Archive for August, 2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
(NaturalNews) Vaccines are the quackery of modern medicine. Mass vaccination programs not only fail to protect the population from infectious disease, they actuallyaccelerate the spread of disease in many cases.
Many website have cropped up over the last few years to counter the pro-vaccine propaganda put out by drug companies (who profit from vaccines) and health regulators (who serve the drug companies). One of those sites iswww.VaccinationDebate.com , which lists the following historical facts about vaccines:
• In the USA in 1960, two virologists discovered that bothpolio vaccines were contaminated with the SV 40 virus which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell tissue cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. (Med Jnl of Australia 17/3/1973 p555)
• In 1871-2, England, with 98% of the population aged between 2 and 50 vaccinated against smallpox, it experienced its worst ever smallpox outbreak with 45,000 deaths. During the same period in Germany, with avaccination rate of 96%, there were over 125,000 deaths from smallpox. (http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/020…)
The Hadwen Documents
• In Germany, compulsory mass vaccination against diphtheria commenced in 1940 and by 1945 diphtheria cases were up from 40,000 to 250,000. (Don’t Get Stuck, Hannah Allen)
• In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organisation after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate. (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990)
• In 1977, Dr Jonas Salk who developed the first polio vaccine, testified along with other scientists, that mass inoculation against polio was the cause of most polio cases throughout the USA since 1961. (Science 4/4/77 “Abstracts” )
• In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children. (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)
• In the 1970’s a tuberculosis vaccine trial in India involving 260,000 people revealed that more cases of TB occurred in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. (The Lancet 12/1/80 p73)
• In 1978, a survey of 30 States in the US revealed that more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. (The People’s Doctor, Dr R Mendelsohn)
• The February 1981 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 90% of obstetricians and 66% of pediatricians refused to take the rubella vaccine.
• In 1979, Sweden abandoned the whooping cough vaccine due to its ineffectiveness. Out of 5,140 cases in 1978, it was found that 84% had been vaccinated three times! (BMJ 283:696-697, 1981)
• In the USA, the cost of a single DPT shot had risen from 11 cents in 1982 to $11.40 in 1987. The manufacturers of the vaccine were putting aside $8 per shot to cover legal costs and damages they were paying out to parents of brain damaged children and children who died after vaccination. (The Vine, Issue 7, January 1994, Nambour, Qld)
“This is very sad and not for the faint of heart.”
Robert Watts and Dominic O’Connell
A radical plan to raise £100 billion by privatising the motorway network has been presented to the three main political parties by NM Rothschild, the influential investment bank.
Rothschild, an architect of several privatisations, made its pitch in the weeks running up to the summer recess on July 21, Whitehall sources said. Bankers told leading politicians that the sale of the roads overseen by the Highways Agency — all motorways and most big trunk roads — could help revive battered public finances.
Toll-road companies and infrastructure funds would compete to operate and maintain stretches of the network.
In one version of the scheme, the government would pay for upkeep through a system of “shadow” tolls. A more radical, and less politically palatable, option would be for companies to charge motorists directly through toll booths or electronic card readers. The RAC Foundation, a motorists’ group, advocated privatisation in a report last week.
The Rothschild plan has already won the support of Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrats’ deputy leader and Treasury spokesman.
“This is an attractive, positive idea which could release considerable resources to the public finances and may have real environmental merits,” Cable said. “The scale of it is vast — it makes rail privatisation look like small beer.”
Theresa Villiers, the shadow transport secretary, said the Conservatives had “no plans” to back Rothschild’s proposals: “Rothschilds, like many other banks and consultancies, have approached me and my team on a range of ideas for our transport network, including their ideas for our road infrastructure, but we are not working on any proposals for privatisation of the strategic road network and have no plans to do so.”
Motorway privatisation was considered by John Major’s Conservative administration, which sold British Rail, but was rejected.
A spokesman at the Department for Transport said: “It is not unusual for organisations to suggest ideas to government departments but ultimately all policy is decided by ministers and there are no plans to sell off a stake in the Highways Agency.” Rothschild declined to comment.
The bank was behind many of the key privatisations of the 1980s and 1990s, including British Steel, British Gas and British Coal. It has close links to the Conservatives, having employed several senior Party figures including Lord Lamont, John Redwood and Lord Wakeham. Oliver Letwin, the former shadow chancellor, works there part-time.
Politicians of all Parties are seeking ways to decrease the need for large tax rises or heavy cuts in public services. The bank bailouts and a recent collapse in tax revenues has seen public sector debt rise to more than £800 billion, 56.8% of GDP — up from 35.5% just two years ago.
Road tolls are unpopular, however. When Labour mooted road pricing two years ago, more than 230,000 signed a petition on the Downing Street decrying the plan.
“Its time for the tar & feathers people.”
Sunday, August 30, 2009
If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.
Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.
There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it’s not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out.
While Democrats have become more supportive of the legislators, voters not affiliated with either major party have moved in the opposite direction. Today, 70% of those not affiliated with either major party would vote to replace all of the elected politicians in the House and Senate. That’s up from 62% last year.
Republicans, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly support replacing everyone in the Congress. Their views have not changed. But Republican voters are disenchanted with their team as much as the Congress itself: 69% of GOP Voters say Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the party base.
Fifty-nine percent (59%) now believe that members of Congress are overpaid. That’s up 10 percentage points from last October. Just five percent (5%) think their Congress member is paid too little. Thirty percent (30%) think the pay is about right.
One reason for this attitude may be that most voters say they understand the health care legislation better than Congress. Just 22% think the legislature has a good understanding of the issue. Three-out-of-four (74%) trust their own economic judgment more than Congress’.
Just 14% give Congress good or excellent review for their overall performance, while only 16% believe it’s Very Likely that Congress will address the most important problems facing our nation. Seventy-five percent (75%) say members of Congress are more interested in their own careers than they are in helping people. On the brighter side, just 37% say most in Congress have extramarital affairs.
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans believe that when members of Congress meet with regulators and other government officials, they do so to help their friends and hurt their political opponents. Most believe that’s why politicians are able to solicit contributions from business leaders. Most, however, say it’s generally a good investment because political donors get more than their money’s worth. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American adults say political donors get more than their money back in terms of favors from members of Congress.
Despite these reviews, more than 90% of Congress routinely gets reelected every two years. It’s a shock when any incumbent loses. One explanation for this phenomenon frequently heard in Washington, D.C. is that “people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”
Voters have a different perspective, and 50% say ‘rigged’ election rules explain high reelection rate for Congress.
When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every election cycle. That was the experience they witnessed in state legislatures at the time (and most of the state legislatures offered just one-year terms). For well over 100 years after the Constitution was adopted, the turnover averaged in the 50% range as expected.
In the 20th century, turnover began to decline. As power and prestige flowed to Washington during the New Deal era, fewer and fewer members of Congress wanted to leave. In 1968, congressional turnover fell to single digits for the first time ever, and it has remained very low ever since.
August 30, 2009
On August 28, Media Matters posted a hit piece on Glenn Beck. In the article, Oliver Willis attempts to link the Fox News disinformation operative Beck to Alex Jones. “We’re used to Glenn Beck being ‘out there’, but today’s show was special,” writes Willis. “Beck’s hour (the second day in a row in which he didn’t say a thing about the passing of Sen. Kennedy) was all about the supposed secret army being built by President Obama. This secret army idea, not supported by any facts, though possibly written in invisible ink that Beck can interpret, is a pet cause of fringe radio host Alex Jones.”
In fact, during the election last year, Obama admitted his desire to create a national security force, what Mr. Willis calls a “secret army.” The U.S. “cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” and needs a “civilian national security force,” he said. Obama said his national security force needs to be as well funded — to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars — as the U.S. military. See the video clip below.
The idea did not disappear after the election. On March 12, during a speech at the National Defense University, Obama said the following: “America must also balance and integrate all elements of our national power. We cannot continue to push the burden on to our military alone, nor leave dormant any aspect of the full arsenal of American capability. And that’s why my administration is committed to renewing diplomacy as a tool of American power, and todeveloping our civilian national security capabilities.” (Emphasis added.)
It gets worse. In January, without any recognizable corporate media coverage, Rep. Bob Filner, a California Democrat, introduced H.R. 675. The bill would amend title 10 of the United States Code and extend to civilian employees of the Department of Defense the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. The bill was referred to the Armed Services Committee on January 26, 2009. At approximately the same time, the DoD issued a Defense Directive 1404.10 that establishes a “DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” and rescinds a prior Clinton era directive dealing with the emergency use of civilian personnel. The Obama administration describes the Civilian Expeditionary Workforce as follows:
Members of the DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce shall be organized, trained, cleared, equipped, and ready to deploy in support of combat operations by the military; contingencies; emergency operations; humanitarian missions; disaster relief; restoration of order; drug interdiction; and stability operations of the Department of Defense in accordance with DoDD 3000.05
In other words, Congress is busy proposing bills that would accomplish what Obama announced during his campaign speech in Colorado.
Mr. Willis and the Clintonite organized Media Matters are uncomfortable with the facts. Here is another one — the Obamas have organized a cadre for a civilian national security force since 1993. It’s called Public Allies and is modeled after the communist Saul Alinsky’s “people’s organizations.” It is under the watchful eye of Michelle Obama. It has received $75 million per year from private donors, including the Rockefellers and the Ford Foundation.
In the lead up to the election, budding activists in the Marxist tradition of Alinsky were sent to Camp Obama. “Obama is not like other candidates, and part of this training is learning to mimic the methods he used before he was an elected official — back when he was a community organizer in Chicago following the textbook of legendary agitator Saul Alinsky,” the Chicago Sun Times reported in September, 2007. Camp Obama was described as a “national program for social change,” no doubt of the sort envisioned by Alinksy, who once said: “From all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”
Incidentally, taking money from globalists and bankers is not a problem for Media Matters. In 2005, CNS News uncovered the fact David Brock, the former conservative turned liberal and Media Matters CEO, had taken money from the arch globalist George Soros. In addition, Media Matters receives money from Democracy Alliance. George Soros is a member of this “progressive” organization.
Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, wrote a book entitled “The Plan: Big Ideas for America.” In the book, Emanuel states: “It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, all Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.” (Emphasis added.)
Emanuel calls this a “new social contract,” that is to say an obligation imposed on the people by the government. “If you forget everything else you read in these pages, please remember this: The Plan starts with you. If your leaders aren’t challenging you to do your part, they aren’t doing theirs. We need a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us by establishing, for the first time, an ethic of universal citizen service,” writes Rahmbo. “Universal citizen service will bring Americans of every background together to make America safer and more united in common purpose.”
It’s a “common purpose” envisioned by George Soros, the communist Alinksy, the Ford Foundation, and globalist “progressives.”
Mr. Willis declares there is nothing sinister about AmeriCorps, created under former president Clinton — a member in good standing with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group. Clinton’s administration was a virtual Who’s Who of CFR members and globalists, apparently a good thing for liberals like Mr. Willis.
Here’s what Willis and Media Matters didn’t tell you about AmeriCorps — the legislation initially called for “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people.” It anticipated requiring “all individuals in the United States” to become indentured servants for the government – including elementary school students. A Washington Examinereditorial on March 26, 2009, stated:
The bill also summons up unsettling memories of World War II-era paramilitary groups by saying the new program should “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service,” while establishing “campuses” that serve as “operational headquarters,” complete with “superintendents” and “uniforms” for all participants. It allows for the elimination of all age restrictions in order to involve Americans at all stages of life. And it calls for creation of “a permanent cadre” in a “National Community Civilian Corps.”
In short, the people who wrote the bill had the same totalitarian mindset as Joe Stalin and Mao.
No mention of the original bill or the mindset of its authors in Mr. Willis’ hit piece against Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. He mentions the fact George W. Bush was all for AmeriCorps and even met with AmeriCorps volunteers for Earth Day. But then “progressives” and those mesmerized by the false right-left paradigm always insist there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans and between Obama and Bush — never mind virtually nothing has changed under Obama, not the twin occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, not the unconstitutional surveillance of the American people, not the torture camps and the murder of hundreds of people in Pakistan — and certainly not the bogus global war on terror (although Obama’s people decided to play asemantic game with the term).
Finally, the article posted on the Media Matters website is a transparent effort to link Alex Jones to the Fox News disinformation operative Glenn Beck and thus discredit him. As a slick disinfo operative, Beck is tasked with taking down the truth and patriot movements by agreeing with their basic arguments while coming off as a kook that can be easily criticized and lampooned by the so-called “liberal” media, thus inflicting damage on the patriot community.
