We followed foreign public policy for 40 years and we read that overseas in FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES as in China -----people living in those zones were exempt from that nations' laws and societal norms. So, any 99% of Chinese workers hired to work inside a FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE in China no longer had Chinese sovereign rights and status. They were treated as a FOREIGN NATIONAL inside their own nation. Same in all FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES globally in Asia, Arabia, Africa, Latin America coming now to US, CANADA, AND EUROPE.
99% WE THE PEOPLE are NOT foreign nationals---we are US CITIZENS----but not until we GET RID OF ALL 5% to the 1% global banking pols and players killing our sovereign status as US CITIZENS.
When our US national media keep using that term TRUMP IS A NATIONALIST FASCIST they are telling us TRUMP is MOVING FORWARD the same ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE policies as CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA. Global corporations are FOREIGN MULTINATIONALS ----those global 1% and their 2% are almost always FOREIGN NATIONALS under national laws----but under ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE only those global 1% and their 2% are then considered GLOBAL CITIZENS.
WE HAVE LOTS OF PEOPLE IN US CALLING THEMSELVES GLOBAL CITIZENS----BUT THEY ARE SIMPLY FOREIGN NATIONALS.
Difference Between U.S. Green Card and U.S. Citizenship
While both green card holders and citizens can stay in the U.S. indefinitely, there are some major reasons to get U.S. citizenship.
By Ilona Bray, J.D.
What is the primary immigration issue? Confusion is common concerning the difference between the two main statuses held by people with long-term rights to live and work in the U.S.: lawful permanent residence (holding a green card) and U.S. citizenship. Let’s look at the similarities and differences.
For someone immigrating to the U.S. on a permanent basis, lawful permanent residence is usually the necessary first step. For example, people may become lawful permanent residents after being petitioned for (often called “sponsored”) by a spouse or close family member or an employer; after receiving refugee status or asylum; after winning the diversity visa lottery; or in various other categories. For more information on eligibility for a U.S. green card, see “Who Qualifies for a Green Card.”
In most cases, green card holders must wait some years before applying to become U.S. citizens, through a process called “naturalization.” Other ways that people can become U.S. citizens include by birth in the U.S., birth overseas to a U.S. citizen parent, and living in the U.S. as a child when when a parent naturalizes (described in Nolo's articles on acquiring or deriving citizenship through parents).
About the only way that someone can go straight from having no U.S. immigration status to being a U.S. citizen is by joining the the U.S. military, as described in "U.S. Citizenship Rights for U.S. Military Personnel and Veterans."
Rights and Benefits of U.S. Lawful Permanent ResidenceA lawful permanent resident receives a photo identity card that is, literally, green. The card is evidence that he or she has the right to live and work in the U.S. on a permanent basis; to travel and return; and to petition for certain close family members to also receive green cards.
However, green card holders cannot do everything that U.S. citizens can. They cannot vote in U.S. elections. They cannot remain outside the U.S. for unlimited amounts of time or make their home elsewhere – doing so will result in abandonment of their residency and refusal of their request to reenter the United States. They can lose their residency rights by failing to advise U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of changes in their address, committing crimes or acts of espionage or terrorism, and more.
Also, green card holders can’t always get the same assistance and benefits from the government that U.S.citizens can. Many federal programs impose a five-year waiting period before green card holders can start receiving benefits. (See “What Public Benefits Can a Green Card Holder Receive?”)
For these reasons, it is wise for permanent residents to apply for U.S. citizenship as soon as possible. For information on doing that, see “Who Can Apply for U.S. Citizenship.”
Rights and Benefits of U.S. Citizenship
U.S. citizenship is the highest status someone can attain under U.S. immigration law. It means a permanent right to live in the United States. Citizens are not subject to the grounds of deportability that affect green card holders. The only way someone can take a former immigrant’s citizenship status away is if that person committed fraud in obtaining it in the first place.
U.S. citizens can vote, and can petition for a longer list of foreign national family members to join them in the U.S. than permanent residents can – for example, unlike green card holders, they can petition for their parents (as immediate relatives), their married children, and their brothers and sisters (in the fourth preference category – it’s a long wait).
While Congress PRETENDS to be passing laws surrounding immigration issues like GREEN CARDS and status as foreign nationals-----the goal as with DACA is to recognize EVERYONE inside a US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE as a FOREIGN NATIONAL.....so, what we call US GREEN CARD policies will disappear.
Are global corporations allowing FOREIGN NATIONALS inside US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES to access controlled technology OR are they allowing a global 1% and their 2% as GLOBAL CITIZENS to access any information needed inside a US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE? This legal discussion written in 2009 by no doubt international lawyers PRETENDS to be addressing US national legal concerns when they KNOW MOVING FORWARD is creating policies that KILL our US national sovereign laws inside US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
What WERE US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES created by FDR/DWORKIN in early 1900s were IMPORT/EXPORT zones for global markets back then taking a very small piece of our US economy. Our US DOMESTIC economy was HUGE back then---today our entire US ECONOMY is now global market and MOVING FORWARD has US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES as EXPORT-ONLY ZONES.
WHAT IS 'DEEMED EXPORT' RULE-----
'A foreign national is any person who is not a US citizen, lawful permanent resident or protected individual (asylee or refugee)'.
So, while FAKE ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT right wing REPUBLICANS pretend to be hating and fighting FOREIGN IMMIGRANTS----while FAKE ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT left social progressives PRETEND to be helping our 99% of new immigrants both are creating policies that make US 99% WE THE PEOPLE and our new immigrant 99% of citizens -----NON-CITIZENS.
These LEGAL REVIEWS written today inside US almost always are DECONSTRUCTING US law-----and converting it to global corporate tribunal ONE WORLD law.
