Mexico’s archaeology institute downplays theories that the ancient Mayas predicted some sort of apocalypse would occur in 2012, but on Thursday it acknowledged that a second reference to the date exists on a carved fragment found at a southern Mexico ruin site.
Most experts had cited only one surviving reference to the date in Mayan glyphs, a stone tablet from the Tortuguero site in the Gulf coast state of Tabasco.
But the National Institute of Anthropology and History said in a statement that there is in fact another apparent reference to the date at the nearby Comalcalco ruin. The inscription is on the carved or molded face of a brick. Comalcalco is unusual among Mayan temples in that it was constructed of bricks.
Arturo Mendez, a spokesman for the institute, said the fragment of inscription had been discovered years ago and has been subject to thorough study. It is not on display and is being kept in storage at the institute.
The "Comalcalco Brick," as the second fragment is known, has been discussed by experts in some online forums. Many still doubt that it is a definite reference to Dec. 21, 2012 or Dec. 23, 2012, the dates cited by proponents of the theory as the possible end of the world.
For example, one will virtually never hear that the Palmer Raids, Prohibition, or American eugenics were thoroughly progressive phenomena. These are sins America itself must atone for. Meanwhile, real or alleged “conservative” misdeeds — say McCarthyism — are always the exclusive fault of conservatives and a sign of the policies they would repeat if given power. The only culpable mistake that liberals make is failing to fight “hard enough” for their principles. Liberals are never responsible for historic misdeeds because they feel no compulsion to defend the inherent goodness of America. Conservatives, meanwhile, not only take the blame for events not of their own making that they often worked the most assiduously against, but find themselves defending liberal misdeeds in order to defend America herself. -- Jonah Goldberg
1) The Trail of Tears (1838): The first Democrat President, Andrew Jackson and his successor Martin Van Buren, herded Indians into camps, tormented them, burned and pillaged their homes and forced them to relocate with minimal supplies. Thousands died along the way.
2) Democrats Cause The Civil War (1860): The pro-slavery faction of the Democrat Party responded to Abraham Lincoln's election by seceding, which led to the Civil War.
3) Formation of the KKK (1865): Along with 5 other Confederate veterans, Democrat Nathan Bedford Forrest created the KKK.
4) 300 Black Americans Murdered (1868): "Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana killed nearly 300 blacks who tried to foil an assault on a Republican newspaper editor."
5) The American Protective League and The Palmer Raids (1919-1921): Under the leadership of Woodrow Wilson, criticizing the government became a crime and a fascist organization, the American Protective League was formed to spy on and even arrest fellow Americans for being insufficiently loyal to the government. More than 100,000 Americans were arrested, with less than 1% of them ever being found guilty of any kind of crime.
6) Democrats Successfully Stop Republicans From Making Lynching A Federal Crime (1922): "The U.S. House adopted Rep. Leonidas Dyer’s (R., Mo.) bill making lynching a federal crime. Filibustering Senate Democrats killed the measure."
7) The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (1932-1972): Contrary to what you may have heard, Democrats in Alabama did not give black Americans syphilis. However, the experimenters did know that subjects of the experiment unknowingly had syphilis and even after it was proven that penicillin could be used to effectively treat the disease in 1947, the experiments continued. As a result, a number of the subjects needlessly infected their loved ones and died, when they could have been cured.
8) Japanese Internment Camps (1942): Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an executive order that led to more than 100,000 Japanese Americans being put into "bleak, remote camps surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards."
9) Alger Hiss Convicted Of Perjury (1950): Hiss, who helped advise FDR at Yalta and was strongly defended by the Left, turned out to be a Soviet spy. He was convicted of perjury in 1950 (Sadly, the statute of limitations on espionage had run out), but was defended by liberals for decades until the Verona papers proved so conclusively that he was guilty that even most his fellow liberals couldn't continue to deny it.
