text:
Resistance to Tyranny — A book by Joseph P. Martino
Resistance to Tyranny Martino
By Joseph P. Martino
For over twenty years people have been talking about the 'takeover' of America, whether by foreign forces, or, by a government intent on creating a truly despotic government.
In 1984, a movie, Red Dawn, depicting one form of takeover was very popular throughout the country. It was so popular that it was the 20th rated movie of that year.
Since then, movies and mini-series have depicted such a "takeover" and have captivated audiences.
What non off them present, and, what has eluded those who have endeavored to "prepare" for such and event , is the complexity of coordination that would be required of people who really wanted to prepare for "Resistance to Tyranny".
Based upon real events of the past as well as his practical application of experience in his tenure with the Air Force, this book is a description of the 'networking' necessary, in today's world, to carry out such a resistance.
Joseph Martino has compiled a complete primer to the organizational elements necessary to be able to affect such resistance.
This book is an absolutely necessary addition to the libraries of for Committees of Safety, Militia units, and Survivalist organizations, as well as anybody who wants to really understand what may be necessary, if we are to survive, as a country. It should be read and understood by any person with any degree of responsibility in such organizations.
Resistance to Tyranny
Available at: Resistance to Tyranny
Dr. Martino is a retired Air Force Colonel. He served in Thailand where he conducted research on counterinsurgency. He later was Chairman of the Counterinsurgency Working Group of the Military Operations Research Society. He teaches a course in Just War Doctrine at Yorktown University. He holds degrees in Physics, Electrical Engineering, and Mathematics.
Served in US Air Force 1953 – 1975, retiring in grade of Colonel. Service included 21 months in SE Asia 1962-1963, researching problems of counterinsurgency. Served as Chairman, Special Warfare Working Group, 1963 – 1968. Published A Fighting Chance: The Moral Use of Nuclear Weapons, 1982, applying Just War Doctrine to use of nuclear weapons. Several papers on counterinsurgency and special warfare at Vietnam Symposium, Texas Tech U. and in military journals. Educational background: AB in Physics; MS in Electrical Engineering; PhD in Mathematics. Worked as Research Scientist at U. of Dayton Research Institute 1975 – 1993. Visiting Professor, Marmara University, Istanbul, 1998 – 1999.
Tags: history, militia, patriots, security, violence
Factions — The Chains of Oppression – Part IV
The Greatest Obstacle to Restoration of Constitutional Government
This is Part IV of IV Parts
Utilizing factions for political purposes
Let's suppose that a faction (a group of people with power and control in mind) wanted to create a situation where this country was filled with factions; each being against one or more of the other factions. As in times past, coalitions will be formed, but they will be weak.
However, at that point, it would be easy for those who have the best control, now, to increase that control; under the guise of maintaining "law and order" — without regard to the Constitution.
This would allow them to manipulate the lesser factions, turning them one against the others.
So, if we were looking from the government's perspective, what is the first step in the implementation of that plan? Well, first we need some factions. However, our immigration policy was designed to foster assimilation, not faction. So, we will have to revise the immigration policy (quotas, education or experience requirements, criminal records checks, etc.) so that we can remove what we can, without exposing our plan. We can even provide amnesty to allow large amounts of people, even those who could care less about being Americans; only concerned about what they can get for free and how much money they can make to send home. By granting amnesty, we will have removed any requirement, or for that matter, any incentive to learn the language and assimilate into the American way of life.
That, however, will not be enough to get the job done as quickly as we would like. So, what can we do to create factions large enough to generate the conflict that we need to strengthen our control over the people?
Suppose we ignore the laws on immigration that are on the books, and then we can also keep the states from enforcing federal law, since it is "our duty", not theirs. We can allow hundreds of thousands to cross the borders, illegally. If they are caught by the charade we have in front of the people to catch them (U.S. Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement), we can let them go on their own recognizance until their hearing. That will give them the opportunity to 'disappear' and still stay within the country.
Everybody that comes in will be a part of a faction, so we will set no limits on what/who is allowed to bypass our immigration laws. That will shorten the time to the uprising of the factions, considerably.
So, what else can we do? Well, if we can create inflation, the purchasing power of the average citizen will be down, so they will be primed and ready to blame any faction for whatever befalls them. They will not blame us because we are going to act like we know what we are doing, and that it is not the government, rather, the foreigners, who are creating the problem.
We can aggravate the situation even more by having looser laws for immigrants than we have for citizens. We are trying it in California, where when someone is stopped for DUI, if they are a citizen, their car gets impounded. If they are not a citizen, we will let them keep their car — even if they don't have a driver's license. That should really begin to create tension, and, if it works, we can spread it to other states.
We will also keep the wars going so that people are thinking about waving the flag, while we trample it into the dirt. They think that we are protecting them, though we are actually distracting them and keeping their attention on the wars rather than seeing what is "behind the curtain".
Our final tool has been in place for many years. It includes the sociological implications of "political correctness" and "diversity". We have planted that seed well, so that if anybody steps out of line, those around them will force them back into compliance. We can see how well that is working by not allowing anybody to recognize that different factions with different interests, working at odds with each other, even exist.
I don't believe that it will be very long before we are "forced" to rule this country, with an iron fist. Our plan is so well laid that we cannot fail!
On December 12, 1774, the Deputies of the province of Maryland passed a number of Resolves. Perhaps the most significant was the last, to wit:
"Resolved unanimously, that it is recommended to the several colonies and provinces to enter into such or the like resolutions, for mutual defense and protection, as are entered into by this province. As our opposition to the settled plan of the British administration to enslave America will be strengthened by a union of all ranks of men in this province, we do most earnestly recommend that all former differences about religion or politics, and all private animosities and quarrels of every kind, from henceforth cease and be forever buried in oblivion; and we entreat, we conjure every man by his duty to God, his country, and his posterity, cordially to unite in defense of our common rights and liberties."
Four months before the outbreak of war, the colonists had realized the necessity of having a common interest. Avoiding any factionalization that might be detrimental to the cause.
Though the goal at the time was for "rights of Englishmen", over time, it evolved into independence from British Rule. Our goal is much simpler, it is simply restoration of Constitutional government.
However, if we cannot learn from the past, and realize that the Principle Faction is our common element — and, that subordinate faction issues must be, at least until such time as we have returned to government, in obedience to the Constitution, buried in oblivion. We cannot expect the success that Providence granted to the Founders, and us, their Posterity.
Adherence to the Principle Faction, above all else, is the goal that we need to pursue, and achieve, in as short a time as possible. For, until that goal is achieved, and we have identified those who are in opposition to that Faction, we cannot even begin to pursue that ultimate goal of restoration.
To all who are members of the subordinate factions, consistent with the Constitution, it is only necessary to set aside the lesser for the more important faction.
For those who are members of subordinate factions, inconsistent with the Constitution, you have a more difficult decision to make. Can you subordinate your faction so that it is not inconsistent with the Constitution? If not, then you should find a country that allows and supports such a faction as you choose to adhere to.
To achieve the proper recognition of the Principle Faction, we cannot allow ourselves to succumb to the political correctness, which has relegated our Constitution to the back seat. To allow lip service to the Constitution to undermine its very tenets and purpose is to fail before we have begun.
Tags: assimilation, citizenship, Constitution, de jure, demonization, factions, history, immigration, patriots
Factions — The Chains of Oppression – Part III
This is Part IIII of IV Parts
Factions in conflict with the Principle Faction
Illegal immigrants: It is often said that the first impression is the most important impression that you will make upon others. Suppose that the first impression that you make is an unwillingness to abide by the rules/laws of the host, when you are a guest; suppose someone came, invited, or not, into your home and started telling you that the wall colors were wrong, that they didn't like the pictures you had hung, that they didn't like carpeted floors, or that you should prepares them a meal and a bed. It would not be surprising if you caused them to exit your home, and assured them that they would never, again, have entry into your home. That impression that they gave was not what is expected of the guest, and any reaction you had to that belligerence is justified, even if force is necessary to remove them.
We are the collective owners of the country (our collective home), and, as such, have established rules/laws for entry into that home. They were enacted in accordance with the Constitution and are, as such, the law of the land. Those who enter with their first step being a violation of those rules/laws have, as the unwanted guest in your house, established an impression that is lasting, and totally unacceptable.
Those who wipe their muddy feet on your clean carpet are not a part of any acceptable class of people, visitors, or those here by right. They have, by their actions, spit in the face of what this country stands for. It is not a melting pot for the entire world, nor was it intended to be destroyed from within, by a cancer that grows at astronomical rates, and, quite often, at the expense of our own depleted treasury. Each person that enters illegally, or overstays their permitted visit, is a greater threat to the future of our country than any military threat, from any other country, without comparison. The military threat, we have proven, cannot prevail against us. This insidious intrusion, however, eats away at our country's soul with every day that they remain.
Illegal immigration advocates: Those who would advocate forbearance in dealing with these intruders are not adherents to the Principle Faction, nor are they adherents to the laws, concepts, traditions, manners, customs, nor anything else, that we hold dear — and must continue to hold dear, if we are to survive as the United States, our birthright.
These people, though they may otherwise not be in conflict with the Principle Faction, and may even be of the class of "We the People", or "citizen of the United States", are, by their support of violation of the law of the land, in conflict with the Principle Faction. They have denied the concept of assimilation, and have thereby provided a means of destruction of the entire purpose of the Founders and Framers, for the creation of this great nation.
Anti- religious groups, Atheists, Agnostics: When we understand our heritage, we recognize that the Founders and Framers were religious, though perhaps not pious, men. Both Washington and Jefferson had problems with organized religion, as many of us do today. Regardless, they had beliefs founded on both Old and New Testaments, and adhered to the Christian moral values, without question. Never did they challenge the concept that was, eventually, embodied in the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court Building (built 1932-35) in Washington, D.C., contains over a dozen depictions of Moses and/or the Ten Commandment, sculpted in stone, and permanent not only in that building, but in the hearts and heritage of this country. Congress begins each daily session with prayer, and has done so from their first gathering. President's have called for days of prayer and thanksgiving, in official proclamations, throughout our history.
However, there are those advocates who have challenged the right of a state, a county, school, or even a small town, to begin with prayer; display the same representation found in the Supreme Court building, or erection of seasonal displays of Christian holidays on public land.
And, in a somewhat surprising response, they have found proponents of their advocacy in those very halls of government mentioned above. All under the guise that such actions and displays are "unconstitutional".
How can that be unconstitutional which was practiced by the very authors of that document, and those who ratified it? Their practices and beliefs were not in question then, and there is the more serious question as to whether even an amendment to the Constitution would be Constitutional if it abrogated the First Amendment.
Surely, we cannot even begin to consider that we may remain as even a vestige of the United States if we allow the denigration of those practices considered by most to be fundamental to the establishment of the country — by those very people who caused to be carved in stone the underpinnings of the moral compass by which we found our course.
So long as they adhere to the Principle Faction, and otherwise meet the requirements of class, and distance themselves from those who advocate to the contrary, they may be considered to be of the Principle Faction.
Those who continue to advocate legal sanctions, removal of displays, or any other means of undermining that which has stood so long, are in conflict with the Principle Faction, and have no place in this country, since they choose not to assimilate, rather to change that which is our heritage.
