We seem to have a group of nation-state leaders joining each other against a common enemy. Many World Leaders and Western populations feel that Iran, Venezuela and Bolivia are a best problematic nations for future world peace. It is amazing that every time a nation state steps over the line and chooses a boisterous or negative PR campaign against the United States; that they are immediately joined in spirit by other malcontents.

Not long ago we watched Venezuela officials visit North Korea. North Korean officials meet with Venezuela, Syria, and Iran. We now see Iran meeting with Hugo Chavez of Venezuela in Bolivia with Evo Morales. Hugo Chavez has recently met with Castro in Cuba as well. Indeed although this is not a huge force even if all combined, it is a group that supports whatever it has available to diminish the USA from its position at the top of the mountain. This includes the use of International Terrorism.

Venezuela, Nigeria and Iran had a special deal outside of OPEC to cut oil production to cause an economic crisis in the US. North Korea and Iran seek nuclear technologies to make weapons to export to rouge nations and for use with International Terrorists. Venezuela has nationalized telecom companies and failed to renew Conoco Phillips and other oil company contracts, effectively nationalizing oil. Bolivia took over mining operations, causing issues with International Banking and inflows of capital.

Venezuela propose a 181 million dollar coca processing plant, to export coca leaves and most likely to pound them into white powder for export. Economically enslaving South America and to export to the USA as the Cocaine coming into our nation is at an all time low thanks to the DEA, Coast Guard, CIA and the War on Drugs. With this money, Boliva's Evo Morales says it will have an export crop, Hugo Chavez has already counted those eggs before they have hatched and ordered late model Russian Migs - to fight who, Venezuela has no enemies, except the one it is making with us.

We have some serious issues in the world, in our own hemisphere, not only in the middle east or North Korea. It is time we all thought a little harder on the growing cancer in the world, it is time to get tough and deal with it, as diplomacy is not working. Am I suggesting more war? Yes, that is one option in political impasse. Think on this. Sincerely, Lance.

By: L. Winslow
L. Winslow is an Economic Advisor to the Online Think Tank, a Futurist and retired entrepreneur http://www.worldthinktank.net. Currently he is planning a bicycle ride across the US to raise money for charity and is sponsored by Calling-Plans.com and all the proceeds will go to various charities who sign up.

Smoking bans are ridiculous. Period. If this were 1987 instead of 2007, next to nobody would have a problem with smoking in public. And in fact, almost nobody did until 1993, when the EPA declared that "secondhand smoke," a term unheard of by most of us until 1990 or so, was declared to be a "Class A Carcinogen." The terms "secondhand smoke," "passive smoking" and "Environmental Tobacco Smoke" were coined by two groups of people:

A) Those offended by the smell of smoke, and

B) those angered because either they or a loved one became sick due to a "smoking-related" illness.

This is in itself questionable, to say the least. Let's suppose 65-year-old John Doe weighs 300 pounds. He also eats 4 Big Macs every week. His exercise consists of getting up off the couch to grab a beer out of the refrigerator. He also happens to smoke a pack of cigarettes every day. Now let's suppose poor John drops dead of a heart attack. Smoking will automatically be recorded as the cause of his myocardial infarction and be added to the supposed 500,000 annual deaths allegedly attributed to smoking. In addition to this scenario, the Center For Disease Control pulls these numbers out of a computer. They are estimates that are pulled out of someone's backside, and carry no proof whatsoever. In reality, the number of deaths directly caused by smoking is probably less than half of what is claimed. Here's another little tidbit of information: While it's true that 87% of lung cancer cases will be found in smokers (or former smokers), the CDC fails to inform the public that less than 10% of smokers will ever GET the disease. In fact, a 75-year-old woman who smokes three packs (that's 60 cigarettes) a day for a period of 55 years has about a 15% chance of developing lung cancer within the next ten years. This also means that she has an 85% of NOT developing the disease! There are approximately 55 million smokers in the United States alone, and only 150,000 or so will die from lung cancer each year. I'm not claiming that smoking doesn't carry health risks. Certainly it does. People who indulge increase their chances for emphysema, COPD, and heart problems, but the assumption that everyone who smokes will go to an early grave is simply not true. There are plenty of people in nursing homes who were around before movies had sound who still smoke like chimneys. Of course now, they're thrown outside, which brings me to my second and most important point.