10) The West Virgina Democrat primary is rigged by John F. Kennedy (1960): From an interview with the late, great Robert Novak.
John Hawkins: You also said that without question, John F. Kennedy rigged the West Virginia Democratic primary in (1960), but that the Wall Street Journal killed the story. Do you think that sort of thing is still occurring with great regularity and do you wish the Journal had reported the story when it happened?
Robert Novak: In my opinion, they should have. They sent two reporters down to West Virginia for six weeks and they came back with a carefully documented story on voter fraud in West Virginia, buying votes, and how he beat Humphrey in the primary and therefore got the nomination. But, Ed Kilgore, the President of Dow Jones and publisher of the Wall Street Journal, a very conservative man, said it wasn’t the business of the Wall Street Journal to decide the nominee of the Democratic Party and he killed the story. That story didn’t come out for many, many years — 30-40 years. It was kept secret all that time.
Whether you're currently writing professionally or still looking to break into the field, formal writing courses can help you hone your skills. If you don't have the money or the time for campus-based courses, there are plenty of universities that offer free writing courses online.
Earn the Lowest-Cost college credit from free courses!
Most free courses don't lead to college credit. Education Portal Academy's free courses do!
Here's how it works:
1. Watch free video lessons.
2. Take free quizzes.
3. Pass an exam to earn real college credit.
See the full course list
1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (mit.edu)
Writing and Reading Short Stories
Writing and Reading the Essay
Writing and Reading Poems
MIT offers dozens of free undergraduate and graduate writing courses online through its MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW) initiative. Course topics include everything from writing fiction, poems and essays to analyzing all forms of literature. Lecture notes, videos, suggested reading lists and more will help you to become the writer you've always wanted to be. No registration is required.
2. Utah State University (usu.edu)
Intro to Writing Academic Prose
Intermediate Research Writing
Technology for Professional Writers
Utah State University's Department of English publishes three free courses devoted to the art of writing through the school's OpenCourseWare program. The courses are extensive and may take up to 16 weeks to complete if you study at the average pace. No registration is required. Courses are similar to the courses that might be found in a professional writing degree program.
Open University, the UK's largest academic institution, offers a number of different writing courses through their OpenLearn website. The free curriculum includes both undergraduate and graduate level writing courses that are available to everyone regardless of country of origin. No registration is required.
Divine Reserve No. 12 is the first of the limited-batch Saint Arnold releases to be packaged in a bomber. MSRP will be $7.99. (Ronnie Crocker / Beer, TX)
A Divine day approaches. Let us all be prepared.
Divine Reserve No. 12, which begins hitting the market Tuesday morning, is a delicious and smooth, deceptively sweet Old Ale that weighs in at 10 percent ABV. When I say it’s sweet, I mean that in the best possible regard — not the least bit cloying, with no perfumy aftertaste.
It really is a good beer to drink now and, as Brock Wagner suggests, it should age well if properly stored.
Divine Reserve 12
Veterans know what a treasure hunt it can be to track down a Divine-release beer. Saint Arnold has made that a little easier by increasing production, now that it has capacity to do so. The brewery also is making the beer available for the first time in 22-ounce bomber bottles, which should stretch the beer in the market further and alleviate some of the disappointment people have experienced in the past.
Still, the hunt can be challenging. (Fun, too, to most; frustrating for some, I realize.)
William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States 84--101 1829 (2d ed.)
The power to establish an uniform system of naturalization is also an exclusive one.
In the second section of the fourth article it is provided that the citizens of each state, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, and the same rule had been ambiguously laid down in the articles of confederation. If this clause is retained, and its utility and propriety cannot be questioned, the consequence would be, that if each state retained the power of naturalization, it might impose on all the other states, such citizens as it might think proper. In one state, residence for a short time, with a slight declaration of allegiance, as was the case under the former constitution of Pennsylvania, might confer the rights of citizenship: in another, qualifications of greater importance might be required: an alien, desirous of eluding the latter, might by complying with the requisites of the former, become a citizen of a state in opposition to its own regulations, and thus in fact, the laws of one state become paramount to that of another. The evil could not be better remedied than by vesting the exclusive power in congress.
