Posts tagged "Code"

Conspiracies

Proving the conspiracy.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/Story?id=6443988&page=1

I was just thinking about the ABC.com article that came out recently asking what is behind the Internet Conspiracy Empires? I think it’s a good question, and so I thought I would take you back through some of the conspiracies that we have looked at over the last couple of years. They will not all be conspiracies, but they will help to show why I have drawn my conclusion about our current conspiracy, and what is behind Gang Stalking.

The Snitching System.

http://www.thejusticeproject.org/wp-content/uploads/snitchsystembooklet1.pdf

[quote]“The history of the snitch is long and inglorious, dating to the common law. In old England, snitches were ubiquitous.Their motives, then as now, were unholy. In the 18th Century, Parliament prescribed monetary rewards—blood money—for snitches, who were turned back onto the streets where they were, in the words of one contemporary commentator,“the contempt and terror of society.”

“The system produced a cycle of betrayal in which each snitch knew he might find himself soon in the dock confronted by another snitch.”

“If all cases ended so poetically, perhaps informant dependent prosecutions would be more humorous than objectionable. In real life, however, O. Henry endings are rare.”

“The snitch system probably arrived in the New World with the Pilgrims.The first documented wrongful conviction case in the United States involved a snitch.The case arose in Manchester, Vermont, in 1819. Brothers Jesse and Stephen Boorn were suspected of killing their brother-in-law, Russell Colvin. Jesse was put into a cell with a forger, Silas Merrill, who would testify that Jesse confessed. Merrill was rewarded with freedom.
The Boorn brothers were convicted and sentenced to death but saved from the gallows when Colvin turned up alive in New Jersey.”[/quote]

With the advent of modern day society can we assume that the Snitching System became obsolete, or would it be better to rightfully conclude that it was and still is an integral part of society and as relevant today as it was yesterday? It is also just as much a concern for this time period as it has been in others?

The Secret Persuaders

During WWII before America agreed to join the war, the United Kingdom set up a secret agency inside of America, designed to convince the entire nation it was a good idea to join the war. This was back in 1940 and this agency had almost 3000 operatives. They sent out false media stories, via newspapers and other mediums they had set up within America. To the individuals that were anti-war they had a game that they played called VIK.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/aug/19/military.secondworldwar

[quote]BSC invented a game called “Vik“, described as “a fascinating new pastime for lovers of democracy”. Printed booklets described up to 500 ways of harassing and annoying Nazi sympathisers. Players of Vik were encouraged to ring up their targets at all hours of the night and hang up. Dead rats could be put in water tanks, air could be let out of the subject’s car tyres, anonymous deliveries could be made to his house and so on. In the summer of 1941, BSC sent a sham Hungarian astrologer to the US called Louis de Wohl. At a press conference De Wohl said he had been studying Hitler’s astrological chart and could see nothing but disaster ahead for the German dictator. De Wohl became a minor celebrity and went on tour through the US, issuing similar dire prognostications about Hitler and his allies. De Wohl’s wholly bogus predictions were widely published.[/quote]

I have never been able to locate the booklet with the 500 ways of harassing those that were anti-war, but I am sure some of those methods survived to this time period.

Here are some more amazing details about this agency that was set up by a foreign body on U.S. soil for the sole purpose of manipulating the population intogoing to war. This would have continued, but conveniently ended when the Japanese hit pearl harbour, what a unique coincidence.

[quote]BSC was set up by a Canadian entrepreneur called William Stephenson, working on behalf of the British Secret Intelligence Services (SIS). An office was opened in the Rockefeller Centre in Manhattan with the discreet compliance of Roosevelt and J Edgar Hoover of the FBI. But nobody on the American side of the fence knew what BSC’s full agenda was nor, indeed, what would be the massive scale of its operations. What eventually occurred as 1940 became 1941 was that BSC became a huge secret agency of nationwide news manipulation and black propaganda. Pro-British and anti-German stories were planted in American newspapers and broadcast on American radio stations, and simultaneously a campaign of harassment and denigration was set in motion against those organisations perceived to be pro-Nazi or virulently isolationist (such as the notoriously anti-British America First Committee – it had more than a million paid-up members).
Stephenson called his methods “political warfare”, but the remarkable fact about BSC was that no one had ever tried to achieve such a level of “spin”, as we would call it today, on such a vast and pervasive scale in another country. The aim was to change the minds of an entire population: to make the people of America think that joining the war in Europe was a “good thing” and thereby free Roosevelt to act without fear of censure from Congress or at the polls in an election.

BSC’s media reach was extensive: it included such eminent American columnists as Walter Winchell and Drew Pearson, and influenced coverage in newspapers such as the Herald Tribune, the New York Post and the Baltimore Sun. BSC effectively ran its own radio station, WRUL, and a press agency, the Overseas News Agency (ONA), feeding stories to the media as they required from foreign datelines to disguise their provenance. WRUL would broadcast a story from ONA and it thus became a US “source” suitable for further dissemination, even though it had arrived there via BSC agents. It would then be legitimately picked up by other radio stations and newspapers, and relayed to listeners and readers as fact. The story would spread exponentially and nobody suspected this was all emanating from three floors of the Rockefeller Centre. BSC took enormous pains to ensure its propaganda was circulated and consumed as bona fide news reporting. To this degree its operations were 100% successful: they were never rumbled. [/quote]

That is an amazing conspiracy that very few knew anything about. Are branches of this program still operational in some capacity on foreign soil today? It’s hard to say.

Operation Gladio

An actual operation that hired agents and had them in keeping in such a time as when they were needed. This is another jewel that came to light while doing research into Gang Stalking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio

[quote]Emblem of NATO’s “stay-behind” paramilitary organizations.After World War II, the UK and the US decided to create “stay-behind” paramilitary organizations, with the official aim of countering a possible Soviet invasion through sabotage and guerrilla warfare behind enemy lines. Arms caches were hidden, escape routes prepared, and loyal members recruited: i.e. mainly hardline anticommunists, including many ex-Nazis or former fascists, whether in Italy or in other European countries. In Germany, for example, Gladio had as a central focus the Gehlen Org — also involved in ODESSA “ratlines” — named after Reinhard Gehlen who would become West Germany’s first head of intelligence, while the predominantly Italian P2 masonic lodge was composed of many members of the neofascist Italian Social Movement (MSI), including Licio Gelli. Its clandestine “cells” were to stay behind (hence the name) in enemy controlled territory and to act as resistance movements, conducting sabotage, guerrilla warfare and assassinations.

However, Italian Gladio was more far reaching. “A briefing minute of June 1, 1959, reveals Gladio was built around ‘internal subversion’. It was to play ‘a determining role… not only on the general policy level of warfare, but also in the politics of emergency’. In the 1970s, with communist electoral support growing and other leftists looking menacing, the establishment turned to the ‘Strategy of Tension’ … with Gladio eager to be involved.”[
[/quote]

A secret paramilitary army that exists in many European countries and has since the end of WWII, set up by the U.S. and the U.K.? Kept secret all the way up to 1990 when the Italian wing was exposed, and then the other branches were exposed as well. This secret army might have remained secret to this day, except for the extreme involvement of the Italian wing in local policy.

[quote]“Coordinated by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), {the secret armies} were run by the European military secret services in close cooperation with the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the British foreign secret service Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, also MI6). Trained together with US Green Berets and British Special Air Service (SAS), these clandestine NATO soldiers, armed with underground arms-caches, prepared against a potential Soviet invasion and occupation of Western Europe, as well as the coming to power of communist parties. The clandestine international network covered the European NATO membership, including Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and Turkey, as well as the neutral European countries of Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden and Switzerland.

‘The existence of these clandestine NATO armies remained a closely guarded secret throughout the Cold War until 1990, when the first branch of the international network was discovered in Italy. It was code-named Gladio, the Latin word for a short double-edged sword [gladius]. While the press said the NATO secret armies were ‘the best-kept, and most damaging, political-military secret since World War II’, the Italian government, amidst sharp public criticism, promised to close down the secret army. Italy insisted identical clandestine armies had also existed in all other countries of Western Europe. This allegation proved correct and subsequent research found that in Belgium, the secret NATO army was code-named SDRA8, in Denmark Absalon, in Germany TD BJD, in Greece LOK, in Luxemburg Stay-Behind, in the Netherlands I&O, in Norway ROC, in Portugal Aginter, in Switzerland P26, in Turkey Counter-Guerrilla, In Sweden AGAG (Aktions Gruppen Arla Gryning, and in Austria OWSGV. However, the code names of the secret armies in France, Finland and Spain remain unknown.
[/quote]

The promised that they would close down these secret armies. We however know that with other similar programs they are never shut down, they are just repackaged and start up again. That is one heck of a conspiracy. Secret armies in many European countries set up by the U.S. and the U.K.

Red Squads

Not so much a conspiracy, but a little known wing of the police that exists in many countries around the world. Set up for the sole purpose of destroying dissidence. During Cointelpro and the Canadian VIP program they worked closely with the government to neutralize dissidence.

http://www.amazon.com/Protectors-Privilege-Squads-Repression-America/dp/0520080351/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229548302&sr=1-1

[quote] The cops love these free-wheeling, elite units. They were ostensibly created to combat terrorism, but have been used mostly to infiltrate and suppress liberal and radical political organizations and civil rights groups. They lift their members out of the routine of police work into something of a James Bond life. As Frank Donner points out in this excellently researched, thoughtful and well-detailed study of police spying, their excesses have been many. But Donner, who directed the American Civil Liberties Project on Political Surveillance, concludes with the chilling thought that the Red squads will be around long after there are any Reds.[/quote]

These groups go back over a hundred years, as each new wave of immigrant population introduced themselves Red Squads were there, using informants to infiltrate, get information and help to disrupt these groups, movements, and unions. With other infiltration programs the idea is to try to get the corportion of members of the infiltrated groups, by asking some of them to become informants. Once you are an informant for the system, you are always considered an informant for the system.

[quote]Worse yet, the information, and misinformation, gathered by these sleuths is fed into the growing number of intelligence networks maintained by federal, state and local law-enforcement organizations. In the computer age, if you attend a left-wing meeting in Echo Park, your name is likely to be spread as far as New York.
As Donner points out, the squads are not a recent invention. One of his most important contributions is tracing the history of the Red squads, showing how deeply rooted they are in American political, social and economic life….

…That set the pattern for the Red squads, a pattern that continues today. Whatever the city, said Donner, the goal and tactics are much the same: “police behavior motivated or influenced in whole or in part by hostility to protest, dissent and related activities perceived as a threat to the status quo.”
[/quote]

Elite branches of the police designed to squash dissident and protect against perceived threats to the status quo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_squad

[quote]In New York, former City Police Commissioner Patrick Murphy traced their origin there to an “Italian Squad” formed in 1904 to monitor a group of Italian immigrants under suspicion[1]. However, it is their association with fighting communism which provides the basis for the name “Red Squad.” They became more commonplace in the 1930s, often conceived of as a countermeasure to Communist organizers who were charged with executing a policy of dual unionism – namely, building a revolutionary movement in parallel with membership in above-ground labor organizations. Similar units were established in Canada in this period, although only the Toronto police used the name.

In the late 1960s, as the protests against Vietnam and the general domestic upheaval intensified, the Red Squads augmented their focus, to include dissidents largely outside the labor movement, including therein not just war resisters, but protest movements of all political stripes, including Neonazis, Native American movements, the women’s movement, environmentalists, the civil rights movement, and others. The methods employed ranged from simple surveillance to isolated incidents of assassination. Anti-activist police operations were expanded under the Johnson and Nixon administrations, particularly in concert with, and within the cadre of the FBI’s COINTELPRO surveillance program, but also including domestic spying by the CIA.
[/quote]

This very rarely discussed unit of the police apparently were in and still are in existence in many cities, some going by different names, but the same concept applies, squash dissidence.

Alexandra Natapoff

http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file744_30623.pdf

[quote]
The use of criminal informants in the U.S. justice system has become a flourishing socio-legal institution. Every year, tens of thousands of criminal suspects, many of them drug offenders concentrated in inner-city neighborhoods, informally negotiate away liability in exchange for promised cooperation, while law enforcement at the local, state and federal levels rely on ever greater numbers of criminal actors in making basic decisions about investigations and prosecutions. While this marriage of convenience is fraught with peril, it is nearly devoid of judicial or public scrutiny as to the propriety, fairness, or utility of the deals being struck. At the same time, it is a quintessential expression of some of the most contentious characteristics of the modern criminal system: law enforcement discretion, secrecy, and the increasing informality of the adjudication process.
The informant institution is also an under-appreciated social force in low-income, high-crime, urban communities in which a high percentage of residents – as many as fifty percent of African American males in some cities – are in contact with the criminal justice system and therefore potentially under pressure to snitch. By relying heavily on snitching, particularly in drug-related cases, law enforcement officials create large numbers of informants who remain at large in the community, engaging in criminal activities while under pressure to provide information about others. These snitches are a communal liability: they increase crime and threaten social organization, interpersonal relationships, and socio-legal norms in their home communities, even as they are tolerated or under-punished by law enforcement because they are useful.

The Article also hypothesizes the harms imposed by the informant institution on socially disadvantaged, high-crime communities in which snitching is common. These harms may include increased crime, the erosion of trust in interpersonal, familial and community relationships and other psychological damage created by pervasive informing, the communal loss of faith in the state, and the undermining of law-abiding norms flowing from law enforcement’s rewarding of and complicity in snitch wrongdoing.

[/quote]

Many people see this article and assume it’s an inner city problem, but it’s not. This is a societal problem. These informant programs are not just going after African American males, they are going after the females, and they are going after other communities. They started in these communities, and these communities currently have higher ratios of Informants, but then it branches out.

Imagine a society where over 50% of your community is a potential snitch? Imagine what that does to the heart and soul of a society? Some people don’t have to imagine because they have already been through something very similar.

[quote]

http://www.november.org/razorwire/2005-02/art/RazorWire-V8N3a.pdf

“As summer travel ebbed, I dove into the study of
the informant system, as pertains to those whom the police arrest, then pressure to go back into their
places of home and work and set others up for arrest.”

How many informants do we have in communities? We can’t measure it because of this secret system, but experts have some guesses.