It is utterly preposterous to the point of being insulting to the intelligence to believe that a minuscule trace of smoke emanating from a 70 millimeter stick of tobacco and paper will somehow travel several feet across a room, enter another person's bloodstream, attach itself to his/her lung, and begin a malignant growth or clog his/her arteries. Let's be honest here. The former Surgeon General is an idiot. He claimed that a mere 30 SECONDS of exposure to someone smoking could cause an instant heart attack! This would be synonymous with claiming that if someone drinks a Pepsi too fast and belches in a diabetics direction, the innocent party will go into a high blood-sugar coma. "Secondhand smoke" is hundreds and even thousands of times less concentrated than the direct smoke that a smoker ingests. An average sixth-grader should be able to determine that if it takes several decades for a smoker to experience ill effects from his/her habit, then it would require thousands of years; rather CENTURIES, for a nonsmoker to render the same damage. Why people can't fathom this is beyond me. Not to mention, I pose a question: Why aren't millions of people who grew up in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's, when smoking was very prevalent, either dead, hooked up to respirators, or have had four or five bypass surgeries by now? Those in opposition love to use this analogy: Smoking sections in restaurants are like having urinating sections in swimming pools. They are shooting themselves in the foot with that argument, because they are right. Allow me to explain: A swimming pool contains thousands of gallons of water. Let's suppose 15 or 20 people are too lazy to get out and use the restroom. A typical urine stream is about 12 ounces. If 20 people relieved themselves in the pool, that's 240 ounces of urine DILUTED by thousands of gallons of water.I'm not advocating the use of swimming pools as toilets, but the point is that if nobody SAW the act of urinating,it would go unnoticed. Similarly, for decades, nobody cared whether or not anyone smoked in public. That is, until the government and media planted it into their minds that it was a health hazard. I believe the big pharmaceutical companies are behind this, for they stand to reap huge profits from the sale of smoking-cessation drugs. The EPA lied by changing the definition of just what a "Class A Carcinogen" was in order to include ETS on their list. They also ignored research that showed no link to disease. As a matter of fact, the whole Report was ruled invalid in 1998 by Federal Judge Willam Osteen. They used junk science to obtain their results. Meanwhile, politicians' pockets were filled with funding from Anti-Tobacco groups and today the bans continue unabated. At first, smokers were thrown outside from restaurants, public transportation, and workplaces. This has now been extended to bars, hotel chains, and even OUTDOOR places such as sports stadiums, theme parks, beaches, and in some cases, if you happen to live in the People's Republic of California, SIDEWALKS. Never in my wildest dreams when I began smoking in 1975 did I ever think that those who smoke would one day be treated like criminals. Smokers are now regarded as child abusers if they so much as even think about lighting up in the presence of young ones. We are told we stink. We are ridiculed. In short, we are hated. Children in schools are being taught to not only despise tobacco, but also those who use it. Famous historical figures such as Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt are now having smoking materials airbrushed away from photos in school textbooks. Try to find a copy of Abbey Road where Paul McCartney is still holding a cigarette. This is social engineering, and has absolutely nothing to do with "public health." Sharing a room with a smoker is about as life-threatening as an earthquake in India would be to someone standing in a cornfield in Nebraska. The goal here is to denormalize smoking. It's wrong. Common sense has taken a backseat to hysteria. It's time for the brainwashing unseen since Hitler became Chancellor of Germany to come to an end. Smokers and nonsmokers co-existed in peaceful harmony for decades. The current bans are nothing short of Fascism, and I don't know about you, but I'd like the America I once knew to be returned. How about it?

By: Patrick Sills

Traditional journalism has been so battered that it can hardly afford to receive another black eye. Remember the CBS Evening Snooze and the Dan Rather debacle regarding President George W. Bush's National Guard service? "Just the facts, ma'am" has been replaced by the mantra, "All sensation, all the time." And there's nothing some members of the mainstream media like better than a salacious story about the troops in Iraq.

Since January, the New Republic has been running a hot series by a soldier operating under the pen name "Scott Thomas." The articles spoke of an Iraqi boy making friends with the Americans, then having his tongue slashed by insurgents. Hard-hearted soldiers in Iraq make fun of a disfigured woman; animal-hating GIs use armored personnel carriers to mow down dogs.

Such stories may make great copy, but the Army says that, as told in the New Republic, they simply weren't true. The whistle-blower, in this case, was the conservative Weekly Standard magazine. In an example of virtual democracy at work, the magazine dared bloggers to uncover the truth behind the liberal New Republic's dispatches.

Meanwhile, the military probe showed that all the soldiers from his unit countered the allegations made by Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp, the author of the articles. The Weekly Standard reported that Beauchamp eventually swore that the articles represented falsehoods.