US companies that allow foreign nationals access to controlled technology in the United States may inadvertently violate export control laws
Squire Patton Boggs
USA February 23 2009
What Is the “Deemed Export” Rule?
The “deemed export” rule1 views any disclosure of US-controlled technology or know-how to a foreign national within the United States as an export to that foreign national’s country of origin whether or not the technology or know-how is physically shipped outside the United States. One of the rationales behind the deemed export rule is the concern that many of the state-of-the-art technologies developed by US companies have potential military use. If foreign nationals have access to US-controlled technology they may disclose such information to terrorist organizations or certain suspect countries. Therefore, the deemed export rule attempts to thwart such disclosures without the appropriate licenses. Nevertheless, the General Accounting Office has reported that one-third of companies it interviewed did not have internal controls in place to protect export-controlled information.2 Compounding the export compliance challenges confronting companies is, as the General Accounting Office observed, a scarcity of readily accessible information disseminated from government agencies.3
Technologies and Industries Covered by the Deemed Export Rule
Many types of technologies and industries are affected by the deemed export rule. Some of the categories of US-controlled technologies include (1) materials, chemicals, microorganisms and toxins; (2) electronics; (3) computers; (4) telecommunications and information security; (5) navigation and avionics; (6) lasers and sensors; (7) marine; and (8) propulsion systems, space vehicles and related equipment. Within each category, items are arranged by groups including (1) equipment, assemblies and components; (2) test, inspection and production equipment; (3) materials; (4) software; and (5) technology. In 2001 most deemed export licenses authorized foreign nationals to work with advanced electronics, computer, or telecommunications and information security technologies.4
Because of the broad list of categories, many industries may find that they have US-controlled technology and know-how which may need to be disclosed to foreign nationals and, therefore, are in need of a license. While it may be obvious that nuclear reactors are on the list of US-controlled technology, many other items that are considered US-controlled technologies are not as obvious. In particular, encryption software developed by a high technology company to be included in a product may be considered US-controlled technology based on the encryption bit level of the software. Additionally, certain speech recognition software and navigational positioning equipment (e.g., global positioning system or GPS) are considered US-controlled technologies.
Who Is a Foreign National?
A foreign national is any person who is not a US citizen, lawful permanent resident or protected individual (asylee or refugee). For example, persons in the United States under non-immigration status, such as H-1B (Specialty Occupation Workers), L-1 (Intra-company Transferees) and F-1 (Student Workers) employees, and persons unlawfully in the United States are considered foreign nationals under the rule.
In the event that an individual is a permanent resident or citizen of a country other than that of their nationality, then it will be necessary to determine an individual’s home country, which will vary depending on the government agency involved.
Using a foreign national from a non-US subsidiary to develop proprietary, state-of-the-art encryption software technology could violate the export control laws.
Examples of Disclosure
Disclosure of US-controlled technology and know-how can happen in many different ways including (1) face-to-face meetings; (2) telephone conversations; (3) email or facsimile transmissions; (4) visual inspections; (5) physical access; (6) practice or application under the guidance of someone knowledgeable of the technology; and (7) making information accessible on servers or intranet or extranet sites. For example, suppose a business needs to fill a vacant network consultant position. The job responsibilities include unrestricted or administrator access to servers containing controlled technical data, for the purposes of ensuring systems are up and running. If an H-1B individual is hired for the position then there could be a violation of the export control laws, even though that foreign national never actually accesses the controlled technical data.
Additionally, using a foreign national from a non-US subsidiary to develop proprietary, state-of-the-art encryption software technology could violate the export control laws. Moreover, if foreign national customers (or even foreign employees from a non-US office) visit manufacturing facilities in the United States and observe US-controlled processes and equipment, there could be a violation of export control laws. Therefore, it is very important to ensure that controlled technology and know-how is not inadvertently disclosed to foreign nationals, unless under the proper license.
How to Determine Whether You Need a License
Unless there is a license exception, a deemed export license is typically required to release US technology or know-how to a foreign national if the technology is controlled for export to the home country of the foreign national, or if the individual is or has been employed by a prohibited entity. Therefore, prior to hiring a foreign national who will have access to US technology or know-how or releasing such information to a foreign national employee or visitor, it is important to obtain, at least, the following information about the foreign national to assess whether a license will be required for this individual:
- Determine the person’s home country;
- Review the individual’s résumé to establish the person’s previous employers;
- Compare individuals and employers on the résumé against the Denied Persons List, Entity List and Specially Designated Nationals List (no technology or know-how can be released to an individual named on one of these three lists); and
- Consult with the Commerce Department to determine if an export license is necessary if a former employer of the individual is on these above described lists.
Additionally, if, for example, a foreign national will be visiting offices or meeting with employees, then a company should consider the following points in order to protect it from inadvertently violating export control laws:
- Will the foreign national’s visit be supervised?
- What type of computer will the foreign national be using? Determine the MTOPS (million theoretical operations per second) of the computer to determine whether the computer is controlled for export.
- What software will the foreign national be using?
- Does the software contain encryption?
- What is the level of encryption and what is the purpose of the encryption?
- Is the foreign national’s use of any encryption software restricted to internal company use? (There are special rules relating to a foreign national’s use of encryption software for internal company use.)
- What technical data is stored on the computer network?
- What technical data is controlled for export that the foreign national might have access to?
- What areas will the foreign national have access to? Do these areas have any controlled information? Is this information secured to prevent unauthorized access?
- Will the foreign national be speaking with employees?
- What subjects will the foreign national be addressing?
- Is it possible that an employee may relay controlled technology to the foreign national?
If the foreign national potentially will have any access (even unauthorized) to any information that is controlled an export license may be necessary to allow the individual site access.