“Because researchers know what is behind the search warrants granted, they know that almost 98% of the time the police don’t have any goods on anyone, just a confidential informant. A lot of informing is going on, and it’s escalating.”

“So they squeeze these people into rolling on their mother. Our family involved my brother’s girlfriend; it was her brother who turned her in, and so we went through this ourselves. And it is hard to try to explain to people this part — people do 20, 30 years and they get through it. Somehow, I don’t know how.
I’ve never been to prison, but they get through
it, and what dogs them all of the time is this —
how could my sister do that to me? How could my friend do this to me? That stays with them.
That psychological damage never goes away.

And it spreads to everyone in the family, just like anything traumatic does, and you get a bunch of sick people.”

When I grew up, the Russians were doing it a lot, the informant system throughout all the communities. A person could be hauled off and interrogated and taken off to the ice fields. It terrified me, those Russian people. We studied these communities in
Russia after that period because there was a lot of
mental illness. Our country went over there to help them with all their crazy people. And do you know what our country found out? Our scientists and
doctors went over there and came back and said, “It was all those informants. It made them crazy to live
among people, and nobody knew who was going to rip them off, or who needed to ‘get in good,’ or some favor. And so turn someone in, and that person gets hauled off to Siberia. It made people crazy. <b>Well, that’s what is happening in our communities now.”</b>
[/quote]

The new face of snitching might surprise you. As mentioned they started in ethnic communities, but they have branched out so much further then this.

http://www.mapinc.org/images/Hoffman.jpg

Meet Rachel Hoffman she was a 23-year-old Florida State psychology graduate, she is also the face of snitching. Rachel earlier this year agreed to become an Informant to lower her sentence for a drug conviction. She was killed while making a drug purchase for the police to help reduce her drug sentence. Informants come from a variety of social and economical backgrounds and once caught up in the system, many will do anything to escape prison sentences normally offered for much more severe crimes.

http://november.org/stayinfo/breaking08/FinalNight.html

[quote]Immediately after Tallahassee police raided her apartment April 17, Hoffman went to her boyfriend’s house and told him about the deal she’d cut. Over the next three weeks, she would tell him and Liza all about her work as a confidential informant.

“They wanted her to turn in her friends, and she wouldn’t do that,” said Liza, a 24-year-old FSU graduate student. “She said she wanted to get some grimy people off the street. She wanted to get bad guys.”

At first she agreed to give up a guy she knew who dealt drugs and sometimes bought pot from her, her friends said. But after one controlled call from the police station, she confessed to him she was working for the police and asked him to help her find someone else to turn in.[/quote]

She was killed during a sting that went wrong. She was an inexperienced 23 year old, who didn’t want to go to jail, didn’t want her parents to find out, and thought this would be a cool way to work off her sentence. She paid the ultimate price for it. This story is not that uncommon in today’s modern society, but many of us, like myself, were previously unaware of the extent to which citizen informants are being used in society.

She should no more have been turned into an Informant than many of these young urban men and woman, who also don’t want to spend years in jail, vs living outside for minor drug possessions, these people exchange their freedoms for a type of slavery and servitude to the system that is unimaginable. These situations are becoming too common, and they are contributing to the detriment and moral fiber of our societies.

Fusion Centers and TLO

The informant system is not just using paid informants. They are also using an army of volunteer Informants. The Citizen Informants who are parts of various community programs, or who were inducted via their place of employment.

http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/privacy/fusion_update_20080729.pdf

The ACLU has released a report on Fusion Centers. 800,000 operatives will be dispersed throughout every American city and town. Set to report on even the most common everyday behaviors which will go into state, local and regional, linked data bases.

This number of 800,000 is outside of other Informant programs that are already in place within America. Informants working via Citizen Corps, and other sub programs.

There are informant programs for local businesses, informant programs for truckers, boats, and so many others.

http://blog.t1production.com/utility-workers-hired-as-stasi-informants-in-colorado-california-arizona

T.I.P.S. officially died, but lived on in many other forms.

Spying101

The Canadian Government spying on it’s own citizens? Canada that friendly and peaceful nation? The very one.

http://www.spying101.com/

http://www.gangstalkingunited.com/forum/books/spying-101/

[quote]If you attended a Canadian university in the past eighty years, it’s possible that, unbeknownst to you, Canadian security agents were surveying you, your fellow students, and your professors for ‘subversive’ tendencies and behaviour. Since the end of the First World War, members of the RCMP have infiltrated the campuses of Canada’s universities and colleges to spy, meet informants, gather information, and on occasion, to attend classes. [/quote]

[quote]RCMP spies kept secret files on hundreds of Canadian Politicians and bureaucrats at all three levels of government as part of a project known as the “VIP program,”[/quote]

[quote]The book, a thorough examination of RCMP surveillance of the academic world, also discusses the Mounties’ efforts to keep tabs on other
elements of society, including government, the media and women’s groups.

The RCMP created security files on 800,000 Canadians, and it has long been known the force took an active interest in politicians and public
servantswith links to Communist organizations or other pursuits deemed subversive.[/quote]

Talk about conspiracy. The Canadian government for over 80 years spied on it’s citizens and opened files on many of it’s citizens just because they attended a university or college? If the Canadian government was willing to do this, what about other nations?

This program after 80 years of operation within Canadian Universities and Colleges, when exposed supposedly formally ended. That is the official story that the public is suppose to believe.

These spying programs were not content to just watch the universities, the research shows that they branched out into the community, because after graduating, these people might still have subversive ideas.

Within the last 10 years since the program supposedly ended, it’s hard to imagine how many new files might have been opened on unsuspecting students.

Stasis- What happened to these people who were former spies for the East German state?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,540771,00.html

[quote]More East Germans were spying on their neighbors, colleagues, family and friends when the Berlin Wall fell than had previously been thought. According to a report published Monday, 189,000 people were informers for the Stasi — the former Communist secret police — when East Germany collapsed in 1989 — 15,000 more than previous studies had suggested.[/quote]

The C.I.A. were handed the list of these names after the Berlin Wall fell. How many went to other countries and were asked to continue with their domestic spying is unclear.

The above scenarios are just a few of the conspiracies, intrigues, and surprising information I have come across when researching Gang Stalking.

what I am seeing is a continual and consistent pattern of something that is systemic, with many absorption points. This means that citizens are being incorporated into these programs through many different venues, some via their families. Other through educational institutions, others via their places of employment, other through religious institutions, etc.

I am also seeing a link to some people that are being mobbed and bullied out of this system. I am also seeing the same patterns of collusion that has been reported elsewhere, by others.

http://www.bullyonline.org/action/obstruct.htm

http://www.targetedindividuals.com/System.html

That’s part of the conspiracy that I am seeing, and this conspiracy has been ongoing within society for some time now. Many communities have been affected by this and some are very aware of the level of snitching and informing that is ongoing in society, paid and unpaid. Others have had very limited or no exposure to these concepts, and therefore are not aware of what is ongoing in society.

gangstalking
http://www.articlesbase.com/news-and-society-articles/conspiracies-695384.html

Review of Labyrinth by Kate Mosse

I bought this book on the basis of the Reviewers’ comments.  However, having had 3 previously bad experiences with following Reviewers’ recommendations, I really should have known better.

What I expected from a book with a story set in the 13thc and a parallel one set in the modern day was an intelligent story about two different worlds but with logical interfaces.  What I got was a plot driven 13thc story and a weak, totally irrelevant modern day story.

It is difficult to understand why the modern day story has been included.  It is light on substance, has no believable romance, and no believable central characters.  You do not really care what happens to them and, although they are meant to be the  modern embodiment of the 13thc characters, there is no discernible or credible link.  Reading the book feels as though the modern day story has been included as ‘padding’ to make the novel appear to be more substantial that it actually is.

In the 13thc story, Alais has a strong and pivotal role in the plot as do her father, husband and sister.  Although some of the characters are not well formed, those of Alais, her father and her husband are.  You can fully understand why Alais becomes the protector of the Book of Words – the third in a trilogy of books – which will bestow tyranny in the event of power and wealth.  Her sister is in search of these three books and has acquired two in her quest for power.  However, it does not explain why good people are harmed and die and why some people are destined to make such dramatic sacrifices which would be too much to bear for the average human being.

Alais is the daughter of a State Official who had, many years before, sworn an allegiance to protect the books when at any time in his life he was summonsed to do so.  When she realises her father cannot protect the Book entrusted to him she takes up the struggle. 

However, the present day story is weak.  Alice has no role in the story; she is working on an archaeological dig for a week at the recommendation of a friend (Shelagh).  Although Shelagh has no role in the story at all, she later gets tortured and dies.  But there is no rationale, rhyme or reason why this is so other than to show a devout Catholic in a bad light.  It is totally meaningless and without plot and you struggle to establish why the torture has taken place at all or how it has furthered the story.  In the post Da Vinci code era of  knocking the Catholic Church, this appears to be the sole rationale for its insertion.

Alice, contrary to the Reviewers’ assertions, is not a ‘feisty heroine’ rather someone who lacks judgement, originality of thought and any discernible personality.  Yet, going against the rules of the archaeological dig she is digging alone and stumbles on the graves of Alais and  her husband – but does not know it at the time -  it makes no difference that you, the reader, know.  Alice purportedly feels a sense of affinity and also the presence of Alais, but there is no proper context to this feeling.  Alice is imbued with ‘déjà vu’ and knowledge – without antecedent or rationale.

The ‘knowledge’ pits Alice against the modern day Catholic Church and the modern day pursuit of the grail – but none, absolutely none, of the story is believable or has any relevance other than Alice has the same name as Alais.  However, the major problem is the so called romance between Alice and Will, whose only link to the 13thc story is that he shares the same name as Alais’ husband.  Alice and Will meet briefly by accident on a park bench and the reader is meant to believe that they fall madly and passionately in love but you are, in fact, left wondering how and why.  Alice has no personality and Will has no character or, excuse the pun, will power.  Yet after one very brief meeting, you are asked to believe in their eternal love!

Quite frankly, into page no. 200 I had really become bored by the book.  So much of it is unnecessary.  All you are doing is reading a text book history lesson, into which some less than credible characters have been inserted.  If you want to read about the siege of Carcassone, go there and visit the museum – you don’t need to read this book – the history is there in its own right.

The book is far too long.  The 13thc story should have formed the only story.  A large chunk of the book is totally irrelevant.  It struggles to link the modern day story to the 13thc one.  The narrative is weak which, combined with a lack of plot and lack of characters in the modern day story, fails to further the story.  Instead, textbook history is relied on to ‘flesh out’ the novel.

I have discerned a trend in media reviews today, if they like you you will inevitably get a good review, whether they like it or not.  I have read 3 books this year the content of which bear no actual relation to the reviews posted about them.  It is clear some  reviewers have not actually read the whole novel before committing pen to paper.

My advice is that you go to Carcassone and read your own history.  It is probably much more interesting than this novel!!  The novel is a  formulaic, commercial novel riding on the back of Dan Brown’s ‘The Da Vinci Code’ therefore guaranteeing publication.

Jo Dominich
http://www.articlesbase.com/book-reviews-articles/review-of-labyrinth-by-kate-mosse-710867.html

Preemption of State Law Intentional Tort Actions Under the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978

After years of tight government control over the airline industry, Congress chose to pursue a policy of economic deregulation, enacting the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA). Areas formerly controlled by the federal government, such as the awarding of routes, the entry of new air carriers, and the setting of fares, were left to the airlines and the free market to determine. Congress, concerned that States might attempt to circumvent federal airline deregulation through their own state enforcement actions, included an express preemption clause in the ADA, which bars States from enforcing laws “related to a price, route, or service of an air carrier.” This apparently innocuous provision continues to cause confusion and divide courts over exactly what causes of action are preempted by the ADA.

 

Top-ranked Chicago personal injury attorney, Matthew A. Passen, examines one class of state-law based actions, intentional tort claims, and considers whether such actions are sufficiently “related to” an airline “service” for preemption under the ADA. For example, can a passenger who was refused boarding on a commercial airline and strapped to an immobile chair in the waiting area sue the airline for false imprisonment? Can a passenger detained by airline employees upon landing of an aircraft, wrongfully accused of stealing another passenger’s ring, and arrested by police, seek recourse against the airline for false arrest, intentional infliction of emotional distress or slander? Can an airline racially discriminate against a passenger or airline employee with impunity?

 

As the following discussion reveals, the answer to these questions often depends entirely on how broad or narrow courts interpret the ADA’s statutory phrase, “related to a . . . service of an air carrier.” If a narrow reading is adopted, plaintiffs will have their day in court. If, on the other hand, a court interprets the preemption provision broadly, airlines will essentially receive immunity from state-law intentional tort actions.

 

Often, the best answer to such questions of statutory interpretation is found by reconsidering the purpose of the underlying statute containing the preemption provision. Here, the purpose of the ADA is straightforward: economic deregulation of the airline industry.

 

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ADA’s PREEMPTION CLAUSE

 

Prior to 1978, the federal government heavily regulated the airline industry.1 Beginning with the Federal Aviation Act (FAA) of 1958,2 Congress created a regulatory organization, known as the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB), to serve three main functions: award routes to airlines, control the entry of air carriers into new markets, and regulate fares for consumers.3 Still, Congress preserved state common law actions against airlines by including a “saving clause,” which provided: “Nothing contained in this chapter shall in any way abridge or alter the remedies now existing at common law or by statute, but the provisions of this chapter are in addition to such remedies.”4

 

In 1978, however, Congress changed courses with respect to airline regulation, determining that “maximum reliance on competitive market forces would best further ‘efficiency, innovation, and low prices’ as well as ‘variety [and] quality . . . of air transportation services.”5 Accordingly, Congress enacted the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA),6 which gradually ended economic regulation of the airline industry in a series of steps over the years, including the elimination of the CAB.7

 

The ADA, unlike its predecessor, contained express federal preemption clause to ensure that “States would not undo federal deregulation with regulation of their own.”8 The ADA’s preemption clause states:

 

Except as provided in this subsection, a State, political subdivision of a State, or political authority of at least 2 States may not enact or enforce any law, regulation, or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service of any air carrier that may provide air transportation under this subpart.9

 

This preemption standard, while simply stated, has proven far more difficult to apply than Congress could have anticipated.