Regardless of the philosophy of the Marxist Saul Alinsky, Obama is not a communist, a fact underscored by the heavy presence of CFR and Bilderberg members in his administration.
Lawrence Summers, the Director of the White House’s National Economic Council, is a former Chief Economist at the World Bank and Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin, the former Director and Senior Counselor of Citigroup and Chairmen of Goldman Sachs. Summers is a member of the CFR. Timothy Geithner, the current United States Secretary of the Treasury, was previously the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Geithner also worked for Kissinger and Associates. In 2002 he left the Treasury to join the Council on Foreign Relations as a Senior Fellow in the International Economics department and was director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund.
“The council has gained a virtual lock-hold on the U.S. government, regardless of which party is in office,” writes John McManus. “No other organization comes close to boasting the kind of clout that the CFR members have held: eight presidents of the U.S.; seven vice presidents; 17 secretaries of state; 20 secretaries of war/defense; 18 secretaries of the Treasury; 15 directors of the CIA. And on it has gone throughout the Cabinets, in seriatim — through Democrat and Republican administrations — with hundreds of deputy secretaries, assistant secretaries, etc.”
One of Obama’s professors at Columbia Universality and an ardent supporter of his campaign — and his early foreign policy adviser — was Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski cofounded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller, a director of numerous multinational corporations and “endowment funds” and a central figure in the Council on Foreign Relations.
“If the Council on Foreign Relations could be said to be a spawning ground for the concepts of one-world idealism, then the Trilateral Commission was the ‘task force’ assembled to assault the beachheads. Already the Commission had placed its members in the top posts the U.S. had to offer.” writes Patrick Wood.
Bankers and one-worlders are not communists in the traditional sense, although they have traditionally used that political ideology to consolidate and centralize power and influence.
“If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs,” wrote the late Gary Allen. “Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.”
“I expected a reaction but not such a violent one”
By: Ellen Chang
U.S. banks face a tsunami of home foreclosures soon, says David Karsbol, chief economist at Saxo Bank.
Homeowners may be faced with no choice and will just stop paying their mortgages, he warns.
“I believe we are about to see a tsunami of foreclosures in the U.S. A lot of homes have been held back because if the banks are foreclosing on them they will have to do a writedown on the mortgages they have on their balance (sheets),” Karsbol told CNBC.
“That’s why they have been reluctant to do so.”
Soon homeowners may be looking around their neighborhoods and realizing that their neighbors have opted to stop paying their mortgages and are living scot free, he said.
“The fact that many homeowners are allowed to stay in their houses without paying on their mortgages begs the question: Why should you pay on your mortgage when your neighbor doesn’t?” Karsbol said.
Rising unemployment in the United States is the main cause behind foreclosures, economists and bankers told the Washington Post. Subprime mortgages are becoming less of a culprit.
“It’s a much harder nut to crack, unemployment,” says Mark A. Calabria, director of financial regulation studies at the Cato Institute.
“It’s much easier to bash lenders than to create jobs.”
In 2009, the first three months reported the largest share of foreclosures moved to prime loans from subprime loans, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.
“Rising unemployment, for the sake of this downturn, has magnified things considerably,” notes John Snyder, manager of foreclosure programs for NeighborWorks, a large housing counseling group.
“It’s less about the payment adjustment.”
Companies from US, UK and Australia have the most concentrated financial power.
Aug 25, 2009
By Lauren Schenkman
Inside Science News Service
WASHINGTON — A recent analysis of the 2007 financial markets of 48 countries has revealed that the world’s finances are in the hands of just a few mutual funds, banks, and corporations. This is the first clear picture of the global concentration of financial power, and point out the worldwide financial system’s vulnerability as it stood on the brink of the current economic crisis.
A pair of physicists at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich did a physics-based analysis of the world economy as it looked in early 2007. Stefano Battiston and James Glattfelder extracted the information from the tangled yarn that links 24,877 stocks and 106,141 shareholding entities in 48 countries, revealing what they called the “backbone” of each country’s financial market. These backbones represented the owners of 80 percent of a country’s market capital, yet consisted of remarkably few shareholders.
“You start off with these huge national networks that are really big, quite dense,” Glattfelder said. “From that you’re able to … unveil the important structure in this original big network. You then realize most of the network isn’t at all important.”
The most pared-down backbones exist in Anglo-Saxon countries, including the U.S., Australia, and the U.K. Paradoxically; these same countries are considered by economists to have the most widely-held stocks in the world, with ownership of companies tending to be spread out among many investors. But while each American company may link to many owners, Glattfelder and Battiston’s analysis found that the owners varied little from stock to stock, meaning that comparatively few hands are holding the reins of the entire market.
“If you would look at this locally, it’s always distributed,” Glattfelder said. “If you then look at who is at the end of these links, you find that it’s the same guys, [which] is not something you’d expect from the local view.”
Matthew Jackson, an economist from Stanford University in Calif. who studies social and economic networks, said that Glattfelder and Battiston’s approach could be used to answer more pointed questions about corporate control and how companies interact.
“It’s clear, looking at financial contagion and recent crises, that understanding interrelations between companies and holdings is very important in the future,” he said. “Certainly people have some understanding of how large some of these financial institutions in the world are, there’s some feeling of how intertwined they are, but there’s a big difference between having an impression and actually having … more explicit numbers to put behind it.”
Based on their analysis, Glattfelder and Battiston identified the ten investment entities who are “big fish” in the most countries. The biggest fish was the Capital Group Companies, with major stakes in 36 of the 48 countries studied. In identifying these major players, the physicists accounted for secondary ownership — owning stock in companies who then owned stock in another company — in an attempt to quantify the potential control a given agent might have in a market.
The results raise questions of where and when a company could choose to exert this influence, but Glattfelder and Battiston are reluctant to speculate.
“In this kind of science, complex systems, you’re not aiming at making predictions [like] … where the tennis ball will be at given place in given time,” Battiston said. “What you’re trying to estimate is … the potential influence that [an investor] has.”
Glattfelder added that the internationalism of these powerful companies makes it difficult to gauge their economic influence. “[With] new company structures which are so big and spanning the globe, it’s hard to see what they’re up to and what they’re doing,” he said. Large, sparse networks dominated by a few major companies could also be more vulnerable, he said. “In network speak, if those nodes fail, that has a big effect on the network.”
The results will be published in an upcoming issue of the journal Physical Review E.
By tmartin • August 28, 2009
Missing Sentence in Transcript Causes Premature HR 1207 Victory Celebration
Several blogs and forums reported during the past 24 hours that Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank, said that Ron Paul’s bill to audit theFederal Reserve, HR 1207, will pass in October.
Incorrect Reports about Barney Frank’s Statement on HR 1207
- Washington Times: Barney Frank says Ron Paul bill will pass
- Politico: Barney: Fed audit bill will pass in October
- Business Insider: Barney Frank: Yes, We Will Pass Ron Paul’s “Audit The Fed” Bill
- United Liberty: Frank: Vote on HR 1207 in October
- Daily Paul: Video: Barney Frank Says House Will Pass HR1207 in October
- ZeroHedge: Barney Frank Says The House Will Pass HR 1207 In October
- Mish: Barney Frank Says Ron Paul’s Audit The Fed Bill Will Pass In October
- Washington Independent: Ron Paul’s ‘Audit the Fed’ Bill to Get October Vote?
A sloppy and incomplete transcript, which appears to have originated at theWashington Times, is making the rounds. The transcript is missing an essential sentence, which is marked in bold:
Barney Frank: “I have been pushing for more openness from the Fed. I want to restrict the powers of the Federal Reserve. First of all, the Fed will be the major losers of power if we are successful, as I believe we will be, setting up a financial product protection commission. The Federal Reserve is now charged with protecting consumers. They were supposed to do subprime mortgage restrictions.
Congress in 1994 gave the Fed powers to ban subprime mortgages. Alan Greenspan refused to do it. They had the power to ban credit card abuses. Under Greenspan they did nothing. Under Bernanke they started but only after Congress acted.That’s one of the reasons why in the new consumer protection agency, we will take away from the Federal reserve the power to go consumer protection.
Secondly, they have has since 1932 a right under Herbert Hoover to intervene in the economy whenever they could. Last September, the Federal Reserve they were going to advance $82 billion to AIG. I was kind of surprised and said, ‘Mr Bernanke do you have $82 billion?’ Mr. Bernanke replied, ‘I have $800 billion and under section 13.3 of the Federal Reserve Act they can lend anything they want.’
We are going to curtail that lending power. We are going to put some restrictions on it.
Finally we will subject them to a complete audit. I have been working with Ron Paul, who is the main sponsor of that bill. He agrees that we don’t want to have the audit appear as if it influences monetary policy as that would be inflationary.
One of the things the audit will show you is what the Federal Reserve buys itself. And that will be made public, but not instantly because if it was made instantly people would be trading off it, so the data would be released after a time period of several months, enough time so it will not be market sensitive. That will be part of the overall federal regulation that we are redacting. This will probably pass in October.”
With “This will probably pass in October”, Frank is referring not to HR 1207, but to his own financial regulation bill, which might or might not include some aspects of Ron Paul’s HR 1207. The preceding sentence, “That will be part of the overall federal regulation that we are redacting,” is for some reason missing from the widely distributed transcript, and has therefore been completely ignored by bloggers and commentators.
In recent weeks Ron Paul repeatedly warned against just this sort of thing happening: that HR 1207 might become part of a more comprehensive financial regulation bill and be watered down so that it appeases the angry masses without instituting any real changes. It would be an irony of history if that happened — if HR 1207 were watered down and integrated into an unconstitutional bill that Ron Paul would have to vote against.
What did Ron Paul really say?
It has become fashionable for the political elite to try to distort Ron Paul’s statements for political gain or even put entirely new words into his mouth. Just the other day,Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said, “Even [Ron Paul] recognizes how important it is to us to have the Fed independent of politics.”
Now Barney Frank claims that “[Ron Paul] agrees that we don’t want to have the audit appear as if it influences monetary policy as that would be inflationary.”
Ron Paul never said that an audit of the Federal Reserve would be inflationary. In fact, he has credibly demonstrated the exact opposite: that the secretive Federal Reserve itself is responsible for inflation, with the dollar having lost 96% of its value since the Fed’s creation in 1913.
Here is what Ron Paul actually said about HR 1207, the bill to audit the Federal Reserve, and why only a real audit will protect the public’s interest.
Ron Paul: “Mr. Speaker, the big guns have lined up against HR 1207, the bill to audit the Federal Reserve. What is it that they are so concerned about? What information are they hiding from the American people? The screed is: transparency is okay except for those things they don’t want to be transparent.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, argues that HR 1207, the legislation to audit the Federal Reserve, would politicize monetary policy. He claims that monetary policy must remain independent, that is; secret. He ignores history because chairmen of the Federal Reserve in the past, especially when up for reappointment, do their best to accommodate the president with politically driven low interest rates and a bubble economy.
Former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Arthur Burns, when asked about all the inflationhe brought about in 1971 before Nixon’s reelection, said that the Fed has to do what the president wants it to do, or it would lose its independence. That about tells you everything.
Not by accident Chairman Burns strongly supported Nixon’s program of wage and price controls the same year, but I guess that’s not political. Is not making secret deals with the likes of Goldman Sachs, international financial institutions, foreign governments and foreign central banks politicizing monetary policy?
Bernanke argues that the knowledge that their discussions and decisions will one day be scrutinized will compromise the freedom of the Open Market Committee to pursue sound policy. If it is sound and honest and serves no special interest, what’s the problem?
He claims that HR 1207 would give power to Congress to affect monetary policy. He dreamt this up to instill fear, an old statist trick to justify government power. HR 1207 does nothing of the sort. He suggested that the day after an FOMC meeting, Congress could send in the GAO to demand an audit of everything said and done. This is hardly the case. The FOMC function under HR 1207 would not change.
The detailed transcripts of the FOMC meetings are released every 5 years, so why would this be so different and what is it that they don’t want the American people to know? Is there something about the transcripts that need to be kept secret, or are the transcripts actually not verbatim?
Fed sycophants argue that an audit would destroy the financial markets’ faith in the Fed. They say this in the midst of the greatest financial crisis in history brought on by none other than the Federal Reserve. In fact, Chairman Bernanke stated on November 14th 2007, “A considerable amount of evidence indicates that Central Bank transparency increases the effectiveness of monetary policy and enhances economic and financial performance”.
They also argue that an audit would hurt the value of the U.S. dollar. In fact, the Fed, in less than a 100 years of its existence, has reduced the value of the 1914 dollar by 96%.