It cannot escape notice, that no definition of the nature and rights of citizens appears in the Constitution. The descriptive term is used, with a plain indication that its meaning is understood by all, and this indeed is the general character of the whole instrument. Except in one instance, it gives no definitions, but it acts in all its parts, on qualities and relations supposed to be already known. Thus it declares, that no person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president--that no person shall be a senator who shall not have been nine years a citizen of the United States, nor a representative who has not been such a citizen seven years, and it will therefore be not inconsistent with the scope and tendency of the present essay, to enter shortly into the nature of citizenship.
In a republic the sovereignty resides essentially, and entirely in the people. Those only who compose the people, and partake of this sovereignty are citizens, they alone can elect, and are capable of being elected to public offices, and of course they alone can exercise authority within the community: they possess an unqualified right to the enjoyment of property and personal immunity, they are bound to adhere to it in peace, to defend it in war, and to postpone the interests of all other countries to the affection which they ought to bear for their own.
The citizens of each state constituted the citizens of the United States when the Constitution was adopted. The rights which appertained to them as citizens of those respective commonwealths, accompanied them in the formation of the great, compound commonwealth which ensued. They became citizens of the latter, without ceasing to be citizens of the former, and he who was subsequently born a citizen of a state, became at the moment of his birth a citizen of the United States. Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity. It is an error to suppose, as some (and even so great a mind as Locke) have done, that a child is born a citizen of no country and subject of no government, and that he so continues till the age of discretion, when he is at liberty to put himself under what government he pleases.
How far the adult possesses this power will hereafter be considered, but surely it would be unjust both to the state and to the infant, to withhold the quality of the citizen until those years of discretion were attained. Under our Constitution the question is settled by its express language, and when we are informed that, excepting those who were citizens, (however the capacity was acquired,) at the time the Constitution was adopted, no person is eligible to the office of president unless he is a natural born citizen, the principle that the place of birth creates the relative quality is established as to us.
The mode by which an alien may become a citizen, has a specific appellation which refers to the same principle. It is descriptive of the operation of law as analogous to birth, and the alien, received into the community by naturalization, enjoys all the benefits which birth has conferred on the other class.
You can access any drives you wish with this method simply by replacing the drive letter:
A Drive, C Drive, D Drive, E Drive, Fictitious T Drive.
You can also use a form button instead of a text link. Simple place the link address into the form action:
<input type="submit" value="Access C Drive" />
Where can I use this? I use this as part of an active desktop. I use this same code to link to some important local and network drives which I need to access on a regular basis. It's better than a standard shortcut. Just one suggestion!
The state of Colorado launched a website Thursday that aims to answer numerous questions about the legalization of retail marijuana and the health impacts of the use of marijuana.
The website — colorado.gov/marijuana — includes answers to questions such as marijuana’s long-term health impacts, its effect on adolescents, whether can it be consumed in public places, if motorists be charged while driving under the influence of marijuana and how to talk to children about marijuana.
“State agencies worked together to develop this website as a reliable resource for parents, consumers, tourists and others who want the facts about marijuana’s health effects and the laws in Colorado, ” said Dr. Larry Wolk, executive director and chief medical officer at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
There is content on the site from the Colorado departments of Transportation, Education, Revenue, Human Services, and Public Health and Environment.
The Department of Public Health and Environment will have education campaigns as well as TV, radio and social media spots over the next year.
Last Friday, Idaho passed a law declaring that the state does not have to abide by federal gun laws going forward. The law, which criminalizes the enforcement of federal gun laws, passed unanimously in both the House and the Senate and takes effect immediately.