 

One source of confusion is Congress’ retention of the “saving clause,” which provides that “[a] remedy under this part is in addition to any other remedies provided by law.” 10 Some courts have found Congress preserved this clause in order to protect the states’ ability to control non-economic matters involving airlines within their respective borders.11 Still, the Supreme Court has referred to the saving clause as “a relic of the pre-ADA/no pre-emption regime,” without power to supersede the specific substantive preemption provision of the ADA. 12

 

The greatest source of confusion surrounding the ADA’s preemption clause concerns the ambiguous language of the statute itself. In particular, courts have struggled to advance a coherent framework for what types of causes of action are “related to a price, route, or service” for preemption under the ADA. Congress neither defined the terms nor specified what types of state action are preempted, and the Supreme Court has not drawn any distinct preemption lines.13 Consequently, lower courts have been left to apply their own, often conflicting, interpretations of the ADA’s preemption clause. Regardless of statutory interpretation, courts remain guided by fundamental principles of preemption doctrine.

 

BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO PREEMPTION DOCTRINE

 

The foundation for federal preemption of state law is based on the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the Constitution, which provides: “This Constitution and the laws of the United States . . . shall be the supreme law of the land . . . anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”14 As a general rule, federal law preempts state law in three situations:15 (1) Express preemption: where Congress has explicitly preempted state law;16 (2) Field preemption: where Congressional intent to preempt may be inferred generally from the pervasiveness of a federal regulatory scheme in a particular area;17 and (3) Conflict preemption: where state law conflicts with federal law or interferes with the achievement of congressional objectives.18

 

Where Congress has included an express preemption clause in a statute, courts “typically do not consider the issue of implied pre-emption,” and instead simply “determine whether the state law in question falls within the scope of the statute expressly promulgated by Congress.”19 In other words, according to the Supreme Court:

 

When Congress has considered the issue of pre-emption and has included in the enacted legislation a provision explicitly addressing that issue . . . ‘there is no need to infer congressional intent to pre-empt state laws from the substantive provisions’ of the legislation. Such reasoning is a variant of the familiar principle of expression unius est exclusio alterius: Congress’ enactment of a provision defining the pre-emptive reach of a statute implies that matters beyond that reach are not pre-empted.20

 

Because Congress included an express preemption clause in the ADA, courts look to the specific statutory language in order to determine whether a particular state action is preempted. Unfortunately, the literal text of the ADA’s preemption clause is ambiguous; and the Supreme Court has not resolved the uncertainty.

 

SUPREME COURT INTERPRETATION OF

 

THE ADA’s PREEMPTION CLAUSE

 

The United States Supreme Court has interpreted the ADA’s preemption provision only twice since 1978. In Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.,21 the Court decided whether the ADA preempts States from regulating deceptive airline fare advertisements through enforcement of state consumer protection statutes.22 The Court held such actions were indeed preempted by the ADA.23

 

In reaching its decision, the Court focused on the statutory phrase “related to” in the ADA’s preemption provision. First, the Court looked to Black’s Law Dictionary for guidance, concluding that “the words thus express a broad pre-emptive purpose.”24

 

Second, the Court examined the similarly worded preemption provision of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA),25 which the Court had previously interpreted as having a “broad scope.”26 Therefore, the Court held: “Since the relevant language of the ADA is identical [to the ERISA preemption clause], we think it appropriate to adopt the same standard here: State enforcement actions having a connection with or reference to airline ‘rates, routes, or services’ are pre-empted” by the ADA.27 Although the Court in Morales declined to define with particularity the circumstances under which a state law “relates to” airline services, it held the state consumer protection guidelines at issue were sufficiently “related to” airline “price[s]” because enforcement of such guidelines would compel or restrict airline price advertising.28

 

Notably, however, the Court recognized there are limits to the scope of the ADA’s preemption clause.29 Specifically, the Court explained that state action affecting the airlines in “too tenuous, remote, or peripheral a manner” will not be preempted by the ADA.30 The Court declined to expand on this notion, instead stating, “[t]he present litigation plainly does not present a borderline question, and we express no views about where it would be appropriate to draw the line.”31

 

In 1995, the Supreme Court revisited the ADA’s preemption clause in American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens.32 Here, the plaintiffs brought claims against American Airlines for breach of contract and for violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act following the airline’s unilateral devaluation of frequent flyer mileage credits earned by the plaintiffs.33 Rather than focusing on the “related to” language of the ADA’s preemption clause, the Court examined the phrase “enact or enforce any law” in the provision.34

 

First, in accord with Morales, the Court held that the plaintiffs’ claims based on the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act were preempted by the ADA.35 The purpose of the Illinois statute, according to the Court, was “to guide and police the marketing practices of the airlines; the Act does not simply give effect to bargains offered by the airlines and accepted by airline customers.”36 Therefore, because the plaintiffs sought to “enforce [a] law” regulating “the selection and design of marketing mechanisms appropriate to the furnishing of air transportation services,” the plaintiffs’ claims under the Consumer Fraud Act were preempted.37

 

Second, the Court carved out an exception to ADA preemption for the plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim. The Court explained: “We do not read the ADA’s preemption clause, however, to shelter airlines from suits alleging no violation of state-imposed obligations, but seeking recovery solely for the airline’s alleged breach of its own, self-imposed undertakings.”38 Because the plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim (based on American’s modification of its frequent flyer program) sought to enforce the terms of a voluntary undertaking by the airlines, and did not seek to “enforce any law,” the claim was not preempted by the ADA.39

 

COURTS OF APPEALS’ CONFLICTING DEFINITION OF “SERVICE”

 

Although the Supreme Court interpreted the “related to” phrase in Morales, and the “enact or enforce any law” language in Wolens, the Court has not defined the term “service” of an airline, as it is used in the ADA’s preemption clause. Instead, the United States Courts of Appeals have been left to define the term, resulting in conflicting approaches.

 

In Charas v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., the Ninth Circuit adopted a relatively narrow definition of “service.”40 Because the term “service” is inherently ambiguous, the court looked to the purpose behind the ADA, which Congress enacted to protect “the economic deregulation of the airlines and the forces of competition within the airline industry.”41 As such, only state laws that interfere with economic deregulation and the forces of competition within the airline industry should be preempted.42 Conversely, ADA preemption should not “displace state tort law in actions that do not affect deregulation in more than a ‘peripheral manner.’”43

 

With these principles in mind, the Ninth Circuit defined “service,” as referring to “the prices, schedules, origins and destinations of the point-to-point transportation of passengers, cargo, or mail.”44 This definition includes “such things as the frequency and scheduling of transportation, and to the selection of markets to or from which transportation is provided.”45 This definition of “service” does not, however, encompass things such as “the pushing of beverage carts, keeping the aisles clear of stumbling blocks, the safe handling and storage of luggage, assistance to passengers in need, or like functions,” which the court found only peripherally affect airline deregulation or competition.46 Any broader a definition, according to the court, “effectively would result in the pre-emption of virtually everything an airline does. It seems clear to us that that is not what Congress intended.”47 This approach to ADA preemption has been followed by the Third Circuit.48

 

In contrast, the Fifth Circuit adopted a much broader definition of “service.”49 In Hodges v. Delta Airlines, Inc., a female passenger was injured when another passenger opened an overhead compartment and dislodged a case of rum. She brought a state law personal injury claim against Delta Airlines based on alleged negligent operation of the aircraft.50 In order to determine whether the plaintiff’s claim was preempted by the ADA, the Fifth Circuit adopted the following definition of “service”:

 

“Services” generally represent a bargained-for or anticipated provision of labor from one party to another . . . Elements of the air carrier service bargain include items such as ticketing, boarding procedures, provisions of food and drink, and baggage handling, in addition to the transportation itself. These matters are all appurtenant and necessarily included with the contract of carriage between the passenger or shipper and the airline. It is these [contractual] features of air transportation that we believe Congress intended to de-regulate as “services” and broadly to protect from state regulation.51

 

This definition of “service” is clearly far broader than the Ninth Circuit’s definition in Charas.

 

Still, the Fifth Circuit held the plaintiff’s claims were not preempted by the ADA. The court distinguished between claims related to the “operation and maintenance of the aircraft,” and claims related to airline “services,” holding that claims falling in the former category are not preempted by the ADA.52 With respect to the plaintiff’s claims, the court explained: “One uses the overhead luggage racks or the food and beverages provided in aircraft operation just as one uses the cigarette lighter or built-in cooler compartment in an automobile, and all these devices are available to support the general purpose of navigation.”53 The court rejected Delta’s arguments that the plaintiff’s injuries arose out of the “service” of baggage handling and boarding.54 Instead, the court found: “Whether certain luggage may be placed in overhead bins and whether the flight attendants properly monitor compliance with overhead rack regulations are matters that pertain to the safe operation of a flight.”55

 

Thus, while the Fifth Circuit adopted a broad definition of “service,” it added another layer of confusion with an almost untenable distinction between “service” and “operation and maintenance.” 56 Nevertheless, at least three other Circuit Courts of Appeals have adopted the Hodges court’s definition of “service.”57

 

SUPREME COURT DECLINES TO DEFINE “SERVICE”

 

In late 2000, the Supreme Court declined the opportunity to resolve the conflict concerning the appropriate definition of “service” within the meaning of the ADA’s preemption clause.58 Earlier that year, in Duncan v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., the Ninth Circuit held that a class-action lawsuit challenging Northwest’s smoking policy was not preempted by the ADA.59 Relying on its earlier narrow definition of “service” in Charas, the Ninth Circuit held that allowing smoking on Northwest flights does not constitute a “service” because such decision does not deal with “the frequency and scheduling of transportation, [or] the selection of markets to or from which transportation is provided.”60 Northwest appealed the Ninth Circuit’s decision, and the Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari.61

 

Justice O’Connor, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Thomas, dissented to the Court’s denial of certiorari. In her dissent, she notes how the Courts of Appeals have “taken directly conflicting positions on this question of statutory interpretation.”62 Given these contradictory interpretations, the dissenting Justices would have granted certiorari in order to “provide needed certainty to airline companies.”63

 

APPLICATION OF THE ADA PREEMPTION CLAUSE

 

TO STATE-LAW INTENTIONAL TORT CLAIMS

 

Also in her dissent to the Court’s denial of certiorari in Duncan, Justice O’Connor suggests that while the underlying case involved a state law personal injury claim based on an airline’s smoking policy, “the legal principle at stake,” namely, the correct definition of “service” within the meaning of the ADA’s preemption clause, “has ramifications for a host of other tort actions against airline,” including “false imprisonment,” “intentional infliction of emotional distress,” and “defamation.”64 This section examines how courts have analyzed and should analyze these types of actions. Such cases often include state law discrimination claims.

 

DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS

 

The United States Supreme Court has not decided whether actions against airlines alleging state discrimination violations are preempted by the ADA.65 For lower courts examining this issue, the preemption outcome largely depends on the court’s definition of “service.”

 

A. Employment Discrimination Actions

 

Generally, discrimination suits brought by former airline employees bear “too tenuous, remote or peripheral” a relation to airline rates or services for preemption under the ADA, regardless of the court’s definition of “service.”66 Courts refusing to preempt such actions stress the purpose of the ADA, which “was concerned with the states’ attempt to regulate airline fares, routes and services, not employment practices.” 67

 

For example, in the racial discrimination context, courts generally agree that neither air safety nor market efficiency is appreciably diminished by the operation of state laws forbidding racial discrimination.68 As the Second Circuit explained in Abdu-Brisson: “Unlike the regulation of marketing practices at issue in Morales or the regulation of frequent flyer programs at issue in [Wolens], whether an airline discriminates on the bases of age (or race or sex) has little or nothing to do with competition or efficiency.”69

 

In other contexts, however, enforcement of state discrimination laws may appreciably “relate to” airline “services,” warranting preemption by the ADA. For instance, in 1996, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that state law weight discrimination claims brought by a baggage handler who was terminated for failure to comply with the airline’s height and weight standards were preempted by the ADA.70 Applying the Supreme Court’s broad interpretation of the phrase “related to” in Morales, the Michigan Court of Appeals held the plaintiff’s discrimination claims “related to” the “services of an air carrier,” and were preempted accordingly.71 In this case, as well as in other disability discrimination actions where the state law arguably “relates to” airline “service,” the scope attached to these statutory terms ultimately determines the preemption outcome.

 

B. Passenger Discrimination Actions

 

Cases addressing the scope of ADA preemption in discrimination actions brought by airline passengers provide a less coherent body of case law.72 Ultimately, whether or not a discrimination claim is preempted depends on the court’s definition of “service.”

 

Generally, courts have found such claims entirely unrelated to the performance of airline services, and therefore outside the scope of ADA preemption.73 For example, in Doricent v. American Airlines, Inc., a male passenger alleged that prior to his flight’s departure from Haiti, American Airlines employees referred to him using racial epithets, threatened to remove him from the plane, and physically assaulted him.74 The court held the plaintiff’s state law race discrimination claims did not “relate to” airline “services” under the Supreme Court’s precedent in Morales.75 While the airline employees’ behavior might “arguably constitute ‘services’—poor services, to be sure,” the court found this behavior had “nothing whatsoever to do with any legitimate or quasi-legitimate industry-wide practice of affording airline service.”76

 

Still, in other contexts, discrimination claims may have some legitimate bearing on an airline’s ability to render safe and efficient “service.”77 In such cases, even those involving alleged race discrimination, the plaintiff’s discrimination claims might be preempted by the ADA.

 

For instance, in Huggar v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois held that an airline passenger’s race discrimination claims against Northwest were preempted by the ADA.78 The plaintiff, a 21-year-old black male was removed from a Northwest flight after removing another passenger’s luggage from an overhead bin and throwing it on the floor, threatening to physically assault the passenger, and claiming he could “buy” the passenger.79 The plaintiff’s ten-count claim against Northwest alleged that his ejection from the flight was racially motivated, and included a claim for a violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act.80

 

In determining whether the plaintiff’s state law race discrimination claims related to Northwest’s “service” of providing airline transportation, the court employed the following analysis: “the critical inquiry is [sic] the underlying nature of the actions taken, not the manner in which they were accomplished. Therefore, a court should not look to the subjective motivations of the employees because they are irrelevant to determining what constitutes ‘services’ within the meaning of the [ADA].”81 According to the majority, because the plaintiff’s actions clearly posed a safety threat to the other passengers, the airline’s decision to eject him from the flight “related to” the “service” of boarding and seating passengers, notwithstanding the airline employee’s subjective, allegedly discriminatory motivations.