Unfortunately, people with a penchant for publicity may be tempted to exaggerate. And the temptation can prove irresistible when there's a magazine around that's salivating at the chance to cast U.S. military efforts in Iraq in the most unflattering light possible.

Still, some important lessons are emerging from this journalistic travesty. To begin with, despite the efforts of some media outlets to discredit our military, the Army is not always wrong. In fact, it may be right quite a bit of the time. Secondly, the mainstream media's opposition to the war can lead to a kind of ideological blindness that makes it possible for articles with little credibility to appear within the pages of mainstream magazines. Thirdly, conservatives have more credibility than many rank-and-file journalists would have you believe. After all, it was the conservatives who called into question Beauchamp's dispatches.

Fourthly, even some members of the Fourth Estate are tiring of the slipshod way that some journalists are operating these days. Fox News reported that Bob Steele of a prestigious institute for journalists in Florida said that giving a writer anonymity "raises questions about authenticity and legitimacy." Steele also noted that anonymity permits the writer to "sidestep essential accountability."

We've seen it at CBS News, the New York Times, and the Washington Post—supposedly ground-breaking stories that proved, in the end, to be false. Inaccuracies and liberal bias have made journalism's old guard antiquated and ineffective. That's why the future belongs to the bloggers, where the goal is simply to report the truth, rather than the sensationalized fantasies of the media elite.

By: Nathan Tabor
http://www.theconservativevoice.com
Nathan Tabor is the Founder and CEO of TCVmedia.com and TheConservativeVoice.com. After just eighteen months, TheConservativeVoice.com gets over 250,000 unique visitors a month, 1.7 million page views and has over 150,000 email subscribers. The Conservative Voice has over 100 columnists and features up-to-the-minute news. He is heard daily on over 250 stations nationally with AConservativeMoment.com.

Howard Zinn, writing recently in The Progressive, said that this Independence Day Americans "...would have done well to renounce nationalism and all its symbols: its flags, its pledges of allegiance, its anthems, its insistence in song that God must single out America to be blessed." His column was an argument against the basic idea that we should consider ourselves Americans, and instead advocated an "allegiance to the human race," as if the two were somehow incompatible.

He described our soldiers in Iraq as "victims...of our government's lies" and claimed that Americans suffer from "a loss of a sense of proportion." To support this claim, he said nationalist thinking had led us to such actions as the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in response to Pearl Harbor, and the killing of tens of thousands in the Global War on Terror in response to the deaths of 3,000 Americans in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, a clear indication of our "loss of a sense of proportion." The implication, of course, is that we should have been much more restrained after being attacked by a ruthless enemy, in 1941 and again in 2001.

With all due respect to Mr. Zinn's opinion, I must disagree. I take great pride not in the fact that I am a soldier, but in the fact that I am an American soldier. I am as capable at helping others as I am at hurting them, and I take far more pleasure in the former than I do in the latter. I am immensely proud and humbled to have the honor of representing my nation, as a member of the armed forces, in bringing relief to those who need it, and justice to those who deserve it.

I, and I believe most Americans, love all the symbols of our greatness: our flag, our anthem, our history, and our culture. I have sworn my life to defending the principles upon which this country was founded, and I do believe with all my heart that our nation is special and unique.

I teach my children to respect our flag and our country, and to be thankful for the blessings we enjoy. I get choked up at the playing of "The Star Spangled Banner" and at the passing of Old Glory, and I and my children stand and give proper honors when either occurs. That may make me a nationalist in Mr. Zinn's eyes, but it doesn't make me any less a member of the human race.

And what about that greatest symbol of America, our national colors, that Mr. Zinn would have us put away? Our flag stands for what this nation is: a beacon of hope to the rest of the world, a place where freedom and prosperity are available to all who come here peaceably and are willing to work for it. It represents the values and beliefs that our soldiers are dying for, because they know America is worth preserving. It represents that magical place where people from around the world still long to be, and it stands for justice and equality, the inherent human rights that are sadly lacking in many places around the world.

Do we sometimes make mistakes in dealing with other nations? Yes, of course, but this nation represents a land where good triumphs more often than not, and that is why the rest of the world continues to look to us for guidance and hope. And it is why our enemies seek to destroy us and everything that we represent.