The deemed export rule is a broad rule covering a wide variety of technologies and industries. In today’s global economy, deemed exports may occur with great ease and frequency. Many companies may not even know that their technology is controlled under the export control laws. Further, companies often do not realize that they are exporting their technology, even though there is no physical shipment of goods. Faced with issues discussed above, it is important for companies to launch effective initiatives to ensure that the proper licensing procedures are in place for compliance with the export control laws.
The RACE TO TOP COMMONER CORE policies during OBAMA was a re-write of US public education laws and policing ending the emphasis of education funding to lift our 99% US WE THE PEOPLE----and it created the structures needed to PRETEND global 1% and their 2% of foreign students were FOREIGN NATIONALS able to receive equal access to our US universities----when in fact those laws recognized those global 1% and their 2% as GLOBAL CITIZENS while our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens HAD NO US RIGHTS AS CITIZENS to equal opportunity and access public education.
This is why RACE TO TOP COMMONER CORE is building structures taking our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE to third world vocational tracking job training as exists overseas ---killing our equal opportunity and access to REAL broad arts and humanities public education needed to be leaders and CITIZENS. GLOBAL CITIZENS have the global 1% and their 2% as CITIZENS WITH RIGHTS----while US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES see NO US CITIZENS.
Who supported CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA KNOWING that these goals of ending our US status as citizens would be the goal? All those global banking 1% national NGOs pretending to be LABOR AND JUSTICE helping our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE. Now of course they are PRETENDING to be helping those global 99% of new immigrant workers making them believe they are working to become US CITIZENS with rights and quality of life.
WE NEED TO GET RID OF THOSE DASTARDLY 5% GLOBAL BANKING POLS AND PLAYERS AS LEADERS OF ALL OUR US LABOR AND JUSTICE ORGANIZATIONS---FIGHT FOR REBUILDING OUR LOCAL, DOMESTIC ECONOMIES IN EACH COMMUNITY.
Being Foreign on the U.S. Academic Market
International graduate students are faced with an added challenge on the U.S. job market -- get a job or go home -- but it's possible to turn their foreignness to their advantage, Christopher Garland writes.
November 7, 2014
About this time last year, I celebrated my seventh year of living in the United States. To be clear, “celebrated” is probably much too generous a term for that particular moment, in part because it was also the fifth year of my Ph.D. and my first year on the job market. As much as I have come to think of the United States as my permanent residence, I was facing a reality that I preferred to ignore if at all possible. I was a Ph.D. student, in English, in 2013. While I had attempted to tick all the boxes that I could in order to be the best possible candidate, the statistics weren’t exactly encouraging. And if I didn’t get a permanent position at an institution of higher education, I was going to have to leave this country which, right or wrong, I have come to think of as my own.
In that milieu of pressure and determination to find a job, I wrote an article about the “job search and the foreign dilemma.” It was about those of us who came to the United States to engage in study and chase a very particular strand of the American Dream: the tenure-track job. In one section of the article, I wrote about the kinship I felt with other “aliens” — from South Africa, the Bahamas, Holland, Germany, Denmark, India — and in particular those of us trying to find life on that increasingly barren planet, the humanities. After the article was published, I received emails from numerous foreign graduate students in various disciplines at universities around the country, and we commiserated and shared advice and wondered about our collective career fates. Most of all, we talked about staying here and how much we’d invested in that outcome.
What else has happened between now and then? Red-eye nights of revising cover letters and rereading job advertisements; mock interviews with professors who played the parts of people we didn’t yet know; maxed-out credit cards due to an underestimation of the job search costs (the financial burden of Interfolio and elite postdoc application materials has rapid growth); a slow boil of anxiety in the stomach when checking my phone for calls, emails, and voicemails; an unhealthy interest in the slightest changes to the Academic Job Wiki; and of course, that one night, a few months into the process, when I woke up sweating with only bad outcomes rattling around in my head.
Where I lived, the weather was out of whack, giving us dense little shards of summer in the midst of a winter that was especially cold for nearly everyone around the country. I knew that I had caught the same virus that had sickened a half dozen of my students, but I blamed my illness instead on the upcoming Modern Language Association (MLA) conference in Chicago. I’d read so much about the conference that I’d even started dreaming about it, turning up in my sleep as some kind of heavy, weirdly shaped blanket I couldn’t throw off.
Of course, my American brethren have no doubt suffered their share of job market traumas, but there’s a clear distinction. International graduate students on the job market who’ve made the United States their home bear an added burden: get a job, or go home.
In saying this, I do not mean to too broadly generalize the international graduate student. Bright minds from all over the world come here with the intention of returning to the countries of their birth to continue their teaching and research. This is an understandably popular route, but many of the people with whom I connected after writing my original article made clear that with each passing year in the United States returning “home” became less of a goal and more of a disappointing Plan B.
While we have been attempting to settle in, staying within the bounds of our respective J-1 and F-1 visas (working only for the university and keeping “in status” by renewing the relevant documents), keeping in contact with friends and family on the other side of the world, there was always the thought of, quite simply, “Where in the world will I end up?” For better or worse, the next year could settle that for you.
In the end, for me, I got a job. And one of the reasons I got a job, I believe, is that I took time to think about how “being foreign” shaped my teaching and research in this country. Of course, the experiences of “aliens” in the U.S. are wildly different, and I know that being a New Zealander of European descent with English as my first language helped my transition into this country in many, many ways.
For one, my experience with the Department of Homeland Security hasn’t been hampered by stereotypes about my birth country and its citizens -- I’ve faced less red tape than others. Also, unlike some of my foreign peers, my “Kiwi” accent is more of a point of curiosity than a reason to question my fluency in English (as was the case for one friend whose first language is English).
