Evil Academy

Full Version: News / Current Events / Random Vids
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
^ What he said. VTFU
(Reuters) - Pope Francis said on Saturday it pained him to see priests driving flashy cars, and told them to pick something more "humble".

As part of his drive to make the Catholic Church more austere and focus on the poor, Francis told young and trainee priests and nuns from around the world that having the latest smartphone or fashion accessory was not the route to happiness.

"It hurts me when I see a priest or a nun with the latest model car, you can't do this," he said.

"A car is necessary to do a lot of work, but please, choose a more humble one. If you like the fancy one, just think about how many children are dying of hunger in the world," he said.

Since succeeding Pope Benedict in March, the former cardinal Jorge Bergoglio of Argentina has eschewed some of the more ostentatious trappings of his office and has chosen to live in a Vatican guest house rather than the opulent papal apartments.

The ANSA news agency said the pope's car of choice for moving around the walled Vatican City was a compact Ford Focus. (Reporting By Catherine Hornby; Editing by Robin Pomeroy)
The car thing led to attacks on the OG. The RCC can't do anything right it seems.
^ Most of the anti christians/catholics have been led to their opinions by mainstream media. Since they never actually formed their own conclusion on the subject, it is not easy for them to employ logic and reason. They are merely working from various rhetoric and talking points.
^ they will find any excuse to bash the RCC.

the love affair with Francis is now over. he is NOT A FAUX LIBERAL!

He is a disturbing (for them) mix of conservative and liberal.

Jesuit power!
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Nearly 30,000 of the 133,000 inmates in California prisons refused meals for the second day in support of inmates held in solitary confinement at Pelican Bay State Prison, corrections officials said Tuesday.

The meals were refused on Monday and Tuesday as inmates announced what they said would be the third extended hunger strike in two years protesting conditions for the more than 4,500 gang members, gang associates and serious offenders held in the security housing units. Many of those inmates are kept in solitary confinement, sometimes for decades.

The protest is the latest disruption for a prison system already facing legal and logistical challenges. Officials are struggling to move about 2,600 inmates from two Central Valley prisons because they are considered especially vulnerable to a potentially fatal airborne fungus. They also are appealing a separate court order requiring the state to release nearly 10,000 inmates by year's end to reduce prison crowding as the best way to improve conditions for sick and mentally ill inmates.

The isolation units that are the focus of the hunger strike are at Pelican Bay near the Oregon border and at three other maximum security prisons around the state.

Inmates refused breakfast and lunch at two-thirds of the state's 33 prisons and at all four private prisons that hold California inmates in other states, said Terry Thornton, a spokeswoman for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

She did not know how many inmates skipped dinners.

About 2,000 inmates statewide refused to go to their jobs or classes Tuesday, down slightly from the 2,300 who refused to participate on Monday. The number of inmates refusing meals also dropped slightly, from more than 30,000 on Monday to about 29,000 on Tuesday.

The number of participating inmates eclipsed two hunger strikes two years ago. Nearly 12,000 inmates missed at least some meals in October 2011, and nearly 7,000 declined meals in July 2011, though officials said most began eating again after several days.

Pelican Bay inmates said through advocacy groups that the protest began after talks with prison officials broke down last month over inmates' demands that the department end long-term solitary confinement.

Thornton said the department changed its policies last year to give gang associates a way out of the units. About half of the nearly 400 inmates considered so far have been or will be let out of solitary confinement, while another 115 are in a program in which they can work their way out of the units, Thornton said.

A federal judge in April refused to dismiss a lawsuit filed by 10 Pelican Bay inmates alleging their living conditions in the isolation units are unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment.

Meanwhile, 12 inmates at High Desert State Prison near Susanville continued a separate hunger strike they began July 1 to protest conditions in the administrative segregation unit there. Twenty-three inmates initially refused meals at the prison 185 miles northeast of Sacramento, but about half have resumed eating, Thornton said.
what would happen if people stopped committing crimes?

honestly think about this.

millions of jobs would be lost.

billions in losses would be incurred due to empty prisons.

What incentive is there to reduce crime?


If you really sit down and truly think this through for about 5-8 minutes you will be shocked. Truly shocked.

In the Middle Ages, people looked to the Church for certainty. In today’s complex, market-based economies, they look to the field of economics, at least for answers to questions concerning the economy. And unlike some disciplines, which acknowledge that there’s a huge gap between the scholarly knowledge and policy advice, economists have been anything but shy about asserting their authority.

As we can see from the current dismal state of economic affairs, economies are incredibly complex systems, and policymakers who are forced to act in the face of this uncertainty and complexity want guidance. And over the last half century, neoclassical economists have not only been more than happy to offer it, but largely been able to marginalize any other disciplines or approaches, giving them a virtual monopoly on economic policy advice.