They claim HR 1207 would raise interest rates. How could it? The Fed sets interest rates and the bill doesn’t interfere with monetary policy. Congress would have no say in the matter and besides, Congress likes low interest rates.
It is argued that the Fed wouldn’t be free to raise interest rates if they thought it necessary. But Bernanke has already assured the Congress that rates are going to stay low for the foreseeable future. And again, this bill does nothing to allow Congress to interfere with interest rate setting.
Fed supporters claim that they want to protect the public’s interest with their secrecy. But the banks and Wall Streets are the opponents of HR 1207, and the people are for it. Just who best represents the public’s interest?
The real question is: why are Wall Street and the Fed so hysterically opposed to HR 1207? Just what information are they so anxious to keep secret? Only an audit of the Federal Reserve will answer these questions.”
75% Want A Real Audit
We need to keep up the pressure to make sure that HR 1207 itself is put up for vote.75% of the American people want a real audit of the Federal Reserve, not a pretend investigation that goes to great pains not to ruffle any feathers, claiming that too close a look at what the Wizard is doing behind the curtain would be “inflationary” (Frank) and “problematic for the country” (Geithner).
On August 28, Media Matters posted a hit piece on Glenn Beck. In the article, Oliver Willis attempts to link the Fox News disinformation operative Beck to Alex Jones. “We’re used to Glenn Beck being ‘out there’, but today’s show was special,” writes Willis. “Beck’s hour (the second day in a row in which he didn’t say a thing about the passing of Sen. Kennedy) was all about the supposed secret army being built by President Obama. This secret army idea, not supported by any facts, though possibly written in invisible ink that Beck can interpret, is a pet cause of fringe radio host Alex Jones.”
In fact, during the election last year, Obama admitted his desire to create a national security force, what Mr. Willis calls a “secret army.” The U.S. “cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” and needs a “civilian national security force,” he said. Obama said his national security force needs to be as well funded — to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars — as the U.S. military. See the video clip below.
“Insanity from my home state. I hope people up there make a serious opposition to this, (for my families sake), or we will be stepping into a new state of ultra-control and the next incremental step to a new dawn of totalitarianism in the United States.
I just hope people smarten up and that they do it fast. You are being plaid like little children by the military industrial complex controlled media. This theatre they are creating is insanity on a massive scale. Don’t become the person you don’t want to be. There is the strength in all of you.
The people in this country are being tested and I think the government is underestimating the burning backlash of a wrath the collective American family will rain on anyone who unnecessarily and seriously threatens the health of their loved ones.”
-Fred Face 8/28/09
A Review of Economist Michael Hudson
Michael Hudson is a highly-regarded economist. He is a Distinguished Research Professor at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, who has advised the U.S., Canadian, Mexican and Latvian governments as well as the United Nations Institute for Training and Research. He is a former Wall Street economist at Chase Manhattan Bank who also helped establish the world’s first sovereign debt fund.
Hudson has frequently described Wall Street as “parasitic”. For example, in a 2003 interview, Hudson said:
The problem with parasites is not merely that they siphon off the food and nourishment of their host, crippling its reproductive power, but that they take over the host’s brain as well. The parasite tricks the host into thinking that it is feeding itself.
Something like this is happening today as the financial sector is devouring the industrial sector. Finance capital pretends that its growth is that of industrial capital formation. That is why the financial bubble is called “wealth creation,” as if it were what progressive economic reformers envisioned a century ago. They condemned rent and monopoly profit, but never dreamed that the financiers would end up devouring landlord and industrialist alike. Emperors of Finance have trumped Barons of Property and Captains of Industry.
More recently, Hudson said:
You can think of the financial sector as being wrapped around the real economy, almost like a parasite, and that’s why it’s been called parasitic for so long. The financial sector extracts interest from the economy, the property sector extracts economic rent, as do monopolies. Now the key thing about parasites, is that it’s not simply that they extract nourishment from the host. The parasite takes over the host’s brain, to make it think it’s part of the economy, to make it think it’s part of the host’s own body, and, in fact, that’s it almost like a child of the host, to be protected. And that’s what the financial sector has done today.
You have Obama coming out and saying, “We have to save the banks in order to save the real economy”. The fact is, you can’t serve both the parasite and the host.
And see this.
Today, I heard the podcast of an interview by KPFA radio host Bonnie Faulkner in which Hudson went even further. Specifically, he said:
- The giant financial institutions have already killed their host – the real American economy
- Since they realize that the American economy is dead, they are trying to suck as much blood out of America as possible while the corpse is still warm
- Because the American economy is dead, their plan is to soon jump to another host. They will ship all of their money overseas
“These are sick people in control and they are obsessed with population control. This is what your swine flu hype is about. Those vaccines are full of additive fillers to help you on your way with fun stuff like Cancer and Arthritis. Stop assuming everybody is good like you.”
“The regular seasonal flu kills thousands more every year than this little media contrived, ultra-hyped, Mexico & U.S. outbreak we just had. Time to step back and look at the bigger picture. Stand up for yourselves for once. You can accept the truth or be in love with your indoctrinated self-hatred, (global warming, cough… cough), and love of death.”
-Fred Face 8/28/09
Henry Kissinger, 1978:
“U.S. policy toward the third world should be one of depopulation”
It is my intention to give you clips from documents, many from the United Nations that prove there is a plan to depopulate this planet. I will also provide quotes from various people and organizations that further show this agenda is afoot. I pray the guidance of the Lord God Almighty will be with me in this pursuit to warn others of this dark plot against humanity.
Everything written in this paper is easily verifiable. It may take some time and effort, but I took great pains to make this paper as accurate as I possibly could.
The depopulation agenda is based on nature worship, or Gaia worship. In Genesis, God clearly told Adam and Eve, and then Noah and his family to go forth and multiply to fill the earth. Nowhere in the Bible does God rescind that clearly spoken commandment. Therefore man is attempting to supercede the command of the Lord God in heaven: The Creator! I ask you, who knows more about the state of the earth, the created, or the Creator?
The basis for the depopulation agenda is a standard all elitist’s hold dear. This standard is called:
The Hegelian Dialectic:
Problem – Reaction-Solution
Create the Problem Cause a Reaction Offer a Solution
You will see exactly how they have created the problem; caused a reaction so widespread it is really quite impressive how successful they have been; and offered a solution: A deadly solution.
I ask that you please make an attempt to distribute this paper everywhere you possibly can. The time grows short and so many are going to be caught unawares. By getting the word out, you may be able to prevent someone from needless pain and suffering.
Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, 1991:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill (this is absolute proof that man made global warming is a fabrication)…. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap of mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”
David Rockefeller: Memoirs 2002 Founder of the CFR:
“We wield over American political and economical institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political structure, one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
David Rockefeller, Co-founder of the Trilateral Commission:
“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine & other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plans for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American Case Officer for the State Department’s Office of Population Affairs (OPA) (now the US State Dept. Office of Population Affairs, est. by Henry Kissinger in 1975): “There is a single theme behind all our work -we must reduce population levels,” said Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the State Department’s Office of Population Affairs (OPA). “Either they [governments] do it our way, through nice clean methods or they will get the kind of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran, or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it. “The professionals,” said Ferguson, “aren’t interested in lowering population for humanitarian reasons. That sounds nice. We look at resources and environmental constraints. We look at our strategic needs, and we say that this country must lower its population -or else we will have trouble.
“So steps are taken. El Salvador is an example where our failure to lower population by simple means has created the basis for a national security crisis. The government of El Salvador failed to use our programs to lower their population. Now they get a civil war because of it…. There will be dislocation and food shortages. They still have too many people there.” (1981)
Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood, funded by the Rockefellers) said in her proposed “The American Baby Code”, intended to become law:
“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
This is the woman (Margaret Sanger) whom Hillary Clinton publicly declared she looked up to, during the 2008 presidential debates.
Here is a short list of some advocates of eugenics; Alexander Graham Bell, George Bernard Shaw H. G. Wells, Sidney Webb, William Beveridge, John Maynard Keynes, Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Emile Zola, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Winston Churchill, Linus Pauling, Sidney Webb, Sir Francis Galton, Charles B. Davenport Futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard (who wanted to create a Dept. of Peace):
“Out of the full spectrum of human personality, one-fourth is electing to transcend…One-fourth is ready to so choose, given the example of one other…One-fourth is resistant to election. They are unattracted by life ever evolving. One-fourth is destructive. They are born angry with God…They are defective seeds…There have always been defective seeds. In the past they were permitted to die a ‘natural death’…we, the elders, have been patiently waiting until the very last moment before the quantum transformation, to take action to cut out this corrupted and corrupting element in the body of humanity. It is like watching a cancer grow…Now, as we approach the quantum shift from creature-human to co-creative human—the human who is an inheritor of god-like powers—the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from the social body. We have no choice, dearly beloveds. Fortunately you, dearly beloveds, are not responsible for this act. We are. We are in charge of God’s selection process for planet Earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death. We come to bring death to those who are unable to know God…the riders of the pale horse are about to pass among you. Grim reapers, they will separate the wheat from the chaff. This is the most painful period in the history of humanity…”
Alexander Haig is quoted referring to the US State Department Office of Population Affairs, which was established by Henry Kissinger in 1975. The title has since been changed to The Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental and Scientific Affairs:
“Accordingly, the Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental and Scientific Affairs has consistently blocked industrialization policies in the Third World, denying developing nation’s access to nuclear energy technology–the policies that would enable countries to sustain a growing population. According to State Department sources, and Ferguson himself, Alexander Haig is a “firm believer” in population control.
Although the above stated quotes should be sufficient to prove that the elitists in power have definite intent to depopulate this planet to what they deem to be a sustainable level. Some will argue these are only opinions and are of no real consequence. I will now move on to providing bits of documentation showing this is a plan that has a worldwide scope of influence.
Most of these documents are at least 10 years old, some older. That however, does not take away from the seriousness of the content. Do not think them invalid due to their age. It takes time to foment plans on such a grand scale. But, if you are honest with yourself you can see glimpses of these things happening today.
I am going to cover some issues stemming from the UN Treaty on Biological Diversity (Agenda 21), which Bill Clinton signed into law in 1993 before it was sent to the U.S. Senate for ratification.
The entire population of the USA is now but one pen stroke away from being subjected to mandatory swine flu vaccinations at gunpoint.
August 28, 2009
The United States of America is devolving into medical fascism and Massachusetts is leading the way with the passage of a new bill, the “Pandemic Response Bill” 2028, reportedly just passed by the MA state Senate and now awaiting approval in the House. This bill suspends virtually all Constitutional rights of Massachusetts citizens and forces anyone “suspected” of being infected to submit to interrogations, “decontaminations” and vaccines.
It’s also sets fines up to $1,000 per day for anyone who refuses to submit to quarantines, vaccinations, decontamination efforts or to follow any other verbal order by virtually any state-licensed law enforcement or medical personnel. You can read the text yourself here:
Here’s some of the language contained in the bill:
(Violation of 4th Amendment: Illegal search and seizure)
During either type of declared emergency, a local public health authority… may exercise authority… to require the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into and investigation of the premises; to close, direct, and compel the evacuation of, or to decontaminate or cause to be
decontaminated any building or facility; to destroy any material; to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons;
(Violation of 14th Amendment; illegal arrest without a warrant)
…an officer authorized to serve criminal process may arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated an order given to effectuate the purposes of this subsection and shall use reasonable diligence to enforce such order. [Gunpoint]
(Government price controls)
The attorney general, in consultation with the office of consumer affairs and business regulation, and upon the declaration by the governor that a supply emergency exists, shall take appropriate action to ensure that no person shall sell a product or service that is at a price that unreasonably exceeds the price charged before the emergency.
“Involuntary Transportation” (also known as kidnapping)
Law enforcement authorities, upon order of the commissioner or his agent or at the request of a local public health authority pursuant to such order, shall assist emergency medical technicians or other appropriate medical personnel in the involuntary transportation of such person to the tuberculosis treatment center.
$1,000 / day in fines
Any person who knowingly violates an order, as to which noncompliance poses a serious danger to public health as determined by the commissioner or the local public health authority, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 30 days or a fine of not more than one thousand dollars per day that the violation continues, or both.
Furthermore, when the commissioner or a local public health authority within its jurisdiction determines that either or both of the following measures are necessary to prevent a serious danger to the public health the commissioner or local public health authority may exercise the following authority: (1) to vaccinate or provide precautionary prophylaxis to individuals as protection against communicable disease…
Forced quarantine for those who refuse (illegal imprisonment without charge)
An individual who is unable or unwilling to submit to vaccination or treatment shall not be required to submit to such procedures but may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal poses a serious danger to public health or results in uncertainty whether he or she has been exposed to or is infected with a disease or condition that poses a serious danger to public health, as determined by the commissioner, or a local public health authority operating within its jurisdiction.