 

As the above case highlights, the preemption outcome in passenger discrimination cases often depends entirely on whether a particular jurisdiction employs a broad or narrow definition of “service.” In order to find the plaintiff’s claims preempted by the ADA, the Huggar court first had to include “boarding and seating decisions” as cognizable “services” under the ADA’s preemption clause. In a similar case, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that a passenger’s lawsuit alleging he was discriminated against on account of his handicap in connection with boarding on a particular flight was preempted by the ADA.82 Necessary to the court’s decision was its reliance on the Fifth Circuit’s broad definition of “service,” which explicitly refers to “boarding.”

 

Conversely, jurisdictions employing the Ninth Circuit’s narrow definition of “service” will reach the opposite result under identical scenarios. For instance, the Ninth Circuit held a plaintiff’s disability discrimination claim against American Airlines based on the airline’s refusal to allow the plaintiff to board without a doctor’s certificate (she was in a wheelchair and had a heart problem) was not preempted by the ADA.83 The court’s analysis was probably over-simplistic; it simply held, “the term ‘service’ does not refer to alleged discrimination to passengers due to their disabilities.”84 Consequently, whether a passenger discrimination lawsuit is preempted by the ADA may ultimately depend on the court’s definition of “service.”

 

FALSE ARREST/ IMPRISONMENT

 

Several courts have addressed the issue of whether the ADA preempts false imprisonment and false arrest claims, reaching divergent conclusions.85 These cases can, however, be reconciled.

 

Where the courts have held a plaintiff’s claim for false arrest or false imprisonment is preempted by the ADA, such cases involve incidents where the airline refused or failed to provide a service relating to the transportation of a passenger.86 In these cases, “where the crux of the claim was the airline’s refusal to transport the passenger,” the courts have concluded that the claims related to the services of the airlines, and were therefore preempted by the ADA.87 This makes sense because all Circuit Courts of Appeals agree that “transportation” of passengers is a cognizable “service” under the ADA.

 

Conversely, where the basis of a false arrest or false imprisonment claim “is that the airline caused the passenger to be arrested by authorities without a proper factual basis,” courts have held that such claims are not “related to” an airline “service.”88 For example, if “an airline held a passenger without a safety or security justification, a claim based on such actions would not relate to any legitimate service and would not be preempted.”89

 

OTHER INTENTIONAL TORT CLAIMS

 

The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in Travel All Over The World, Inc., examined whether a travel agency’s intentional tort claims against Saudi Arabian Airlines, arising out of the travel agency’s unsuccessful attempts to arrange flights to Saudi Arabia for its clients, were preempted by the ADA’s express provision.90 The court organized the plaintiff’s claims into two categories: (1) defamation and slander; and (2) “other” intentional tort claims.91

 

With respect to the first category, the Seventh Circuit acknowledged that courts have reached “divergent results” concerning whether claims for slander and defamation are preempted by the ADA.92 Here, the plaintiff based its defamation and slander claims on the airline employees’ making knowingly false verbal and written statements about the travel agency to the agency’s clients; specifically, that the agency “was not a reputable company, that [the agency] had not booked seats on Saudi for many of them, that [the agency] often lied to its clients about reserving seats for them, and that” the agency’s president would not be there to help them.93

 

Even after adopting the Fifth Circuit’s broad definition of “service,” the Seventh Circuit held the statements themselves were not airline “services” within the meaning of the ADA.94 Citing the Supreme Court’s opinion in Morales, the court explained: “It is difficult for us to envision how tort claims based on an airline’s knowingly false statements about a travel agency would have even a ‘tenuous, remote or peripheral’ economic effect on the rates, routes, or services that the airline offers.”95 Furthermore, although the statements refer to the travel agency’s services, the court held they certainly do not refer to the airline’s rates, routes, or services.96 Therefore, the plaintiff’s defamation and libel claims were not preempted by the ADA.

 

With respect to the second category of “other” intentional tort claims, including intentional infliction of emotional distress, tortious interference and fraud, the Seventh Circuit reached a different opinion. Only where these claims are based upon the same slanderous and defamatory comments that the court already found not preempted, could such claims withstand preemption scrutiny.97

 

Yet, the Seventh Circuit doubted this would hold true for the plaintiff in Travel All, as with most plaintiffs. Instead, the “other” intentional tort claims were most likely “based, at least in part, on [the airline’s] canceling the confirmed tickets of [the agency’s] clients and requiring these clients to purchase their tickets directly through [the airline].”98 To the extent that the plaintiff’s intentional tort claims rely on this “conduct” of the airline, rather than the airline employee’s allegedly slanderous and defamatory “comments,” the court held such claims “expressly refer to airline ‘services,’ which include ticketing as well as the transportation itself,” and are therefore preempted by the ADA.99 Again, this holding depends entirely on the court’s adoption of the Fifth Circuit’s broad “service” definition in Hodges, as opposed to the Ninth Circuit’s narrow definition of “service” in Charas.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The ADA’s preemption clause continues to cause confusion and divergent opinions throughout our nation’s courtrooms. The fundamental problem concerns the seemingly benign phrase “related to a price, route, or service” of an air carrier. The Supreme Court has done little to clear the fog surrounding this issue. Aside from expressly declining the opportunity to define “service,” the Court’s interpretation of the phrase “related to” has recently come into question.

 

In Morales, the Supreme Court interpreted the “related to” language of the ADA broadly, based largely on the “broad scope” previously applied to the similarly worded ERISA preemption clause.100 Yet, in recent years the Supreme Court has been narrowing the reach of ERISA’s preemption provisions.101 Indeed, the phrase “related to” in ERISA’s preemption clause “appears to be developing, to some degree, to mean whether state law actually ‘interferes’ with the purposes of the ERISA legislation.”102 Although the literal text of ERISA’s preemption clause is “clearly expansive,” like the ADA, the Supreme Court has held that for practical purposes the statute must be interpreted more narrowly, “lest its reach stop nowhere.”103 Analogously, it is unclear whether the ADA’s “related to” phrase should likewise receive a narrower interpretation to mean: whether state law actually interferes with the purpose of the ADA.

 

The larger question involving the ADA preemption clause concerns the proper definition of “service.” The Supreme Court has expressly declined to answer the question, despite the objections of three Justices.104 If the Court is not going to answer this question, Congress should. A clear definition of “service,” from either the Supreme Court or the Legislature, “would provide needed certainty to airline companies.”105

 

The question becomes: What definition of “service” should the Supreme Court or Congress adopt for the ADA’s preemption clause? This question must be answered in light of the fundamental purpose behind the underlying statute—courts should look to the objectives of the ADA as a guide to the scope of state law that should survive. The ADA is an economic deregulation statute designed to promote competitive rates, routes and services among the nation’s airlines.106 As such, only those actions directly impacting the airlines’ ability to provide competitive rates, enter new markets, and provide effective transportation to consumers should be preempted by the ADA.

 

The Ninth Circuit’s narrow definition of “service,” which encompasses the “prices, schedules, origins and destinations of the point-to-point transportation of passengers, cargo or mail,” best aligns with the purpose of the underlying ADA statute. Furthermore, this definition comports with the Supreme Court’s approach to express preemption clause analysis: “the familiar principle of expression unius est exclusio alterius.”107

 

Neither the language nor the history of the ADA suggests that Congress was attempting to displace all state law tort causes of action against the airlines; nor should the preemption clause act as a safe harbor against claims having only a tenuous impact on airline services.108 The vast majority of state law intentional tort claims cannot be said to frustrate the goal of economic deregulation in the airline industry. Furthermore, such claims do not affect a particular airline’s competitive posture any more so than a lawsuit affects any corporation in America. Accordingly, such actions should fall outside the scope of federal preemption under the ADA.

 

1 For a good discussion of the ADA’s legislative history, see Daniel H. Rosenthal, Legal Turbulence: The Court’s Misconstrual of the Airline Deregulation Act’s Preemption Clause and the Effect on Passengers’ Rights, 51 Duke L.J. 1857, 1869-1872 (2002).

 

2 Pub. L. No. 85-726, 72 Stat. 731 (later codified as amended at 49 U.S.C. §§ 40010-44310 (1994)).

 

3 Matt Andersson, The New Airline Code 62-64 (iUniverse, Inc. 2005).

 

4 49 U.S.C. § 1506 (current version at 49 U.S.C. § 40120 (c)).

 

5 Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 504 U.S. 374, 378 (1992) (citing 49 U.S.C.App. §§ 1302 (a)(4), 1302 (a)(9)).

 

6 49 U.S.C. app. §§ 1301-1557 (1988).

 

7 Matt Andersson, The New Airline Code 67 (iUniverse, Inc. 2005).

 

8 Morales, 504 U.S. at 378; See also Trinidad v. American Airlines, Inc., 932 F. Supp. 521 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (stating that the purpose of ADA’s preemption clause was to prevent states from interfering with the development of an air transportation system driven to higher levels of innovation and efficiency by economic competition).

 

9 49 U.S.C. § 41713 (1997) (emphasis added).

 

10 49 U.S.C. § 40120 (c); Chrissafis, 940 F. Supp at 1296.

 

11 Hodges v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 44 F.3d 334, 337 (5th Cir. 1995); Morales, 504 U.S. at 425 (Stevens J., dissenting).

 

12 Morales, 504 U.S at 385.

 

13 See Matthew J. Jelly, Federal Preemption by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978: How do State Tort Claims Fare?, 49 Cath. U. L. Rev. 873 (2000).

 

14 U.S. const. art. VI § 1, cl. 2.

 

15 See Susan D. Hall, Preemption Analysis After Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 90 Ky. L.J. 251 (2002).

 

16 Shaw v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 463 U.S. 85, 95 (1983).

 

17 Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp, 331 U.S. 218, 230 (1947).

 

18 Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, 373 U.S. 132, 142-43 (1963).

 

19 Branche v. Airtran Airways, Inc., 342 F.3d 1248, 1253 (11th Cir. 2003).

 

20 Id.; Cipollone v. Liggert Group, Inc. 505 U.S. 504, 517 (1992) (quoting Malone v. White Motor Corp., 435 U.S. 497, 505 (1978)); compare Grier v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., 529 U.S. 861 (2000) (existence of express preemption provision does not mean that implied preemption cannot exist where the express preemption does not apply).

 

21 Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 504 U.S. 374 (1992).

 

22 Id. at 378.

 

23 Id. at 391.

 

24 Id. at 383.

 

25 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (a).

 

26 Morales, 504 U.S. at 384 (citing Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts, 471 U.S. 724, 739 (1985).

 

27 Id. (emphasis added).

 

28 Id. at 390.

 

29 See John T. Houchin, Harris v. American Airlines: Flying Through the Turbulence of Federal Preemption and the Airline Deregulation Act, 51 U. Miami L. Rev. 955, 966 (1997).

 

30 504 U.S. at 390 (quoting Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 463 U.S. 85, 100 (1983) (emphasis added)).

 

31 Id.

 

32 American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, 513 U.S. 219 (1995).

 

33 Id. at 224.

 

34 Id. at 226.

 

35 Id at 228.

 

36 Id.

 

37 Id. (emphasis added).

 

38 Id. at 228 (emphasis added); see also Williams v. Midwest Airlines, Inc., 321 F. Supp. 2d 993, 996 (E.D.Wisc. 2004) (holding the plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim was not preempted because the airline’s agreement to transport plaintiffs to New York City “was a self-imposed undertaking, and plaintiffs’ attempt to enforce it does not involve the enforcement of any state law”).

 

39 Wolens, 513 U.S. at 232-33. The Court stated that this distinction makes sense in light of the ADA’s saving clause, which does not prevent states from “affording relief to a party who claims and proves that an airline dishonored a term that the airline itself stipulated.” Id.

 

40 Charas v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 160 F.3d 1259 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc).

 

41 Id. at 1261.

 

42 Id. at 1263 (citing Gee v. Southwest Airlines, Inc., 110 F.3d 1400, 1410 (9th Cir. 1997) (O’Scannlain, J., concurring).

 

43 Id. at 1265.

 

44 Id. at 1261.

 

45 Id. at 1265-66.

 

46 Charas, 160 F.3d at 1266.

 

47 Id.

 

48 See Taj Mahal Travel, Inc. v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 164 F.3d 186, 195 (3d Cir. 1998); Duncan, 531 U.S. 1058; compare Abdulla v. American Airlines, Inc., 181 F.3d 363, 367 (3d Cir. 1999) (holding that the entire aviation industry is field preempted).

 

49 Hodges v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 44 F.3d 334, 336 (5th Cir. 1995) (en banc).

 

50 Id. at 335.

 

51 Id. at 336 (citations omitted) (emphasis added).

 

52 Hodges, 44 F.3d at 336-37. The court found that claims relating to the “operation and maintenance of the aircraft” concern matters of “air navigation.” Id. at 338 (citing 49 U.S.C.App. § 1301(31) (1998)).

 

53 Id. (emphasis added)

 

54 Id. at 338-39.

 

55 Id. at 339.

 

56 The Firth Circuit admits that “the provinces of ‘services’ and ‘operation and maintenance of aircraft’ overlap somewhat conceptually; no strict dichotomy exists.” Id. at 339.

 

57 See Duncan, 531 U.S. 1058; Smith v. Comair, Inc., 134 F.3d 254, 259 (4th Cir. 1998); Travel All Over The World, Inc. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 73 F.3d 1423, 1433 (7th Cir. 1996); Branche v. Airtran Airways, Inc., 342 F.3d 1248, 1257 (11th Cir. 2003).

 

58 Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Duncan, 531 U.S. 1058 (2000) (cert denied)

 

59 Duncan v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 208 F.3d 1112 (9th Cir. 2000).

 

60 Id. at 1115 (quoting Charas, 160 f.3d at 1265-66).

 

61 Duncan, 531 U.S. 1058 (2000) (cert denied).

 

62 Id.

 

63 Id.

 

64 Id.

 

65 Lynette M. Bledsaw, The Express Preemption Provision of the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act Does Not Reach State Civil Rights Claims of Race Discrimination, American Bar Association (2000).