Moreover, I believe it directly aided in the minutiae of the job search. New Zealand is on many travelers' bucket lists, so it provided a conversation piece during those unavoidable, potentially awkward moments on the campus visit: for example, that lengthy drive with a graduate student from the airport to the hotel, or that very long breakfast with a senior professor. Admittedly, I’ve lived in the United States long enough that talking specifically about my “other” home in the South Pacific is sometimes strange. But as a foreigner there’s still culture shock that, while somewhat diminished today, informs the way that I approach both the classroom and my own writing.
Thus, in various documents for the job search -- specifically, the cover letter and teaching philosophy -- I argued that an instructor’s foreign identity offers a valuable and compelling avenue for teaching and learning in the U.S. university classroom. The foreign teacher is a conduit to a world outside the American educational experience, synthesizing his or her own background in classrooms abroad with a distinctive set of pedagogical approaches influenced by the U.S. tertiary system. This is just part of what we foreigners can bring to our students. If I were to offer advice, this would be a starting point: you should embrace being an alien. Think about how that makes you different, how it works as a point of tension that can invigorate your teaching and research.
There are other, less positive realities that foreigners on the U.S. academic job market will face. For example, there are postdoctoral fellowships -- generous postdocs at prestigious universities with a strong commitment to cosmopolitan education -- that exclude those who aren’t American citizens or permanent residents. You’ll see those, but it’s definitely not worth worrying about.
Also, some job advertisements will state that they will only employ U.S. citizens or those who are able to work legally in this country. I’d advise you to email the contact person listed in the job ad to clarify what that means; for one of the jobs I applied for last year, it turned out that it was meant to include the fact that they will sponsor successful candidates with the appropriate visas. Some schools will state that they don’t sponsor visas for foreign nationals; don’t worry about it and move on to the next application.
Another thing: as I mentioned before, a large-scale job search can be expensive. Unlike our native-born compatriots, loans just aren’t readily available to be able to cover those extra costs. So you’ve got to be ready for that. But, for the most part, it’s good to be foreign on the job market. You’ve got a story to tell about how and why you come to this country; you’ve got the opportunity to add diversity to the faculty at any given university; you’ve got the confidence of having made a life in another country.
My first day on campus for my new job, I had my required meeting at the international center. I had to make sure I had all the appropriate paperwork in order as the stakes were higher now than they’re ever been. On getting there, I sat down next to a guy in his early to mid-20s wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the school’s nickname.
He was flipping his passport around in his hand; the cover was adorned with both the insignia of a far-away monarch and the specific local iconography of a distant, former European colony. We were both hoping to see someone who would try to help us through the next stage: the opportunity to stay at this mid-sized regional university in the American South. In the center’s reception area, the chatter of those with many different accents filled the air; however, my neighbor wasn’t talking much. He told me he was a new graduate teaching assistant, so it was easy for me to wonder if this was his first time getting those valuable signatures that would allow him to stay in the United States.
I didn’t ask that question, but I did notice on the side table next to him there was a small stack of familiar, newly printed documents. Issued by the Department of Homeland Security, these stapled-together pages are a throwback to a time when the physical trumped the digital, which, as of August 2014, was still the case with the DHS. (Another thing we foreigners know: If you don’t have the papers in your hand, forget about passing through the borders, let alone getting or keeping the authorization to work and/or study in the country.)
He seemed nervous, understandably, because moving across the globe to study is no small thing.
And I couldn’t tell him that it would always go smoothly (it didn’t for me), or that he wouldn't question his decision (at times I did). But if it all comes together, he won’t regret the journey.
While the OPEN BORDERS ----OUR REVOLUTION ONE WORLD for only the global 1% crowd work to DUPE the US left social progressive 99%-----below we see the same thing being done by global banking 1% BUSH/TRUMP neo-conservatives duping their right wing 99%.
Here is a media political think tank calling itself FEDERALIST trying to protect TRUMP making it appear TRUMP is a real US nationalist fighting for our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE and their sovereign rights as CITIZENS----when this media outlet KNOWS TRUMP is a ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE global 1% and their 2% as GLOBAL CITIZENS MOVING FORWARD policies making US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES into zones where 99% of US CITIZENS and our global 99% of new immigrants are considered a FOREIGN NATIONAL.
Global banking 1% and OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS did this same thing last century installing a HITLER----a MUSSOLINI-----a FRANCO-------a STALIN------a MAO all sold to their 99% of citizens as NATIONALISTS. Each of these war-mongerers where killing those nations' national sovereignty to open those nations to sacking and looting and re-writing of all sovereign laws and rebuilding societal structures---WORKING FOR THESE SAME GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS.
Who was a NATIONALIST FASCIST? CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA----NOW TRUMP.
Moving foreign nationals into a sovereign nation to seize control to global corporations.........NATIONALIST FASCISM.
'Among professional pundits, the argument is more refined but more or less the same: Trump is a nationalist ................. Therefore, Trump is a fascist'.
'THE LEFT' as this global banking 1% media outlet knows are FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING 1% CLINTON NEO-LIBERALS. So, this is a media group THE FEDERALIST that should be discussing all of what we do as regards this attack on US national sovereignty -----but they are 5% global banking players hiding the real goals of MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD for only the global 1%.
Stop Calling Donald Trump A Fascist, Because He’s Not One
The Left’s favorite epithet for Donald Trump is 'fascist.' The problem is, the term simply doesn’t apply. They should stop using it.
By John Daniel Davidson
February 8, 2017
In case you haven’t noticed, our president is a fascist. So are his supporters and advisors. If you don’t agree Trump is a fascist, you’re a fascist. If you voted for Trump, for whatever reason, and don’t regret it now, you’re a fascist. If you’re not sure whether Trump is a fascist, and refuse to demonstrate against his fascist administration, you’re a fascist.