Arrest for refusal to be “decontaminated”
If an individual is unable or unwilling to submit to decontamination or procedures necessary for diagnosis, the decontamination or diagnosis procedures may proceed only pursuant to an order of the superior court… During the time necessary to obtain such court order, such individual may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal to submit to decontamination or diagnosis procedures poses a serious danger to public health or results in uncertainty whether he or she has been exposed to or is infected with a disease or condition that poses a serious danger to public health.
When the commissioner or a local public health authority within its jurisdiction reasonably believes that a person may have been exposed to a disease or condition that poses a threat to the public health, in addition to their authority under section 96 of chapter 111, the commissioner or the local public health authority may detain the person for as long as may be reasonably necessary for the commissioner or the local public health authority, to convey information to the person regarding the disease or condition and to obtain contact information… If a person detained under subsection (1) refuses to provide the information requested, the person may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal poses a serious danger to public health…
Journalist Wayne Madsen tells Russia today scientists involved in creating previous vaccinations are telling family and friends not to take the H1N1 vaccine. Madsen also warns that the government may make the vaccination mandatory.
Randy Wright – Daily Herald
“Umm…Government Run Health care. The eugenic possibilities are limitless… cool. See what in store for you. Eugenics is awesome!!”
BY FRED TASKER
One patient who had a colonoscopy at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Miami using equipment that was not properly sterilized has tested positive for HIV. Seven patients have confirmed cases of hepatitis C. No local patients were positive for hepatitis B.
The VA confirmed the number in a press release Friday but cautioned that there is no way to know if the veterans contracted the viruses from the VA equipment or in other ways.
All three viruses to which veterans might have been exposed are serious and contagious under some circumstances.
Hepatitis B is a liver disease that can range from mild, temporary illness to serious chronic conditions, and hepatitis C can lead to cirrhosis of the liver and liver cancer. HIV, or the Human Immunodeficiency Virus, can lead to AIDS.
Dan Shannon, a Broward veteran who had two colonoscopies at the Miami VA hospital, got a letter saying his tests were negative, but wasn’t entirely reassured.
”I’m going to go outside and get a second opinion from a private doctor, just as a precaution,” he said.
”Wow, that’s a bummer,” said Stuart McLees, Vietnam vet and commander of a Davie VFW post, who had six colonoscopies at the Miami VA after an operation for colon cancer. McLees also received a letter from the VA that his test was negative.
”I’m still a little shaky,” he said. “But I’ve been treated well at the VA hospital, so I really have no complaints.”
In its news release, the VA said that, of 3,341 Miami veterans who had colonoscopies with the improperly cleaned equipment, 3,184 have been notified, 2,038 have asked for testing, 1,880 were tested and 1,639 so far have been notified of their results.
VA officials in Washington and Miami did not immediately respond to calls for further comment. It isn’t known whether colonoscopies, which were suspended in Miami when the problem came to light, have resumed.
The VA announcement said: “Although the risk of cross-contamination and exposure to these infections is exceptionally low, our directive is to treat all veterans potentially affected, regardless of risk, and regardless of cause.”
The problem with the came to light in late March, after the Miami VA sent letters to more than 3,000 veterans who had received colonoscopies there between May 2004 and March 12, warning that improperly sanitized equipment might have exposed them to the three dangerous viruses. Miami VA hospital chief of staff Dr. John Vara later said a staffer apparently had been rinsing parts of the equipment instead of chemically sanitizing them between uses, as recommended by the manufacturer.
Similar problems took place at VA medical facilities in Murfreesboro, Tenn., where nearly 6,400 veterans were told they might have been infected, and in Augusta, Ga., with nearly 1,100 veterans.
At those facilities, the VA on Friday reported that in Murfreesboro, 6,387 were potentially exposed, five tested positive for hepatitis B, seven for hepatitis C and one for HIV. In Augusta, 1,069 were potentially exposed, one tested positive for hepatitis B, five for hepatitis C and one for HIV.
The problem was first detected in Murfreesboro in December. In March, the national VA directed all 153 VA medical facilities to do a formal ”step-up” inspection and retraining program about the equipment. That’s when the problem was discovered in Miami.
A team of doctors and administrators from the national VA has been at the Miami VA hospital since the last week of March poring over records, interviewing staffers, and trying to figure out how the Miami VA Medical Center, which won a ”Best in VA” award in 2007, could have made such a fundamental error as rinsing instead of disinfecting the equipment.
Dr. David Greenwald, a gastroenterologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York and a spokesman for the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, said that despite the apparent breach of protocol, people should not fear getting colonoscopies at civilian medical facilities.
”Colonoscopy is a very effective procedure for cancer screening,” he said. “It’s important to note that if the guidelines are followed, there should be no fear of infection.”
All civilian hospital and clinics — but not the VA centers and clinics — are inspected periodically by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, which also responds to patient complaints. Hospitals must report any ”adverse incidents” to the state agency.
Doctors and staffers at local hospitals also say procedures are in place to catch such problems immediately.
”We have such a culture of constant observation here that that kind of thing would not happen. It would be weeded out very quickly,” said Barbara Russell, spokeswoman for Baptist Hospital in Kendall.
Baptist, she said, has several overlapping standards and procedures to be sure safety rules are met, including a quality control protocol called Toyota Lean Thinking, devised by the automaker to control its manufacturing quality and adapted for use in business offices, hospitals and other institutions.
I just received this Skype message from General Bert:
“We have to send out an emergency notice to all of our forums and an emergency Health Freedom Action eAlert blast telling all Health Freedom supporters that our NSCC Yahoo! Forum for Health Freedonm Volunteers has been hacked and attacked – in fact, actually removed from Yahoo! by stealthbecausewhat we are doing is so important!
Someone realizes that the more hands – and hearts – we have committed to health and freedom, the more powerful we are. They knew that our Wednesday calls and our volunteer program are dynamic and gaining members all the time. Clearly, we are a significant threat to them. – ANS”
Volunteers are important Perhaps we did not realizehowimportant until now: Natural Solutions Foundation’s Volunteer Forum, NSCC has disappeared from the Internet! None of our other forums has been harmed.. makes one wonder?
You can see all the forum links (and more) at our Social Networking page:
Clearly, the more hands we have to do the work of health freedom, the more effective we will be. So what better way to attack us than to cut off our communications?
While no one’s private information was jeopardized, the Forum held our contact list of Volunteers, their entries in the Skills Database, the Volunteer Calendar and our accumulated Volunteer Messages. We have emailed Yahoo requesting an investigation.
It’s something that the other side has tried before. Instead of erasing us from the map, it lets people know just how meaningful their efforts for health freedom are and we come back stronger each time!
Is this a way to make sure that we cannot follow-up with the Emergency FDA “Stop the Shot” Petition?
We need all of you who had joined the NSCC forum to join our new volunteer forum ASAP:
Like other NGOs (nongovernmental organizations) Natural Solutions depends on the work of volunteers to do all the things we do to make your Push Backpossible – and to make it work! So, it is not surprising that this one forum out of nearly a dozen should be attacked.
General Bert tells me that we need to meet this sort of attack head-on and should consider such attacks to be demonstrations of the strength and increasing ability to impact public affairs. By refusing to be intimidated; by picking ourselves up and rebuilding our Volunteer Communications, we grow even stronger.
Thank you for your continued support!
Ralph Fucetola JD
“FREAKED OUT WHITE PEOPLE”—MSNBC & The Great Liberal Narrative: The Truth About The Tyranny of Political CorrectnessAugust 28, 2009
“Freaked out white people,” the new political kool-aid for Washington. The overwhelming majority of people showing up to these healthcare town hall meetings are non-racists, good middle-class, well informed!!, people of all races. Your being lied to on a massive scale when you watch stupid liberal TV or stupid republican TV. Yes, there are racist people of all races and unfortunately there may always be some. They live in fear and are not very bright.
Your television is off the hook with insane propaganda right now. Just because you oppose Obama doesn’t mean your a racist. He is fucking up things just as bad as Bush fuck, (actually much worse if you want the truth). They all work for the same people. And they are working in overdrive right now to divide this country… divide & conquer, get it?? You need to tap back into your brain and realize you have options. It’s the 21st century, we all need to wake up and evolve a bit.”
-Fred Face 8/27/09
FIND THE TRUTH AT:
“Lester Bangs is head and shoulders above anyone when it comes to the music critic business. Nobody before him, nobody after him. 98% of all art critics should be burned alive at the stake. Lester Bangs is 2%.”
-Fred Face 8/27/09
Lester Bangs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Bangs
The Velvet Underground are alive and well (which in itself may surprise some people) and ever-changing. How do you define a group like this, who moved from “Heroin” to “Jesus” in two short-years? It is not enough to say that they have one of the broadest ranges of any group extant; this should be apparent to anyone who has listened closely to their three albums. The real question is what this music is about—smack, meth, deviate sex and drugdreams, or something deeper?
Their spiritual odyssey ranges from an early blast of sadomasochistic self-loathing called “I’m So Fucked Up,” through the furious nihilism of “Heroin” and the metaphysical quest implied in the words “I’m searching for my mainline,” to this album, which combines almost overpowering musical lyricism with deeply yearning, compassionate lyrics to let us all know that they are finally “Beginning to See the Light.”
Can this be that same bunch of junkie – faggot – sadomasochist – speed – freaks who roared their anger and their pain in storms of screaming feedback and words spat out like strings of epithets? Yes. Yes, it can, and this is perhaps the most important lesson the Velvet Underground: the power of the human soul to transcend its darker levels.
The songs on this album are about equally divided between the subjects of love and freedom. So many of them are about love, in fact, that one wonders if Lou Reed, the malevolent Burroughsian Death Dwarf who had previously never written a complimentary song about anybody, has not himself fallen in love. The opening song, “Candy Says,” is about a young girl who would like to “know completely what the others so discreetly talk about.” The fact that this and about half the other tracks on the album are ballads marks another radical departure for the Velvets. The next track is a deep throbbing thing in which he chides perhaps the same girl for her confusion with a great chorus: “Lady be good/Do what you should/You know it’ll be alright.” John Cale’s organ work on this track is stark and spare and, as usual, brilliant—this time as much for what he leaves out as what he puts in.
Then there is “Some Kinda Love,” a grooving Latiny thing, somewhat like Donovan but much more earthy, and with words that will kill you: “Put the jelly on your shoulder/Let us do what you feel most/That from which you recoil/Uh still makes your eyes moist.”
Perhaps the greatest surprise here is “Jesus,” a prayer no less. The yearning for the state of grace reflected ther culminates in “I’m Set Free,” a joyous hymn of liberation. The Velvets never seemed so beautifully close to the Byrds before.
The album is unfortunately not without its weak “tracks though. “The Murder Mystery” is an eight minute exercise in aural overload that annoys after a few listenings, and “Pale Blue Eyes” is a folky ballad that never really gets off the ground either musically or lyrically. On the whole I didn’t feel that this album matched up to White Light/White Heat, but it will still go a long way toward convincing the unbelievers that the Velvet Underground can write and play any kind of music they want to with equal brilliance.
(Posted: May 17, 1969)
FIND THE TRUTH AT:
Remembering Senator Ted Kennedy
Senator Kennedy visits then Cleveland City Councilman
“I first met Senator Kennedy on May 4, 1971, when he visited me at St. Alexis Hospital in Cleveland. I was then a Cleveland City Councilman recovering from an injury and, somehow, he discovered I was in the hospital and paid a surprise visit to my room. He was visiting hospitals as part of his national effort to raise awareness of the need for reform of our health care system. I was elated to meet him. The visit began a friendship which has spanned four decades, during which time I had the privilege of serving with Senator Kennedy in the United States Congress.
His compassion and caring was always personal and always real. When my brother Perry died unexpectedly in December of 2007, Ted Kennedy was one of the first to call with condolences, sharing his sympathetic understanding of what it means to lose a sibling.
He had a powerful sensitivity to human emotion and his life writ large the range of human experience: great triumphs and sudden reversals. His tenacity often came against the heavy burden of deep personal tragedy, which enlarged the quality of his spirit, and made his frequent expressions of humor poignant and profound. Yes, he made himself into one of the greatest Senators, with his advocacy for human rights for health care, education and worker protections.
But Ted Kennedy was more than a great Senator. He was a great friend.”