 

66 See Branche v. Airtran Airways, Inc., 342 F.3d 1248 (11th Cir. 2003) (former airline employee’s state court claim for retaliatory discharge was not preempted by the ADA); Wellons v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 165 F.3d 493, 495 (6th Cir. 1999) (former airline employee’s race discrimination claim was not preempted); Parise v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 141 F.3d 1463, 1467-68 (11th Cir. 1998) (plaintiff’s age discrimination claim was not preempted by the ADA); Aloha Islandair Inc. v. Tseu, 128 F.3d 1301, 1303 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding Hawaii law barring physical disability discrimination was not preempted by the ADA); Abdu-Brisson v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 128 F.3d 77, 84 (2d Cir. 1997) (holding New York age discrimination action was not preempted by the ADA).

 

67 Id.; (citing Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 652 N.Y.S2d 253, 257 (1996);

 

68 Ryan L. Bangert, When Airlines Profile Based On Race: Are Claims Brought Against Airlines Under State Anti-Discrimination Laws Preempted By the Airline Deregulation Act?, 68 J. Air L. & Com. 791, 801 (2003); see Thomas v. United Parcel Service, 241 Mich. App. 171 (2000) (holding that former African-American employee’s race discrimination claim was not preempted by the ADA).

 

69 Abdu-Brisson, 128 F.3d at 84; Wellons, 165 F.3d at 496; Thomas, 241 Mich.App. at 181; see also Wellons v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 165 F.3d 493, 495 (6th Cir. 1999) (“State law claims of racial discrimination—as opposed to claims of discrimination on the basis of physical characteristics that might have some bearing on the individual’s ability to render service safely and efficiently—are not preempted, in our view; they bear ‘too tenuous, remote, or peripheral’ a relation to airline rates or services.”); Thomas, 241 Mich.App. 171, 181 (2000) (“Plaintiffs’ race and gender are wholly unrelated to defendants’ services”).

 

70 Bledsaw, supra note 65; Fitzpatrick v. Simmons Airlines, Inc., 218 Mich. App. 689 (1996).

 

71 Fitzpatrick, 218 Mich. App. At 692. See also Belgard v. United Airlines, 857 P.2d 467, 471 (Colo.App.1992) (“any law or regulation that restricts an airline’s selection of employees, based upon their physical characteristics, must necessarily have a connection with and reference to, and therefore must be one ‘relating to,’ the services to be rendered by the airline”)

 

72 Bangert, supra note 22 at 803.

 

73 Bledsaw, supra note 65 at 5.

 

74 Doricent v. American Airlines, Inc., 1993 WL 437670 (D.Mass 1993).

 

75 Id.

 

76 Id. at *5.

 

77 Bledsaw, supra note 65 at 5.

 

78 Huggar v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 1999 WL 59841 (N.D. Ill. 1999).

 

79 Id. at *1; see also Bangert, supra note 22 at 805-06.

 

80 Id.

 

81 Id. (citations omitted).

 

82 DeTerra v. America West Airlines, Inc., 226 F. Supp. 2d 274 (D.Mass. 2002).

 

83 Newman v. American Airlines, Inc., 176 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir. 1999).

 

84 Id. at 1131;

 

85 Chrissafis v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 940 F. Supp. 1292, 1298 (N.D. Ill. 1996).

 

86 Id.; see Williams v. Express Airlines I Inc.,, 825 F. Supp. 831, 832-33 (W.D. Tenn. 1993) (holding that plaintiff’s claim for false imprisonment after he was denied admittance to a flight and then strapped to an immobile chair in the airline waiting area was preempted by the ADA); Lawal v. British Airways, PLC, 812 F. Supp. 713, 715 (S.D. Tex. 1992) (holding that plaintiff’s false arrest and false imprisonment claims where airline personnel detained the plaintiff and forced him to purchase a new ticket were preempted); Galbut v. American Airlines, Inc., 27 F. Supp. 2d 146 (E.D. N.Y. 1997) (holding that plaintiff’s false arrest and false imprisonment claims arising out of airline’s refusal to permit plaintiff to upgrade using stickers the airline had falsely alleged were stolen and the demand for payment for the upgrade were preempted by the ADA); Smith v. Comair, Inc., 134 F.3d 254 (4th Cir. 1998) (passenger’s claim for false imprisonment based on the airline’s refusal to permit him to board due to the airline’s failure to ask for photo identification at the point of original departure was preempted).

 

87 Chrissafis, 940 F. Supp. at 1298.

 

88 Id.; see Diaz Aguasviva v. Iberia Lineas Aereas 902 F. Supp. 314, 316 (D. Puerto Rico 1995) (permitting a passenger to pursue a claim that airline personnel falsely identified the passenger as an illegal alien, causing police and customs agents to arrest and detain her); Curley v. American Airlines, Inc., 846 F. Supp. 280, 281-82 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) (holding that plaintiffs claim that the flight crew had falsely arrested the passenger for smoking marijuana, causing him to be strip-searched, was not preempted); Bayne v. Adventure Tours USA, Inc., 841 F. Supp. 206, 207 (N.D.Tex 1994) (refusing to preempt a passenger’s claim that an airline pilot made misrepresentations to police, causing the plaintiff to be taken into custody, detained, and subjected to a luggage search); Rombom v. United Airlines, Inc., 867 F. Supp. 214, 224 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) (finding that false imprisonment claims stemming from the airline’s decision to have plaintiff arrested, allegedly motivated by spite, were not preempted).

 

89 Smith v. Comair, Inc., 134 F.3d 254, 259 (4th Cir. 1998); Chrissafis v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 940 F. Supp. 1292, 1289-99 (N.D. Ill. 1996)

 

90 Travel All Over The World, Inc., v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 73 F.3d 1423 (7th Cir. 1996).

 

91 Id.; see also Chrissafis , 940 F. Supp. 1292 (recognizing this distinction). In addition to defamation and slander, the “other” intentional tort claims included tortious interference with a business relationship, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and tortuous interference with a business relationship.

 

92 Travel All Over The World, Inc., 73 F.3d. at 1433; compare Fenn v. American Airlines, Inc., 839 F. Supp. 1218, 1223 (S.D. Miss. 1993) (finding claims for slander unrelated to airline “services”) with Chukwu v. Board of Directors of British Airways, 889 F. Supp. 12, 14 (D.Mass. 1995) (finding specific claims for slander related to airline “services”) and Pearson v. Lake Forest Country Day Sch., 262 Ill.App.3d 228 (1994) (same).

 

93 Id.

 

94 Id. at 1433.

 

95 Id. citing Morales, 504 U.S. at 383-85.

 

96 Id. at 1433.

 

97 Travel All Over The World, Inc., 73 F.3d at 1434..

 

98 Id.

 

99 Id. (citing Hodges, 44 F.3d at 336); see also DeTerra, 226 F. Supp. 2d at 277 (finding handicapped passenger’s claims for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress in connection with his denial of boarding on a particular flight was preempted); Chukwu v. Board of Directors British Airways, 889 F. Supp. 12, 13 (D.Mass. 1995) (concluding that plaintiff’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress based on the allegation that he had been improperly denied boarding on a flight was preempted by the ADA).

 

100 Morales, 504 U.S. at 384.

 

101 See Abdu-Brisson, 128 F.3d 77, 82 (2d Cir. 1997); DeBuono v. NYSA-ILA Medical and Clinical Serv., 520 U.S. 806, 816 (1997).

 

102 Abdu-Brisson, 128 F.3d at 82 (emphasis added); citing New York State Conf. of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Ins. Co., 514 U.S. 645, 655 (1995); Boggs v. Boggs, 520 U.S. 833 (1997) (“We can begin, and in this case end, the analysis by simply asking if state law conflicts with the provisions of ERISA or operates to frustrate its objects).

 

103 Travelers Ins. Co., at 655 (Too expansive an interpretation of “relate to,” according to the Court, “would be to read Congress’s words of limitation as mere sham, and to read the presumption against pre-emption out of the law whenever Congress speaks to the matter with generality. That said, we have to recognize that our prior attempt to construe the phrase ‘relate to’ does not give us much help drawing the line here”).

 

104 See Duncan, 531 U.S. 1058 (cert denied).

 

105 Id.

 

106 See Morales, 504 U.S. at 378.

 

107 See Cipollone, 505 U.S. at 517 (quoting Malone, 435 U.S. at 505).

 

108 Smith v. America West Airlines, Inc., 44 F.3d 344, 346-47 (5th Cir. 1995).

 

Mathew A. Passen
http://www.articlesbase.com/personal-injury-articles/preemption-of-state-law-intentional-tort-actions-under-the-airline-deregulation-act-of-1978-706745.html

A Surprising New World Order is About to Start

A Surprising New World Order is about to start.

Our world will soon (as in years rather than decades), be facing a global crisis which will herald its end.

The Bible as a Guide

1
The people behind this article:
We take the Bible as our only rule. After having devoted considerable time to its study, especially chapters referring to our future, we have realized that we must share with you what we have learned. This knowledge is of utmost importance.

2
Why do you take the Bible so seriously?
Because we discovered how accurate it is – so accurate, that even predictions made thousands of years earlier occurred in the very day foretold, to the very letter. This
has compelled us to conclude that there is an all-knowing God behind the Bible, who is not bound by time and knows the end from the beginning.
We would not have taken the Bible so seriously if God had not demonstrated such complete control and knowledge of the future. This mastery is revealed
most clearly in two books:Daniel in the Old Testament and The Revelation in the New
Testament.

Fulfilled Bible Prophecies

3
An example of a fulfilled prediction

In the book of Daniel, chapter 2, God outlined in a dream to the Babylonian king that from his time until the end of time, the world would witness only four world empires. History has proved what God pre-ordained. The four world empires were:
Babylon (605 BC-538 BC),
Medo-Persia (538 BC-331 BC),
Greece (331 BC-168 BC), and
Rome (168 BC-476 AD).
He further revealed that Rome would be split into ten territories and that in the time of these territories the end will come. History is proving the accuracy of God’s word: Rome was divided into ten nations from which present-day Europe has emerged.
See Daniel 7 & 8.

4
The purpose of the Bible prophecies
It is to warn us about future crises in order to save us:
e.g. God warned Noah of the coming flood. People had to obey the warning in faith.

A Most Fearful and Solemn Warning

5
The most solemn prophetic warning is yet to be fulfilled. Today, there is nothing more
important for us to understand than this prophecy because events are taking place in rapid
succession indicating its imminent fulfillment.

6
Please read Revelation 14:9-12.
The fearful warning in the above passage describes two groups of people.
The first group is heading to receive the mark of the beast; while the second group is viewed positively as keeping the commandments of God. Furthermore, the description of
the second coming of Christ directly follows this warning. Therefore, we know that this is
the last warning given before the second coming of Christ.

7
How to avoid worshipping the beast and his image and receiving his mark
To know this, we need to identify the beast, the image of the beast, and the mark of the beast. It is only reasonable to assume that God would not warn us about such dangerous entities without helping us to identify them in a conclusive way.

Identifying the Beast

8
Bible Description of This Beast
Please read Revelation 13: 1-8, 16-18.

9
The above passage is full of symbols. How to understand it?
We need to allow the Bible to interpret its own symbols. We should expect that God, for our benefit, would reveal within the Bible the meaning of these symbols. The Bible defines its own symbols;
e.g. the book of Revelation contains 404 verses of which 278 are found almost
word for word in other books in the Bible, where their meaning is expounded.

10
Which symbols do we need to unlock to identify the beast and his mark?
The necessary ones are: ‘beast’, ‘dragon’, ‘sea’, ‘forty-two months’, and ‘blasphemy’.
Beast: In Bible prophecy, a beast is a symbol of a king or kingdom: See Daniel 7:17, 23.
With this beast, we are studying a unique kingdom, for it is not only a political power but a religious one as well, because people ‘worshipped the beast’.
Rev.13:4.
Dragon: According to the Bible, the dragon is another name for Satan, the father of lies and deceptions. When Satan gives “his power, and his seat, and great authority” to the beast, we can expect the beast to behave in the same deceptive ways of Satan. Thus, a great deal of deception will be found in the affairs of the beast. Rev. 12:9; 13:2.
Sea: In Bible prophecy, sea is symbol of a multitude of many different people. Rev.17:15. Accordingly, this unique kingdom or power rose out of the sea, signifying that it came out of a location that was densely populated with different nationalities of people.
Forty-two months: This period is equivalent to three and a half years (42 divided by 12 months). And the Bible was written based on the Jewish calendar where every Jewish ear is of 360 days (30 days for each month). So, three and a half years and forty-two
months are both equal to 1260 days. The reason why we are changing the months to their
equivalent in days is that when God gave time prophecies, He often equated a day for a year: “I have appointed thee each day for a year.” Ezekiel 4:6.
Therefore, the forty-two prophetic months imply a period of 1260 years during which the beast was given, a “mouth speaking great things and blasphemies” and would “make war with the saints…and power was given him …” Rev. 13:5, 7, meaning that during this period the beast would blaspheme, persecute Christians, and have great
authority.
Blasphemy: In the Bible, blasphemy is defined in two ways. The first is when a person claims to be God or His representative: See John 10:33. The beast, this religio-political
power and kingdom, has blasphemed God by pretending to be in the place of God on earth. The second way of committing blasphemy is by granting absolutions (claiming the power to forgive the sins of others): See Mark 2:7.
The beast, this religio-political power and kingdom, has blasphemed God by claiming the right of absolution. No wonder the beast has the “name of blasphemy” and speaks “blasphemy against God”; this is because the beast claims powers that are
the sole prerogative of God. Rev. 13:1, 6.