Homosexual rights groups: Some will argue that homosexuality is a disease, others that it is a lifestyle choice. Each is a diversion from the crux of the matter. It is considered by the Christian moral values adopted by this country, 220 years ago, to be immoral. Though with the exception of some local jurisdictions, and some states, it has not been considered criminal — just immoral.
Even when criminal, it was seldom prosecuted, since it was conducted between consenting parties, in private circumstances. To intrude on that privacy was as much a crime as the behavior itself, at least under the principles of the Constitution. However, if we look at a few of the steps taken to endeavor to assign legitimacy and morality to the practice, we will find an excellent example of the destructiveness of factions. The common terminology used to describe homosexuals was often "queer" (which is rather what their behavior was considered to be), or the more objectionable "fag" or "faggot" (a derogatory term).
As late as the fifties and sixties, homosexual, or, queer, bars and clubs were not uncommon. Their public behavior was normal, and their private behavior, in such facilities, was, to use the expression of the time, "done in the closet". And, very few had objection to such behavior, so long as it did not "spill onto the streets".
There was an effort in California, back in that period, to establish a homosexual community in the village of Alpine, in the High Sierra. Even then, there was no general outrage, since the village would be their own 'closet'.
Next came a change in terminology. A word that was frequently used to indicate jovial, happy, light, was adopted by the homosexuals. Back then, people would go to a "gay party" meaning that it was going to be sitting around in a light and humorous atmosphere, perhaps telling jokes and stories. However the theft, yes, I mean theft, of that word, which had only positive connotations, was a move to give an air of legitimacy and acceptance to a behavior that was, heretofore, considered immoral. A major coup by this faction managed to change the image of the homosexual, and to remove from usage a word that was commonly used, even then.
Since that time, this once frowned upon group has managed to use the courts and legislative process to provide special protection and special privileges from what was, through most of our history, a subject unworthy of discussion. They have taken a word, "marriage", with millennia of understanding of the definition, and still recognized in US Code as between a man and woman, and have managed to steal that word for their own uses and economic gain.
They have successfully lobbied for legislation that forces the government schools to encourage such behavior, contrary to the wishes of the parents who are clearly among the Principle Faction, and are advocating a moral degeneration of our society.
Those advocates of homosexuality are in conflict with the Principle Faction, and have no place, with the exception of the closet, in our country.
Black rights advocates: As explained in the "We the People" series (linked above), a second class of citizen was established by the Fourteenth Amendment, and confirmed by a subsequent amendment and decisions of the United States Supreme Court. However, through a subtle process of indoctrination, beginning in the late fifties and early sixties, the intent of that Amendment has been converted to an application that has generated havoc, loss of property, and even loss of life.
The "civil rights" movement of that period moved us from a society that recognized the Principle Faction (basically, a fundamentally white culture) to one that has legislated, encouraged, and enforced against, that society, undermining it, in favor of granting privileges to those citizens of the United States, as well as other without such standing, under the guise of equality, greater even than that afforded to "We the People".
Society, itself, had moved in that direction, at the rate that was warranted by the people, not the government. Whether Jackie Robinson, Nat King Cole, or Fats Domino; acceptance of negros as a part of our culture, was in the works. Society, itself, was approaching a degree of equality, voluntarily.
Instead, it turned to demonstrations (not the preferred form of legislative influence), by both sides. And, since those early days of civil rights demonstrations, they often turned to violence, instigated by both sides. America has been in a near constant state of turmoil, since the time that the government stepped in and tried to privilege the second class even above the first class. And some of that violence, today, perpetrated by those who believe that "change has not come fast enough", is nothing more than rioting and thievery, perpetrated under the guise of equality, couched in phrases about social and economic 'justice'.
These, groups, relying upon judicial intimidation and violence, have proven that their methods and goals are in conflict with the Principle Faction, the Constitution and its principles, and our way of life.
Woman's right advocates: Abigail Adams, wife of John Adams, is probably the best known advocate of women's rights. However, as much as she discussed the subject in correspondence with her husband, he never did advocate such a change in the legal relationship of women within that society.
Over the years, the nation evolved, not turning against the Founding principles, rather, in a social or societal form, with Wyoming being the first to enact women's suffrage laws. Rights of ownership of land and/or inheritance were becoming common, and barriers were falling, as well as advancing women in the society, without intervention by the federal government.
Finally, in 1920, with the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment, the federal government intervened in an area that was reserved by the Constitution to the states. As with the Fifteenth Amendment (race suffrage), the right of the states to determine who could vote in elections, both state and national, as protected by the Constitution, was now being assumed by the federal government.
Not that it was a bad move, rather, that it was the abrogation of the right of the states to make such a decision, that was so appalling. It was just seven years earlier that the right of the states to be represented, by senators chosen by their respective legislatures, in Congress, was removed by the Seventeenth Amendment. This was, effectively, the end of states' rights.
As contrary to the original construction of the Constitution as this was, it also opened a means of the presumption of federal authority in manipulating the society to the will of the powers in Washington, D.C., and those who influence such social change.
Over time, unconstitutional legislation has resulted the reduction of the male to a subordinate position in our society, where lawsuits and intimidation work in only one direction, to the detriment, and at the expense of, one half of the society.
Our society, which was based upon rewards for performance, was converted to one where rewards are mandated by quotas, with little regard to ability and performance. This denies to society the making of the choices that were assured and protected by the Constitution.
The advocacy of federal intervention, as opposed to the normal evolution of these norms in our culture, is in conflict with the Constitution and its principles, and is inconsistent with the Principle Faction.
Christian militia: Militia, the right to collective self-defense, is embodied in the Second Amendment, and has been a part of our heritage and culture since the Magna Carta. Since 1215, that right has existed, and, since that time, the Militia have always been subordinate to civil authority and have been geographic in their composition. From the Shires of England, to the counties, townships, villages and plantations of the seventeen hundreds, participation in the militia was a right and was a duty. The only exceptions were exclusions for certain people because of vocation, and those that were "inimical to the cause of American Liberty" (Tories). To exclude people who do not claim to be of the Christian faith is contrary to the Constitution and the principles upon which it was founded.
Christian militia are inconsistent the Principle Faction
Islamic groups: Islam is not just a religion. Islam, in its current manifestation, is a social and political system, as well. It is a social system that includes a number of practices that are considered abhorrent, by our culture. Its social/judicial system manifests extreme punishments for what our culture might perceive to be a minor transgression or no crime at all.
Though two hundred years ago, "Mohametmen" simply practiced as a religion, and were accepted as a religion by the Framers, their character has changed to be anything but just a religion.
We can look to Europe and see the consequences of the intrusion of Islam into a society. Eventually, the demand for change or legal reform to comply with their social/political system takes many forms, including physical abuse against people that oppose them; and the obstruction of roadways so that they can hold collective prayer absent a facility for such service; exercising their form of justice, including capital punishment, contrary to the host country's laws, and often exempt from prosecution for crimes that would otherwise result in incarceration, or worse.
Much like the illegal immigrants, members of the Islamic faith come here with a total disregard for our laws, our culture, and our society. They come with the intention of forcing change, by intimidation, by their numbers, or any means that suits them. Their presence in the country, under their present manifestation, is contrary to the Constitution and its principles, and contrary to the Principle Faction.
The Congress: Congress, especially after their vote for the Debt Ceiling Increase, has demonstrated that they are a faction unto themselves, without regard for the Constitution or the will of the people.
The Congress acts in conflict with the Principle Faction of this country.
The Executive Branch: The Executive Branch, tasked with enforcing the laws of the land, has continued to ignore existing laws regarding immigration, and when forced into enforcing such laws, does so with a leniency that is more encouraging to the violation of the immigration laws than deterring them.
The Executive Branch has declared that Tea Party members; Constitutionalists; Gun Rights (Second Amendment) advocates, combat veterans, and others, who fall well within the Principle Faction as "terrorist".
The executive Branch of the government is in conflict with the Principle Faction of this country
The US government: The government "erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance", to lie, steal and even murder, members of the Principle Faction, and has done so with immunity from prosecution.
The Administrative Branches of government are in conflict with the Constitution and its principles, and the Principle Faction.
State governments: State governments, with rare exception, do not defy federal intrusions against the Principle Faction, and often participate in the enforcement of unconstitutional polices and laws, receiving compensation from the federal government for the submission to its assumed and unconstitutional authority.
The state governments are acting in conflict with the Constitution and its principles, and the Principle Faction.
Of course, within each of these factions are members who are adherents to the Principle Faction and the Constitution, though they may be facilitating that faction in opposition to the Principle Faction. Rather than suffering guilt by association, they would be well advised to understand that adherence to the Principle Faction and assimilation is imperative.
Tags: assimilation, citizenship, Constitution, de jure, definitions, demonization, education, factions, history, public, sovereign
Factions — The Chains of Oppression – Part II
This is Part II of IV Parts
Factions not in conflict with the Principle Faction
Let's look at some factions that are examples of those consistent with the Principle Faction:
Christians: Our nation was founded, without doubt, upon Christian moral values. Some of those values, however, have been disputed between various sects of Christianity since before the Founding of this great nation. In fact, the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", was adopted to assure that the ability to practice one's religion, as one might chose to practice it, was a fundamental (God given) right. Even "Mohametmen" were allowed to practice their religion, though the principles established by the Constitution retain the moral values of Christianity. It was never implied that laws could be passed based upon Islam — only those based upon Christian moral values, and those, only locally, in order to provide a comfortable community for those who chose to live therein. The idea that a law would be passed allowing the wearing of a Burka, contrary to norms for the community and country, was inconceivable. It was the need for assimilation, in order to maintain that which was created by the Revolutionary War, that is necessary to maintain the greatness of the country.
Outlawing prostitution, gambling, alcohol, done at the local community level (often county level), was paramount in the concepts adopted by the Founders. To assume that a state could enact and enforce such laws was not even under consideration during those formative years, and efforts to establish moral laws on a state-wide level were inconceivable.
Many Christians have beliefs that are not consistent with the beliefs of others, though there is a tendency to suppress expressing them outside of one's own circle, in recognition of the rights of others to believe as they wish. However, if we look back in history, we find that these ideals were expressed in newspaper articles, on soap boxes, and by legislators in assemblies, without fear of repercussion or arrest. Absent the ability to express such feelings, we are denied the right to pursue legislation that we believe to be for the good of the country, the state, the county, or the town, in which we live — not to impose upon others, but rather to refrain from leaving those moral values behind.
So long as Christians adhere to the Principle Faction, and subordinate their beliefs, except as addressed above, to that Principle Faction, they are adherents to, and a product of, the United States. They are what America stands for.