Under the new law, state law-enforcement officials could also be fined up to $1,000 and charged with a misdemeanor for enforcing federal gun laws.
"This is an important first step for Idaho," Tenth Amendment Center spokesman Mike Maharrey told BenSwann.com. "Getting this law passed will ensure that any new plans or executive orders that might be coming our way will not be enforced in Idaho. Then, once this method is established and shown to be effective, legislators can circle back and start doing the same for federal gun control already on the books."
Both Alaska and Kansas have passed similar "nullification" laws. Kansas approved the Second Amendment Protection Act last April, and Alaska enacted a similar law in June. A ProPublica investigation from last spring found that at least 37 other states have introduced similar bills. Under the Kansas law, residents could "manufacture and sell semi-automatic weapons in-state without a federal license or any federal oversight." The law also made it a felony for federal authorities to enforce any law that conflicts with state law.
Idaho's Legislature—which enjoys a Republican supermajority in both its chambers—has become home to many state laws that attempt to circumvent federal law. Earlier this month, the state tried and failed to pass a bill that would have outlawed federal environmental regulations. And in 2011, Idaho tried to declare the Affordable Care Act null and void. Since then, Gov. Butch Otter has come under attack from his fellow Republicans for softening his position on Obamacare.
Writ large, many conservative states are exploring creative but arcane ways to circumvent federal law. One growing conservative cause at the state level, the Article V movement, would attempt to call a convention of states to make laws in lieu of federal oversight.
The Exploit Database (EDB) – an ultimate archive of exploits and vulnerable software. A great resource for penetration testers, vulnerability researchers, and security addicts alike. Our aim is to collect exploits from submittals and mailing lists and concentrate them in one, easy to navigate database.
Critics say the project's underlying objective is to convert non-Muslim children to Islam by bringing proselytizing messages into public schools under the guise of promoting multiculturalism and fighting "Islamophobia."
The group recently ran an advertisement promising to pay 250 Czech korunas ($13 dollars) to any student aged 15 to 18 years who would attend a two hour presentation about Islam.
More recently, Muslims in the Czech Republic have tried to ban a book they say is Islamophobic, and have filed a ten-page criminal complaint against its formerly-Muslim author.
The Czech government has approved a new project aimed at promoting Islam in public elementary and secondary schools across the country.
The project—Muslims in the Eyes of Czech Schoolchildren—is being spearheaded by a Muslim advocacy group and is being financed by American taxpayers through a grant from the US Embassy in Prague. (The US State Department is also promoting Islam in other European countries.)
The group says the Czech Ministry of Education has authorized it to organize lectures and seminars aimed at "teaching Czech schoolchildren about Islamic beliefs and practices" and at "fighting stereotypes and prejudices about Muslims."
But critics—there are many—say the project's underlying objective is to convert non-Muslim children to Islam by bringing proselytizing messages into public schools under the guise of promoting multiculturalism and fighting "Islamophobia."
age source: Website of "Muslims in the Eyes of Czech Schoolchildren". .
The Karankawa Indians lived along the Texas coast of the Gulf of Mexico. See the map . Their territory was from the west end of Galveston Island down the coast to where Corpus Christie is today. There were several bands, or maybe even several tribes. We are not sure, because much of the history of the Karankawa is lost. No one bothered to study them in any detail while they were still around to study. Making things worse, the Karankawa were favorite targets of many false myths and made up stories.
One false myth is that they were cannibals. Yes, they sometimes ate the captured enemy warriors and leaders after a battle or war. They did not do this for food. They did it to get the magic power of the dead warrior or leader. Almost every other Texas Indian tribe did the same thing. This cannibalism is presented as one of the most important things about the Karankawa. That is not fair. Even though other Indian cultures did the same thing, it is not the first or most important thing you find out about them.
When Cabeza de Vaca told the Karankawa his starving companions had eaten the bodies of other expedition members the Karankawa were shocked. Why would so-called cannibals be shocked if they really were cannibals?
