LIBERTY 15 COASTAL CAROLINA 14 Flames earn automatic FCS playoff berth out of Big South Conference – Video

Posted on by


LIBERTY 15 COASTAL CAROLINA 14 Flames earn automatic FCS playoff berth out of Big South Conference
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/CarolinaLive Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/newschannel15 Subscribe to our YouTube channel: ...

By: WPDE NewsChannel 15

Follow this link:

LIBERTY 15 COASTAL CAROLINA 14 Flames earn automatic FCS playoff berth out of Big South Conference - Video

2014 Liberty Football Stuns #1 Coastal Carolina: Sights and Sounds – Video

Posted on by


2014 Liberty Football Stuns #1 Coastal Carolina: Sights and Sounds
Chima Uzowihe blocked a potential game-winning field goal as time expired, allowing Liberty to punch its ticket to the NCAA FCS Playoffs for the first time with a 15-14 victory over No. 2/1...

By: Liberty University Flames

Read the original:

2014 Liberty Football Stuns #1 Coastal Carolina: Sights and Sounds - Video

2006 Jeep Liberty Limited 4dr SUV 4WD for sale in Chambersbu – Video

Posted on by


2006 Jeep Liberty Limited 4dr SUV 4WD for sale in Chambersbu
This 2006 Jeep Liberty Limited 4dr SUV 4WD is for sale in Chambersburg, PA 17202 at Kyners Auto Sales INC. Contact Kyners Auto Sales INC at http://www.kynersautos.com or http://www.carsforsale.c ...

By: Kyners Auto Sales

Go here to read the rest:

2006 Jeep Liberty Limited 4dr SUV 4WD for sale in Chambersbu - Video

Liberty football team to face JMU in first round of FCS playoffs

Posted on by

LYNCHBURG, Va. -

The Liberty University football team will make its first-ever FCS playoff appearance on Saturday against James Madison University.

The game will be played at 4 p.m. at Bridgeforth Stadium in Harrisonburg. The game will be broadcast on ESPN3.

The winner of Saturdays Liberty-JMU game will travel to Villanova on Dec. 6 to take on the sixth-seeded Wildcats. The playoff field was announced Sunday morning.

Liberty (8-4) is making its first-ever NCAA FCS Playoffs appearance after upsetting No. 2/1 Coastal Carolina on Saturday in Conway, S.C.

JMU (9-3) has won seven-straight games and was an at-large selection. This is the Dukes first playoff appearance since 2011.

North Dakota State will begin its quest for its fourth straight FCS national championship as the No. 2 overall seed in the playoffs.

New Hampshire (10-1) earned the top seed in the 24-team tournament pairings released Sunday. The top eight seeds receive first-round byes.

The field includes 11 conference champions who automatically qualified and 13 teams with at-large bids. All games will be played at home sites starting Saturday, except the Jan. 10 championship game in Frisco, Texas.

North Dakota State (11-1) will play its first game Dec. 6 against the winner of South Dakota State and Montana State.

Read more:

Liberty football team to face JMU in first round of FCS playoffs

State board boots Arnold off Libertarian line for State Senate

Posted on by

ALBANY The state Board of Elections invalidated the Libertarian Party nominating petition of Gia M. Arnold Friday, ending her campaign for 62nd District state senator.

Arnold, now of Lockport, lost the Republican primary to North Tonawanda Mayor Robert G. Ortt, 5,645 to 1,589, but had hoped to survive through the general election by filing independent petitions for the Libertarian line. However, Ortts campaign filed 60 different objections to the legality of the signatures, and they left Arnold with not enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.

Ortt will face Democrat Johnny G. Destino of Niagara Falls in the race for the Senate seat being vacated by George D. Maziarz, R-Newfane. However, Paul Brown of North Tonawanda, business manager for Local 9 of the Plasterers Union, won a write-in primary for the Working Families Party line over Destino, 59-37, so there will be three candidates on the Nov. 4 ballot after all.

Read more here:

State board boots Arnold off Libertarian line for State Senate

Which Is Worse, a Libertarian or a Humanitarian-Warrior?

Posted on by

by David Swanson November 3, 2014 http://warisacrime.org/content/which-worse-libertarian-or-humanitarian-warrior

Is it worse to put into Congress or the White House someone who wants to end wars and dismantle much of the military but also wants to abolish Social Security and Medicare and the Department of Education and several other departments they have trouble remembering the names of, OR someone who just wants to slightly trim all of those departments around the edges while waging countless wars all over the world in the name of every heretofore imagined human right other than the right not to get blown up with a missile?

Can dismantling the military without investing in diplomacy and aid and cooperative conflict resolution actually avoid wars? Can a country that continues waging wars at every opportunity actually avoid abolishing domestic services? I would hope that everyone would be willing to reject both libertarians and humanitarian-warriors even when it means rejecting both the Republican and the Democratic Parties. I would also hope that each of those parties would begin to recognize the danger they are in and change their ways.

Democrats should consider this: States within the United States are developing better and worse wages, labor standards, environmental standards, healthcare systems, schools, and civil liberties. The Washington Post is advising people on which foreign nations to go to college in for free -- nations that both tax wealth and invest between 0 and 4 percent of the U.S. level in militarism. A federal government that stopped putting a trillion dollars a year into wars and war preparations, with all the accompanying death, trauma, destruction, environmental damage, and loss of liberties, begins to look like a decent tradeoff for a federal government ending lots of other things it does, from its very minimal security net to massive investment in fossil fuels and highways. Of course it's still a horrible tradeoff, especially if you live in one of the more backward states, as I do. But it begins to look like less of a horrible tradeoff, I think, as we come to realize that representative democracy can work at the state and local levels, and the major crises of climate and war can only be solved at the global level, while the national government we have is too big to handle our local needs and is itself the leading opponent of peace and sustainability on earth.