Boy Scouts of America: Why would we even consider discussing a private organization such as the Boy Scouts of America under the heading of factions? Well, they are a faction — one that has been around for over a hundred years. Their principles are based upon the Christian religion, and the Constitution and principles of this great country. Recently, however, the courts in this country have endeavored to impose upon the Boy Scouts rules of admission and acceptance that are absolutely contrary to the foundation of that organization. They, like Christians, are able to practice as they choose, and allow only those who conform to their beliefs to become members of that organization.
Instead, the courts have ruled that the Boy Scouts cannot prohibit membership to those who don't espouse the objectives of the Boy Scouts. They are forcing change upon an organization that exists totally within the concept of adherence to the Principle Faction, and have every right, under the Constitution, to allow membership only to those who adhere to the principles of that organization.
The Boy Scouts of America adhere to the Principle Faction, and subordinate their beliefs, except as addressed above, to that Principle Faction, they are adherents to, and a product of, the United States. They are what America stands for.
Jews: Jews don't believe, with few exceptions, that Christ existed, or, that if he did, he was not the Messiah. Well, this is definitely not consistent with Christianity, though it is not inconsistent with Christian moral values. In fact, for many years, many Christians despised the Jews and held them in contempt. Often crimes were committed against them, in the name of Christianity. In those instances, the Christians stepped outside of their adherence to the Principle Faction, though such instances are few and far between.
The Jews have established their own communities where they adhere to the precepts of their religion, and do not endeavor to impose their beliefs into the law, or upon others. They adhere to the Principle Faction, and subordinate their beliefs, except as addressed above, to that Principle Faction, they are adherents to, and a product of, the United States. They are what America stands for.
National Socialist Movement (in certain of its various forms): Much like the Jews, the beliefs of many National Socialists are inconsistent with the general tenor of the country, and though outspoken in their beliefs, they have, for the most part, adhered to the Principle Faction.
Some participants in this faction have stepped outside of the law and impose injury, unjustly, on others. These few, however, do not speak for the whole; the majority adhere to the laws, and their expression of their beliefs is consistent with the Constitution, though, perhaps, not politically correct.
Though they have chosen symbols (swastika and other Nazi representations) that are considered evil by most, what they hold to is not much different than the government's support of Japan and Germany, since the end of World War II. It was the whole of the people of each of those countries that stood firmly behind their governments — responsible for death and devastation, around the world.
So long as National Socialists do not break the law and adhere to the Principle Faction, and subordinate their beliefs, except as addressed above, to that Principle Faction, they are adherents to, and a product of, the United States. They are what America stands for.
Anarchists (in certain of their various forms): The Founders enacted very few laws that acted directly on the people. For the most part, the laws enacted in the first few decades of the United States were laws to define, enhance, or protect the government. The exceptions were the moral laws, also known as Blue Laws, which generally existed within the confines of a town's ordinance, or, perhaps, even county ordinances, in an effort to establish a moral foundation that was comfortable to the majority of those residing there. Otherwise, a degree of anarchy, at least by one definition, was a part of life of the times.
There is an old adage that Liberty is existent so long as your fist stops before it reaches my nose. Our individual constraint on our own actions, so that we do no harm to others, is, perhaps, the best definition of that which should be.
The modern anarchist, even those who might espouse absence of government, altogether, are not inconsistent with much of what the Founders believed. A minimum of government is, perhaps, best, and, is without a doubt, consistent with the Constitution and most state constitutions, at least as originally ratified.
So long as Anarchists adhere to the Principle Faction, and subordinate their beliefs to that Principle Faction, they are adherents to, and a product of, the United States. They are what America stands for.
The Patriot Community: This is the most loose-knit community within the factions adhering to the Constitution. It is comprised of people who have, generally, taken one issue or aspect of the Constitution, to be their cause. Some of those aspects are taxation, the monetary system, the judicial system, the immigration policies (laws) that are not enforced, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment (either, or both, right to bear arms and militia), and, other lesser and greater causes. They are as diverse, and, perhaps more so, than the Founders, at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, yet they are probably the most vociferous of factions that comprise the adherents to the Principle Faction. They do, without a doubt, adhere to the Principle Faction, and subordinate their beliefs to that Principle Faction. They are adherents to, and a product of, the United States. They are what America stands for.
Tags: assimilation, citizenship, Constitution, de jure, factions, government, history, immigration, patriots, public, sovereign
Factions — The Chains of Oppression – Part I
August 25, 2011, 10:34 am
This is Part I of IV Parts
Factions are rather interesting, though often ignored by most, in the world we live in. Factions are "somebody else", and we, individually, have no part in them, except those that we are a part of — though we don't really see them as factions, only truth. We know what we believe; we know our moral values; we know what right and wrong are; we know what we want to know; everybody else is, if they don't agree with us, simply wrong.
So, let's begin by understanding what a faction is.
Webster's 1828 Dictionary:
A party, in political society, combined or acting in union, in opposition to the prince, government or state; usually applied to a minority, but it may be applied to a majority. sometimes a state is divided into factions nearly equal.
… whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
Or, the more simplistic:
A group of persons forming a cohesive, usually contentious minority within a larger group.
Factions are, however, a way of life. We are all in factions and in many different areas.
For the most part, people perceive, with very few exceptions, that there are two political factions in this country; Democrats/Liberals, and, Republicans/Conservatives. What the political philosophies of the two "factions" are is inconsequential, at least at this point, to the discussion. The point to be made here is that we have perceived that there are only two factions, and anything else is hardly worthy of our consideration.
With regard to other aspects of our lives and our society, there are minor factions that we see, all of the time. For example, the queer community is recognized as a faction, though most fail to recognize that there is a large faction, which is opposed to the smaller, recognized, faction. That larger faction is those of us who, whether Christian, or not, understand the necessity for moral values and standards within a country.
However, legislation, political correctness, and/or influence through the press tend to either render illegal, or, at least minimally subject those who are a part of that larger faction, to ridicule for expressing themselves, in dispute with the faction's principles.
The net effect is to render that larger faction as inconsequential, or illegitimate, providing a strong platform for the assertion of the values of the lesser faction, even to the point of additional legislation on their behalf.
Factions in history
We can look at history, and around the world, today, and see the affect of factions.
Let's start by looking at revolutions. After all, there have been many revolutions throughout history, though there has only been one that provided a rather smooth transition of government. And all of them have been lead by factions — sometimes one, sometimes multiple, and, sometimes, begun by one faction where another faction became dominant before the job was done.
The French Revolution began in 1789, the same year that our Constitution became the framework of our own government. That revolution lasted for a number of years, and during the entire course of it, the control of government passed from hand to hand, each hand being the one that, at any given time, had the most influence and power. Often, those in power for the moment would require the execution (guillotine) of someone that was a partner in power, just months before. The groundwork was laid, as the Revolution needed, to restore monarchy and the emperor, Bonaparte (twice). So much for a smooth transition.
The Russian Revolution began in 1917. The Mensheviks began the turmoil, and, eventually, the Bolsheviks gained control. Then, the Bolsheviks became factionalized, Red verse White, leading, eventually, to Lenin obtaining power. Again, not a very smooth transition.
Revolutions, at least those of the ordinary sort, tend to have factions that vie for power, even while the revolution is going on. The resultant government is, generally, unstable and retains its authority by force.
Today, we see the beginnings of revolution in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, and Yemen. These "street" revolutions are lead by factions. Most often those factions have a religious foundation, though often, there are factions within a religious group, of an ethnic nature. There can be little doubt that the stronger faction will take control, though the conflict will not cease — until the opposition is exiled, imprisoned, or killed.
Factions in the United States
So that we can put in perspective the factions and the roles that they play in the maintenance of a country, or its destruction, we must first understand just what factions exist, what their role is, and whether they are acceptable, in terms of maintaining the United States of America, as intended.
In a recent series of articles ("We the People', but, who are We?" – five Parts, linked to Part I), a review of the Founding documents, subsequent amendments, and, Supreme Court Decisions, provides us an understanding of just who "We the People" are, and, as Justice Taney described in one Decision, that this country is only for these "We the People", but for no one else".
Now, right there, with that last statement, I would expect that many would cringe and began to react in accordance with the decades of conditioning that we have been subjected to. After all, haven't we been raised to believe that this country was made for anybody who wants to come here, for any reason, even if their purpose is to change the nature and purpose of what the Founders willingly gave their lives for? But, is it in the best interest of this country, our future, and our progeny, to accept that what was created just over 200 years ago should fall prey to changes which will destroy that which is our birthright?
So, let's begin by understanding that though there may be smaller factions, with their own respective interest and objectives, that there is, and should be, a Principle Faction — upon which all else is subordinate.
Principle Faction
As explained in the "We the People" series, there are two classes of people that comprise the Principle Faction. These are those who are described as the cause and purpose of the existence of the United States and its Constitution; and, those who were made citizens, though not fully empowered with the rights inherent within the Constitution, through the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, and are, or should be, of the Principle Faction.
However, within both of these classes, there may be many who, though of the nature and class of "We the People" or citizens of the United States, for other reasons, reject the principles upon which the country was founded. These, though they may have rights, privileges and immunities, as described in that series, that do not adhere to the principles are no more a part of the Principle Faction as one who joins an organization to change its nature.
Absent adherence to the Constitution and the principles upon which it was founded, makes one a citizen by birth, though a traitor by attitude — as much as any spy who endeavors to subvert the country by his actions.
Subordinate, or lesser, factions
Factions are created when a significant number of people, having similar ideologies or purposes, realize that they are sufficient in number to create a "body politic" to champion their purpose.
That purpose can take two forms; First, to achieve a recognition, though in so doing, not to affect the Constitution, the laws, or obtain any favor other than those enjoyed by all of the people; Second, to achieve recognition for the purpose of political gain, changing of laws, and obtaining favor that is not enjoyed by others.
The former has existed in this country throughout its history, and is comprised of people who were born into or have assimilated into the American culture — without intentions of changing that culture.
The latter, on the other hand, is inclined to adapt the culture to his beliefs, to effect change that is inconsistent with that which the Founders gave us, and, will often employ the pretense of Constitutional right, though the result will be the diminishment of the rights of others, in favor of their object, whether financial, legal, or both. They choose not to assimilate, rather, to force change upon the Principle Faction and force that Faction to subordinate to their will.
Now, as we begin to look at lesser factions (any subordinate to the Principle Faction), they will come under two categories. First will be those who are not in serious conflict with the Principle Faction. Second, those who are in conflict with the Principle Faction.
Tags: assimilation, citizenship, Constitution, de jure, demonization, education, factions, government, history, immigration, organization, patriots, public, sovereign
Social and Political Superiority
The Founding Fathers, as we most often recognize them, were "gentlemen". They were men of leisure that had incomes to sustain that leisure, without effort on their part. For the most part, they earned, in their earlier years, the status of gentlemen by establishing themselves as farmers, landowners or businessmen who had residual income, leaving them a great deal of time for social or political functions. They seldom, if ever, received compensation for the efforts on behalf of the public. Washington is, perhaps, the best known and recognized for this behavior by refusing to receive payment for service as either the Commander of the Continental Army, or, as the First Executive. In both instances, he received only expenses related to the position.