They were pretty good fighters and European settlers feared them. The Europeans also wanted the Karankawa's land. This may be why they made up so many bad myths about them. Many of the Karankawa warriors were over 6 feet tall. People were shorter back then and 6 foot tall Indians were really big. They had bows almost as tall as they were and shot long arrows made from slender shoots of cane. It is said they would suddenly show up in their canoes, seemingly out of no where, to attack. They would run away and retreat or escape the same way. They would go into the swamps and swampy woods were Europeans had a hard time following. There was a good reason why they were such good fighters and why they were so unfriendly to American settlers.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry ended his campaign for president today and endorsed Newt Gingrich as the best conservative to take on President Obama in the fall.
David Goldman, AP
Texas Gov. Rick Perry announces the end of his presidential campaign in North Charleston, S.C., on Thursday as his son, Griffin, and wife, Anita, look on.
Perry's departure two days before the South Carolina primary leaves four candidates vying for the GOP nomination.
"Newt is not perfect, but who among us is?" Perry said. "There is forgiveness for those who seek God. I have no question that Newt Gingrich has the heart of a conservative reformer" and "the ability to rally and captivate the conservative movement."
Editor's note: Hilmar von Campe wrote the following comments in July 2004 – "long before anybody had heard the name of Obama," as the writer explains. His thoughts are still relevant, perhaps more so, today. Von Campe is the author of "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America"
There is a great deal of confusion regarding the nature of the Nazi movement. Most if not all people who are familiar with the events of those years agree that its leaders were criminals. But quite a number of them, especially in the media, call Nazis fascists. Even though the bloody years of Nazi rule ended 64 years ago, the definition of who they were is of great importance for today. Without it we would be blind to reality.
As a German World War II veteran who grew up under the Nazis and who has studied about everything that has anything to do with their ideology, it is not difficult to define their reality. One principle theme of my 280 radio and television interviews in America has always been the comparison of the moral and ideological basis of the German Nazi society of that time and the American society of today. That theme also enters my books and articles.
Nazi society was based on lies, and lies are in the process of taking over America. I try to clarify for the American people that the ideological attack on America is part of the global attempt to eliminate God everywhere, replace Him with arbitrary rule of (leftist) man and destroy freedom. Godlessness brought Germany down. Godlessness is America's and freedom's No. 1 enemy.
Nazi is an abbreviation for National Socialist. Nazis are Socialists. That means they are radical left-wing. Fascists, on the other hand, have to be placed on the right. To put the label of fascism on National Socialism is an invention by the Soviet and East-German Communist leaderships after the war. It is meant to eliminate in the public mind the embarrassing link between the Nazi movement and socialism and hide the deadly threat to free society. After they had launched their antifascist movement, they made the label of fascism stick with the help of leftist media around the world. They also invented the word Nazism, a ridiculous word creation also used in the U.S., for the same reason: to replace the correct definition National Socialism.
Are we headed for a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss? Find out in "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America"
The implication of what I am saying is far-reaching. Fascism, an authoritarian form of government with ugly features, is not an international conspiracy and a global threat to the United States. Global socialism, however, is. There are innumerably different socialist parties and movements. They are all fruits of the same rotten tree and lead inevitably to a totalitarian system. All socialist functionaries use national concepts and language in their different countries, but you can't argue rationally with them because they have a hidden purpose, which is different from the purpose of their non-socialist opponents. They are committed to transforming the world into a socialist system with them at the top. They are in America, and they are no patriots; they are traitors to their country, to the words and spirit of the Constitution, and to the mission of freedom, given by our Creator to this nation at her birth. The "politically correct" is the American equivalent of the "party line" of the Nazis and the Communists.
