Infowars: Russia Not Obliged to Notify West of War Games – Ministry
en.rian.ru
April 1, 2013Russia was not obligated to notify Western countries beforehand of its recent snap military exercises, a top Russian Defense Ministry official said Monday.
“The mechanism of checks today is such that we only need to notify Western countries when we hold planned events,” Sergei Ryzhkov, the chief of the ministry’s treaty implementation department, told journalists.
“If exercises occur suddenly, we may notify them [other countries] only when the exercises begin,” Ryzhkov said.
Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered snap drills on Thursday, as concerns persist over the combat readiness of the armed forces in Russia.
The Black Sea exercise, which ended on Sunday, involved up to 7,000 military personnel, including rapid deployment, airborne and special task forces, more than 30 warships, about 250 armored vehicles, up to 20 pieces of artillery and 20 aircraft.
The unscheduled exercise was the second in the span of two months and followed a major shake-up at the top of a military establishment demoralized by persistent evidence of rampant corruption.
Ryzhkov added that in line with the 2011 Vienna Document on Confidence- and Security-Building Measures, other countries should be notified of war games only when at least 9,000 troops participate in the drills.
Furthermore, when the number of troops taking part in the drills equals or exceeds 13,000, such exercises should be subject to foreign observation, he said.
Poor Richard's News: Here we go: NFL begins caving to pressure, considers rule changes
Well, we could see this coming a mile away. Under pressure from the media, the government and other liberal groups, the NFL is changing.
From Slam Sports:
A rule proposed by the NFL’s competition committee would make it a foul for a ball carrier to smash into a defender with the crown of his helmet in open space.
It would be the first rule in American football history limiting a runner’s contact with a defender, outside of egregious acts such as punching a tackler, or grabbing his facemask while stiff-arming.
Owners vote next Wednesday at the league’s annual meeting in Phoenix on whether to approve this and five other proposed new rules, announced Thursday by the competition committee on a conference call with NFL writers.
When liberals set their minds to change something, they change it, no matter how long it takes. In the case of the NFL, it didn’t take all that long.
I’ve heard people say that this (and things like it) aren’t political issues. I think that notion couldn’t be more naive. I will agree that it shouldn’t be political, but when you live in a world where literally everything is affected by big government, then everything is, by definition, political.
I’ve heard liberals complain about football for years: “It’s despicable that they get paid way more than teachers!” or “It’s no better than watching gladiators kill each other!”, etc. But the problem for them was always that football (primarily the NFL but college too in recent years) was—and is— the most popular thing in America. Period. The overwhelming majority of Americans love the game along with its hard hits and rock star salaries.
Enter big government. Lawsuits and the threat of them slowly began leading to regulations while anecdotes of severely injured players began making the rounds on the TV networks. Before you know it, a crisis and a vacuum for change had been created. It’s the same old drill.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want NFL players to get hurt. Truly. I love the game of football and it’s always a horrible sight to see a player stay down for any reason. What’s worse, for years we didn’t know how bad the effects of repeated blows to the head, specifically concussions, were. But with increasing technology, we’re changing that. Things are getting better. Furthermore, it’s not like the game of football has ever been billed as perfectly safe. Players know the risks and are willing to take a chance with their health in order to receive the enormous payoff associated with playing and winning. It’s like anything else in life, with great risk comes great reward.
My thoughts on this are not meant to sound insensitive, rather, level-headed (pardon the pun). I say let adults make their own decisions. If they want to play a game that puts their bodies at risk, who is the government to stop them. And yes, I recognize that this rule change didn’t come from the government, but I can assure you that it was prompted by it.
I think Emmitt Smith summed it up best:
“You’ve absolutely lost your mind.’’
Government plans to give consumers more copyright freedom
Government plans to give consumers more copyright freedom
http://www.pressat.co.uk/releases/government-plans-to-give-consumers-more-copyright-freedom-96fe7fa42c70d0409c27785ed653b569/
Obesity in America: To Win, We Have to Lose Government (by ReasonTV)
Can the government make you lose weight? Officials sure think so.
In May 2012, an HBO documentary and a Washington conference, both named “The Weight of the Nation,” made the case for government intervention in your workout, your workplace and your kid’s lunchbox. They argue that lack of individual willpower is not to blame for obesity, and that it will take a serious government overhaul to shrink waistlines on a national scale.
“It’s an access issue. We live in an obesogenic environment,” says Dr. Lisa Santora, chief medical officer of Southern California’s Beach Cities Health District. President Obama agrees. He has already bundled $15 billion in with his healthcare reform bill, and we’ve seen government programs intervening in nutrition time and time again.