They also maintained an indifference to political situations. What this meant was that they were disinterested parties — they had no dog in the fight, so to speak. They did not use their political influence for financial gain, and to do so would be a violation of the public trust that they had assumed.
Of course, there were exceptions. Two that never gained the status of gentleman were Thomas Paine and Samuel Adams. One who was the only significant one to have been born a gentleman, though he used his influence for financial gain, was Aaron Burr. Of these three, only Adams retains respect for his role in bringing about the new nation, the United States of America.
The Founders, when they wrote or spoke, directed their work to their peers — the other gentlemen. They did sense that they had social and political superiority over the working class, and for decades, spoke of political philosophy only amongst themselves.
Much of what they said, especially the writings of Paine, brought to the common man the idea, that had not existed in England, that decisions could be made by them, as the common people — the body of the nation.
The secrecy of the Constitutional Convention, in Philadelphia, in 1787, was secretive so as to avoid outside influence, and, because these were gentlemen and their discussions were amongst themselves. However, the result of the Convention, especially when discussed in the state ratifying conventions, brought to light to those common people that they were able to participate in the selection, even from among themselves, of their representatives. The time of the gentlemen looking down their noses at the common people was expired, and, it was expired as a result of the actions of those gentlemen.
From that point on, the ability of those elected and appointed representatives of the people to influence legislation that would provide them financial gain, has continued to grow. While the concept of social and political superiority had been substantially abolished, until recently.
Over the past few decades, we have not only seen the extremes of legislation to provide financial gain to the office holders, and, of course, their supporters, but have also seen an air of social and political superiority return, more manifest than ever, then in the days of the Founders.
If we return to the late thirties and early forties, the participation of the United States in World War II was not going to happen. Public sympathy and the idea that it was not our war, held the government back from open participation, until the events of December 7, 1941, when Japan attack Pearl Harbor.
More recently, however, the public is lead, by false claims, false flag waving, and any other means conceivable, to assure our willingness to let the decision be made in Washington, by those who act as our social and political superiors.
WE can look to the early nineties and the discussions about NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), where the "superiors" had decided that the Trade agreement must be adopted. Their underlings, those who aspired to join the elite as social and political superiors, took hold of the discussion and directed it toward which provisions were good, and which were bad, without regard to the whole concept of such a Free Trade Agreement. We now understand that it was not the provisions, rather, the concept, that was flawed.
More recently, we have what is commonly referred to as 'Obamacare'. The discussions were directed, by the wannabes, to the discussing of the merit of the provisions, rather than the concept itself. After all, both parties had, for years, attempted to foist national healthcare on us, and, as our social and political "superiors", they knew what we wanted, and, finally, convinced us that we should participate in the discussion and accept the outcome. Of course, those who would like to prove themselves as social and political "superiors" were the men (and women) on the ground who encouraged us to play along and accept what the elite had decided was best for us.
Just a couple of weeks ago, though the majority strongly held out against a debt ceiling increase (a near annual occurrence, though only recently brought to light), the social and political superiors, and their minions, have brought us perpetual, self-sustaining, debt. Only, this time, they and their minions could not convert us to acceptance of their policy, without consideration of the people and their posterity, and, it appears, to most of the financial world, that their concept of philanthropy was destructive to the entire world. It appears that in their arrogance, they have failed to even consider the consequences of their folly, so they remain in Washington, knowing that they were right, and wondering why the entire world cannot see things as they do.
Now, I don't want to say that financial gain is all that they pursue, though when we consider the makeup of the country and the Congress, we find only 1% of the population is millionaires while 47% of the Congress is millionaires.
It does appear that we have returned to that age of gentlemen (and gentlewomen) being those who have social and political superiority make the decisions, yet the concept that deriving personal gain is unethical, is lost to history. Absent prohibition of the latter, there are no practical constraints on the former. There are no longer disinterested parties who will make rational decisions. The decisions of the current government are made by those very interested in the outcome — and what they and their friends might derive therefrom.
Tags: congress, Constitution, government, history, public, revolution
"We the People", but, Who are We? – Part V
In Part I, we established what the Supreme Court determined to be "We the People", or, "citizens of the United States", prior to the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment.
In Part II, we saw that the Fourteenth Amendment conferred to those not of "We the People", regardless of prior status, a new class of people who are granted "privileges and immunities", though not the rights inherent with "We the People".
In Part III, we see that within a few years of ratification of the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court confirms that "rights" were not conveyed by that Amendment.
In Part IV, we found that the Supreme Court did recognize that there was a difference between a citizen of a state and a citizen of the United States, and that the latter was protected (jurisdiction existed) by the Fourteenth Amendment and to the former, it did not (no jurisdiction).
Now, we will move forward, 56 years, to 1964, to a case that reaffirms the classes of citizen, though begins to erode the protections previously provided to citizens of the United States.
The case is Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1, and involves a discussion by the Court of just which Amendments (Bill of Rights) are extended to those who seek protection under the Fourteenth Amendment, when it says:
"It was on the authority of that decision that the Court said in 1908 in Twining v. New Jersey, supra, that "it is possible that some of the personal rights safeguarded by the first eight Amendments against National action may also be safeguarded against state action, because a denial of them would be a denial of due process of law."
So, the question that arose in this case is, to what extent does the Fourteenth Amendment apply to the protection of rights, and, which rights are protected. It redefines what was said in Twining, and requires that any right being protected "be a denial of the due process of law". This is a simple paraphrase of "the equal protection of the laws", from the Fourteenth Amendment. So, it simply expands that singular authority to include speech, press, and other rights within the first eight amendments, so long as "due process" can be brought into the equation.
It did not, however, even begin to address anything that would remove, or affect, the nature of the two classes of citizen. They remain unimpaired and intact.
Since the Courts will use a stepping stone process in "revising" laws to a more modern "interpretation", Malloy afforded the Court the opportunity to undermine the distinction between the two classes. However, they chose not to walk upon that sacred ground. Their absence of comment on the two classes leaves that distinction intact.
So, we can see that from Dred Scott (Part I), in 1854, the Court established a foundation of this country as being built upon, by, and for, a certain class of people. This is probably best defined by the wording of Justice Taney, in that decision, to wit:
"It is true, every person, and every class and description of persons, who were at the time of the adoption of the Constitution recognised as citizens in the several States, became also citizens of this new political body; but none other; it was formed by them, and for them and their posterity, but for no one else and privileges guaranteed to citizens of this new sovereignty were intended to embrace those only who were then members of the several State communities, or who should afterwards by birthright or otherwise become members, according to the provisions of the Constitution and the principles on which it was founded. It was the union of those who were at that time members of distinct and separate political communities into one political family, whose power, for certain specified purposes, was to extend over the whole territory of the United States. And it gave to each citizen rights and privileges outside of his State which he did not before possess, and placed him in every other State upon a perfect equality with its own citizens as to rights of person and rights of property; it made him a citizen of the United States.
For the sake of discussion, this sacred class (within the United States) shall be referred to as "We the People". But, perhaps, we should endeavor, with a bit more precision, to define just what/who those "We the People" were/are, in light of what Justice Taney said.
After much thought, I can only come up with three possibilities that might shed light on Taney's description of that class known as "We the People".
That it would include only those who are defined by the rather common acronym, "WASP", meaning "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant". When we consider that in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, Jews were not allowed to reside in some of the colonies; that loathing of Catholics (Popists) was common through most of the colonies, during that period, more effectually demonstrated by the objection to the Quebec Act of 1774, allowing Catholics to vote and hold office in Canada, are indicative of the sympathies of the times;
Caucasians of European descent, which would include perhaps 99% of those who had immigrated to the colonies to begin life, anew; or,
Those of Indo-European language groups (first defined in 1647 and including English, Dutch, Greek, Latin, Persian, German, Slavic, Celtic and Baltic languages), thus having a common heritage and culture, at least in the distant past.
There is no way that we can interpret, from what Justice Taney said, just who "We the People" were, though it is clear by the context of his description that it would include those above described peoples, or combinations thereof, "but for no one else.
Then, the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified and granted citizenship to people who were not of this class, "We the People". Further, it granted then only privileges and immunities. It did not grant them rights.
This position (distinction between classes) is further supported by the ratification of the 15th Amendment (granting the right of suffrage (voting), regardless of "race, color, or previous condition of servitude".
Then, in 1874, the Court, in Happersett (Part III), made clear that the Fourteenth Amendment did not convey rights. However, the Constitution makes clear that there are rights retained by the people (We the People), so since there cannot be conflict between the Constitution and an AMENDMENT (unless expressly resolved in the amendment), the distinction is further enhanced.
So, for all intents and purposes, there are four classes of people in this country, today:
"We the People", those descended from the Framers, or otherwise within the principles of the original Constitution, who have retained their rights;
Those made citizens by the Fourteenth Amendment, with the privileges and immunities granted therein, and any rights specifically bestowed, by subsequent amendments;
Those who are here, lawfully and in accordance with all laws, as visitors, and who have not violated any conditions of the permission granted to visit; and,
Those who are here unlawfully, that have entered in violation of our laws or have violated the conditions of their permissive visitation.
The foundation of this country, then, rests upon an understanding that the purpose of the Constitution, and the country, is to provide a home for those of the class, "We the People". That others who choose to assimilate into the American Culture do so with that understanding, and the understanding that they are the beneficiaries of all privileges and immunities, though only those rights specifically granted.
It can also be concluded that any who have designs contrary to the support and continuation of the United States, as intended by the Framers, and described herein, are inconsistent with the purpose of the country, and, as such, are against the Constitution and should be deemed unacceptable and unwanted visitors.
If the United States is to return to its former stature as the beacon to the world of freed enterprise by a free people, we must return, also, to the concept that allowed such concepts of freedom to prosper, and grow, in a rather short history, to what it had become by the end of the Nineteenth Century.
It can return to that stature only if we do return to those principles that made this nation great. Absent a dedication to that purpose, we are destined to be nothing more than a footnote in history. And, that will be our rightful place, if we fail to act to secure that which we hold so dear.
Thus concludes this series.
Part I can be found at "We the People", but, Who are We? – Part I
Part II can be found at "We the People", but, Who are We? – Part II
Part III can be found at "We the People", but, Who are We? — Part III
Part IV can be found at "We the People", but, Who are We? — Part IV
Tags: assimilation, citizenship, Constitution, de jure, definitions, government, history, immigration, law, sovereign, supreme Court
Category: Articles, citizenship | 2 Comments