Bob Just described his own party as the "Party of Treason." "Hatred and corruption," he writes in Whistleblower magazine, "are on the march in America as they have never been before, and leading this march is the Democratic Party." And the United Nations, I add. Just points out that there seems to be a loyalty to "something other than the American people" and refers very often to the Nazis. "If I am right about the fanatical direction my party is taking, then America has never faced a danger like this, and real Democrats who stand by and watch will be as guilty before history as the actual leaders of this corruption movement. … Carried to its extreme, this corruption movement will destroy us all." Not many people understand that totalitarian socialism grows out of moral corruption.
Liberals in reality are socialists; they are not true Americans as far as I am concerned. They may not necessarily be a conscious part of the conspiracy, but they are part of the conspirators' immorality, their concepts and lust for power, which are expressions of hard-core socialism. But the appeaser of treason is no better than the traitor – both are liars who covet other people's money and property and sponsor all and every immoral cause hostile to our Creator.
Arabs and Israelis nowadays are both saying the same thing: "What is the matter with you people? You are going to walk away and you think your interests are going to be protected here?"
One of the things that has changed in this administration is that people who are fighting for democracy in places such as Turkey, Russia or China do not feel as if they have any moral or political support coming from Washington in a way that they have over the years.
Is this foreign policy reversible? My answer is yes for a number of reasons.
There was recently a remarkable article in the New York Times, based on an interview with the National Security Adviser, Susan Rice. In it, she described what the Times called the "new, modest U.S. policy in the Middle East." Susan Rice said we have three goals in the Middle East:
Negotiations with Iran over its nuclear weapons program.
Negotiations with Syria over its chemical weapons program and over the war taking place in Syria.
Negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians over Middle East peace.
What is striking is that it really is the foreign policy of Belgium: negotiations, negotiations, negotiations.
The foreign policy of the United States is, apparently, now to be centered in the United Nations, Brussels and Geneva, where we have talks about Syria with the Russians and talks about Iran with Iran's representatives.
What is missing in this formulation? In one word: power.
The president seems to regard power and the use of power pretty much the way he regards, for example, sexism -- as if this is a problem we had in the past; in past decades we had to deal with this phenomenon, but we have overcome it. As if this is the great thing about the United States: that we have gotten beyond an old‑fashioned concept such as the use of power.
Once upon a time we would have said that the center of American policy in the Middle East is actually not Geneva or Brussels or the United Nations, it is the Fifth Fleet in the Gulf and the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean. Once upon a time, the rules for the Middle East were actually enforced by the United States.
I find when I talk to Arabs and Israelis nowadays, they are both saying the same thing: "What is the matter with you people? Don't you understand we have counted on you since the Second World War; you have essentially kept the peace here, you have been, as the British would say, 'the top country' in the Middle East since the Second World War, or at least since the British withdrew from Aden. You are going to walk away from that and you think your interests are going to be protected here?"
Who said that? We can go down a long list of people. Was it the King of Jordan, was it Prince Saud of Saudi Arabia? Was it Binyamin Netanyahu? Was it the Emirates, was it the Lebanese Christians, was it the Moroccans?
The answer is: all of the above because, in private, they are saying the same thing. This is the only thing President Obama has actually achieved in the Middle East: He has brought the Israelis and the Gulf Arabs together.
In the world, and the international political system, we -- and certainly they in the Middle East -- are faced with the Hobbesian situation of a "war of all against all" except for one thing -- the United States. It used to be that the United States was what prevented that situation from exploding in ways that hurt both all of them and the West as well.
Saddam Hussein, for example, invaded Kuwait; it was the United States that said, No, we are not having countries swallowing each other up. So we reversed that attempt by sending 500,000 troops -- parenthetically a feat that we could no longer achieve because of the downsizing in the military -- but we enforced that rule.
When the Iranians started building a nuclear weapons program, it was the United States that said -- three presidents have said -- "You are not permitted to do that." There was at least someone saying, "No, this is not a Hobbesian 'war of all against all': there are certain rules here that everyone will live by, and we, the United States, will enforce them."