That’s what the Left is saying, anyway. One can hardly read progressive commentators (or commenters) without stumbling over the word. Over the weekend, a column I wrote for The Guardian ran under the headline, “Trump is no fascist. He is a champion for the forgotten millions.” Of course, I didn’t write the headline, and the piece itself is more concerned with explaining how Trump’s election was a revolt against our political elites.
But the response was telling. Many readers insisted that yes, Trump is indeed a fascist and anyone who can’t see that is a fool—or worse. Among professional pundits, the argument is more refined but more or less the same: Trump is a nationalist who’s obsessed with national security, he has disdain for the media, he’s sexist, bullish on law and order, wants to build up the military and tighten immigration laws. Therefore, Trump is a fascist.
Sorry, but none of that makes Trump a fascist. Progressives are no doubt thinking of Hitler and Mussolini, but in fact they’re using “fascist” in the way George Orwell described it in “The Politics of the English Language,” merely to signify “something not desirable.”
Fascism Actually Means Something
But fascism isn’t just an abstract word that can stand in for anything you dislike. The term has an infamous history that all Americans should know about, especially since so many of us are so fond of throwing the term around lately.
As a political movement, fascism in Europe had distinct characteristics—expansionist nationalism, extreme militarism, a conception of the National Socialist as a “new man” for whom politics is above all a spiritual struggle. They took the trappings of militarism seriously, to the point that fascist leaders would typically dress in military uniforms, as would their rank and file.
When they weren’t in power, fascists would organize into paramilitary units—complete with uniforms, like Hitler’s brownshirts and Mussolini’s blackshirts—and disrupt the authority of the government. “We do not enter parliament to use parliamentary methods,” wrote Joseph Goebbels in a 1929 propaganda pamphlet. Indeed, after the Nazis gained 95 seats in the 1930 elections, they would routinely disrupt proceedings in the German Reichstag by shouting down speakers, throwing debris from balconies, and generally raising hell. They held only 107 of 577 seats, but they were determined to undermine democracy in Germany—and they did.
Once in power, fascists overwhelmed democratic institutions and consolidated the power of the state in the party. A year after the 1922 March on Rome that put Mussolini in power, he passed the Acerbo Law, which guaranteed a two-thirds parliamentary majority to the party that managed to secure 25 percent of the vote. The law effectively ensured Mussolini could rule as a dictator. Two years later, public meetings of opposition parties were banned, and eventually all rival political parties and newspapers were banned in Italy.
In 1932, Mussolini wrote an entry on the definition of fascism for the Italian Encyclopedia: “The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State.”
Misusing ‘Fascist’ Corrupts Our Language
Trump shares none of these characteristics. He might be a bully, a cynic, and a misogynist. His statement to Bill O’Reilly over the weekend drawing a moral equivalency between the United State and Russia was disgraceful and idiotic. His casual comment about destroying the career of a Texas state senator who wants to reform civil-asset forfeiture laws was thuggish and disturbing. He incessant tweeting is irritating and foolish and needs to stop.
But Trump’s not a fascist, and nothing he’s done since taking office suggests he’s setting America on the path to a fascist dictatorship.
The corruption of “fascist” is but one example of the pernicious habit of sloppy thinking that’s plaguing our public life. Dropping the term from our political discourse when it doesn’t apply is an important step, but it should be just the beginning. Words are ideas, after all, and ideas have consequences. The mishandling of “fascist” and other such terms will, in time, cause us to lose grip of their meaning, which would be dangerous.
In the meantime, it should suffice to stop calling Trump a fascist and recognize, as Orwell did, “that the present political chaos is connected with the decay of language, and that one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end.”
We discussed in DETAIL why Trump's MADE IN AMERICA is simply MADE IN CHINA-----the pretense that MOVING FORWARD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES building global corporate campuses and global factories leads to anything having to do with US AND FEDERAL GOVERNANCE----US CONSTITUTION----US BILL OF RIGHTS---US COURTS---US LEGISLATION----US ELECTIONS ----is LYING.
So, supposedly we have a battle between Clinton neo-liberals morphing into far-right wing extreme wealth extreme poverty MARXISM----and of course Trump is that LIBERATOR----LIBERTARIAN. This is how global banking 1% sold corporate fascism to our 99% of German citizens as they installed HITLER----that is how it was sold in Italy and Spain under Mussolini and Franco----sold in China and USSR under STALIN/MAO. Same global banking 1% FOREIGN NATIONALISTS sacking and looting sovereign nations.
WHAT WAS A TERM TIED TO US NATIONAL PRIDE-----BEING NATIONALIST USED TO MEAN BEING 'PROTECTIONIST' OF OUR US DOMESTIC ECONOMY-----TODAY, THAT IS CORRUPTED TO MEAN THE OPPOSITE.
For whom does TRUMP work as too CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA? The foreign sovereignty of MALTA----KNIGHTS OF MALTA----- foreign nationals.
Why do people say Trump is a fascist rather than a nationalist?
Professor of History and Political Theory at Oxford Brookes University, author of The Nature of Fascism (Routledge), A Fascist Century (Palgrave Macmillan) and more. @oxford_brookes
Because they’re ignorant of the word fascism, simple as that. Fascism is a revolutionary form of nationalism, and Trump is absolutely not a revolutionary. He’s a dynamic conservative who wants to get rid of socialism just like Thatcher did in Britain in the 1980s, who wants to liberate the ruling elites from the shackles of any sort of socialism or redistribution or care for the environment or care for the poor, and wants to keep America American. This isn’t fascism, it’s radical right-wing populism in alliance with Republican conservatism.