August 26, 2009
Dear Friend of Liberty,
Make no mistake: there’s a strong, unrelenting push to destroy what remains of private health care in this country.
And now congressional leaders are attempting to overcome their scheme’s plunging approval numbers by manipulating Ted Kennedy’s death to create support for a “legacy” health care bill.
Our representatives and senators are eager to get back to Washington and away from the tremendous grassroots opposition to health control.
Which means it’s time for us to turn up the heat.
Click hereto get contact information to write, call, and fax Congress to express your outrage at their plans to finish taking over what remains of private health care. And be sure to signour “Stop the Government Health Care Scheme” petition.
Health control propagandists claim that we are defending the status quo of a “failed” private sector by opposing their latest scheme.
However, their bill cementsthe status quo in health care: continuing (and expanding) government intrusion.
Protectionist regulations have decimated competition in health insurance at the local level, and the vast, complex tax code has subsidizedemployer-provided high cost health care. The FDA, in the name of consumer protection, has restricted the supply of drugs from home and abroad. And individuals are barred from shopping across state lines for health insurance.
Watch this YouTubevideo to see a ER physician describe how the government obstructs the supply of health services.
Does any of that really sound like the free marketat work to you?
Government-manipulated health care is bankrupting this country. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are drowning in tens of trillions of dollars worth of unfunded liabilities and red ink, yet the response from Congress is to propose more 1,000+ page bills that will move our health care system perilously close to other nations’ statist care.
You know as well as I that this unfair plan is doomed to be a fiscal nightmare comparable to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and that Congress-created HMOs are notorious for denying care to control spiraling costs.
Our nation has seen enough big government schemes, especially in medicine. President Obama is right about one thing: it’s time to take action.
It’s time to let the free market work.
Click herefor contact information for the House and Senate in order to demand real reform. In addition to contacting your representative and senators, be sure to campaign hard for health freedom at your local townhall meeting.
Urge your representative to fight to allow individuals to shop across state lines for insurance, curb the authority of the FDA to prevent Americans from going outside the country for cheaper medications, and enable individuals to purchase their own health insurance without being taxed for doing so.
Tell Congress to give Americans control over their health care by giving them control over their health care dollar via tax credits and deductions similar to those outlined in Congressman Ron Paul’s Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act (HR 1495).
Ask your congressman to protect privacy rights by allowing patients and physicians to opt-out of any government-mandated or funded system of electronic health care records, and to repeal the federal law creating an “unique patient identifier” by adopting the policies contained in Congressman Ron Paul’s Protect Patients and Physicians Privacy Act (HR 2630).
In the meantime, we can push for reform of our respective state’s competition-destroying mandateson private insurers. These simple, common-sense reforms would immediately alleviate the costs of health care without adding to the exploding national debt.
And if you are able, please donateto Campaign for Liberty today so that we can educate Americans on a true free market health care system and defeat this latest health control scheme.
Don’t let the proponents of Obamacare sell you on the notion that we need the government to save us from the mess that government made. Click hereto demand that Congress support legitimate health care reform!
The business lobby, hoping to fend off potentially sweeping emission limits, wants the EPA to hold a ‘Scopes’-like hearing on the evidence that climate change is man-made.
By Jim Tankersley
Reporting from Washington – The nation’s largest business lobby wants to put the science of global warming on trial.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, trying to ward off potentially sweeping federal emissions regulations, is pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to hold a rare public hearing on the scientific evidence for man-made climate change.
Chamber officials say it would be “the Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century” — complete with witnesses, cross-examinations and a judge who would rule, essentially, on whether humans are warming the planet to dangerous effect.
“It would be evolution versus creationism,” said William Kovacs, the chamber’s senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs. “It would be the science of climate change on trial.”
The goal of the chamber, which represents 3 million large and small businesses, is to fend off potential emissions regulations by undercutting the scientific consensus over climate change. If the EPA denies the request, as expected, the chamber plans to take the fight to federal court.
The EPA is having none of it, calling a hearing a “waste of time” and saying that a threatened lawsuit by the chamber would be “frivolous.”
EPA spokesman Brendan Gilfillan said the agency based its proposed finding that global warming is a danger to public health “on the soundest peer-reviewed science available, which overwhelmingly indicates that climate change presents a threat to human health and welfare.”
Environmentalists say the chamber’s strategy is an attempt to sow political discord by challenging settled science — and note that in the famed 1925 Scopes trial, which pitted lawyers Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan in a courtroom battle over a Tennessee science teacher accused of teaching evolution illegally, the scientists won in the end.
The chamber proposal “brings to mind for me the Salem witch trials, based on myth,” said Brenda Ekwurzel, a climate scientist for the environmental group Union of Concerned Scientists. “In this case, it would be ignoring decades of publicly accessible evidence.”
In the coming weeks, the EPA is set to formally declare that the heat-trapping gases scientists blame for climate change endanger human health, and are thus subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. The so-called endangerment finding will be a cornerstone of the Obama administration’s plan to set strict new emissions standards on cars and trucks.
The proposed finding has drawn more than 300,000 public comments. Many of them question scientists’ projections that rising temperatures will lead to increased mortality rates, harmful pollution and extreme weather events such as hurricanes.
In light of those comments, the chamber will tell the EPA in a filing today that a trial-style public hearing, which is allowed under the law but nearly unprecedented on this scale, is the only way to “make a fully informed, transparent decision with scientific integrity based on the actual record of the science.”
Most climate scientists agree that greenhouse gas emissions, caused by the burning of fossil fuels and other human activities, are warming the planet. Using computer models and historical temperature data, those scientists predict the warming will accelerate unless greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically reduced.
“The need for urgent action to address climate change is now indisputable,” said a recent letter to world leaders by the heads of the top science agencies in 13 of the world’s largest countries, including the head of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
The EPA’s endangerment finding for greenhouse gases, as proposed in April, warned that warmer temperatures would lead to “the increased likelihood of more frequent and intense heat waves, more wildfires, degraded air quality, more heavy downpours and flooding, increased drought, greater sea level rise, more intense storms, harm to water resources, harm to agriculture, and harm to wildlife and ecosystems.”
Critics of the finding say it’s far from certain that warming will cause any harm at all. The Chamber of Commerce cites studies that predict higher temperatures will reduce mortality rates in the United States.
By Joe Bageant (about the author)
Almost a year after the Great Giddy Swarming of the Obamians last November, some of the revelers are waking up with one booger of a hangover. And they are asking themselves, “What were we thinking when we had that 10th drink of Democratic Party Kool-Aid?” It was a clear cut case of seduction and date rape. The spike in the drink was of course, hope. Poor pathetic American liberals. Forever doomed to be naive freshmen at the senior beer bash.
Corporate interests? Yup. It’s like this. Congress and the president hands the public treasury to elite financial corporations, via bailouts, special tax breaks and cash stuffed aircraft carriers bound for their fortified French20villas. Then Congress and the administration go looking for some new scheme to the pay for the Congressional Country Club out there in Bethesda, MD, the White House heating bill and money to keep Air Force One in toilet paper and armengnac marinated quail breasts.
This newest Social Security shell game is quite a bit slicker than the previous one. The old one consisted of simply ripping the money out of the SS fund, and replacing it with bad paper — IOUs repayable in up to 100 years. Since our Social Security checks cannot be cut by law, the boys on the Hill had a problem. The solution was to raise the Medicare prescription drug premium deducted from SS payments. Now I ask you, could the old zombie war hero and the semi-slutty Alaskan have come up with anything like that? I doubt it. It takes a Harvard degree in constitutional law and a devil on your shoulder named Tim Geithenr whispering the game plays in your ear.
A poster on AlterNet named monkeywrench observed that Obama couldn’t have handed the corporate owners of this country more if he had been a Trojan Horse candidate. So prescient was the poster that I have highjacked his chain of thought herein. Could Obama be a Trojan horse? Maybe, but it would be a waste of time and effort. Trojan hoses are not necessary in a country that has only one political party anyway – Big Business. You don’t need a Trojan Horse when Troy is your home. The Republicans vs. Democrats mock combat are mere bread and circuses for the clamoring crowd. Personally, I have no problem with that. I fully understand I was born under a corpocracy. But I do wish our masters grasped the importance of free alcohol in the suspension of disbelief.
Look how hard they work to avoid the suggestion that genetically modified crops may be the root cause of the deaths of the honeybees, yet it is already documented that pollen from genetically modified plants is harmful to benign insect species! See Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae (Nature, Vol 399, No 6733, p 214, May 1999)
By BRYAN WALSH
In late 2006, something strange began to happen to America’s honeybees. Colonies that were once thriving suddenly went still, almost overnight. The worker bees that make hives run simply disappeared, their bodies never to be found. Over the past couple of years, nearly one-third of all honeybee colonies have collapsed this way, which led to a straightforward name for the phenomenon: colony collapse disorder (CCD).
This might seem like little more than a tantalizing mystery for entomologists, except for one fact: honeybees provide $15 billion worth of value to U.S. farmers, pollinating crops that range from apples to avocados to almonds. Any number of possible causes for CCD have been put forward, from bee viruses to parasites to environmental triggers like pesticides or even cell-phone transmissions. Despite the Department of Agriculture’s allotment of $20 million a year for the next five years to study CCD, it’s still a mystery — and the bees keep dying.(Read “Why We Should Care About Dying Bees.”)
A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) shows that the causes of CCD may be more varied than scientists expect. The bees may be dying not from a single toxin or disease but rather from an assault directed by a collection of pathogens. A research team led by entomologist May Berenbaum at the University of Illinois compared the whole genome of honeybees that came from hives that had suffered from CCD with hives that were healthy. The sick bees exhibited genetic damage that could account for the die-off, and that damage indicated that they might be afflicted with multiple viruses simultaneously. This could weaken them enough to trigger CCD. “It’s like a perfect storm,” says Berenbaum.
The PNAS team’s work was possible only because the honeybee’s genome is one of the few animal genomes that scientists have decoded in full. The researchers looked at the genes that were switched on in the guts of sick and healthy bees — the gut being both the place pesticides are detoxified and the main region for immune defense. The technique they used is what’s known as a whole-genome microarray, and it’s ideal for this kind of sweeping analysis. “It’s a really powerful tool that lets us look at all 10,000 honeybee genes at the same time,” says Berenbaum. “The causative agents [for CCD] might just leap out.”
In the guts of CCD-afflicted bees, the microarray analysis showed unusual fragments of ribosomal RNA. Ribosomes are essentially the protein factories inside cells — they’re vital to the health of the cell itself and the larger organism. Berenbaum believes that the presence of those genetic fragments inside the CCD-afflicted bees indicates that they may be under attack by a number of insect viruses — including deformed wing virus and Israeli acute paralysis virus — that damage the ribosomes. “It was the one factor that remained consistently associated with the CCD bees we tested, no matter where they came from or how severe the disorder was,” says Berenbaum. “It doesn’t have to be a specific virus, just an overload.” Once the bees’ systems get burdened this way, they are less capable of fighting off any other threat, from pesticides to other environmental causes.(See TIME’s video “Bees Without Borders.”)
Berenbaum is quick to point out that the microarray analysis is only correlative, meaning that while it can show evidence that certain viruses are present in CCD-afflicted bees, it doesn’t reveal exactly what role the viruses play, nor how best to battle them. One approach might be to control infestations by varroa mites, which carry multiple viruses into the hives they attack. The good news is that the disorder may be on the wane, with the Apiary Inspectors of America reporting that deaths from CCD are below 30% for the first time since the crisis began. “The phenomenon seems to be in decline,” says Berenbaum. “The most vulnerable populations might have already crashed.” American farmers should be thankful; just think of trying to pollinate all those crops by hand.
By Ron Paul
During August recess, many legislators have heard an unexpected amount of discontent from their constituents about what is happening on Capitol Hill, particularly regarding healthcare. Some people are justifiably terrified at what the government could do to healthcare, should it get its claws even further into it. Others demand a public option for health insurance and are adamant that healthcare be treated as yet another absolute entitlement. One thing everyone agrees on is that the final bill needs to be read and understood by all legislators before a vote is taken. To any American, this is common sense. In Washington, that is unlikely to happen.
There is much confusion and debate over what is and is not in the reform plan being considered. Are there or are there not so-called death panels? What are the end-of-life consultations really for? How will private insurance be affected? Can you keep your current plan or will you eventually be forced into a government plan? Will it pay for elective abortions or not? What are the implications for medical privacy? The truth is no one knows what will be in the final bill until it is on the House floor, and provisions could be added in and taken out in the wee hours of the morning before.