But there are two big problems with this. First, despite economists’ calming assurances, we still know little about how economies actually work and the effect of policies. If we did, then economists should have sounded the alarm bells to head off the financial collapse and Great Recession. But even more problematic, even though most economists know better, they present to the public, the media and politicians a simplified, vulgar version of neoclassical economics — what can be called Econ 101 — that leads policymakers astray. Economists fear that if they really expose policymakers to all the contradictions, uncertainties and complications of “Advanced Econ,” the latter will go off track — embracing protectionism, heavy-handed “industrial policy” or even socialism. In fact, the myths of Econ 101 already lead policymakers dangerously off track, with tragic results for the economy and everyday Americans.

Myth 1: Economics is a science.

The way economists maintain stature in public policy circles is to present their discipline as a science, akin to physics. In Econ 101, there is no uncertainty, only the obvious truths embedded in supply and demand curves. As noted economist Lionel Robbins wrote, “Economics is thescience which studies human behavior as a relationship between given ends and scarce means, which have alternative uses.” If economics is actually a science, then policymakers can feel more comfortable following the advice of economists. But if economics is really a science – which implies only one answer to a particular question — why do 40 percent of surveyed economists agree that raising the minimum wage would make it harder for people to get jobs while 40 percent disagree? It’s because as Larry Lindsey, former head of President Bush’s National Economic Council, admitted, “the continuing argument [among economists] is a product of philosophical disagreements about human nature and the role of government and cannot be fully resolved by economists no matter how sound their data.”

"The U.S. military has reportedly spent $34 million to build a new complex in Afghanistan – but is unlikely to ever actually use the facility.

Voice of America reports that the unused site came to the attention of a congressional oversight committee that reviews projects in Afghanistan.

"I don't know if [Secretary Chuck Hagel] will provide a formal response. I do not have one at this stage," said Defense Department spokesman George Little when asked about the project. "I think it is going to take us a little bit of time to review the findings and to coordinate with the SIGAR."

SIGAR stands for the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, which described the base as a "potentially troubling example of waste."

Special Inspector General John Sopko told Congress that some U.S. commanders opposed the 20,000-square-foot installation’s construction in 2010. But a year later, a British firm was nonetheless hired to build it. Originally, it was planned to serve as a regional command headquarters in the country’s southern region. Technically, it was designed to house 1,500 staff. But now, commanders say it’s unlikely to ever be occupied by military personnel.

Sopko said that as U.S. forces begin to leave the country, they will be left with two options: destroy the facility or hand it over to Afghan officials.

And as of today, at least one person who spent time at the facility thinks demolishing it makes more sense."

[Image: EmptyBase1.jpg]
^ this is how corruption works in the US.

give your buddies all kinds of contracts for unnecessary things.
[Image: divorce-ii-projected.jpg]
Another crazy conspiracy theory.


"A lawsuit in federal court in Colorado accuses Charlotte-based Bank of America of racketeering, in what amounts to more fallout for the bank stemming from a federal mortgage-modification program.

The suit, filed Wednesday, claims violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, also known as RICO. It cites statements that former Bank of America employees made last month in a separate, ongoing federal lawsuit in Massachusetts. Those former employees, including at least one who worked in Charlotte, claim the bank awarded cash and gift cards to them if they denied mortgage modifications to homeowners through the Home Affordable Modification Program.

Pointing to those statements, Wednesday’s lawsuit alleges that the bank and a contractor ran a “scheme” to deny the modifications. The Colorado lawsuit, brought by three homeowners who sought HAMP modifications from Bank of America, names as a co-defendant Urban Lending Solutions, a Broomfield, Colo., contractor to whom the bank sent HAMP work.

The lawsuit echoes claims made in the Massachusetts case, alleging that Bank of America pushed homeowners to accept costlier in-house modifications, because those were more profitable for the bank than HAMP modifications. The latest lawsuit claims those activities constituted racketeering, using “interstate mails and wire communications.”

The Colorado lawsuit paints a picture of the bank and Urban Lending Solutions working “in concert” to prevent “as many homeowners as possible from obtaining permanent loan modifications that complied with HAMP while allowing BOA to maintain the appearance to regulators and the public of trying to comply with its HAMP obligations.”

Bank of America and Urban Lending Solutions had a “scheme to defraud,” the suit says.

“To accomplish its objectives, BOA created a widespread RICO enterprise to defraud homeowners who sought modifications and then acted as the kingpin of that enterprise,” the suit says.

Bank of America enlisted Urban Lending Solutions “to act as a member of the RICO enterprise,” the suit says.