So far, the programs haven’t worked out too well.
“The reasearch shows that we haven’t been very good at trying to, through government, control obesity,” says Cal Poly economics professor Michael Marlow. He says that even when the government realizes that their solutions don’t work, they will only try more aggressive regulations that will further impend on your freedom to choose whatever you want on the menu.
Produced by Tracy Oppenheimer. Shot by Paul Detrick, Sharif Matar and Oppenheimer.
About 5.40 minutes.
Go to Reason.tv for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv’s YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.
Mayor Bloomberg’s War on Sugar (Walter Olson) (by catoinstitutevideo)
http://www.cato.org/people/walter-olson
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has a long history of getting into the diets - and even bloodwork - of New York residents. Cato Institute senior fellow Walter Olson comments.
Video produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg.
CON Job: How A VA Law Enriches Established Businesses by Limiting Your Medical Options - Press Conf. (by InstituteForJustice)
http://www.ij.org/vacon
Ordinarily, if you want to start a new business or offer a new service there is a simple test to find out whether your new business is needed: You open the doors and tell the world. If people need your business, you will have customers. If they don’t, you won’t. That experience—of learning what people need and how new types of services can fit in—is familiar to anyone who has ever been an entrepreneur. Indeed, it is familiar to anyone who has ever been a customer.
It is also an experience that the state of Virginia turns entirely on its head for people who want to offer new healthcare services. If you want to offer new healthcare services, even something as routine as opening a private clinic, you have to obtain special permission from the state government. And permission is not easy to come by: Would-be service providers have to persuade state officials that their new service is “necessary”—and they have to do so in a process that verges on full-blown litigation in which existing businesses (their would-be competitors) are allowed to oppose them. Not surprisingly, this process can be incredibly expensive, and it frequently results in new services being forbidden to operate at all.
To be clear, this requirement (called a certificate-of-need or CON program) has nothing to do with public health or safety. Separate state and federal laws govern who is allowed to practice medicine and what kind of medical procedures are or are not permitted. Virginia’s CON program only regulates whether someone is allowed to open a new office or purchase new equipment; it is explicitly designed to make sure new services are not allowed to take customers away from established healthcare services.
In short, Virginia’s CON program is nothing but a government permission slip to compete. It ensures that more money flows into the pockets of established, politically connected businesses, and it accomplishes this by trampling entrepreneurs’ economic liberty and reducing Virginians’ choices for medical care.
But patients and doctors—not state officials—are in the best position to decide what healthcare services are needed. That is why Colon Health Centers of America, headed by Dr. Mark Baumel, MD, and Washington Imaging Associates Maryland, LLC, headed by Dr. Mark Monteferrante, MD, have joined forces with the Institute for Justice to challenge Virginia’s protectionist CON program. The Constitution protects individuals’ right to earn an honest living free from unreasonable government interference, and it prevents states from putting up unnecessary barriers to interstate commerce. The Virginia CON program does both, and that is why the federal courts should strike it down.
Lt. Col. Terry Lakin Discusses Obama’s Eligibility and His New Book Officer’s Oath (by BirtherReportDotCom)
John Stossel - Hate Speech Or Free Speech? (by LibertyPen)
Accusations of hate speech can be an effective politically correct pretense to either stifle free speech or to defend the undependable. Geert Wilders
The State of Freedom in America (by RonPaulFriends2)
Jan 24, 2012 - The Judge reviews the state of freedom in America on the eve of the State of the Union
Insert the word “force”, and here we are.
Sad thing. Your called raciest if you bring this up.
(via nomosshere)
Title:
Fast and Furious: Case Files on Brian Terry Murder Have Disappeared.
Source:
Uploaded by NRAVideos on Nov 16, 2011
Cam Edwards talks to Katie Pavlich from Townhall.com - NRA News - November 15, 2011 - http://www.NRANews.com
Title:
Rush Limbaugh - The Democrats Voted For More Rape And Murder By Not Passing Obama’s Jobs Bill.
Source:
Uploaded by MrTimotheus85 on Oct 21, 2011
Rush Limbaugh - The Democrats Voted For More Rape And Murder By Not Passing Obama’s Jobs Bill
Yes, I am one of those libertarians that actually votes. No I don’t believe it’s “submitting” to the State.
Agree 100% percent. Plus if you don’t play the game. How can you change anything?
via @BenjySarlin
Quick to the draw, a campaign slogan nobody wants to be associated with.
I am rolling my eyes!
(via shortformblog)