In February, the House was forced to vote on an over 1,000 page “stimulus” bill that had first been posted on the internet just after midnight the morning of the vote. It passed. Then in June, House leaders rushed a vote on the cap-and-trade bill, even though an over 300 page “manager’s amendment” making substantive changes to the bill, was introduced shortly after 3:00 a.m. the morning of the vote.
Washington thrives on crisis. If enough people can be convinced that we are in an emergency, they will more likely tolerate rushing legislation to the floor like this. Last minute changes will be slipped in, benefitting who knows what special interests and at what expense to the taxpayer. But the mantra is repeated over and over: We are in a crisis. We must act immediately.
It should be unconscionable for legislators to vote in favor of legislation they have not had the opportunity to read. This is why I have re-introduced the Sunlight Rule, H.Res 216. The Sunlight Rule prohibits any piece of legislation from being brought before the House of Representatives unless it has been available to read for at least 10 days.
The Sunlight Rule allows citizens to move for censure of any House Member who votes for a bill in violation of this act. Because the Sunlight Rule could never be waived, any Member could raise a point of order requiring any bill in violation to be immediately pulled from the House calendar until it can be brought to the floor in a manner consistent with this rule. This rule does not require that Members read the bills. It merely guarantees the opportunity to do so. It has 4 cosponsors.
Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” The Sunlight Rule would do much towards negating the cycle of pseudo-crises and cleaning up the legislative process here in Washington. I sincerely hope this is the year Congress remembers its deliberative duties and passes it.
By PAMELA HESS and MATT APUZZO – THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) — With just two weeks of training, or about half the time it takes to become a truck driver, the CIA certified its spies as interrogation experts after 9/11 and handed them the keys to the most coercive tactics in the agency’s arsenal.
It was a haphazard process, cobbled together in the months following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington by an agency that had never been in the interrogation business. The result was a patchwork program in which rules kept shifting and the goals often were unclear.
At times, the interrogators went too far, even beyond the wide latitude they were given under the Bush administration’s flexible guidelines, according to newly unclassified documents released Monday. Interrogators took the simulated drowning technique of waterboarding beyond what was authorized. Mock executions were held. Family members were threatened. There were hints of rape.
If it was a terrifying process for the detainees, it was a bureaucratic nightmare for the interrogators. Until 2003, the agency provided its interrogators with rules on a case-by-case basis, sometimes giving permission by e-mail or even orally from CIA headquarters.
Despite the lack of clarity, interrogators were required to sign documents saying they understood the rules and would comply with them. Yet they were given ample room to improvise and make decisions about how much humanity to show to terror detainees.
While former Vice President Dick Cheney said the interrogation program was run by “highly trained professionals who understand their obligations under the law,” the newly released documents suggest otherwise, at least in the early months.
The interrogators slapped prisoners, held a handgun to one’s head, used power drills to make threats and left men shackled and naked in frigid rooms until they cooperated.
“How cold is cold?” one officer said in the 2004 CIA inspector general’s report released Monday. “How cold is life threatening?”
The CIA’s Counterterrorism Center began training interrogators in November 2002, two months after suspected terrorist Abu Zubaydah already had been repeatedly subjected to waterboarding.
But because the CIA had so little information about al-Qaida, CIA analysts could only speculate about what the detainees “should know,” hobbling the interrogators’ ability to ask meaningful questions and identify misleading or useful answers.
Some in the CIA correctly feared that the existence of the program would leak out someday. Others worried they’d be identified by name in news stories.
“One officer expressed concern that, one day, agency officers will wind up on some ‘wanted list’ to appear before the World Court for war crimes,” the inspector general wrote.
Another added, “Ten years from now we’re going to be sorry we’re doing this … (but) it has to be done.”
Even the Justice Department, which authorized the interrogation program, conceded in a 2004 memo that “at least in some instances and particularly early in the program,” the program appeared to have gone off track.
Attorney General Eric Holder appointed a prosecutor Monday to look into whether such incidents amounted to violation of federal law. He said nobody who operated within the framework of the Justice Department’s legal opinions will be charged.
But the program that the Bush administration’s Justice Department approved in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks began to short-circuit almost immediately.
In August 2002, government lawyers said interrogators were not supposed to use harsh tactics until all other methods had failed. But three months later, when officials captured the terrorism suspect Abd al-Nashiri, believed to be behind the bombing of the USS Cole, interrogators immediately launched into enhanced tactics.
And the method of waterboarding used by the CIA did not always resemble the clinical, closely supervised process that the Justice Department approved. One official, explaining why interrogators were pouring excessive amounts of water over a detainee’s cloth-covered mouth and nose, said, “It is for real.”
Another interrogator repeatedly choked off the carotid artery of a prisoner, causing the detainee to pass out, then shaking him awake again. The interrogator had only recently been trained in interrogation tactics and had previous experience only in debriefing, the practice of questioning people already willing to cooperate.
As late as September 2003, the CIA was still sending mixed signals to its interrogators.
“No formal mechanisms were in place to ensure that personnel going to the field were briefed on the existing legal and policy guidance,” the report said.
It was a debriefer, not a trained interrogator, who threatened alleged al-Nashiri with a power drill and an unloaded gun. Such threats violate U.S. anti-torture laws.
It’s not clear from CIA reports whether waterboarding or other aggressive tactics made America safer, as Cheney has long claimed. CIA officials credited the detention and interrogation program with thwarting several terrorist attacks. But investigators said it’s less certain that waterboarding or other coercive tactics directly contributed to that success.
In one case, CIA officials staged a mock execution to terrify a detainee into cooperating. Mock executions are prohibited under U.S. law. But authorities believed the detainee was withholding information, and they felt they needed to get creative. So they pretended to kill another detainee in a nearby room.
It was an elaborate setup, complete with a guard playing a dead detainee.
But the scheme apparently didn’t work. A senior officer later said the effort was so obviously a ruse, it yielded no benefit to interrogators.
“By far my biggest influence growing up as a young painter. Especially his 70’s meaty cartoon stuff.”
-Fred Face 8/24/09
By Kim Zetter
An anonymous blogger unmasked by Google last week following a court order has vowed to sue the internet giant for violating her privacy.
Rosemary Port, who operated a blog called “Skanks in NYC,” was outed last week after failing in her efforts to quash a subpoena served on Google, whose Blogger service hosted Skanks.
Port’s lawyer, Salvatore Strazzullo, now plans to sue Google for $15 million for breaching its “fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity.” He told the New York Daily News that he’s prepared to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court.
“Our Founding Fathers wrote ‘The Federalist Papers’ under pseudonyms,” Strazzullo told the Daily News. “Inherent in the First Amendment is the right to speak anonymously. Shouldn’t that right extend to the new public square of the Internet?”
Port, a 29-year-old student at New York’s Fashion Institute of Technology, launched Skanks last year. It published only five posts, all devoted to attacking model Liskula Cohen, a 37-year-old who has reportedly modeled for Australian Vogue, Georgio Armani and Versace. In the posts, Cohen was called a “psychotic, lying, whoring . . . skank” and an “old hag,” and was depicted as a desperate “fortysomething” who was past her prime.
Cohen then subpoenaed Google in an effort to unmask her critic’s identity with the aim of filing a defamation suit against the blog author once the identity was known. Google provided Port with notice of the subpoena, giving the blogger an opportunity to anonymously challenge the subpoena in court.
Cohen charged that the blog comments harmed her career and caused potential clients to question her suitability to represent their products. Port’s lawyer argued that the posts in question amounted to nothing more than vague insults on par with calling someone a “jerk.”
Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Joan Madden ruled that Cohen demonstrated sufficient claims for the defamation lawsuit, and ordered Google to comply with the subpoena. Madden said that the words, posted in conjunction with provocative photos of Cohen, implied that the model was “a sexually promiscuous woman,” belying that the comments were merely opinion or hyperbole.
Google complied with the order, but Port essentially asserts that Google should have defied the court to protect her First Amendment right to call Cohen a skank anonymously.
Port has blamed Cohen for any negative attention the blog might have brought her, telling the Daily News that until Cohen sued Google no one had seen the blog, and that by filing a public suit that brought attention to the matter, Cohen had “defamed herself.”
“Before her suit, there were probably two hits on my website: One from me looking at it, and one from her looking at it,” Port told the paper. “That was before it became a spectacle. I feel my right to privacy has been violated.”
The Daily News reports that the two women were acquainted through Manhattan’s fashion scene and had quarreled after Cohen badmouthed Port to her ex-boyfriend. Cohen told the paper that she has decided not to proceed with filing a $3 million defamation suit against Port and is satisfied that the blogger was identified.
Update: This post has been corrected to properly reflect the legislative history of the case and note that the discovery subpoena against Google was filed prior to a defamation suit being filed.
“Pretty cool. Hopefully it’s only natures work here.”
By Betsy Mason
These long, crazy-looking clouds can grow to be 600 miles long and can move at up to 35 miles per hour, causing problems for aircraft even on windless days.
Known as Morning Glory clouds, they appear every fall over Burketown, Queensland, Australia, a remote town with fewer than 200 residents. A small number of pilots and tourists travel there each year in hopes of “cloud surfing” with the mysterious phenomenon.
Similar tubular shaped clouds called roll clouds appear in various places around the globe. But nobody has yet figured out what causes the Morning Glory clouds.
This shot was captured by photographer Mick Petroff from his plane near Australia’s Gulf of Carpenteria.
Image: Mick Petroff
As researchers discover more agents that alter mental states, the Chemical Weapons Convention needs modification to help ensure that the life sciences are not used for hostile purposes, says Malcolm Dando.
In October 2002, Chechen rebel fighters held more than 750 people hostage at a Nord-Ost production in a theatre in Moscow. The siege was broken only after special military forces used what the Russian Health Minister, Yuri Shevchenko, later described as a mixture of substances derived from fentanyl — an opiate developed in the 1950s as an anaesthetic. Widespread relief that many of the hostages were saved was tempered by 124 of them being killed by the gas.
Chemicals with effects like those of fentanyl are often known as ‘incapacitating agents’. These substances affect biochemical processes and physiological systems to produce a disabling condition such as unconsciousness, and in higher concentrations can cause death. With effects that last from hours to days, they are distinct from standard riot-control agents such as CS gas, which cause sensory irritation that disappears shortly after termination of exposure.
That Russian special military forces resorted to using fentanyl in Moscow is a possible harbinger of the wider militarization of advances in the biological sciences.
Attempts to exploit benignly intended research for hostile purposes are not new. After the Second World War, the international medical community began to discover compounds that alleviated symptoms of mental illnesses such as depression and mood swings. These findings weren’t accompanied by a good understanding of how the drugs worked. Nevertheless, they prompted nations to ramp up their efforts to find chemicals suited to military use. In fact, in 1959, the chairman of the UK government’s secret Chemistry Committee of the Advisory Council on Scientific Research and Technical Development told his colleagues that the committee was “looking for agents which would produce, not cure, psychoses”1.
Between the early 1950s and 1970s, researchers working in laboratories that eventually became the US Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense studied chemical agents that affect the central nervous system. Indeed in 1961, the US military weaponized BZ — a drug that had originally been studied as a possible therapy for gastrointestinal diseases. BZ is one of a group of chemicals that act on the brain and can cause delirium; people exposed to it may fall into a stupor, struggle to speak, show poor coordination and have difficulty processing thoughts.
Despite the long-standing interest the defence industry has shown in drugs that alter people’s physiological and mental states, a lack of knowledge has hampered attempts to use them. For example, by 1966, the US military had stockpiled munitions capable of delivering BZ, but its mode and site of action were poorly understood, and its effects varied widely from person to person. This and other problems led to its abandonment. The United States destroyed its stocks by 1990, several years before the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) entered into force in 1997.
Current biochemical threats range from lethal chemical agents to traditional and genetically modified biological agents. In general, biological agents such as anthrax cause governments the most concern. Only a few pathogens are suitable for military use, however. For example, smallpox could prove useful as a weapon because it is highly contagious; anthrax because it has a life cycle that involves the production of long-lived spores. The limited range of possibilities means that there is a good chance of developing countermeasures such as vaccines or antibiotics against these agents. Even if efforts are made to modify them — for example by introducing genes that encode antibiotic resistance — the problem of designing countermeasures is potentially surmountable because the range of effective manipulations that can be made is also limited.
But recent scientific and technological advances could transform the biochemical-threat landscape. Indeed, in 2003, military analysts from the Counterproliferation and Technology Office of the Defense Intelligence Agency in Washington DC predicted that emerging biotechnologies were likely to lead to a “paradigm shift” in the development of biological warfare agents2. They warned that it would soon become possible to engineer agents to target specific human biological systems at the molecular level.