With that in mind, consider a leading face of the Democratic Party: Hillary Clinton. She's openly corrupted by war profiteers. She was too corrupt to investigate Watergate. Wall Street Republicans back her, and she believes in "representing banks." She'd be willing to "obliterate" Iran. She laughed gleefully about killing Gadaffi and bringing Libya into the liberated state of hell it's now in, with violence having spilled into neighboring nations since. She threw her support and her vote behind attacking Iraq in 2003. She is a leading militarist and authoritarian who turned the State Department into a war-making machine pushing weapons and fracking on the world, and she supports the surveillance state. There's a strong feminist argument against her. The pull of superior domestic rhetoric is strong, but not everyone will see a candidate who backed a war that killed a million dark-skinned Iraqis as the anti-racist candidate.

Republicans should consider this: Your star senator, Rand Paul, can be relied on to talk complete sense about the madness of war, right up until people get scared by beheading videos, and then he's in favor of the madness of war, if still so far short of all-out backing of war-on-the-world as to horrify the Washington Post. He has backed cancelling all foreign aid, except for military foreign "aid" up to $5 billion, mostly in free weapons for Israel. He used to favor serious cuts to military spending, but hasn't acted on that and now has John McCain's support as a good "centrist." Hesupports racist policies while hoping not to be seen doing so, and was against the Civil Rights Act before he was for it. He thinks kids should drive 10 miles to find a good school or get educated online.

Everyone should consider this: Candidates like the above two are so horrible, and end up moving ever closer to each other's positions, that the real choice is between them and someone decent. If the choice ever really arises between a libertarian who opposes war (many self-identified libertarians love war and are only against peaceful spending) and a humanitarian warrior with something to offer domestically (many humanitarian warriors don't have much of an upside elsewhere) it could shake up some people's blind partisanship. By why wait? Why not shake it up now? Why not start now investing energy in activism rather than elections, including activism to reform elections and how they are funded? Why not start now voting for candidates we don't have to hold our noses for? Six years into the Obama presidency, we have peace groups -- not all of them, thank goodness -- but we have peace groups putting everything into electing Democrats, after which they plan to oppose advocating for peace, instead backing limited war. It isn't the lesser-evil voting that kills us; it's the lesser-evil thinking that somehow never gets left behind in the voting booth.

David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is director of WorldBeyondWar.org and campaign coordinator for RootsAction.org. Swanson's books include War Is A Lie. He blogs at DavidSwanson.org and WarIsACrime.org. He hosts Talk Nation Radio.

Scoop Media

Continue reading here:

Which Is Worse, a Libertarian or a Humanitarian-Warrior?

NSA Reform Could Pit GOP Hawks Against Partys Libertarian Wing

Posted on by

Efforts to curb the National Security Agencys bulk collection of American phone metadata were dealt a blow with the defeat of the USA Freedom Act on Nov. 18. With a 58-42 vote, the bill failed to attract the 60 votes necessary to clear the Senate filibuster.

With Republicans taking control of Congress in January, privacy advocates are concerned that the vote represented the last chance to enact surveillance reform. Experts say its too close to call whether the new, GOP-controlled Congress will maintain the status quo or look to pass legislation that accomplishes some of the Freedom Acts objectives.

Theres enough uneasiness and opposition to the NSA that the GOP is split over what to do next, said Robert Jervis, a professor of political science and international affairs at Columbia University. Still, theres a broad political coalition thats in favor of surveillance, said Abraham Newman, an associate professor at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University.

Normally hawkish Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, voted for the bill.

Incoming Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., referring to the terrorist group ISIS, said now is the worst time to tie our hands behind our backs and voted against it.

Incoming Senate judiciary chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, voted against the bill. Rand Paul, R-Ky., a front-runner for the GOP 2016 presidential nomination, voted against it because of a provision to extend Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which provides the legal foundation for the data collection. It will expire on June 1 next year if not renewed.

The very likely outcome is that it will be renewed, Newman said, adding that a provision could be attached to another bill in the weeks before the June 1 deadline. Many provisions of the Patriot Act have sunset clauses, but, if you look, very few of them have ever actually sunset. It could be reauthorized through some omnibus legislation.

The USA Freedom Act proposed an end to the indiscriminate collection of American phone metadata and would have installed a privacy watchdog within Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court deliberations.

The USA Freedom Act would have also forced the NSA to reveal how many Americans are inadvertently ensnared in the investigation of foreign suspects and given technology companies the ability to be more transparent on the number of data requests they are forced to comply with.

If passed, the act would have ensured that the NSA still had access to phone metadata while keeping those records in the hands of phone companies. That raised eyebrows from the civil liberties community, with critics pointing to the recent news of Verizons nearly undetectable tracking cookie as proof that the corporate world is hardly a better privacy safeguard than the NSA.

Here is the original post:

NSA Reform Could Pit GOP Hawks Against Partys Libertarian Wing

The Peace Islands Institute’s 5th Annual Law Enforcement Appreciation Award – Video

Posted on by


The Peace Islands Institute #39;s 5th Annual Law Enforcement Appreciation Award
The outstanding contribution of law enforcement officers was recognized at an award ceremony in Morristown, New Jersey. The Peace Islands Institute #39;s 5th Annual Law Enforcement Appreciation...

By: Gulen4WorldPeace

Read the original:

The Peace Islands Institute's 5th Annual Law Enforcement Appreciation Award - Video