The immigration ban is not a fascist policy, either. That’s called racism, and racism doesn’t have to be fascist. You can have male-chauvinist working-class fascists, you can have socialist-party anti-immigration – trade unions have a long history of being anti-immigration because it takes away jobs. The relationship between fascism and racism is complex – Italian fascism under Mussolini was not racist until the very end.
It’s no surprise that the word fascist is being used inaccurately to describe him. I’ve spent 30 years defining it and it is misused constantly. Thatcher was called a fascist, Putin is called a fascist – any authoritarian you don’t agree with can be called a fascist but that’s using it as an expletive rather than as a technical description. The reason people are using the word fascist about Trump is simply that it’s a handy insult.
There are no fascist regimes in the world right now. There are one or two fascist movements – Golden Dawn in Greece is one – and there are lots of individual fascists elsewhere but not enough of them to create a dynamic populist movement. Fascism still exists but there’s no fascist regime in the world, and there only ever were two anyway – the Fascist and Nazi states.
“The reason people are using the word fascist about Trump is simply that it’s a handy insult.”Comparing Trump to Hitler is equally wrong-headed. There’s absolutely no connection between the two, and all it does is show the urge to make sense of the world by dividing it up simplistically into good and bad, right and wrong, evil and good. Why compare him to Hitler? We have gutter press all over the world who like headlines, and cartoonists and social commentators who are battling for attention. In a world of sound bites and Twitter, a word like “fascist” or “Nazi” or “Hitler” provokes emotion.
If we’re trying to understand what’s going on, however, to call Putin or Assad or ISIS or Trump fascist is absolutely meaningless because it puts into the same box extraordinarily different things. We should forget about labels and concentrate instead on the uniqueness of events and phenomena which are absolutely new and unique and whose long-term outcome we cannot yet predict.
“To call Putin or Assad or ISIS or Trump fascist is absolutely meaningless because it puts into the same box extraordinarily different things.” We should just try to describe things as they are. Trump is a maverick politician in America who’s got in on a Republican ticket and has some links with that party but is also loathed by some of its members. He is by definition unclassifiable, and we should just watch him. Similarly Putin is not a fascist, he’s abusing a democratic Russian system in order to acquire presidential power and “make Russia great”. He’s not a fascist, he’s just a highly nationalistic politician.
This is about the way words get devalued. If we want to go around the world labelling things and carrying banners with slogans on then call him a fascist. But if we want to understand the world then we throw away our banners and our slogans and our graffiti, and we try to study and read and listen and develop a complicated understanding of the world.
What TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT---TPP does in MOVING FORWARD goals of ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1% here in US is address the ECONOMIC AND TRADE differences in each member nation. This is the GORILLA-IN-THE-ROOM public policy that makes any nation SOVEREIGN. CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA worked with global 1% in writing TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT to do just that---TRUMP is simply advancing these same policies tied to all FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES overseas and inside US.
That is why our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE both right wing and left wing have been shouting against TPP while CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA now TRUMP pretending to be right wing Republican ---left wing Democrat simply keep MOVING these WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION policies forward.
If Chinese or Singapore FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES allow multi-national corporations and the global 1% into their nations' regions to operate under global laws then so too will US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES. Chinese and Singaporean 99% working in FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES inside their nations are NOT SOVEREIGN CHINESE OR SINGAPOREAN CITIZENS------only those global 1% CHINESE AND SINGAPOREANS are GLOBAL CITIZENS.
When our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE are brutalized and illegally jailed in US cities----when our 99% of WE THE PEOPLE watch as all our retirements, health savings accounts, 401Ks, homes are lost to deliberate frauds and government corruptions -----this is why-----all these ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE policies kill 99% of US WE THE PEOPLE---whether black, white, or brown---AND makes sure those global 99% new immigrants NEVER get the chance to be REAL US CITIZENS.
Below we see that 5% ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT FREEMASON/GREEK religious leader pretending all these policies were PRE-DETERMINED BY GOD and will lead to ETERNAL PEACE AND PROSPERITY-----well, yes if you are an OLD WORLD KING AND QUEEN pretending you are GOD.
'God Almighty! He has the power and the wisdom to make utopia a reality!
This is the very message God sent Jesus Christ to proclaim to the world. It is the “gospel”—the good news--that Christ will return with the power of God to bring us universal peace and prosperity'!
THE PHILADELPHIA TRUMPET QUITE THE 5% FREEMASON/GREEK PLAYER PROPAGANDA.
One World Government: Impossible—Yet Inevitable!
Kena Betancur/Getty Images
The Philadelphia Trumpet, in conjunction with the Herbert W. Armstrong College Bible Correspondence Course, presents this brief excursion into the fascinating study of the Bible. Simply turn to and read in your Bible each verse given in answer to the questions. You will be amazed at the new understanding gained from this short study!
From the March 2011 TrumpetFive years after the close of World War ii, Winston Churchill declared in a speech in Copenhagen, “Unless some effective world supergovernment can be brought quickly into action, the proposals for peace and human progress are dark and doubtful.”
In the early 1960s, noted nuclear physicist Edward Teller, who helped develop the hydrogen bomb, warned, “We must work for the establishment of a world authority sustained by moral and physical force—a world government capable of enforcing worldwide law.”
Since then, an unprecedented number of international and regional bodies of all shapes and sizes—political and financial institutions, aid organizations, non-government organizations, judicial institutions—have emerged to play a role in global affairs. Today we have the Nuclear Energy Agency, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the International Chamber of Commerce, the G-8 and G-20, the Commonwealth, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Council of Europe, Greenpeace, Freedom House, Amnesty International, and the list goes on and on and on.