This idea of identifying crucial biochemical pathways, and then designing compounds to disrupt them is a leap from the traditional model of biological-agent development. It expands the options: there are likely to be thousands of potential molecular targets and numerous ways of disrupting each one.
Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, August 24, 2009
Authorities are preparing to seize children from schools, set up quarantines and morgues, conduct mass vaccinations, and deal with riots and unrest, according to an international swine flu summit recently held in Washington DC which was attended by distinguished scientists, industry leaders and top health officials from all over the globe.
A conference first discussed by this website three weeks ago has now taken place, with health authorities meeting at the end of last week to finalize response plans to a swine flu pandemic that has been all but guaranteed to occur this coming fall.
According to a PDF information leaflet released before the meeting, attendees were briefed on how to “conduct morgue operations,” manage an interruption in food supplies and “manage panic caused by sudden disruption of services & interruptions in essential goods & services”.
During a swine flu pandemic, their duties would also include dealing with civil disturbances, controlling and diffusing social unrest and public disorder, carrying out mass vaccination programs and enforcing quarantines, according to the conference documentation.
One of the most shocking modules of the conference deals with “School/University Pandemic Planning” and strongly implies that authorities will usurp parental rights over children in the event of a swine flu pandemic.
“Concurrent Breakout Session #10″ outlines plans to “train teachers to screen for symptoms & know what to do when students / teachers fall ill,” before then transporting ill students, which presumably means transporting them to quarantine zones with or without the consent of parents. The use of schools as “shelters” or quarantine centers is also mentioned.
As we have documented, authorities have been training to raid and remove children from schools during times of emergency for over a decade, mainly under the auspices of preparing for school shootings or during drug sweeps.
In October 2001, authorities swooped in to kidnap and remove 115 children from Heartland Christian Academy without a warrant. Children were forcibly loaded onto buses like criminals as they screamed for help in shocking scenes featured in Alex Jones’ Road To Tyranny documentary.
Earlier this month we reported on how a Maine high school was taken over by National Guard in a drill focused around riots during a mass vaccination program. In this scenario, the rioters were begging for the vaccine, but obviously the opposite is likely to be the case if a mandatory vaccination program is announced, if there are riots then they will consist of people refusing to take the shot.
A You Tube user posted the following video which covers some of the issues raised by the swine flu conference.
August 24, 2009
It looks like Ponzi-scheme criminal Bernard Madoff will share the fate of the convicted Enron criminal and Bush buddy Ken Lay. “Bernard Madoff, convicted of swindling $65 billion through the biggest-ever Ponzi scheme, has told fellow prison inmates that he is dying of cancer, the New York Post reported on Monday, citing unnamed prison sources,” reports Reuters.
Madoff allegedly told his fellow inmates at a North Carolina federal prison he does not have longer to live. The New York Post reports there had been speculation that Madoff was suffering from pancreatic cancer earlier this year. Inmates said Madoff was taking “about 20 pills a day” and “not doing very well.”
Ken Lay, CEO of Enron and the poster child for corporate abuse and accounting fraud, allegedly died died while vacationing in Snowmass, Colorado on July 5, 2006, about three and a half months before his scheduled October 23 sentencing.
Last month, Bob Chapman, publisher of the financial newsletter The International Forecaster, predicted arch criminal and fall guy Bernie Madoff would die within six months. It appears Chapman was way off the mark but spot-on about Bernie’s demise. “I don’t think he will die,” Chapman told Jones. “I think they will tell you he died and he will be shipped out some place.”
As Alex noted during the conversation with Chapman, there are persistent rumors that Ken Lay is alive and well and living in Paraguay on a Bush ranch, sort of like infamous Nazis guilty of the most unimaginable war crimes ended up in South America sixty odd years ago.
Chapman noted that the Fed and the Treasury know exactly where the money went — to offshore bank accounts — and the Madoff scam was merely business as usual.
“Wow. People have really lost their fuckin minds. How that is hate speech is beyond me by a couple of light years. Man, the government loves to use the race card when it suits them. This is a total non-issue. There is zero debate about this. Bush-Fuck would be getting same treatment, (probably much worse), doing the same absolutely horrible job Obama is doing. The image of Obama as the Joker & the word fascism has nothing to do with race. Period. End of story. Go smoke a joint and fuckin relax people. ”
-Fred Face 8/24/09
Monday, August 24, 2009
Get involved and fight back against phony charges of hate speech — make a poster and enter The Poster Revolution contest.
A local Texas newspaper has cited the now iconic “Jokerbama” image as an example of hate speech after a military veteran reported the presence of the posters on light poles in his local area to City Hall officials.
The Hays Free Press carried the headline Freedom… of hate speech?on its front page late last week next to the Infowars version of the Jokerbama image, with the word “fascism” underneath.
The article notes that the appearance of the posters has been spearheaded by Alex Jones’ competition, but only cites negative feedback from a few local residents who they say have been taking the posters down:
“This is appalling,” [local resident] Lutrick said. “I served in the military. That’s my commander in chief.”
The article also quotes a City of Kyle spokesperson:
“Jerry Hendrix declined to comment about the nature of the fliers hung in the public right-of-way, but said they violate the city’s sign ordinance. If caught, the individual could be fined up to $2,000.”
“Whoever is doing it needs to stop,” Hendrix said. “It creates additional work for our code enforcement officer.”
Despite this threat of a fine, the article also notes that there are “no actual restrictions prohibiting” the placement of the posters.
Meanwhile, ABC affiliate KBMT News reported on the appearance of the posters in Tyler, Texas, noting that “Tyler police took photos and collected some of the posters as evidence,” as if they are investigating a crime.
Watch Alex Jones’ breakdown of this story from yesterday’s syndicated Sunday show (begins 8 mins in):
The censorship of the image online also continues with Yahoo owned photograph website Flickr now closing down discussion forums on the image in addition to removing the image from their pages.
Firas Alkhateeb, the artist behind the picture has said he plans to file a counterclaim against Flickr censorship of his image.
CALL THE 10 SENATORS LISTED BELOW: Your PHONE CALLS to Kill Obamacare socialized medicine have been very effective and the tide is definitely turning our way! Talking points are 1) NO more socialism 2) NO government health co-ops 3) NO rationing 4) NO mandates 5) NO government bureaucrats making life and death health decisions 6) YES to keep private insurance. Tell them to KILL Obamacare before it kills you or family members with health care rationing. We just need to KEEP making PHONE CALLS!. Most of these are conservative Democrats in red states:
Sen. Jon Tester (MT) 202-224-2644
Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME) 202-224-5344
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (AR) 202-224-4843
Sen. Mark Pryor (AR) 202-224-2353
Sen. Kent Conrad (ND) 202-224-2043
Sen.Byron Dorgan (ND)202-224-2551
Sen. Ben Nelson (NE) 202-224-6551
Sen. Bill Nelson (FL) 202-224-5274
Sen. Mary Landrieu (LA) 202-224-5834
Sen. Max Baucus (MT) 202-224-2651
BY JOHN BYRNE
Memo tells employees to keep a low profile
A spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s trade group, admitted in an article published Mondaythat as many as 50,000 industry employees are involved in an effort to fight back against aggressive healthcare reform.
The admission, published in the last sentence of a Wall Street Journal article, highlights the stakes of potential healthcare reform for the private health insurance industry. Insurers and investors alike are terrified at the prospect of a so-called “public option,” which would create a government-run health insurance program to compete with private insurers. Because the government plan wouldn’t have to earn a profit, the plan would be able to undercut the premiums of private firms, pressuring profit margins.
“The health-insurance industry is sending thousands of its employees to town-hall meetings and other forums during Congress’s August recess to try to counter a tide of criticism directed at the insurers and remain a player — and not an outsider — in the debate over the future of the health-care system,” the Journal’s Vanessa Fuhrmans and Avery Johnson wrote Monday.
Employees of the health insurers have also been given talking points that encourage them to keep a low profile and avoid taking “the bait” when the industry is criticized in public, the reporters say. The industry’s trade group drafted a “Town Hall Tips” memo that instructs employees to stay calm and not to yell at members of Congress.
The industry’s staff have also been encouraged to write their local representatives.
Health insurers are trying to reshape the debate over the public option by fighting back against charges that they’re enjoying record profits at consumers’ expense. Most private insurers enjoy a four to six percent profit margin, which is less than many other industries, but, all told, amounts to billions and billions of dollars.
Karen Ignagni, America’s Health Insurance Plans’ chief lobbyist, says that town hall meetings are a chance for employees “to strongly push back against charges that we have very high profits.”
“It’s very important that our men and women… calmly provide the facts and for members of Congress to hear what these people do every day,” Ignagni added.
Insurers have also been trying to convince the public that they’re well-intentioned. They’ve agreed to dispense with policies that prevent patients with pre-existing conditions from getting coverage and stop marking up policies based on gender. But they’ve agreed to this only on the condition that Congress mandate health insurance coverage for all Americans, which would add tens of millions of new customers to insurers’ pools.
Friday 21st August, 2009
11,000 veterans who had colonoscopies at U.S. Veterans Affairs hospitals may have been exposed to hepatitis B, hepatitis C and HIV.
The veterans were advised equipment used during their treatment was not sterilized. Of those so far that responded by having follow-up blood checks, 8 have tested positive for HIV. Twelve of the veterans have tested positive for hepatitis B, and 37 have tested positive for hepatitis C.
This week it was learned a 55-year-old North Miami man, Juan Rivera, a thirteen-year Army veteran with a wife and 5 children, filed notice last month that he will sue the Federal Government claiming he was infected with HIV during a colonoscopy at the Miami Veterans Administration hospital. He had a colonoscopy at the hospital in May last year.
Rivera is suing the government for $20 million.
On March 28, the VA department wrote to more than 3,000 veterans who had colonoscopies at the Miami VA hospital advising them that improperly cleaned equipment might have exposed them to hepatitis B, hepatitis C and HIV.
VA officials say endoscopy equipment was rinsed instead of being sterilizing as was required by the manufacturer’s directions.
Similar problems were uncovered at VA hospitals in Murfreesboro, Tenn., and Augusta, Ga. The total number of veterans subsequently blew out to more than 11,000.
Following congressional inquiries, Miami VA hospital director Mary Berrocal disciplined up to 10 employees.
North Carolina State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, the longest-serving lawmaker in the General Assembly, shot an intruder as he tried to break into his home Sunday. He shot 22-year-old Thomas Kyle Blackburn in the leg as Blackburn and another man allegedly tried to break down his door. They apparently were both legal clients of the senator.
The Senator, who has made a career of being against guns for you and me, didn’t hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger, and was the victim of a crime against himself.
In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the “Do as I say and not as I do” anti gun Democrat picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was self defense ahooting, something he doesn’t want you be able to do.
His life must and personal safety must be be far more valuable than yours or mine.
But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can.
“Then maybe this guy needs a “shot” in the mouth, then one in the head, the chest, the back, etc, etc.”
August 24, 2009
I am in the Bay Area and rocking with the San Francisco Bay View newspaper. But something quite insidious is happening and I think you should know immediately how it involves my friends and me.
Hot on the heels of my learning that the Georgia Green Party might have been described by the U.S. Government as a “terrorist organiztion,” it has just now come to my attention that a “journalist” who suggested that I be lynched was actually being paid by our own government to say that. Now, when I reported it to the FBI, how in the world was I to know that he was at that time on the FBI’s payroll? Interesting that charges stem from his comments against Connecticut lawmakers and Illinois judges, but not from the threat made against me, a sitting Member of Congress at the time! I wonder why. To whom can I or any other innocent citizen turn when the government, itself, is the instigator?
John Judge, my Congressional staffer, is the one who reported the threat. Here is what John just wrote, along with the article that reports that Turner was on the FBI payroll at the time the threat was made against me, according to Turner’s attorney. See the green highlights below:
John Judge wrote:
This is the guy who announced a program topic suggesting that Cynthia McKinney be lynched on her way to the polls to vote in 2006 and published her campaign office address on the website. He asked how she would look swinging at the end of a rope and what message it would send to other “uppity” Blacks. I called NJ Homeland Security and FBI at the time sincee related to it as a death threat. The FBI agent I spoke to said “We know all about Mr. Turner”. Looks like they did. Now they say he was trained as an agent provocateur by the FBI to get others to participate in illegal acts. As Jim Garrison says in the movie JFK after interviewing Clay Shaw, “I think we got one”.