text:
<?php

class Main extends CI_Controller
{
	function __construct() {
		// Call the Controller constructor
		parent::__construct();
		$this->load->library('session');
	}

	public function _remap($method, $params = array()) {
		// enforce access control to protected functions

		$user = $this->session->userdata('user');

		$client = array(
			'index',
			'get_events',
			'next',
			'get_rooms',
			'form_add_booking',
			'add_booking',
			'form_edit_booking',
			'edit_booking',
			'change_booking',
			'delete_booking'
			);

		$admin = array(
			'move_event',
			'resize_event',
			'confirm_event',
			'add_event',
			);

		/* Check if the user is logged in */
		if (in_array($method, array_merge($client, $admin)) && !$user) {
			redirect('account/index', 'refresh');
		} else if (in_array($method, $admin) && $user) {
			/* Check if the user is an admin */
			if ($user->usertype != User::ADMIN)
				redirect('main/index', 'refresh');
		}

		return call_user_func_array(array($this, $method), $params);
	}

	function index() {
		// Check if a custom message was specified.
		$message = $this->session->flashdata('message');
		if (isset($message))
			$data['message'] = $message;

		$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
		$data['main'] = 'main/body';
		$data['scripts'] = 'main/scripts';
		$data['styles'] = 'main/styles';

		$this->load->view('template', $data);
	}

	function get_events() {
		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$this->load->model('client_model');
		$this->load->model('room_model');

		$bookings = $this->booking_model->get_bookings();
		$events = array();
		$color = array('0' => 'blue' , '1' => 'green', '2' => 'red' );

		foreach ($bookings as $booking) {
			$client = $this->client_model->get_from_id($booking->userid);
			$room = $this->room_model->getFromId($booking->roomid);

			$date = new DateTime("$booking->start_time");
			$start = $date->format('h:ia');
			$date = new DateTime("$booking->end_time");
			$end = $date->format('h:ia');

			$str = "Room: " . $room->name . "
" .
			"Booked from: " . $start . " to " . $end . "
" .
			"Booked by: " . $client->agency . "
";
			"Description: " . $booking->description;

			if ($booking->repeat == 1) {
				$repeat = true;
				$repeat_end = new DateTime($booking->repeat_end);

				while ($repeat) {
					$events[] = array(
						'id' => $booking->id,
						'title' => $booking->title,
						'start' => $booking->start_time,
						'color' => $color[$booking->status],
						'end' => $booking->end_time,
						'resourceId' => intval($booking->roomid),
						'description' => "$str"
						);

					$booking->move($booking->repeat_freq, 0, $booking->roomid);
					$start = new DateTime($booking->get_start_date());

					if ($start < $repeat_end) {
						$repeat = true;
					} else {
						$repeat = false;
					}
				}
			} else {
				$events[] = array(
					'id' => $booking->id,
					'title' => $booking->title,
					'start' => $booking->start_time,
					'end' => $booking->end_time,
					'color' => $color[$booking->status],
					'resourceId' => intval($booking->roomid),
					'description' => "$str"
					);
			}
		}

		echo json_encode($events);
	}

	function next($limit){
		//move the page to next set of rooms
		$limit = intval($limit) + 6;

		$data['go_date'] = $this->input->post('date');
		$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
		$data['main'] = 'main/body';
		$data['scripts'] = 'main/scripts';
		$data['styles'] = 'main/styles';
		$data['lower_limit'] = $limit;

		$this->load->view('template', $data);
	}

	function get_rooms($id){
		$var = intval($id);
		$this->load->model('room_model');

		for($i=$var; $i<$var+7; $i++){
			$room = $this->room_model->getFromId($i);
			$rooms[] = array(
				'id' => $i,
				'name' => $room->name
				);
		}
		echo json_encode($rooms);
	}

	function move_event() {
		$data = $this->input->get_post('json');
		$event = json_decode($data);

		$this->load->model('booking_model');

		$booking = $this->booking_model->get($event->id);
		$booking->move($event->day_delta, $event->minute_delta, $event->resourceId);

		$this->booking_model->update_date_time($booking);
		$this->booking_model-> updateRoom($booking);
	}

	function resize_event() {
		$data = $this->input->get_post('json');
		$event = json_decode($data);

		$this->load->model('booking_model');

		$booking = $this->booking_model->get($event->id);
		$booking->resize($event->day_delta, $event->minute_delta);