And of course, we have the United Nations. Despite its 60-year track record of malfunction and failure, the UN Commission on Global Governance in 1995 recommended far-reaching changes for the UN, including a system of global taxation, a standing UN army, an international criminal court, expanded authority for the secretary-general and the formation of a world parliament, among other things. Only the court was created—in 1998.
After World War ii, the call went out from many highly esteemed people for a world government to be set up to solve mankind’s problems. Serious-minded scientists and world leaders know that the solution to world ills and the establishment of world peace is possible only if all nations are brought together under a supreme, all-powerful, world-ruling government!
We have created many such institutions. Yet look at this world. International coalitions and organizations and government have not solved our problems. In fact, in many instances they have made problems worse.
Doesn’t it make you wonder …
Is World Government Possible?“World government is still a long way off,” declared A. F. K. Organski in the book World Politics. “The creation of a world government through the voluntary agreement of existing nations is so unlikely that we can say flatly that it will never happen” (emphasis ours throughout).
Hans J. Morgenthau, in his book Politics Among Nations, asserted: “There is no shirking the conclusion that international peace cannot be permanent without a world state, and that a world state cannot be established under the present moral, social and political conditions of the world.”
What a paradox! World leaders realize that man’s most urgent need is world government. Yet others admit that such a government is a total impossibility under present world conditions!
Viewing the history of mankind, anyone can plainly see that men have utterly failed to bring about world peace and prosperity. Fear, hatred, disease, poverty, oppression and injustice have been rampant throughout history.
What about it? Is world government impossible—an idle pipe dream of unrealistic optimists? Is the idea of a soon-coming utopia on Earth merely an absurd myth?
If our only hope lies in the efforts of men, then a utopia is not possible, and humanity is doomed!
How World Government Will ComePeople today fail to recognize any power other than their own that could bring about a literal utopia on this war-torn, problem-filled Earth.
What great power can, and will, do this?
God Almighty! He has the power and the wisdom to make utopia a reality!
This is the very message God sent Jesus Christ to proclaim to the world. It is the “gospel”—the good news--that Christ will return with the power of God to bring us universal peace and prosperity!
Few today understand that God has allotted mankind 6,000 years in which to rule itself. During this time, God has kept hands off the affairs of men. He has allowed man to pursue the course that seems right to him (Proverbs 16:25). God has given man the opportunity to prove, by experience, the basic inadequacies of any form of human government.
God is allowing humanity to prove to itself that nohuman form of government can bring world peace!
Your Bible shows a literal utopia is ahead! It will be a time of spiritual and physical rejuvenation—1,000 years of boundless peace and prosperity! Let’s take a look into the future through the prophecies of the Bible, so you can know what that wonderful World Tomorrow will be like!
1. How will Christ need to begin His rule when He returns to Earth? Revelation 19:11-16.
comment: At His return, Christ will have to powerfully subdue the world and force mankind to submit to His rule. As verse 15 mentions, He will use a “rod of iron,” symbolizing absolute authority. He will rule with power, not hesitating to use it when necessary. A world that has been deceived and influenced by an invisible devil (Revelation 12:9) must be ruled rigidly until it learns the positive fruits of living God’s way!
Christ’s government will begin at Jerusalem, where His headquarters will be located (Jeremiah 3:17). As His rule spreads over the whole Earth, all rebellious nations will be brought into line.
2. How will Christ deal with those nations that refuse to come to Jerusalem to worship God the way He commands? Zechariah 14:16-19.
comment: It is true that God will rule with power and authority, but it is only human rebellion that necessitates harshness. God is not a stern, cruel monster as some have falsely implied. God wants man to be really happy! But God knows that the only way to lasting happiness is obedience to His laws!
Gradually, as men obey God’s laws, they will wake up to the wisdom and justice of God’s rule and will submit gladly to His authority. A “rod of iron” will no longer be necessary.
God’s System for ReeducationDuring the Millennium, God will teach mankind the laws that produce happiness. He will give each individual the choice, after learning His laws and seeing the happiness they produce, of whether to obey God’s laws or not. The vast majority of mankind will see God’s way is truly best and will voluntarily choose to obey Him.
But before men can really choose, they must clearly see the alternatives. They must be reeducated so they can see through old prejudices and discern true values.
1. In addition to ruling as supreme King over all nations, will Christ also be the supreme Educator? Isaiah 2:3; Psalm 25:8-10.
comment: Christ will unite these two functions in Himself. In God’s pattern for world rule, religion and government are not separate. They will be consolidated and harmonized in the World Tomorrow!
2. Who else will rule and teach with Christ in the World Tomorrow? Revelation 2:26; 5:10.
comment: The resurrected Christians mentioned in Revelation 5:10 are to be “priests” as well as kings, and one of the true functions of a priest is to teach (e.g. Leviticus 10:10-11; Deuteronomy 24:8; 33:10).
When God intervenes in human affairs, it will not be left up to the people to vote in their own rulers or choose their own teachers. In the World Tomorrow God will appoint His resurrected saints to be the rulers and educators. They will teach the people all of God’s laws and statutes, which are the way to peace, prosperity and happiness!
3. Will the resurrected saints be able to appear to humans at will? Isaiah 30:20-21. What will they do? Verse 21.
comment: In the World Tomorrow, those now qualifying to rule under Christ will be ever present and ready to speak or act, both to teach and to prevent potential criminal action.
Because they will be composed of spirit, they will be able to come and go as necessary and to pass through walls or simply disappear, just as Christ was able to do after His resurrection (John 20:19, 25-27; Luke 24:31).
Results of Universal Education1. Will the whole world come to know God’s truth? Habakkuk 2:14; Jeremiah 31:34.