I have been around the world and seen the joy in people's eyes when American help has arrived, and I have felt pride and thankfulness for being part of such a wonderful nation, knowing that few other countries could provide the hope and promise that we do. And I have seen the utter fear in those who know that we have come to right the wrongs on behalf of those who cannot fight for themselves against tyranny and oppression. A former commanding officer of mine summed it up beautifully when he said, "When we deploy our forces, one of two things happens: people either say ‘Thank God, they're coming, or they say, ‘Oh shit, they're coming.'" Both speak to the greatness of this nation.

The flag, and all our symbols of national pride, mean something because they represent all that is good and right about America, and all that can be good and right in the world. They serve as an inspiration and source of pride not only to most Americans, but also to everyone who wants to be an American or wants their nation to be more like ours.

No, the time has not come to renounce nationalism and symbols of national pride. Instead, now, more than ever, it is time to stand up and be counted. Because now is a time of great peril for our nation, when radical enemies seek to destroy everything we stand for and everything we believe in. And it will take proud Americans, and not proud humans, to ensure that our country and our way of life continue, for us, and for the rest of the world.

By: Greg Reeson
http://reeson.townhall.com
Greg Reeson is a Senior Writer for The New Media Journal and a Featured Author for The Veterans' Voice. He also regularly contributes to GOPUSA and The Land of the Free.

Featured by Resources For Attorneys, a Legal Services and Lifestyle Resources portal.

Are you getting depressed over what's going on in the world today? Do you need something to pick you up? Do you need some laughter in your life? Check out our Jokes index and brighten your day.

I was just sitting down about to enjoy my morning coffee, when my boss rambled in.

“Did you see that Op-Ed in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning?” asked Don Margolis, the founder of adult stem cell company, Theravitae. I sighed knowing another rant was coming my way.

Margolis pointed to the last paragraph-

So, until Bush is gone, American researchers dependent on government grants will be forced to use adult stem cells and existing embryonic stem cell lines. And, without the benefit of enhanced embryonic stem cell research and treatments, Americans will continue to die so we can protect frozen embryos that will never live.

“That is just another example of the mainstream media not giving Americans the entire picture. Forced to use adult stem cells? As if that is something negative? My patients aren’t dying. The adult stem cells are working for them! Ask them yourself. If I lose all my money and become homeless and I am looking for a job, I will make my way to Salt Lake City and apply for a job as editor of the Salt Lake Tribune because I know I can do better!” Don exclaimed.

I mentally picture this and smile. Don has reason to be angry. At last count, his company has treated over 200 no-option heart disease patients with his company’s Vescell adult stem cell therapy.

Don continued, “When I think of embryonic stem cells, I think of the number zero. How many clinical trials are there now involving embryonic stem cells? Zero. How many treatments use embryonic stem cells? Zero. How many people have ever been helped by ESCs? ZERO.”

Margolis believes that investors have pooled their money into more promising adult stem cell research because “they know they will get a good return on their investment.” This leaves the embryonic stem cell researchers with nothing except to beg for money from the American taxpayer citing the “potential” and “promise” of embryonic stem cells. Sadly to say, the only promise the world has seen is in the words of the embryonic stem cell research lobby. “Their mouths are writing checks that their research can’t cover.” Don flatly stated.

"If the subject were merely the $100 billion they are desperately trying to scam from the taxpayers on this embryonic science fiction, I wouldn't be so upset. But in order to succeed, they have to con the public into believing that adult stem cells don't work, since, if the truth were to come out, the taxpayers would protest "who needs embryonic stem cells?," and the embryonic con men would have to go to professional investors for their funding and THEY would laugh the embryonic profiteers out of town.

"But their lies are costing thousands of lives every month. The corrupt USA medical press is forced by "political correctness" to follow the party line and pretend that embryonic stem cells work (which they never have and probably never will) and that adult stem cells, which have saved and improved THOUSANDS of lives around the world, don't work. Jerry, I ask you, is it murder to send heart patients to the grave unnecessarily or is it merely voluntary manslaughter?"

“Everyday, I have to read something like this.” He says dejectedly as he points to the Salt Lake Tribune article. “One day, the adult stem cells will be given their due. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like it will be anytime soon.

By: Jerry Steele
Jerry Steele is Patient Relations Manager of Theravitae, a company that treats heart disease with adult stem cell therapy Vescell The company also maintains a blog - Stem Cell Therapy Blog.

Featured by Resources For Attorneys, a Legal Services and Lifestyle Resources portal.

Are you getting depressed over what's going on in the world today? Do you need something to pick you up? Do you need some laughter in your life? Check out our Jokes index and brighten your day.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, whether pro or anti, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include it.