		$this->booking_model->update_date_time($booking);

	}

	function confirm_event(){
		$data = $this->input->get_post('json');
		$event = json_decode($data);

		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$booking = $this->booking_model->get($event->id);

		$user = $this->session->userdata('user');

		if ($user->usertype == User::ADMIN) {
			$booking->status = 1;
			$this->booking_model->updateStatus($booking);
		}

	}

	function add_event() {
		$data = $this->input->get_post('json');
		$event = json_decode($data);

		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$this->load->model('user_model');

		$booking = new Booking();

		$user = $this->session->userdata('user');

		$booking->userid = $user->id;
		$booking->title = $event->title;
		$booking->date_booked = date('d-m-Y');
		$booking->set_times($event->start, $event->end, TRUE);
		$booking->roomid = $event->room;

		if ($event->allDay) {
			$booking->set_start_time(9, 0);
			$booking->set_end_time(18, 0);
		}

		$this->booking_model->insert($booking);
		echo json_encode($booking);
	}

	function form_add_booking() {
		$this->load->model('room_model');
		$this->load->model('client_model');
		$this->load->model('booking_model');

		$user = $this->session->userdata('user');

		if ($user->usertype == User::ADMIN || $user->usertype == User::FRONTDESK) {
			$data['clients'] = $this->client_model->get_clients();
		} else if ($user->usertype == User::CLIENT) {
			$client = $this->client_model->get_from_id($user->clientid);
			$clients = array($client->id => $client->agency);
			$data['clients'] = $clients;
		} else {
			$data['clients'] = array();
		}

		$data['rooms'] = $this->room_model->get_rooms();
		$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
		$data['main'] = 'booking/add_booking';
		$data['styles'] = 'booking/styles';
		$data['scripts'] = 'booking/scripts';

		$this->load->view('template', $data);
	}

    // If the from-date is before today's date, it is invalid
	function validate_from_date($from_date){

		$from_date   = $this->input->post('from_date');
		$from_time   = $this->input->post('from_time');

		$start = $from_date . 't' . $from_time;

		$start_date = strtotime($start);
		$today = strtotime("now");

		if ($start_date < $today) {
			$this->form_validation->set_message('validate_from_date',
				'The %s field can not be a date that is before today\'s date');
			return FALSE;
		} else {
			return TRUE;
		}

	}

    // If the to-date is before the from-date, it is invalid
	function validate_to_date(){
		$from_date   = $this->input->post('from_date');
		$from_time   = $this->input->post('from_time');
		$to_date     = $this->input->post('to_date');
		$to_time     = $this->input->post('to_time');

		$start = $from_date . 't' . $from_time;
		$end = $to_date . 't' . $to_time;
		$start_date = strtotime($start);
		$finish_date = strtotime($end);

		if ($start_date > $finish_date) {
			$this->form_validation->set_message('validate_to_date',
				'The %s field can not be a date that is before the From field');
			return FALSE;
		} else {
			return TRUE;
		}

	}

	function add_booking() {

        // Load model, helper, library
		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$this->load->helper(array('form', 'url'));
		$this->load->library('form_validation');
		$this->form_validation->set_rules('title', 'Title', 'required');
		$this->form_validation->set_rules('from_date', 'From', 'required|callback_validate_from_date');
		$this->form_validation->set_rules('to_date', 'To', 'required|callback_validate_to_date');

		if ($this->form_validation->run() == FALSE) {

			$this->load->model('room_model');
			$this->load->model('client_model');

			$user = $this->session->userdata('user');

			if ($user->usertype == User::ADMIN || $user->usertype == User::FRONTDESK) {
				$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->get_bookings();
				$data['clients'] = $this->client_model->get_clients();

			} else if ($user->usertype == User::CLIENT) {
				$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->getByUserID($user->clientid);
				$client = $this->client_model->get_from_id($user->clientid);
				$clients = array($client->id => $client->agency );
				$data['clients'] = $clients;
			}

			$data['rooms'] = $this->room_model->get_rooms();
			$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
			$data['main'] = 'booking/add_booking';
			$data['styles'] = 'booking/styles';
			$data['scripts'] = 'booking/scripts';

			$this->load->view('template', $data);

		} else {

			// Get the input data from the POST data
			$title       = $this->input->post('title');
			$from_date   = $this->input->post('from_date');
			$from_time   = $this->input->post('from_time');
			$to_date     = $this->input->post('to_date');
			$to_time     = $this->input->post('to_time');
			$all_day     = $this->input->post('all_day');
			$repeat      = $this->input->post('repeat');
			$repeat_freq = $this->input->post('repeat_freq');
			$repeat_end  = $this->input->post('repeat_end');
			$description = $this->input->post('description');
			$client      = $this->input->post('client');
			$room        = $this->input->post('room');
			$status      = $this->input->post('status');

			// All day events default to same-day events running from 9-7
			if ($all_day == TRUE) {
				$to_date = $from_date;
				$from_time = '09:00:00';
				$to_time = '19:00:00';
			}

			// Handle repeating events
			if ($repeat == 'repeat') {
				$repeat = 1;
			} else {
				$repeat = 0;
				$repeat_freq = 0;
				$repeat_end = NULL;
			}

			// Add the event

			// Create a new Booking object
			$booking = new Booking();
			$booking->init();

			// Set the relevant properties in the Booking object
			$start = $from_date . 't' . $from_time;
			$end = $to_date . 't' . $to_time;
			$booking->set_times($start, $end);

			$booking->title = $title;
			$booking->description = $description;
			$booking->userid = $client;
			$booking->roomid = $room;
			$booking->status = $status;
			$booking->repeat = $repeat;
			$booking->repeat_freq = $repeat_freq;
			$booking->repeat_end = $repeat_end;

			$booking->date_booked = date_format(new DateTime(), 'Y-m-d');

			$this->booking_model->insert($booking);

			//Redirect to the main application page
			redirect('main/index', 'refresh');

		}

	}

	function get_all_rooms(){
		$this->load->model('room_model');
		$rooms = $this->room_model->get_rooms();
		echo json_encode($rooms);
	}

	function form_edit_booking(){
		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$this->load->model('client_model');
		$this->load->model('user_model');
		$this->load->model('room_model');

		$user = $this->session->userdata('user');

		if ($user->usertype == User::ADMIN || $user->usertype == User::FRONTDESK) {
			$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->get_bookings();
			$data['clients'] = $this->client_model->get_clients();
		} else if ($user->usertype == User::CLIENT) {
			$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->getByUserID($user->clientid);
			$client = $this->client_model->get_from_id($user->clientid);
			$clients = array($client->id => $client->agency );
			$data['clients'] = $clients;
		}

		$data['rooms'] = $this->room_model->get_rooms();
		$data['booking'] = new Booking();
		$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
		$data['main'] = 'booking/edit_event';
		$data['styles'] = 'booking/styles';
		$data['scripts'] = 'booking/scripts';

		$this->load->view('template', $data);
	}

	function edit_booking($id){
    	        // Load the client and room models
		$this->load->model('client_model');
		$this->load->model('room_model');
		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$this->load->model('user_model');

		$user =  $this->session->userdata('user');
		$msg =" The changes cannot be implemented because  :  ";
		$this->load->helper(array('form', 'url'));
		$this->load->library('form_validation');
		$this->form_validation->set_rules('from_date', 'From', 'required|callback_validate_from_date');
		$this->form_validation->set_rules('to_date', 'To', 'required|callback_validate_to_date');

		if ($this->form_validation->run() == FALSE) {
			$msg .= validation_errors();
			$this->change_booking($id,$msg);

		}
		else{
        // Get the input data from the POST data
			$title       = $this->input->post('title');
			$from_date   = $this->input->post('from_date');
			$from_time   = $this->input->post('from_time');
			$to_date     = $this->input->post('to_date');
			$to_time     = $this->input->post('to_time');
			$all_day     = $this->input->post('all_day');
			$repeat      = $this->input->post('repeat');
			$repeat_freq = $this->input->post('repeat_freq');
			$repeat_end  = $this->input->post('repeat_end');
			$description = $this->input->post('description');
			$client      = $this->input->post('client');
			$room        = $this->input->post('room');
			$status      = $this->input->post('status');

        // All day events default to same-day events running from 9-7
			if ($all_day == TRUE) {
				$to_date = $from_date;
				$from_time = '09:00:00';
				$to_time = '19:00:00';
			}

        // Handle repeating events
			if ($repeat == 'repeat') {
				$repeat = 1;
			} else {
				$repeat = 0;
				$repeat_freq = 0;
				$repeat_end = NULL;
			}

        // Load the booking model

			$booking = $this->booking_model->get($id);

        // Set the start and end times
			$start = $from_date . 't' . $from_time;
			$end = $to_date . 't' . $to_time;
			$booking->set_times($start, $end);

        // Set more data
			$booking->description = $description;
			$booking->userid = $client;
			$booking->roomid = $room;
			$booking->status = $status;
			$booking->repeat = $repeat;
			$booking->repeat_freq = $repeat_freq;
			$booking->repeat_end = $repeat_end;

        // Update fields
			$this->booking_model->updateRoom($booking);
			$this->booking_model->update_date_time($booking);
			$this->booking_model->updateStatus($booking);
			$this->booking_model->update_client($booking);
			$this->booking_model->update_freq($booking);
			$this->booking_model->update_description($booking);

			if ($user->usertype == User::ADMIN || $user->usertype == User::FRONTDESK) {
				$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->get_bookings();
				$data['clients'] = $this->client_model->get_clients();
			} else if ($user->usertype == User::CLIENT) {
				$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->getByUserID($user->clientid);
				$client = $this->client_model->get_from_id($user->clientid);
				$clients = array($client->id => $client->agency);
				$data['clients'] = $clients;
			}