2. Will universal knowledge and obedience to God’s way lead to universal peace? Isaiah 11:9.
comment: God will soon halt this world’s mad plunge toward nuclear cosmocide. He will send Jesus Christ to intervene in world affairs and put down all rebellion. Then He and His saints will begin teaching the nations God’s truth and His laws—His ways that bring blessings, prosperity, peace and happiness.
The utopian paradise which mankind has always longed for will finally be ushered in. Men will at long last wake up! They will finally see through the veil of prejudices that have prevented them from following the way that would bring the fulfillment of their true desires.
The millennial world will be filled with happy people guided, helped, protected and ruled by Christ and the saints. And all human beings will be called by God to inherit everlasting life in supreme happiness and thrilling joy!
What a fabulous world that will be!
Although a utopian paradise is indeed impossible by the hands of men—none of this world’s governments can bring us true peace, prosperity and abundance—your Bible shows the great GOD of heaven and Earth can and WILL PRODUCE utopia on Earth … SOON!
May God speed that glorious day!
We will end this week's discussion on how vital political terms like US NATIONALISM-----FOREIGN NATIONAL RIGHTS INSIDE US -----GLOBAL CITIZEN-----are being re-written here in the US to conform to FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE policies overseas------how that is not good for our 99% US WE THE PEOPLE or our 99% of global new immigrants.
Below we see just as we discuss over and again---our US CONSTITUTION for 300 years already have strong protections for those new immigrants coming to America. While our US citizens see immigrants illegally crossing the border as different than new immigrants hired by corporations and brought to US to work----these same US CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS of foreign nationals inside America has always protected our new immigrants to US.
So, why did we need a PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDER by OBAMA named DACA?
DACA is simply that UNITED NATIONS WORLD BANK ONE WORLD policy standardizing what FOREIGN NATIONAL means in FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES this being in US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES. Why do we need it if our US CONSTITUTION already provides those rights and protections----for all other than VOTING IN ELECTIONS and RUNNING FOR FEDERAL OFFICE IN US?
There we have it! If global 1% and their 2% will be those FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL politicians they will need not only to be legally allowed to run for FEDERAL office but to have those 99% of new immigrants voting for them.
Why is this being done NOW and not last century? Because all last century the US had a DOMESTIC ECONOMY as the dominate force with corporations primarily AMERICAN NATIONAL. They did not need or want 99% of immigrants ----largely agriculture and domestic employment.
What our 99% new immigrants LOSE with DACA in coming to US as workers is that pathway to US CITIZENSHIP because MOVING FORWARD ends our US national sovereignty.
Yes, illegal aliens have constitutional rights
By Raoul Lowery Contreras - 09/29/15 12:30 PM EDT
© Getty Images
These words, from Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution rank along with the Constitution's Bill of Rights as — in these precincts — the most important in world and American history:
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The following words do not rank well in American history, jurisprudence or in truth: "(Illegal aliens) do not have legal rights." Glenn Beck declared this on CNN in February 2007.He is not alone; popular radio talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity agree with Beck to one degree or another. For example, Ingraham — a lawyer — says that Supreme Court Justice William Brennan in Plyler v. Doe (1982) offhandedly commented that illegals had rights because they were "persons," so no one should take Brennan seriously or his official declaration of legal rights of illegal aliens.
The critics all claim that undocumented workers or immigrants or migrants — whichever label is the flavor of the day — don't have legal rights because they are lawbreakers by entering the country illegally and owe no loyalty to the United States. They claim that only U.S. citizens (natural born or naturalized) are protected by the Constitution. The critics are not only wrong — they are really, truly and sincerely wrong.
The U.S. Supreme Court settled the issue well over a century ago. But even before the court laid the issue to rest, a principal author of the Constitution, James Madison, the fourth president of the United States, wrote: "that as they [aliens], owe, on the one hand, a temporary obedience, they are entitled, in return, to their [constitutional] protection and advantage."
More recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) that "due process" of the 14th Amendment applies to all aliens in the United States whose presence maybe or is "unlawful, involuntary or transitory."
Twenty years before Zadvydas, the Supreme Court ruled that the state of Texas could not enforce a state law that prohibited illegally present children from attending grade schools, as all other Texas children were required to attend.
The court ruled in Plyler that:
The illegal aliens who are ... challenging the state may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection clause which provides that no state shall 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' Whatever his status under immigration laws, an alien is a 'person' in any ordinary sense of the term ... the undocumented status of these children does not establish a sufficient rational basis for denying benefits that the state affords other residents.
A decade before Plyler, the court ruled in Almeida-Sanchez v. United States (1973) that all criminal charge-related elements of the Constitution's amendments (the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and the 14th) such as search and seizure, self-incrimination, trial by jury and due process, protect non-citizens, legally or illegally present.
Three key Supreme Court decisions in 1886, 1896 and 1903 laid the 14th Amendment basis for the consistent ruling of the court that aliens, legal and illegal, have constitutional protection in criminal and certain civil affairs in the justice system.
In Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886), the court ruled that:
Though the law itself be fair on its face, and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and unequal hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons of similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution [the 14th Amendment].
In Wong Win v. United States (1896), the court ruled that:
It must be concluded that all persons within the territory of the United States are entitled to the protection by those amendments [Fifth and Sixth] and that even aliens shall not be held to answer for a capital or other infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury, nor deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.
In summary, the entire case of illegal aliens being covered by and protected by the Constitution has been settled law for 129 years and rests on one word: "person." It is the word "person" that connects the dots of "due process" and "equal protection" in the 14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution and it is those five words that make the Constitution of the United States and its 14th amendment the most important political document since the Magna Carta in all world history.
"Aliens," legal and illegal, have the full panoply of constitutional protections American citizens have with three exceptions: voting, some government jobs and gun ownership (and that is now in doubt) — Glenn Beck and others notwithstanding.