The suit also says that homeowners seeking HAMP trail plans were told by Bank of America to send financial information to Urban.

“Consumers were led to believe that they were dealing with BOA, when secretly they were communicating with Urban,” the lawsuit says. “As part of the loan-modification scheme and enterprise, Urban became a ‘black hole’for documents sent by homeowners.”

As a result of the bank and Urban’s scheme, hundreds of thousands of homeowners were wrongfully denied a modification, the suit says.

HAMP was designed to lower monthly mortgage payments for struggling borrowers suffering in the collapse of the housing market.

One of the employees who filed a statement in the Massachusetts lawsuit is William Wilson, who worked in Charlotte and described workers being made to participate in a “blitz.” In a blitz, he said, the bank would order case managers and underwriters to “clean out” a backlog of HAMP requests by denying all those whose financial documents were more than 60 days old.

“The purpose of the mass denials was to reduce the volume of pending modification requests as quickly as possible while extending as few permanent modifications as possible,” Wednesday’s lawsuit says.

The former employees’ claims have attracted the attention of Joseph Smith, who oversees the $25 billion settlement reached last year with 49 states and five major banks, including Bank of America. Smith said he’s examining the Massachusetts suit for any evidence that the bank violated the settlement."
Russia, China block U.N. condemnation of Iran missile tests


Quote:(Reuters) - A U.N. Security Council committee is split over whether Iran's missile tests last year violated U.N. sanctions imposed on Tehran because of its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, Australia's U.N. envoy said on Monday.

That division effectively rules out any expansion of sanctions against Tehran over the tests for the time being, U.N. envoys said on condition of anonymity.

Diplomats said it was Russia, backed by China, that refused to declare Tehran's missile launches a violation of the U.N. restrictions, as a U.N. Panel of Experts on Iran said was the case.

The rift on the Iran sanctions committee, which consists of all 15 Security Council members, highlights the difficulties Western powers face in persuading Russia and China to join them in keeping up the pressure on Tehran to halt banned nuclear and missile work.

Iran rejects allegations by the United States, European powers and their allies that it is developing an atomic weapons capability. It says the U.N. sanctions against it are illegal and refuses to comply with them.

As long as the sanctions committee remains divided, it will be difficult for the Security Council to add names of any Iranian individuals or entities linked to the missile tests, Security Council diplomats said on condition of anonymity.

Australia's U.N. Ambassador Gary Quinlan, chairman of the Iran sanctions committee, told the council that "a number of committee members expressed the view ... that the launches constituted a clear violation of (U.N. sanctions) and that therefore all member states should redouble their efforts to implement ballistic missile-related sanctions on Iran."

"At this stage some committee members cannot share this view," he added in his latest three-month report to the council.

The tests involved the launch of Iranian Shahab missiles in July 2012 during the "Great Prophet 7" military exercises.

"These included launches of the Shahab 1 and 3, Zelzal, Fateh-110 and Tondar missiles, as well as an anti-ship ballistic missile, the Khalij Fars," the Iran Panel of Experts said in its May report to the Iran sanctions committee.


The panel said those exercises were conducted by the Aerospace Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Russia, diplomats said, led the dissenters in rejecting the view that the tests were a clear violation of U.N. sanctions.

A Russian delegate explained Moscow's position to the Security Council, saying "hasty conclusions not based on facts must be avoided."

A Chinese delegate reiterated Beijing's stance: "We are not in favor of increased new pressure or new sanctions against Iran."

U.S. Ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo told reporters, "We're disappointed that the (Iran sanctions) committee was unable in this case to state the obvious."

"There is nothing ambiguous about the ban imposed by the Security Council on such ... missile launches," she said. "Most of the Security Council members agree with us on this issue."

Quinlan's report also referred to alleged arms embargo violations.

Western powers accuse Iran of supplying arms to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and militant groups like Lebanon's Hezbollah, which has been fighting alongside Assad's troops in Syria to defeat rebels in the civil war there.

"Several committee members stated that the evidence presented in the report was sufficient to assert that Iran was in violation of its obligations, illustrating a pattern of sanctions evasion through arms smuggling in the Middle East," his report said.

"Other committee members stated that the lack of stronger evidence as to the provenance of the arms, such as documentation, justified the lack of a definitive conclusion," his report added.

Russia and China were the "other committee members" who opposed finding Tehran in clear violation of the U.N. ban on Iranian arms exports, council diplomats said.

(Reporting by Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Xavier Briand)
"Several committee members stated that the evidence presented in the report was sufficient to assert that Iran was in violation of its obligations, illustrating a pattern of sanctions evasion through arms smuggling in the Middle East," his report said.

China and Russia are using their power in the UN to cockblock the NWO's warmongering plans.
Reference URL's