Nine Key Marks
Having allowed the Bible to unlock the meaning of its own symbols, we can now highlight the nine major identifying marks of the beast to determine which power in history fulfills these features.
1. The beast combines religious and political powers simultaneously: “They worshipped the beast.” Rev. 13:4.
2. The beast came to power in a densely populated area of the world: “I…saw a beast rise up out of the sea.” Rev. 13:1.
3. The beast obtained its power and authority from Satan: “The dragon gave him [the beast] his power, and his seat, and great authority.” Rev. 13:2.
4. The beast ruled ruthlessly, possessing absolute dominating power for 1260 years.
See Rev. 13:5, 3, 7.
5. The beast persecuted Christians during the 1260 years. Rev. 13:7.
6. The beast will fully recover from its ‘deadly wound’ and the world will marvel after it: Rev. 13:3.
7. The beast has a mysterious 666 number that identifies his office and name. Rev. 13:18.
8. The beast blasphemes by claiming to be God and granting absolutions (the power to forgive sins of others).
9. The beast made other blasphemous claims too, undertaking actions that are God’s exclusive prerogative. Rev. 13:5.
There is but one power in history which fulfills all the identifying marks: The Roman Catholic Church. This Church is the beast which God, out of love, is warning us of.
It is not the purpose of this article to attack Roman Catholics, but to reveal the truth about the Catholic system. Rev. 13:2.

11
Historical evidence and facts for this conclusion
1. The Roman Catholic Church combines religious and political powers simultaneously:
Apostle John saw this union in a prophetic vision concerning the fourth and final kingdom of the world and described it as, “a woman sit[ting] upon a scarlet coloured beast.” Rev. 17:3.
In the Bible, a woman is a symbol of a church. See Jeremiah 3:20; 2Corinthians 11:2. In addition, it is unanimously understood in prophecy that a beast is a nation. Even in today’s world, nations are symbolized as beasts. The USA is seen as an eagle, Russia is
likened unto a bear, etc. Many years ago, God unveiled to Daniel all the world empires until the end of time. In a vision, Daniel saw the last beast to be “diverse from all the others.” Daniel 7:19. But how would it be diverse? According to Revelation 17:3, as seen
above, this beast (nation) will have a woman (church) ruling it. Today, is there a church
and state working together as one globally recognized power? The only entity in the world that has accomplished this is the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic
pope is absolute religious leader of over one billion followers world-wide.
“The Roman Pontiff, as the successor of Peter, is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.” Vatican Council II (1962-65).
“Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil; for no one may judge the Pope.” Pope Innocent III (1198-1216).
Simultaneously, the pope is king over an independent nation: “Vatican City”. The Vatican is a distinct sovereign miniature nation, although within Italy. Thus, the papacy is a unique power combining religious and civil power.
2. The Roman Catholic Church came to power in a densely populated area of the world, amidst the various powers and nations of Europe.
3. The history of the Roman Catholic Church is full of deception:
Informed Catholics readily confirm forgeries as a way of life for the popes. Hans Kung, a
Catholic priest and theologian who was a consultant to the Second Vatican Council 1962-1965), stated that as early as the fifth century, the popes “decisively extended their power with explicit forgeries.” The Catholic Church: A Short History (translated by John owden), p. 61. One of the best examples is the document Donation of Constantine, dated March 30, 315 AD, which the Roman Catholic Church forged to extend her power and authority. For details of this information see www.worldslastchance.com. In 1440, this document was proved forged by a papal aide called Lorenzo Valla.
Pope calls for a new world order:
“VATICAN CITY (AP) – Pope John Paul II rang in the New Year on Thursday with a renewed call for… the creation of a new world order based on respect for the dignity of man and equality among nations.” Thursday, January 1, 2004.
Posted: 9:21 AM EST (1421GMT). “The great over-riding feature of the entire system of the Anti-Christ – the New World Order – is blatant deceit. In fact, New World Order writers boast of their planned deceptions, because they arrogantly believe … that only the New World Order Planners know what is best for the world, and they have determined that they can achieve their goals only by deliberate deception of the poor masses.” Bill Cooper, “Behold A Pale Horse,” p.49.
4. The Roman Catholic Church ruled ruthlessly for 1260 years, having absolute dominion over other nations. This period has a clear starting point, and a ‘deadly wound’ at its end:
The Roman Catholic Church received its deadly wound in 1798 when Pope Pius VI was taken prisoner in France at the behest of Napoleon. “In 1798 General Berthier made his entrance into Rome, abolished the papal government, and established a secular one.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 1941 edition. Having established the end of the prophecy to be 1798, going back 1260 years, we arrive at 538 AD. For the papacy to fulfill this identifying mark, an important event must have occurred in 538 AD to mark the start of the 1260-year period. Historical evidence reveals that in 533 AD the Roman Emperor Justinian recognized the pope’s ecclesiastical supremacy as ‘head’ of all the churches in both east and west of the Roman Empire. However, it was not until 538 AD when the papacy was effectively freed from its last Arian opponent, the Ostrogoths (who were at that time ruling Italy), did the pope emerge as the leading figure in the West. Thus, in 538 AD the stage was set for the gradual but steady ascendancy of the papacy.
“Vigilius…ascended the papal chair (538 A.D.) under the military protection of
Belisarius.” History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 327. As the papacy increased
in power, she subjugated not only her followers but also the rulers and kings of Europe. To that end, the popes issued several papal bulls to bolster their authority over the kings of Europe: “It is the office of the papacy to tread under foot kings and emperors.” J.H.
Ignaz Dollinger, The Pope and the Council, (London), p. 35. In the papal bull of Pope Gregory XI, dated 1372 AD, and entitled In Coena Domini, the pope pronounced papal dominion over the entire Christian world, secular and religious, and excommunicated all who failed to obey the popes and to pay them taxes. This papal bull was confirmed by subsequent popes and, in 1568 AD, Pope Pius V vowed that it was to remain an eternal law. A practical demonstration of the above assertion was the treatment of Pope Gregory VII in 1077 AD to King Henry IV, Emperor of Germany. When the king appeared to disregard the pope’s authority, the pope ex-communicated and dethroned him. Henry decided to make peace with the pope and crossed the Alps in mid-winter to humble himself. When he reached the pope’s castle, Henry was made to wait for permission to see the pope in the outer court, bare-footed, with his head uncovered,
and dressed in a miserable dress. It took the king three days of fasting and confession before the pope pardoned him. Today, this claim of supremacy over leaders of the world continues to be upheld by the papacy: “The First See [papacy of Rome] is judged by no one. It is the right of the Roman Pontiff himself alone to judge…those who hold the highest civil office in a state…There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff.” The Code of Canon Law.
5. The Roman Catholic Church persecuted Christians during the 1260-year period: During this period of history (also known as the Middle Ages), the Roman Catholic Church held a strong sway over Europe, and every citizen was required to be a Roman Catholic. Anything short of total submission to the pope was punishable by torture or death. This led the Roman Catholic system to become one of the most persecuting religions the world has ever known, according to Vicars of Christ: the Dark Side of the
papacy, by Peter de Rosa, p. 180.
“For professing faith contrary to the Church of Rome, history records the martyrdom of more than one hundred million people.” Brief Bible Readings, p. 16.
“We must rank the Inquisition… as among the darkest blots on record of mankind.” Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, vol. 4, p. 78.
6. The Roman Catholic Church will fully recover from its ‘deadly wound’ and the whole world will wonder after it:
When Pope Pius VI died in captivity in France in 1799, the world expected an end to the Roman Catholic Church. However, God told us, about 2000 years ago, that the beast would recover from its deadly wound. Here is how the New York Times reported the healing of the beast, the papacy:
“MORTAL WOUND HEALED:
Rome, June 7.— From 11 o’clock this morning there was another sovereign independent State in the world. At that time Premier Mussolini …exchanged with Cardinal Gasparri, Papal Secretary of State, representing Pope Pius XI, ratifications of the treaties signed at the Lateran Palace on Feb. 11. By that simple act the sovereign independent State of Vatican City came into existence.” New York Times, July 7, 1929. Does the world today ‘wonder’ after the papacy, as the Bible predicted? “The best way to honor Pope John Paul II, truly one of the great men, is to take his teaching seriously; is to listen to his words and put his words and teachings into action here
in America. This is a challenge we must accept.” President George W. Bush, March 21, 2001. “Pope John Paul II is one of the greatest moral and spiritual leaders of this century.” Billy Graham in the Saturday Evening Post, Jan-Feb. 1980. “Pope John Paul II celebrates outdoor mass in Spanish for over million people in Mexico City.” The newYork Times, Jan 25, 1999. “There is no doubt that Paul VI, together with John XXIII and John Paul II, will be remembered as the three great Popes of Peace, pioneer of a momentous transcendence of the Catholic Church into the New Age.” Robert Muller, former U.N. Assistant Secretary General.
7. The Roman Catholic Church has the mysterious number 666:

The official title of the pope is “Vicarius Filii Dei”, which translated is, “Representative of the Son of God”. To confirm, the Catholic newspaper Our Sunday Visitor of April 18, 1915 wrote: “The engraved letter on the pope’s Mitre is as follows: ‘Vicarius Filii Dei’”. Since in Latin certain letters have numerical values, we only need to add them up to come to 666.
8. The Roman Catholic Church blasphemes by claiming to be God and granting absolutions:
“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” Pope Leo XIII, in an Encyclical letter, dated June 20, 1894. “The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ, hidden under a veil of flesh.” The Catholic National, July 1895. “But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff… [who] requires …complete submission and obedience of will… as to God Himself.” Pope Leo XIII, the Great Encyclical Letters, p. 193. The Roman Catholic Church created a vast ‘market’ on
earth for a unique kind of merchandise, for which she had no competitors and unquenchable demand. She claimed that she had the right to sell God’s grace, His free act of forgiveness, to the sinners. To this day, this blasphemous power, maintains the power to forgive sins. “This judicial authority will even include the power to forgive sin.” The Catholic Encyclopaedia Vol. 12, Article “Pope”, p. 265.
9. The Roman Catholic Church made other blasphemous claims too by undertaking actions belonging only to God:

Some samples: “The priest has the power of the keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of changing them from the slaves of Satan into the children of God. And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests…The Sovereign Master of the universe only follows the servant by confirming in heaven all that the latter decides upon earth.” Liguori, “Dignity and Duties of the Priest”, pp. 27, 28. “Thus the priest may, in a certain manner, be called the creator of his Creator, since by saying the words of the consecration, he creates, as it were, Jesus in the sacrament, by giving him a sacramental existence, and produces him as a victim to be offered to the eternal Father…The power of the priest, is the power of the divine person; for the trans-substantiation of the bread requires as much power as the creation of the world.” Saint Bernadine of Sienna. “Priests are the saviors of the world.” Saint Jerome. As for her blasphemous actions, the Roman Catholic Church has committed the most blasphemous act of all. She altered the very law of God – the Ten Commandments. She dared to cancel the second commandment altogether, for it condemned her practices and rituals. And worse, she changed the day of worship in the fourth commandment from Saturday to Sunday. This was done although God gave Adam this perpetual command at creation and has confirmed it to us: “My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” Psalm 89:34. The Ten Commandments are the only portion of the Bible that was uttered by God’s voice in the presence of a congregation.
And God wrote them with His own finger and handed them to Moses: “These words [The Ten Commandments] the Lord spake unto all your assembly…and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone…” Deuteronomy 5:22. Christ further stressed the immutability of the Ten Commandments when He said: “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.” Luke 16:17. Christ further confirmed: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” Matthew 5:17, 18. T h e Catholic Church is not ashamed that she changed the day of worship. In fact, she takes pride in this action, and regards it as her ‘mark’ of authority and superiority over other churches and religions. “The Sabbath, the best known day of the law, was changed into the Lord’s day. These and others have not ceased because of instructions received from Christ, (because he himself says, I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it), but because due to the authority of the church they ave been changed.” Archbishop of Rheggio, Sermon on 1-18-1562, Mansi XXIII, p. 526. “The Sunday is a Catholic institution, and its claim for sacredness can be defended only on Catholic authority… In Holy Scripture from the beginning to the end we find not one single text which justifies the transfer of the weekly public worship service from the last to the first day of the week.” Catholic Press, Sidney, 8-25-1900. According to the Roman Catholic Church, ‘Sunday’ is their distinct and distinguished mark of authority.
“Sunday is our mark of authority. The church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.” The Catholic Record, London, Ontario, September 1, 1923. “The observance of Sunday by Protestants is an homage hey pay, inspite of themselves, to the authority of the (Catholic) Church.” Plain Talk About the Protestantism of Today, by Monsignor Segur, p. 213. “Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act… a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.” Office of Cardinal Gibbons, through Chancellor C. F. Thomas, Nov. 11, 1895. From the overwhelming weight of evidence, we can decisively
conclude that the beast of Revelation 13 & 14 is the Roman Catholic Church, and that its mark (the mark of the beast) is Sunday observance.
Why is this mark so important? Only by signing is a document authenticated. Government declarations must always bear an official mark or seal. An official seal
or signature must include three features:
1. The name of the official
2. The title of the official
3. The territory or domain of his authority
Looking to the Almighty Creator, we realize that He has a Heavenly Kingdom. and the document containing the law of His Kingdom is The Ten Commandments. Looking directly in the midst of them you will find the seal of the living God! “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea…” Exodus 20:11.
Notice the three distinct features:
1. Name: THE LORD ( “I am the Lord: that is my name.” Isaiah 42:8.) 2. Title: REATOR (“the LORD made”) 3. Territory: HEAVEN AND EARTH (“Heaven and earth”) Clearly, the seal of the Creator is found in the Sabbath commandment of His law.