        // Call the view
			$data['rooms'] = $this->room_model->get_rooms();
			$data['booking'] = new Booking();
			$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
			$data['main'] = 'booking/edit_event';
			$data['styles'] = 'booking/styles';
			$data['scripts'] = 'booking/scripts';
			$data['message'] = $booking->title . " has been updated";

			$this->load->view('template', $data);

		}
	}

	function delete_booking(){

		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$this->load->model('client_model');
		$this->load->model('room_model');

		$user =  $this->session->userdata('user');

		$id = $this->input->post('id');
		$booking = $this->booking_model->get($id);

		if (($booking->status == Booking::TENTATIVE && $booking->userid == $user->clientid && $user->usertype == User::CLIENT) ||
			($user->usertype == User::ADMIN)) {
			$this->booking_model->delete($id);
			$data['message'] = $booking->title . " has been deleted";
		} else {
			$data['message'] = "Insufficient rights to delete $booking->title.";
		}

		if ($user->usertype == User::ADMIN || $user->usertype == User::FRONTDESK) {
			$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->get_bookings();
			$data['clients'] = $this->client_model->get_clients();
		} else if ($user->usertype == User::CLIENT) {
			$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->getByUserID($user->clientid);
			$client = $this->client_model->get_from_id($user->clientid);
			$clients = array($client->id => $client->agency );
			$data['clients'] = $clients;
		}

		$data['rooms'] = $this->room_model->get_rooms();
		$data['booking'] = new Booking();
		$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
		$data['main'] = 'booking/edit_event';
		$data['styles'] = 'booking/styles';
		$data['scripts'] = 'booking/scripts';

		$this->load->view('template', $data);

	}

	function change_booking($id="", $msg=""){

		$this->load->model('booking_model');
		$this->load->model('client_model');
		$this->load->model('room_model');

		if($id == ""){
			$id = $this->input->post('booking_id');
		}

		$user =  $this->session->userdata('user');

		if ($user->usertype == User::ADMIN || $user->usertype == User::FRONTDESK) {
			$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->get_bookings();
			$data['clients'] = $this->client_model->get_clients();
		} else if ($user->usertype == User::CLIENT) {
			$data['booking_list'] = $this->booking_model->getByUserID($user->clientid);
			$client = $this->client_model->get_from_id($user->clientid);
			$clients = array($client->id => $client->agency );
			$data['clients'] = $clients;
		}

		$data['rooms'] = $this->room_model->get_rooms();
		$data['booking'] = $this->booking_model->get($id);
		$data['title'] = 'Storefront Calendar';
		$data['main'] = 'booking/edit_event';
		$data['styles'] = 'booking/styles';
		$data['scripts'] = 'booking/scripts';
		$data['message'] = $msg;
		$this->load->view('template', $data);

	}

}

/* End of file main.php */
/* Location: ./application/controllers/main.php */

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Creating modern beautiful software is our passion!
Amorph Systems specializes in the design and development of software within the scope of resource integration, data collection, transformation, visualization, analysis and forecasting technologies.
Are you a talented, passionate, and curious person? Do you want to shape solutions for high-tech industries? If yes, then join Amorph Systems.
Create the future with us! Become part of our motivated and powerful teams with various development and career chances as well as projects asking for your creativity, your ingeniousness and your great ideas.
Amorph Systems strives for excellence and leadership. Our products and services are of the highest quality and are designed to our customers' targets. Our actions are shaped by continuous fast learning, permanent innovation and high reactivity to changes.
We avoid outside control by remaining financially successful and independent. At the same time, we build our success on our employees, managers and owners who remain with the company for a long time and identify with it.
In our collaboration with customers, suppliers and partners we place great value on honesty, respect for individuals, mutual respect, reliability and trustworthiness.
Amorph Systems offers a work environment distinguished by short cycles of decision-making processes and open doors. Upper and middle management is always ready to listen to the concerns of employees. This easy access to management speeds up the decision-making processes. Happiness also plays an important role: There is no day that goes by without a smile.
The company is seen by the founders and employees as one team striving together for success. Together we carry forward the goals of the company, working jointly in harmony to ensure a sustainable company growth.
Are you interested in being part of a team in an innovative company?
Are you looking for the right way to get started in a future-oriented, high-tech professional field?
Find out about open positions at Amorph Systems.


GB&A acoustic guitar + cushioned guitar cover with more than 4 pockets + capo + plectrums. These all have hardly been used and I want to sell to a buyer who is eager to learn and really in need. Price is non-negotiable.


winning office three years ago.
trade and Harper said so himself in 2007.
going to "vocally and publicly" stand up for human rights?
plank of its relationship with China.
mix of issues on this week's agenda.
express concern on others," Soudas said.
It doesn't seem that way to outside observers.
and that he should be returned to Canada.
a terrible miscalculation and he now sits in jail.
release of any other political prisoners during his three days here.
rebalancing of the Canada-China relationship.
concerned about order. They're very concerned about a billion people.
They're fearful of the consequences of losing that kind of control.
paramount consideration in all aspects of how we have dealing with China."
into the country do any monitoring or research.
politicians, says Rae, who dealt with them while he was Ontario's premier.
freer society generally leads to a freer politics."


Kuzeyboru Power Plant Spiral Corrugated Pipes are manufactured by HDPE raw material and preffered on the high prestigous projects in the world. Up to 2000 mm diameter of Power Plant Spiral Corrugated pipes are producing for all over the world projects in demanded specifications.
Kuzeyboru working for your Power Energy Projects and gives guarantee with Powerfull pipes.
Kuzeyboru young and dynamic team well experienced and support you on the Power Plant Piping Systems of you. We are near of you! In Georgia HPP Projects, in Guetamala, in United States, in Lebanon, in United Kingdom, in Bulgaria, in Cameroon, in Ghana, in Ecvatoral Guinea, in Turkey, in Philippines... In your site.
Kuzeyboru HDPE power plant pipes are connecting with electrofusion jointing type and it's easly connectable with the lightweight speciality. Two HDPE Pipes are pairing with a electrofusion band and joining with two melted corrugated spiral pipes. It is provide safely usage on your HPP Projects and manufacturing according to international standards and client demands.
Kuzeyboru Producing Power Plant HDPE Corrugated Spiral Pipe on your site.
Kuzeyboru HDPE Corrugated Spiral Pipes allowing to produce at site and saving time & cost. Kuzeyboru produce the HPP Pipes on your construction area!
The Kuzeyboru Hyroelectric Power Plant Pipes are preffered in worldwide. HPP Pipes to be indispensable for your prestigious projects too with high performance and quality.
Here are the current 2019 Power Plant Spiral Corrugated Pipes Price list. Contact us to get best price and you can take an information by calling +90 382 266 23 03 or export@kuzeyborugroup.com.


Your home and car loan rates may soon come down after the Reserve Bank of India's, or RBI's, decision to cut the repo rate by 25 basis points or bps to 7.75 per cent on January 15, much ahead of the February 3 policy review.
The cut in the rate at which banks borrow from the RBI for short-term needs is the first in 20 months. The last cut (from 7.5 per cent to 7.25 per cent) happened in May 2013; the rate was increased two times (by 25 bps each) after that.
The out-of-turn rate cut has given hope that the RBI has reversed the interest rate cycle and further rates cuts are on the horizon in 2015.
"We believe this is the beginning of a big rate cut cycle. We expect a further 125 bps cut over the next 12 months, a cumulative 150 bps in this cycle, if CPI (consumer price inflation) stays closer to 5 per cent in most of 2015," Morgan Stanley said after the RBI's decision.
The cut will reduce the cost of capital for banks and, in turn, cause lending rates to fall. Banks are saying that there is scope for a rate cut as the RBI's recent move indicates the beginning of a rate cut cycle. However, at what pace banks will cut rates will depend on their balance sheets, credit policies and asset-liability situation.
"The lending rate cut depends on deposit rates. As and when deposit rates come down, lending rates will also fall. Some banks have already cut deposit rates. When the impact of the same is seen on the credit cost, the rates will come down," says Ashish Parthasarthy, treasurer, HDFC Bank. According to Parthasarthy, most banks will start cutting rates before March.
Some banks are likely to soon hold meetings of asset-liability committees to decide the course of action. Asset-liability committees monitor asset (loan given and investments) and liability (deposits) situation of banks and suggest policies in case of changes in the interest rates cycle.
"We had reduced the base rate in June 2014. After the recent RBI move, we are assessing the situation. Our asset-liability committee will meet in a week or 10 days," says KR Mohana Chandran, GM and chief risk officer, Federal Bank.
United Bank of India has already cut the base rate from 10.25 per cent to 10 per cent. Base rate is the rate below which banks cannot lend. Lending rates are base rate plus a spread. For example, ICICI Bank's lending rate for home loans of less than Rs 75 lakh is base rate (10 per cent) plus 0.10 per cent (10.10 per cent).
Some banks have also started cutting deposit rates. Oriental Bank of Commerce (OBC) recently reduced interest rates on deposits for 2-10 years 50 bps to 8.75 per cent.
The RBI has also reiterated that the spread charged by banks from existing borrowers should not be increased except on account of deterioration in customers' risk profile.
It has also asked banks to spell out the rationale for their pricing policy and the range of spread for given borrower categories.
The rate cut has also cheered real estate companies as they feel it will not only boost sales but also bring down their borrowing costs. "This repo rate cut, though insufficient, is a timely dose to revive consumer sentiment. The real estate sector, along with other areas of the economy, now has a reason to cheer, not merely because of rate cut but also the underlying positive message sent by Raghuram Rajan (RBI governor) and his team," says Aman Nagar, director, Paras Buildtech.
"It is now banks' turn to pass the benefit to consumers. We hope to see home loan rates come down to 8 per cent in the near future." says Ajay Aggarwal, managing director, Microtek Infrastructures.
Meanwhile, the latest repo rate cut and expectation of more rate cuts this year have stoked bullish sentiment in the bond market.
The 10-year government bonds, trading at just 7.7 per cent, are expected to trade between 7.2 per cent and 7.5 per cent. Debt fund investors will gain from a rate cut and the resultant drop in yield. They should invest in duration funds - income funds, short-term bond funds, etc - that gain from drop in rates.


