posts. This was especially a big argument that ended with a crash. SAs were obligated to respond and found its cause, a vase on the other side of the room.A houseman picked up the damage. The First Couple couldn’t just sweep up and toss out the remains because everything in the White House is logged and recorded, befitting its role as a national landmark and a veritable museum.
I peeked into the curator’s small, windowless ground-floor office across from the China Room and the Diplomatic Reception Room. It was cluttered with blueprints and history books on the every detail of the White House: fabrics, furniture, artifacts. Sure enough, there was a box containing a light blue vase smashed to bits. The rumors were true!
“Can I help you?”
The White House’s official curator looked up from what she was reading, clearly annoyed and already tired of people checking out the box. “Can I help you, Officer?” she said again.
“No thanks,” I said.
The president entered around nine. His arrival times fluctuated. I couldn’t believe my eyes: a black eye! I was well accustomed to his allergy-prone, puffy eyes. But this was a shiner, a real, live, put-a-steak-on-it black eye. I was shocked. Minutes later, I popped into the office of Betty Currie, the president’s personal secretary. Nancy Hernreich, his personal scheduler, was already there.
“What’s the black mark on the president’s face?” I asked.
I felt real tension.
“Oh, uh, he’s allergic to coffee,” said Nancy, turning toward her office.
“An allergy to coffee shows in just one eye?”
Betty smiled. She burrowed down into her work, chuckling, but looking busy. As I departed, I added, “I’m also allergic to the back of someone’s hand.”
I wanted to send a message. We knew what the mark was from, and it wasn’t right. Surely the Clintons must realize how close we are to them, I thought, how deeply we feel about our responsibilities for their safety. Didn’t they feel the same? It wasn’t just that we protected them 24/7, but we were extremely loyal. We didn’t do our job for the paychecks. Each man and woman protecting them had their reasons, but the Clintons were the focal point of every reason.
What might happen if she had sucker-punched him? Or if that vase had hit its target? If his head hit a countertop corner, my entire life’s work would have been for nothing.
Sure, seeing a president’s black eye is strange but standing at my post I couldn’t escape the sinking feeling that this didn’t make sense.
This wasn’t how it was supposed to be. I loved my job and I believed in it, but I couldn’t make sense of any of it.
It was a circus. Yet I never lost a sense of wonder and excite- ment. Even when the First Lady hollered and cursed and demanded firing thousands of people who protected her—and we spent more hours ensuring the Clintons’ protection than we spent with our own families—I loved every minute of most every day. Law enforcement — protecting others — is my passion. Protecting a president is an incredible honor. I low, I kept asking myself, did a kid from Ridley, Pennsylvania, ever get to the White House? I wanted to stay for the rest of my life.
Reality destroyed my dream—in ways I never imagined.
More damning accusations from Byrne:
On 9/11 we vowed “Never forget.” But we always somehow do. And because I was there—in the spotlight, in the crosshairs—I realize better than most Americans that we have pretty much forgotten what an amateur-night, three-ring circus the Clinton White House was. But I haven’t forgotten.
* * *
I remember Monica, sure. But I remember Hillary, too: the shortcuts she took, the methods she employed, the yelling, the screaming, her disdain for “the little people,” Bill’s black eye—the country’s black eye.
You want to know something? I wanted to forget it all myself I needed to forget it all. d had enough of the whole damned mess— the sleepless nights, the Protective Privilege bullshit, the lawyers, C-SPAN… the cuddling up at night with a loaded pistol just in case. Satchel Paige said: “Don’t look back, something might be gaining on you.” I didn’t want to look back. I wanted to move forward, to shut the door on the Clintons and their whole sordid operation.
To never look back.
But there’s another saying: “It ain’t over t ill it’s over,” and now it’s 2016, and Hillary is running for president again. I faced a choice in 1998: Would I keep silent? Or tell the truth about what I knew, what I saw?
I spoke up. I testified truthfully.
Not everybody did. Some people’s memories got really faulty. Maybe you can’t blame them. They got scared. They had mortgages and careers. They had kids.
People who swore an oath to the Constitution and the law, people who pledged to lay down their lives for principle, people who strapped iron on their hips . . . got scared.
And they conveniently forgot things.
Byrne continues to slam a Hillary who would have been “too busy swapping gossip” with Sidney Blumenthal to hold herself accountable:
Character in leadership comes down to two questions: Would you trade places with anyone under your command? Do you hold yourself to the same level of accountability as those for whom you bear responsibility? Would Mrs. Clinton have been willing to trade places with Chris Stevens and Sean Smith?
No. She was too busy swapping gossip and classified information with Clinton loyalist Sidney Blumenthal.
Finally in a crushing afterword, Byrne exclaims:
Over a twenty-nine-year career serving my country in the military and in federal law enforcement, I’ve encountered both heroes and villains.
I’ve observed human character at its greatest heights and lowest depths. In any organization, character is defined at the top; it percolates down to the top executives of an organization, to the middle managers, and to the grunts at the front lines.
Hillary Clinton is now poised to become the Democratic nominee for president of the United States, but she simply lacks the integrity and temperament to serve in the office. From the bottom of my soul I know this to be true. So I must speak out.
Perhaps this sums up best what America would have to look forward to… “The Clintons treat running the free world like a damn part-time job.”
Byrne’s book is available for preoder, and courtesy of Amazon, here are some of the key sections that will be all the media can talk about in the coming days.
Source
        
Posted: 06 Jun 2016 03:55 AM PDT


Talk about speaking with a forked tongue.
At a Democratic Party event this weekend, Elizabeth Warren claimed she’s opposed to her party’s superdelegate system. She almost has to say this to show disenfranchised Bernie Sanders supporters that she’s on their side.
In the same sentence however, she admitted that she’s a superdelegate herself.
From Politico:
Warren: ‘I don’t believe in superdelegates’
Sen. Elizabeth Warren said on Saturday that she doesn’t believe in her party’s superdelegate process.
“I’m a superdelegate, and I don’t believe in superdelegates,” Warren told reporters following the Massachusetts State Democratic Convention.
Warren’s comments came after the state party here voted on a resolution to “thoroughly, objectively, and transparently” study the superdelegate process ahead of the 2020 presidential race.
Warren said she agreed that the process should be scrutinized.
The Massachusetts senator, a leader of the party’s progressive wing, has conspicuously avoided backing either Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton. She said today she has “no timetable” for making an endorsement in the race.
Asked whether Sanders should leave the race next week, Warren demurred.
Watch her say it with a straight face:
Warren hasn’t endorsed a candidate in her party because she’s a coward.
If she endorsed Hillary, she’d anger Bernie supporters with whom she agrees philosophically. If she endorses Bernie, she’ll be seen as a traitor to feminists who want to see Hillary as the first woman president.
And with regard to the superdelegate thing… Who’s making her do it? If she hates the superdelegates, why has she agreed to be one?
Source
        
Posted by Roberto Abraham Scaruffi at 22:25