Identifying the Image of the Beast

12
To be able to identify the image of the beast, we need first to identify the two-horned beast that helps in the formation of the image. Please read Rev 13:11-12, 14-17.
This two-horned beast has the following identification marks:
1. It came into existence around the time the papacy received its deadly wound in1798: “another beast coming up.”Rev. 13:11.
2. It came up out of the earth, as opposed to the first beast that came up out of the sea. If ‘sea’ represents many people and nations, then ‘earth’ represents a sparsely settled region.
3. It has two lamb-like horns. According to the Bible, a horn represents power. “He had
horns…and there was the hiding of his power.” Habakkuk 3:4. Therefore, this nation has two separate powers, distinct from each other. Also, a lamb is a symbol of Christ; hence, we can deduce that this nation was founded on pure and noble Christian principles.
4. However, it speaks like a dragon; a nation ‘speaks’ through legislative and judicial
authorities. The “lamb-like horns” and “dragon’s voice” point a striking contrast between the peaceful professions and the practices of this nation.
Which nation fulfils these identifying marks? There is but one: The United States of America.
1. USA came into existence around 1798. Only one nation was rising into existence at the time of the papacy’s loss of power in 1798. This prophecy points directly to the nited
States. The USA was organized under the Constitution as a federal republic in 1787.
2. USA arose in a sparsely populated land: The USA grew not in the Old World which was crowded with its teeming multitudes, but in the New World, with its relatively few inhabitants.
3. USA has two separate powers founded on Christian principles: The USA has a unique form of government, where church and state enjoy liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Because of this system of government, the USA is indeed a Republic (a kingdom without king) and Protestant (church without pope), with both powers completely separated. Also, her lamb-like qualities made the USA a refuge for the persecuted and oppressed of many nations.
4. USA speaks like a dragon: The fundamental law of the USA written in its constitution guarantees individual liberty of conscience. Nothing is dearer or
more fundamental. However, the USA has already begun to and will soon fully repudiate every principle of its Constitution. And that which gives greater significance to this movement is the fact that the principal object is the enforcement of Sunday observance.
Such action will be directly contrary to the principles of this government. The
Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The inconsistency of such action is no greater than is represented in the symbol. It is the beast with lamblike horns – in profession pure and harmless – that speaks as a dragon. Just observing what is occurring in the news and in the recent past will confirm this biblical description. “Our priority is our faith.” George W. Bush, Greensboro, North Carolina, October. 10, 2000, quoted from Jacob Weinberg, “The Complete Bushisms.” “The plain message conveyed by the new administration is that George W. Bush’s America is a Christian nation and that non-Christians are welcome into the tent so long as they agree to accept their status as a tolerated minority rather than as fully equal citizens.” Alan M. Dershowitz, in “Bush Starts Off by Defying the Constitution,”
Los Angeles Times, January 24, 2001.

Prophecy soon to be Fulfilled

13
It is clear the two-horned beast is the USA. But what is the relationship between the USA and the image of the beast?

Although the USA was founded on principles opposed to the papacy, today we observe how the USA and the Vatican are working more closely together to make their influence more prominent. The Bible tells us that one day, in the not too distant future, the USA will legislate a law requiring its citizens, and then the world, to worship the first beast, the papacy. “And he [USA] exerciseth all the power of the first beast [papacy] before him, and causeth the earth [first USA, then globally] and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast [honoring papacy's Sunday], whose deadly wound [1798] was healed [1929]…saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast [duplicating the papacy when she used civil power to enforce religious dogma], which had the wound by a sword, and did live.” Rev. 13:12, 14. Soon the USA will renounce its religious freedom to enforce Sunday observance (the mark of the beast). his means that the Protestant Churches will control the government to accomplish their agenda. When this happens, the USA will have made an image to the Roman Catholic Church, uniting church with state. Then USA will speak “as a dragon” and exercise “all
the power of the first beast.” Rev. 13:11, 12. She will have the same spirit of intolerance and persecution that was manifested by the first beast, the papacy.
Therefore, as religious freedom is lost, persecution of the dissenting minorities will be inevitable, and there will be a repetition of the religious intolerance of the Middle Ages: “And he [USA] had power to give life unto the image of the beast [Sunday laws enacted]…and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast [by honoring Saturday, not Sunday] should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark [those who honor the true Sabbath will be forbidden to buy and sell], or the name of the beast…”
Rev. 13:15-17

14
For this to be true, there should be evidence that the papacy is currently pursuing
Sunday exaltation in the USA, and that the Protestants of the USA (historic enemies of Rome), have changed their attitude, and are expressing readiness to collaborate in enacting Sunday laws. Is there such evidence?
Today most Protestants are favorable towards the papacy, and this has emboldened the
papacy to seek aggressively the legislation of Sunday observance: “All Americans would do well to petition the President and the Congress to make a Federal law – an amendment to the Constitution if need be – to re-establish the [false] Sabbath as
a national Day of Rest.” CATHOLIC TWIN CIRCLE, August 25, 1985, Article
“Sacking Sunday”. “In this matter, my predecessor, Pope Leo XIII…spoke of Sunday rest as a worker’s right which the State must guarantee.” Pope John Paul II – DIES
DOMINI, May 31, 1998. “…Christians [everywhere] should seek recognition of Sundays and the Church’s holy days as legal holidays.” Catechism of the Catholic
Church, popular and definitive edition, 2000, par 2188.
Most of the Protestant leaders in the USA are ready to bury the hatchet with the
Catholics: “Heads of American Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches who were
meeting with Pope John Paul II on Friday hailed their first broadly representative discussion as a landmark on the road to greater unity…” The Montgomery Advertiser,
Sept. 12, 1987.
Billy Graham:

“I’ve found that my beliefs are essentially the same as those of orthodox Roman Catholics.” McCall’s, January 1978.
Paul Crouch: “I’m eradicating the word Protestant even out of my vocabulary…I’m not protesting anything… “Praise the Lord” program, Trinity Broadcasting Network, Oct 17, 1989.
David Wells: “If Catholicism is to become more Catholic in the future, which is what I expect under the present pope, then theological differences will become sharper, but our alliances with Catholics against the secular culture can become deeper. I, for one, am ready for the trade-off.” Eternity Magazine, Sept. 1987.

Avoiding the Mark of the Beast

15
How then can we avoid receiving the mark of the beast?
This is the most important question. God, in His infinite love, has warned us not to worship the beast and thereby receive his mark. Those receiving the mark of the beast “shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture
[without mercy] into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone… who worship the beast [honor papacy through Sunday observance] and his image [USA enforcing Sunday observance], and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.” Rev. 14:10, 11.
These are very solemn words from God. His wrath is in proportion to the offense. By honoring Sunday, originated by Satan through the papacy, one prepares to receive the mark of the beast.

16
What about the billions of Christians in the past who honored Sunday instead of Saturday – did they unknowingly receive the mark of the beast? And what about the Christians today who sincerely think Sunday is the Bible Sabbath?
None are accountable for their errors since the light has not been brought to them; for the Lord “winks” at our times of ignorance. See Acts 17:30. We are only judged by the
light we had the opportunity to receive. But, when the universal Sunday law is enforced, the issue will be clear before all, and then whoever shall transgress the command of God to obey a precept which has no higher authority than that of Rome, will receive the mark of the beast. Soon each person will face this test with eternal stakes, to keep the mmandments of God or of the papacy. Where will you be found standing?

No Room for Neutrality

17
Why care?
God’s solemn warning in Revelation 14 leaves no room for indifference. Jesus said, “He that is not with me is against me.” Luke 11:23. God counts all men as decidedly for the truth or against it. This warning is no respecter of person, class, condition, or religion. It is addressed to all humanity. It is not necessary for us deliberately to choose the kingdom
of darkness in order to come under its dominion. We have only to neglect to ally urselves
with the kingdom of light.

What must we do?

18
God is most eager to enter into a serious relationship with you individually. In fact, He wants you to be His son/daughter. Just think what a privilege it would be to be a child
of the King of the universe. This genuine opportunity is granted to you. He is eagerly waiting to bestow this highest of honors upon you. Yet, His word to you is: “Be ye
not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what communion hath light with darkness? … for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in
them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore
come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and I will receive you,
and will be a Father unto you,
and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. 2Corinthians 6:14- 18. This important Bible passage contains the following principles:
1. God does not permit any mixture of truth with error (even if it’s 99% truth). For “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.” 1 John 1:5. Only Satan mixes truth with error to maximize his deception.
2. The duty of a person aspiring to be in harmony with God is to not be a member of any church or religious system that is built on Satan’s foundation: the mixture of truth with error.
3. Knowing that when you leave Satan’s systems of religion, you will lose friends, family, influence, work, etc…God assures you: “I AM the Almighty.” It means that He will more than compensate you for all that you have lost. Believe Jesus’ precious promise in Mark 10:29, 30.

Seoster
http://www.articlesbase.com/religion-articles/a-surprising-new-world-order-is-about-to-start-55756.html

The Other America

Recently, one of the Network News agencies, has chosen to warm our hearts with a new Series “the Other America”. The content is good. Overall the series is supposedly a Media example of their “sensitivity”. In reality it’s an example of their elitism, blinded by daily life, lack of understanding of what life is to millions and millions of Americans. The series is as enigmatic to the people it is profiling as is the plight of the majority of Americans to 99.9% of all politicians. “the Other American” being reported on is America! The media, the politicians, and most of upper-middle class America, are… really… the “Other America”. The only class that is constantly growing in the U.S. any longer, is, the “poor”.

There is a very great consensus in the “more fortunate” America, that Welfare recipients are the representation of poverty. Hogwash. People on Welfare programs get cash subsidy, food stamps, and some of the best health care available. Just because they may not have a car… does not make them the “Poor”! In most areas they also get bus passes. They qualify for subsidized housing because they have a reliable payday with a consistent amount, every month, and… they wear out a lot of TV’s!

As of late, there has been some exposure, still not enough though, of the fact that there is an America, a very, very large America, that is Generationally locked in an income bracket that is too high for money from government assistance programs, but not enough to have what people at that Network, employed by Government agencies, and in that News Agency take for granted everyday. The parents and children in these families don’t go to the Dentist… they eat handfuls of Aspirin and swipe a tube of Ora-Gel from the drug store. In a dire situation, they go to the hospital emergency and wait for 4… 6… 8… 20 hours, using the ER as their “clinic” to get their temperature taken and a prescription for an anti-biotic. They don’t actually get the anti-biotic, though. They go home and have to make an appointment at the qualification program for being determined to be medically indigent. That appointment is usually 3 to 14 days away. By the time they could get this done, they feel well enough to forego the sitting and waiting at yet one more place. Or… they’re now so sick that they have to return to the ER and now they are triaged and the ER administers the medicine that they needed 2 or 3 weeks ago. Sometimes… they just die! No medicine wasted, huh? This class works… puts in a week that should support them, but doesn’t. They are not going to the Food Bank, no way are they going to take handouts. So… they eat a diet really full of beans, potatoes, eggs and bread products. But they don’t have to ask for a handout. Why should they, most of them have a job? As life progresses they become overweight, often developing hypertension and diabetes, and never knowing that, that is why they feel crummy so often. For most of them recreation involves beer. Watching sports on TV and going to the park don’t have admission fees. In the summer, if they are lucky enough for there to still be no fees charged, they go to the river or lake for “cool” recreation. If they live in a city, they usually just have a back yard BBQ and a wading pool, a slip-n-slide, or a water hose and sprinkler. What’s “air conditioning”? Can’t afford to pay the power company even if they have it… a fan keeps them from being overcome by heat prostration, sometimes. They’re used to this stuff, though. They may wish it were different, but have to learn not to live above their means. They have a pretty decent used car, but don’t drive it any more than necessary because they can’t afford to pay for insurance, and if they get pulled over, most places these days, their car will get impounded or confiscated. There’s not much time for helping the kids with homework, so they don’t do especially well in school, and end up working somewhere similar to where mom and dad work. Their children are going to do the same thing, too. Unless…

“Man, if I could sell that “Crank” and not use it, I could bust out of this place.” We know that seldom works!

“Heh, those “Arian Boys” that hang out down at the old plant take care of each other. They got some things ‘goin’ on’, and always have money. They hardly ever do any of that race stuff everybody says they do.” Oh… Yeah… they do; just not in the daylight!

“I took a hit off of a joint for the first time the other day” the 12-year-old says. “… and it made me laugh and forget about dad hittin’ mom in the face.” Twelve is the average age kids first use Marijuana now. Crank is just over the horizon!

“Heh Joe, I know that Pot isn’t going to get me hooked. I’ve been smokin’ it since I was twelve” the 14-year-old says. “Why don’t ya let me have a taste of your Heroin? Just once won’t hurt anything, I’m sure.” The average user who likes the “down” from Heroin can get psychologically hooked in two or three weeks, using 3 to 5 times a week. I’ve seen people try Meth and start using every day… starting with the 1st trial run!

Three 15-year-olds that have been hanging out together since 3rd Grade are sitting on the block wall in front of the Clinic on a warm summer evening, wishing they had the money to go see a movie, or get Arnie to buy them some beer. Bill says, “See that hall, right behind us, in the Clinic?” Tasha and Geraldo reply, “Yeah!” “Well,” Bill says, “there’s a window that is always open, and the supply room is on the other side of it! You know what’s in there, huh?” Oh yeah, they simultaneously reply. Bill says, “I’ve walked up there and pushed on it and no alarm went off. I don’t think there’s one on it, and I could fit through there, easy!” Geraldo asks, “You think we could get some money for something in there, easy?” Tasha says, “No problem! My brother knows some dudes who’ll buy almost anything, and sell it for some profit. That’s what they do!” There’s an alarm. It’s a sensor on the windowsill, not the window. If they were to get away with it, it would just make the next time easier to move on. If not, as young as they are, first offenses usually don’t cost much. But, either way, there’s a good chance that this kind of thinking is the beginning of an anti-social lifestyle, because of their environment and financial status. Anyway, it’s probably just the beginning of thinking that results from desperation and predictably low expectations. Even if they don’t turn toward crime as a future, but are dissuaded by consequences, a low paying job is often their future, as was the fate of their primary role models. If they do become Addicts and go to Prison behind a felony conviction, one new door will open… Drug Treatment. Sad but true, in most States that is the only access to funded treatment, that is far to expensive for most Addicts or their families. Bush’s vouchers are a joke, intended to subsidize “Faith based programs”. Separation of Church and State? No, and few Addicts are able to adjust to them as a 24-hour-a-day way of life. The streets don’t inspire much faith in anything!

These American that are America, feel fortunate to move from an $8/hr job into one that will eventually peak at $15/hr with no benefits. For these really common, everyday Americans Social Security is the light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel. There isn’t going to be a 401K, stocks or bonds. … just Social Security, and finally health care will be in their reach, too. This is not “the Other America”. It is America. Notice that no one mentioned here owns a home? The death of the American Dream is not a recent phenomenon.

Children of these families are many of those fighting Bush’s War. It’s a shot at getting out! We all know by looking at the VA hospitals that, that’s no done deal! Find out how many Senators or Congressmen have children fighting the War in Iraq. Find out how many had children fighting in Vietnam. See how many families with two College educated parents, or even one, have children in Iraq. See how many UAW members, Electricians, College Professors, Doctors or Lawyers are Veterans.