text:
Good Time (A24, NR)
By Sarah Boslaugh August 25, 2017 August 25, 2017
Leave a Comment on Good Time (A24, NR)
Sometimes it's a compliment to say that a product offers two things in one, as in the old Certs commercial (it's a candy mint! It's a breath mint!). But in filmmaking, the trick is a lot harder to pull off, with exhibit A for that proposition being the latest Ben and Joshua Safdie movie Good Time. It's one movie up to about the hour mark, and is reasonably successful up to that point, with a story that could have been brought to a satisfying conclusion within the normal running time for a feature film.
Then, for reasons known only to the filmmakers, Good Time veers off into an entirely different movie, featuring the same central character but with quite a different tone as well as new characters and a brand new story line. The Safdies try to wrap up the first story at the end of the second, but it feels like they arbitrarily tacked a coda onto the second story line rather than letting it develop through its own internal logic.
The first, and better, story features a de-glammed Robert Pattinson as Connie Nikas, a low-rent crook and all-around parasite who lives only in the moment and will exploit anyone and anything to get what he wants. He does seem to care for his brother Nick (Ben Safdie), who has some kind of a mental disability as well as being hard of hearing, but without making the effort to comprehend who his brother is or what he needs. I'm no expert in mental health, but I'm pretty sure that involving Nick in Connie's criminal enterprises, when Nick is not capable of making even the most elementary decisions for himself, is probably not in Nick's best interests.
When we first meet the Nikas brothers, they're robbing a bank while wearing latex masks that make them appear to be black. It's the first of many subtle ways that the film reminds us of the white privilege the brothers enjoy; another is who the police trust, and who is immediately regarded with suspicion, by the police. Things go badly wrong in the robbery (there's a scene that could have been exploited for humor, Woody Allen style, in which Connie and the bank clerk exchange handwritten notes), due in part to Connie's greed and obstinacy, and one result is that Nick is arrested and placed, under guard, in a hospital.
Connie is not one to quit while he's behind, so he decides to break his brother out of the hospital (as is typical of Connie, he has no concern for the other patients or staff—he can only see what he wants in any situation), but that effort goes even more wrong. This is the start of the second movie, which is much more slowly paced and could have developed into something interesting were it not forcibly grafted on to the first story, and if the screenwriters (Ronald Bronstein and Josh Safdie) raised a finger in the service of making it seem plausible. As it stands, this second story relies so thoroughly on a string of improbabilities that I lost my patience long before the end credits rolled.
In the second story, Connie is shown kindness by a black woman and her teenage daughter, underlining what most people know—the people with the least to give are often the most willing to share it. Of course, all Connie does is exploit them for his own purposes, but in the process the daughter (Taliah Webster, in a very promising film debut) reveals several things about her life that show why she is so easily manipulated by Connie. This brief glimpse of growing up female also suggests how Connie's girlfriend Corey (Jennifer Jason Leigh) came to be the way she is. While both actresses are very good in small roles, we never get to know much about them, because they remain bit players in the male characters' story.
If you can overlook the many problems with Good Time's plot, there are a lot of things to like about it. The first is the filmmakers' unmistakable style, which offers a non-tourist view of New York City that feels true to life (and I'm speaking as someone who lived there for more than a decade). The first half of the film in particular maintains so breathless a pace that watching it becomes a visceral experience, a choice that not coincidentally keeps you from thinking too much about anything you are seeing on the screen. The acting is quite good as well, including Pattinson (no trace of the beautiful vampire, or the Hogwarts schoolboy, is present in his performance), Barkhad Abdi (the head pirate in Captain Phillips) as a security guard, and Peter Verby as Nick's psychiatrist. | Sarah Boslaugh
Tags: featured In the Theatre robert pattinson
Previous Entry Menashe (A24, PG)
Next Entry The Only Living Boy in New York (Roadside Attractions, R)
Live from the Boom Room | Joe Thebeau

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Army Risks Being Outmatched, Leaders Warn
The 2019 defense budget will help "reverse the downward trend that has stifled Army modernization," senior officials are telling Congress.
In joint written testimony, Lt. Gens. John M. Murray and Paul A. Ostrowski told a House subcommittee that the Army has urgent demands. "The Army is engaged in a protracted struggle to out-innovate future competitors, and right now, we are not postured for success. If the Army does not modernize its force to expand and maintain overmatch, we face the potential of being out-matched in high-end conventional combat," they wrote.
"The American people expect their Army to win, and meeting this expectation requires the Army to maintain overmatch against emerging threats and adversaries," Murray and Ostrowski wrote.
Murray is the deputy chief of staff for programs. Ostrowski is military deputy to the assistant secretary for acquisition, logistics and technology.
The 2019 budget includes a 22 percent increase in modernization over the 2018 request.
"Modernization is critical to the future of our Army. For the last several decades, the U.S. Army possessed overmatch based on its qualitative edge in capabilities. It enabled our Army to defeat enemy formations, underpinned credible deterrence, and served as a critical pillar of Joint Force capabilities in all domains—air, land, maritime, space, cyberspace, and the electromagnetic spectrum," Murray and Ostrowski testified. "Now, a combination of strategic, technological, institutional, and budgetary trends places at risk the Army's competitive edge over near-peer adversaries in the next fight."


Xeeva will be there to help every step of the way. If you have questions, we have answers. From onboarding to specific use-case scenarios and everything in between, we offer a range of services to ensure you get the most out of your investment.
Our goal for implementation is to decrease time to results through a rapid launch and deployment. We do this by providing a team of specialists who are trained and ready for specific integration requirements, procurement challenges, change management, and industry expertise to assist with any and all configuration and business process questions. While our software is easy to use, an effective implementation is vital to get your organization onboarded quickly and successfully.
Put our expertise to work for you. Xeeva's professional services cover a range of offerings, including spend analytics, sourcing services, category management services, and tail spend management. Whether you need us to parachute in for help, work side-by-side with you, or just act as a coach for support, we have the knowledge you need. Our experts will change your organization into a strategic operating unit, delivering immediate and sustainable savings. Let our professional services team turn your goals into results.
Xeeva training creates value for your organization through shared knowledge and best practices. We use a combination of classroom style, web-based, hands-on training, and train the trainer courses. For supplier training, we offer a self-service video via our online learning management system for easy accessibility. We also have sourcing support available as a value-added service. Regardless of where you need help, we have training services customized to you.
Xeeva's Results Desk is there to provide the support you need to be successful. Extending beyond typical technical support, our support professionals have sourcing, infrastructure, integration, and software development knowledge. With three service level options to choose from, our Results Desk team is focused on delivering results to our clients. Breathe easy knowing that Xeeva has your back no matter what challenges come up.
All you need to do is fill out the form below.
Let us assist you with your industry specific concern.
Complete the form below for free assistance.
Free 1 hour, no obligation consultation with an industry expert.
Complete the form below to schedule a free consulation session.
Complete the form below to apply for this job post.
We love talking about AI and how it fits into the future of procurement, so leave your info below and we'll reach out shortly!
Are invoices matched to contracted rates?
Want the full report (with all the details)?


text:
A rabbinic cabinet or rabbinic council is a branch of a usually secular Jewish organization of some type. Rabbinic cabinets are reserved as advisory and outreach councils for rabbis and cantors who are members of such organizations. They are not to be confused with the associated rabbinical membership and policy bodies of religious and denominational organizations.

Rabbinic cabinets have also been assembled by leaders of Jewish seminaries and educational institutions, such as HUC-JIR's President's Rabbinic Council or JTS's Chancellor's Rabbinic Cabinet. These are usually assembled to help guide educational and administrative policy along a theological or ethical perspective.

Organizations which possess rabbinic cabinets
 Jewish Voice for Peace
 Arzenu
 J Street
 Jewish Federations of North America
 State of Israel Bonds
 Friends of the Israel Defense Forces

References

Rabbinical organizations

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Butragueno backs under-fire Lopetegui
Under-fire Real Madrid coach Julen Lopetegui received support from director Emilio Butragueno.
Dejan Kalinic
20 October, 2018 08:11 IST
Real Madrid coach Julen Lopetegui. - Getty Images
Real Madrid director Emilio Butragueno backed Julen Lopetegui, saying the under-fire coach had his trust.
Lopetegui is under increasing pressure at the European champions after a four-match winless run, during which Madrid has failed to score.
But Butragueno – director of institutional relations at the club – offered the former Spain boss support ahead of Madrid's hosting of Levante in La Liga on Saturday.
"We have a great technical team. We trust them and we are confident that we will have a good season. Real Madrid always go to win at any field and every time we play it's for the millions of fans around the world," he said on Friday.
Madrid is fifth in the table but, given it is kicking off before its rivals this matchday, would jump top with a win over Levante.