These are the people who have nothing to really hold on to if Social Security is not stabilized and kept out of the privatization mode. These are the people whose faith in America could be reborn if they just found they could go to the doctor when they get sick. We know that there are about 40,000,000 of them if that News agency is accurate in their reporting. That’s no sure deal either, though, is it?

If we are not at an epic moment where the myth of the Free Market economic stabilization (trickle-down economics – Neo-Conservative philosophy) concept is finally realized to be at an end, and socialization of basic necessities for daily living is not implemented as a result… we may be at the end of a dream set forth in 1776. Capitalistic Democracy just may not work as a permanent philosophy for an entire culture. The American Dream may die because Capitalist greed will have alienated its workforce. As it is, the average working person has become the modern version of the Plantation Owner’s Slave. The lending agencies have replaced “the Company Store”! We’re kept just healthy enough to assure that the corporation’s product continues, but no longer well enough to be the best producers in the world. Quality was the backbone of American production, and the Unions kept up wages and helped workers realize the American Dream, as a result. Well may very well pertain to psychological fitness even more than physical fitness. Right now the problem is that the “Company Store” got so greedy that they loaned past the point where the “Slaves” could ever repay their debts. The debts are closing the Company Stores. The workers losing their jobs, no longer can even attempt to pay their irresolvable debt. The economy is stuck because greed has produced a broken link in the chain and it can’t hold up the system. No workers work, no product is produced, so there is no need for the company. So, after enough companies fade away an entire industry fades with them. America is in trouble and it’s big. As much as our leaders talk about mainstream America, they still don’t get it. Almost anything that is strong is strong because it has a strong Foundation. The Banks are not the foundation of America. The Insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies are not it. The foundation is at the bottom of anything and everything. The lowest paid worker is the bottom. They are the foundation of the United States. The Unions, at one time grew to protect almost all workers in every capacity, and this country thrived like it never had. But when Ronald Reagan broke the Air Traffic Controllers Union strike, big business began a campaign to break them all and maximize their profits and their shareholders dividends by gradually lowering wage, not providing the Health-care covered by the Unions, and doing away with Retirement Benefits by introducing the, eventually (NOW) to become an absolute failure, 401K, placing the future of all workers in the Stock Market. This move favoring the “Corporations” resulted in such outrageous profit that the CEO came to make 7 to 10 figure salaries and other executives secured commensurate salaries. This kind of wealth bread a class of power that produced Criminal business practices rooted in pure greed. These were companies like Enron and people like Dick Cheney. Though Enron more or less got exposed, what was not seen was how widespread and well hidden these practices were in the major corporations of America. Well, we can see them now. The sad thing is, that the average American worker whose future is very questionable, is paying for all of it. That problem grows unbelievably as our bankrupt Government slips ever farther into debt to the rest of the World. They’re now spending our Grandchildren’s taxes. Still, in the long term, all of the Capitalist greed has to be paid for by the workers not their bosses.

Start at the bottom, the foundation. Raise the minimum wage. Raise it a lot. Make sure that full-time employment is always “gainful” employment. Legally protect the Unionization of workers with regulation. Socialize Health-care and get the workers healthy. If the Unions are strong they’ll then contribute to the Health-care socialization program. Fund Drug Rehabilitation and get those people out of Prison and back into the taxpaying public. Fix Social Security so that benefits increase and the age of retirement does not go up. If people are working and making reasonable pay, the Social Security tax could go up without affecting the overall income of its contributors, and they won’t mind because their Golden Years will be funded. Give the people the ability to “spend” money. If we do that, everything else will follow. Yeah, the Stock Market will have to become realistic, and shareholders will only get reasonable dividends. Executives will still be rich but they don’t need the income of an entire small community or some small countries, to live above the rest of us. They can keep their “Power-trip”! Throw out all the “pork barrel” shit and invest taxpayer money on three things that all charge the economy. First is infrastructure 101. Get our bridges and highways up out of the rubble and safe again. Second is powering our country. Wind and Solar generation need to be taken to the maximum conceivable state. They are inexhaustible. Also, there is no “clean” coal technology, abandon it. The automobile needs to become clean technology and that means fossil fuel is out of the picture. In all reality we should be able to produce electric vehicles that inevitably cost less than current internal combustion powered vehicles. We should already have a battery that meets the needs of the average American’s transportation demands, but we don’t. Why? Expand rail service nationwide and locally, with existing models as guides, including High Speed. In cities elevated and subways can be retrofitted in. Clean buses should run 24/7. Make solar power a building code inclusion for construction of new structures including private, business and public. Third and finally, we should build our foreign policy around peaceful coexistence, eliminating hunger and disease in third world countries, and including them in the world of technology with all counties included in all aspects of improving quality of life on the planet, with all things, always considering ecology and the future of the Planet. You see Mr. Television Network, Doctors, Lawyers and Chief Executive, and you safe and secure Government Employees… YOU are not only the “other America”, you are the other “World”! Most of the people on this Planet do not know what it is like to be in the upper 25%, whether American, British, Japanese, Indian, Iraqi, Israelite, or French and Spanish.

Do you realize that most American teenagers can no longer afford to go to a concert to see their favorite musicians or other performers? Tickets that cost $60 to $250 dollars are a monthly payment on a decent used car, for really a lot of people. What percentage of the people do you think ever see a play, Broadway level, or a Ballet, or a Symphony Orchestra? The American Dream has been fading for some time now. For the true majority of us buying a home as a primary financial goal has been replaced with buying a New Car, and that’s fading fast. These are the facts that brought the Stock Market into “realistic” phase. All the BS facts used for speculation have been forced to more or less call in the debts and see what’s really left given true values. 50 to 100 million people is a big number, but it’s actually not a big percentage of the population if you’re making realistic evaluation of the quality of life in our country. Even if you look at the incomes of the top 250 million citizens, it leaves a lot of people to consider. I’ll bet that 25% of the people in almost every town in the U.S. can’t afford anything that costs an extra $50 per month added to their budget!

The job situation in this country is an ominous problem for the future of our economy, and it’s beginning to look as though it is not readily solvable. Companies are down-sizing and folding, period. In folding, the jobs they provided no longer exist. They’re not coming back is what that means. My God, just exactly how many jobs have been lost and companies folded during the Bush Presidency. I think we’re talking about a historical unseen event in modern history. Neo Conservatives with their de-regulation and trickle-down economics may already have destroyed the United States, as we have known it during my lifetime. And if they have, it is in truth, a direct result of greed and selfishness at a National level. We have two choices, right now, as I see it. We can move toward socialization of essentials (spread the wealth), or… we can do as Third World countries do, and just let a lot of people starve to death and die from curable disease! I think that would actually make us a 3rd World Country, huh? “the Other America”, hah… it would be hilarious if it weren’t so frightening to hear the Majority of Americans being referred to as “the Other America”!

CounselorDave
http://www.articlesbase.com/economics-articles/the-other-america-734549.html

Rescuing Gm

According to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, bailing out America’s Big Three automakers should not be considered “as life-support to sustain a dying industry, but a jump start for an industry that is essential to our country’s economic health.” Really, Madam Speaker? America, let’s face it, the proposed bailout isn’t about rescuing GM, it’s about preserving the UAW, its toxic contracts, and its political ties with the Democratic Party. A bailout of the Big Three is a mistake of monumental proportions as it subsidizes a failed business model and supports continued mismanagement. Jack Kemp, former United States Representative and founder and co-director of Empower America, a public policy and advocacy organization, stated it best:

“If you tax something, you get less of it. If you subsidize something, you get more of it. The problem in America today is that we are taxing work, saving, investment, and productivity; and we’re subsidizing debt, welfare, consumption, leisure, and mediocrity.”

According to conservative industry estimates, GM alone is bleeding $1 billion of cash per month. If you give GM a $10 billion lifeline, they’ll burn through it in 10 months! 

A bailout clearly is not the answer. GM’s primary foreign rivals (BMW, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, and Toyota) all build vehicles in the USA using American labor. The key difference is they maintain leaner and more adaptable organizational structures than GM, and can perform the same operations better, faster, and with fewer resources. In the current business environment of global competition, rapid technological change, and uncertainty, this is unacceptable. GM’s multi-layered, bureaucratic organizational structure is crippling its ability to compete effectively in a global marketplace.

If a bailout is not the answer, what can GM do?

o GMAC must stop originating, securitizing, and servicing insurance and mortgage products and focus on automotive financing.

GMAC lost $2.3 billion in 2007; unfortunately, it will be difficult for GM to force any changes at GMAC. (Cerberus acquired a controlling 51% stake in 2006.) In order to return GMAC to profitability, the subsidiary must reduce exposure to the foreclosed assets, impaired loans, loan commitments, and reserve requirements inherent in their insurance and mortgage product portfolio. The business of GMAC is borrowing and lending money, and that’s not GM’s business.

o Alternatively, GM could swap a portion of its remaining 49% equity stake in GMAC to Cerberus for ownership of Chrysler. 

According to its 2007 Form 10-K, GM has 184 directly or indirectly owned subsidiaries. As a result, there’s plenty of room for asset sales and internal consolidations to generate cash and to enhance operational efficiencies. Ownership of Chrysler would enable additional asset sales and consolidations beyond what GM already can do on its own. In particular, GM and Chrysler can consolidate or dispose of assembly plants, automotive retailers, brands, duplicative corporate assets, employees and layers of management, and parts suppliers. For instance, the All-American Chevrolet and Dodge brands can be merged, as can the iconic Hummer and Jeep brands. The Chrysler nameplate can be sold to generate cash, as can Global Electric Motors. GM can swap Mopar to Delphi for forgiveness of GM’s remaining financial (including pension) and other obligations and expedite Delphi’s emergence from bankruptcy. Finally, Chrysler Financial can either be left with Cerberus or sold after the swap.

Not only is GMAC not as critical to GM’s operations as it once was, “GMAC’s business requires substantial capital”1 GM doesn’t have and cannot get. Additionally, it draws management attention away from the firm’s core operations and its reason for existence. This is something Sears discovered long ago, leading to their decision in late 1992 to divest their capital intensive non-core financial services network (i.e., Allstate, Coldwell Banker, and Dean Witter/Discover.)  Please refer to Outsourcing the American Dream by Christopher M. England for additional information related to Sears’ failed venture into retail financial services.

1General Motors Corp 2007 Form 10-K

o GM must invest heavily in intellectual property and research and development.  

In my July 2008 article, “Rescue the American Dream from the Tyranny of Foreign Oil,” I outlined several initiatives that are essential to the survival of America’s Big Three automakers, including investments in breakthrough automotive technologies and commercially-viable alternative-fuel sources. For example, GM can drive up Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) thresholds in a couple of ways. One is by substituting the same lighter-weight carbon-fiber composite body panels used by our military for steel. Another is by harnessing kinetic energy from the natural motion, rotation, and vibration of the vehicle and its parts as a supplemental power source. GM also must replace current “flex-fuel” (a.k.a. E85) vehicles with “multi flex-fuel” vehicles capable of using any pure or blended fuel source. Alternative-fuel sources can include ammonia, bio-diesel/bio-fuels, compressed natural gas, gas/electric hybrids, plug-in electrics, etc.

While hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, most of it remains locked up in more complex compounds such as ammonia, methane (natural gas or propane), or water. Not only does it require tremendous amounts of energy to separate the hydrogen from its natural compounds, it requires tremendous amounts of energy to liquefy and condense hydrogen; however, scientists are experimenting with electrolyzers, genetically-engineered bacteria, and various reactive metals that might one day lead to an abundant alternative-fuel source. According to Kevin Mayhood in a June 30, 2008 article in The Columbus Dispatch, Gerardine Botte, director of Ohio University’s Electrochemical Engineering Research Laboratory, is working on a method to pull hydrogen from the ammonia in animal and human urine. This is important for several reasons. First, we already have the infrastructure in place to distribute ammonia to retail gas station pumps, as it’s been used to make fertilizer for decades. Second, separating hydrogen from ammonia does not produce “greenhouse gases” as long as the required electricity comes from a source which produces no greenhouse gases. (The same can be said for gas/electric hybrids and plug-in electrics.) Third, ammonia is more easily liquefied and condensed than hydrogen.

o GM should consider Chapter 11.

Filing for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code should present GM with an enhanced opportunity to restructure its business model and dump its burdensome union agreements. GM can enter and re-emerge from Chapter 11 without enormous job losses, something the UAW and the pro-bailout Democrats chose to ignore. We’re not talking about Chapter 7 here. We’re talking about an opportunity to reign in the massive healthcare, pension, and other legacy costs that are draining GM of value and leaving it at a competitive disadvantage. Chapter 11 should be considered even if it means freezing defined benefit pension funds to new employee participation, beefing up 401(k) plans, and increasing cost sharing with employees and retirees. If GM leaves legacy costs untouched, employees and retirees ultimately will be the ones who suffer. That being said, GM also must redesign performance management and reward systems to ensure workers are compensated in the most appropriate ways. Despite suffering a net loss of $38.7 billion in 2007, Richard Wagoner, Jr., Chairman and CEO of GM, earned $15.7 million in total compensation. Something’s definitely wrong with this picture. 

 

If a bailout is not the answer, what can the Federal Government do?

o Put an end to America’s unilateral free-trade policies.

We should practice free-trade only with nations who practice it with us. Why do we allow Japan full access to the American economy, when Japan puts up barriers to American ownership of Japanese corporations or restricts the number of automobiles GM or Ford can sell in Japan? If Japan puts up barriers, we need to do the same. If China implements a 25% import tariff making our automobiles more expensive in Chinese markets, we need to do the same making Chinese automobiles more expensive in American markets. This isn’t protectionism; it’s good economic sense. 

o Rescue the American Dream from the Tyranny of Foreign Oil

In my July 2008 article, “Rescue the American Dream from the Tyranny of Foreign Oil,” I not only outlined several initiatives that are essential to the survival of America’s Big Three automakers, I also outlined numerous initiatives we must undertake to simultaneously diversify sources of oil supplies, dramatically slash oil consumption, and increase production of alternative-energy sources to clean up the environment, increase our energy efficiency, protect national security interests, reduce the military and political leverage of OPEC oil, revitalize the U.S. economy, and shrink trade deficits.

www.christophermengland.com

 

Christopher M. England
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/rescuing-gm-690521.html