Here is an excerpt _ JJ
“Prosecutors have acknowledged that Turner was an informant who spied on radical right-wing organizations, but the defense has said Turner was not working for the FBI when he allegedly made threats against Connecticut legislators and wrote that three federal judges in Illinois deserved to die.
“*But if you compare anything that he did say when he was operating, there was no difference. No difference whatsoever,*” Orozco said.”
Harold Charles “Hal” Turner is an American white nationalist and white supremacist from North Bergen, New Jersey. He was arrested in June 2009 over alleged threats to politicians, and is currently jailed without bail. Prior to Turner’s arrest his program, The Hal Turner Show, was a webcast from his home once a week, and it depended on listener donations.
Turner promotes antisemitism (including the rounding up and killing of Jews, he opposes the existence of the state of Israel and he denies the Holocaust.
According to the AP Hal Turner has exposed through his attorney that he worked for the FBI from 2002 to 2007 as an “agent provocateur” and “his job was basically to publish information which would cause other parties to act in a manner which would lead to their arrest”
August 22, 2009 | Issue 45•34
ERIE, PA—Upon being informed by a McDonald’s cashier that the lunch menu would not be available until 11 a.m., restaurant patron Don Turnbee elected to wait 20 minutes inside the fast food establishment Saturday until the items he ordered would be served.
“There aren’t any other stores or anything that I like around here, so I figured I would just wait,” said Turnbee, who typically frequents the McDonald’s in the Buffalo Road shopping plaza, but chose to stop at the Pleasant Valley location because of its proximity to his wife’s hair salon. “The girl at the counter said I could still get breakfast if I wanted, but 10:40’s too late for breakfast.”
Added Turnbee, “I want lunch.”
The 41-year-old explained that he had already eaten breakfast earlier that morning, when he and his wife, Shelly, went to a nearby Bob Evans. Turnbee said he was not aware of the lunch-serving policy at this particular McDonald’s.
“They said they start [serving lunch] at 11 on weekends and 10:30 on weekdays,” Turnbee told reporters. “The one on Buffalo Road does it earlier, so I guess it’s different at different McDonald’s. It should probably be the same, but it’s different.”
According to restaurant employees, when Turnbee entered the establishment, he proceeded to order a No. 3 value meal with no pickles and a large Sprite. After they told him that lunch was not available until 11 a.m., Turnbee reportedly stood in silence for a few seconds, backed away from the cash register, and made his way to the seating area.
“Before I ordered, I saw that the breakfast menu was up,” Turnbee noted. “But sometimes they forget to switch the menu if you get there right when breakfast ends. Also, if it’s close, they’ll usually serve you lunch anyways. I guess they don’t do that here.”
After dispensing several napkins and filling two ketchup containers, Turnbee selected a booth with a view of the menu board. He then sat for approximately one minute before glancing at his wristwatch and returning to the condiment counter to fill another ketchup container.
By 10:48 a.m., Turnbee had begun slowly walking around the restaurant’s perimeter, perusing the various decorative paintings hanging on the walls. He also examined a plaque featuring a brief description of the restaurant and its founder, even though he had previously read the same inscription on an identical plaque at the Pleasant Valley McDonald’s.
At one point, Turnbee entered the men’s room. He later acknowledged that this trip was mainly to fill time.
“It’s getting pretty close to 11,” Turnbee said.
As he waited, Turnbee expressed his commitment to ordering lunch, stating that he would not, under any circumstance, order breakfast.
“Their Egg McMuffins are pretty good, and the pancakes are all right, but I’m in the mood for a burger,” said Turnbee, who when spotted moments later eating a hash brown explained that he needed something to tide him over, and that “hash browns are basically French fries.”
With five minutes to go before lunch, Turnbee began standing in line, allowing customers to proceed ahead of him if they confirmed they were ordering breakfast. He repeatedly peered out at patrons in the drive-thru, apparently to make certain they were not being served lunch.
“There shouldn’t be any difference between the drive-thru and when you go inside,” he said.
According to Turnbee, he has been in this position many times before, though mostly at Wendy’s—a fast food establishment he said isn’t very good at making clear when they serve breakfast.
“I just hope that when the lunch menu goes up they’re ready to serve everything,” Turnbee said. “They should have the fries and the nuggets already cooked because people are definitely going to order them when they order lunch. You can usually order pop with breakfast, so that shouldn’t be an issue.”
Continued Turnbee, “I wonder if the girl will remember my order or if I’ll have to order again.”
“I have many “practicing” Jewish-American friends, (I lived in NYC & Brooklyn for almost 10 years), I have absolutely nothing against Jewish people, (Obviously!!)… it’s their sick & twisted government, (much like our own who help support this activity). Although, it would be nice to see more Israeli citizens protesting the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by the hand of their own government.”
-Fred Face 8/23/09
“He’s really doing a bang-up job and with that stupid grin to boot. Ahhhh… duhhhhh?”
-Fred Face 8/23/09
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise. The trustees who oversee are projecting there won’t be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn’t happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.
By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.
“I will promise you, they count on that COLA,” said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. “To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal.”
Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.
Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.
“For many elderly, they don’t feel that inflation is low because their expenses are still going up,” said David Certner, legislative policy director for AARP. “Anyone who has savings and investments has seen some serious losses.”
About 50 million retired and disabled Americans receive Social Security benefits. The average monthly benefit for retirees is $1,153 this year. All beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent increase in January, the largest since 1982.
More than 32 million people are in the Medicare prescription drug program. Average monthly premiums are set to go from $28 this year to $30 next year, though they vary by plan. About 6 million people in the program have premiums deducted from their monthly Social Security payments, according to the.
Millions of people withfor doctors’ visits also have their premiums deducted from Social Security payments. Part B premiums are expected to rise as well. But under the law, the increase cannot be larger than the increase in Social Security benefits for most recipients.
There is no such hold-harmless provision for drug premiums.
Kennelly’s group wants Congress to increase Social Security benefits next year, even though the formula doesn’t call for it. She would like to see either a 1 percent increase in monthly payments or a one-time payment of $150.
The cost of a one-time payment, a little less than $8 billion, could be covered by increasing the amount of income subjected to Social Security taxes, Kennelly said. Workers only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,800 of income, a limit that rises each year with the average national wage.
But the limit only increases if monthly benefits increase.
Critics argue that Social Security recipients shouldn’t get an increase when inflation is negative. They note that recipients got a big increase in January — after energy prices had started to fall. They also note that Social Security recipients received one-time $250 payments in the spring as part of the government’s economic stimulus package.
Consumer prices are down from 2008 levels, giving Social Security recipients more purchasing power, even if their benefits stay the same, said Andrew G. Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank.
“Seniors may perceive that they are being hurt because there is no COLA, but they are in fact not getting hurt,” Biggs said. “Congress has to be able to tell people they are not getting everything they want.”
Social Security is also facing long-term financial problems. The retirement program is projected to start paying out more money than it receives in 2016. Without changes, the retirement fund will be depleted in 2037, according to the Social Security trustees‘ annual report this year.
President Barack Obama has said he would like tackle Social Security next year, after Congress finishes work on health care, climate change and new financial regulations.
Lawmakers are preoccupied by health care, making it difficult to address other tough issues. Advocates for older people hope their efforts will get a boost in October, when the Social Security Administration officially announces that there will not be an increase in benefits next year.
“I think a lot of seniors do not know what’s coming down the pike, and I believe that when they hear that, they’re going to be upset,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is working on a proposal for one-time payments for Social Security recipients.
“It is my view that seniors are going to need help this year, and it would not be acceptable for Congress to simply turn its back,” he said.
By Paul I. Adujie, New York
America’s establishment of the so-called African Command(AFRICOM), should be seen for what it is: America’s self-interested armada of protection for America, and her allies and not for Africa’s security. Africa has steadily and increasingly become more important by playing the role for Westerners as repository of energy resources which powers the engine-rooms of Western economies.
Additionally, America and her Western allies are in trepidations and stampede to stem China’s forays into Africa with plethora of real investments in solid infrastructures in many African nations.
The formation of this command was made official by former president of the United States, George W. Bush on February 6, 2007. It has been controversial since, particularly among
There is as well a lively debate by Americans in the Department of Defense, the War College, US State Department, and various Policy Foundations by policy wonks, aside from the Africans.
A major component and a key element in these debates is the fear of China. China is buoyed by her recent economic progress. China has, for more than a decade, attained major economic expansion of more than nine percent annually.
China has become exceedingly confident on the world stage. America and her Western allies are therefore deeply troubled by this state of affairs. China is seen by Western governments as a nuisance, an irritant and a competitor worth her weight in gold.
The sheer size of China, her industrial and technological ascendancy, tripled with her ability to produce with low overhead costs, empowers China, like no other nation. China is as well a major financier of America’s public debt, in the trillions. Sino-phobia in Western countries can also be blamed for America’s sudden desire to establish military presence in Africa.
Cynthia McKinney – Oppose Africom
21 August 2009 by Jim Giles
WHEN thousands of protestors took to the streets in Iran following this year’s disputed presidential election, Twitter messages sent by activists let the world know about the brutal policing that followed. A few months earlier, campaigners in Moldova used Facebook to organise protests against the country’s communist government, and elsewhere too the internet is playing an increasing role in political dissent.
Now governments are trying to regain control. By reinforcing their efforts to monitor activity online, they hope to deprive dissenters of information and the ability to communicate.
The latest evidence of these clampdowns comes in a report on the Middle East and north Africa by the OpenNet Initiative (ONI), a collaboration of researchers based in the UK and North America. Among the restrictions it reports are clampdowns on Facebook in Syria and the use of hidden cameras in Saudi Arabia’s internet cafes.
Most of these actions are aimed at stifling political debate. “Political filtering is the common denominator,” says Helmi Noman of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society in Boston, who compiled the report. “It’s the main target.”
Noman asked volunteers to check whether roughly 2000 sites covering a range of subjects, including gambling, political news and humour, are accessible in various countries. He also examined government eavesdropping schemes and the actions of local law enforcers.
The survey showed that governments in the Middle East and north Africa routinely block sites that host discussions critical of their policies or that cover human rights issues. Opposition parties’ sites are also censored.
At times entire social networking services, including Twitter, are unavailable, and the same goes for the YouTube video-sharing site. Orkut, a social networking site, is offline in the United Arab Emirates. The BBC Persian site cannot be accessed from Iran. The governments’ task of blocking internet access is made easier because many countries in the region have only a handful of service providers.
Governments also keep tabs on who is using the internet and what they are viewing. In March, newspapers in Saudi Arabia reported that police had started visiting internet cafes to ensure that owners had installed cameras to monitor users, as the country’s law requires. In Jordan, cafe owners have to record their customers’ names and monitor the sites they visit.
Noman says that filtering and monitoring have become more widespread as the internet’s role in political activity has increased. “More activists are going online and more activists are being created online,” he says.
Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP for the South East of England and author of The Plan: Twelve Months to Renew Britain.
Then Maj. Gen. Hamid Gul, Director General of the ISI (far left), with William Webster, Director of Central Intelligence, Clair George, Deputy Director for Operations, and Milt Bearden, CIA station chief, at a training camp for the mujahedeen in Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province in 1987 (RAWA.org)
August 12, 2009
by Jeremy R. Hammond
In an exclusive interview with Foreign Policy Journal, retired Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul responds to charges that he supports terrorism, discusses 9/11 and ulterior motives for the war on Afghanistan, claims that the U.S., Israel, and India are behind efforts to destabilize Pakistan, and charges the U.S. and its allies with responsibility for the lucrative Afghan drug trade.
Retired Lieutenant General Hamid Gul was the Director General of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) from 1987 to 1989, during which time he worked closely with the CIA to provide support for the mujahedeen fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Though once deemed a close ally of the United States, in more recent years his name has been the subject of considerable controversy. He has been outspoken with the claim that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were an “inside job”. He has been called “the most dangerous man in Pakistan”, and the U.S. government has accused him of supporting the Taliban, even recommending him to the United Nations Security Council for inclusion on the list of international terrorists.
In an exclusive interview with Foreign Policy Journal, I asked the former ISI chief what his response was to these allegations. He replied, “Well, it’s laughable I would say, because I’ve worked with the CIA and I know they were never so bad as they are now.” He said this was “a pity for the American people” since the CIA is supposed to act “as the eyes and ears” of the country. As for the charge of him supporting the Taliban, “it is utterly baseless. I have no contact with the Taliban, nor with Osama bin Laden and his colleagues.” He added, “I have no means, I have no way that I could support them, that I could help them.”
After the Clinton administration’s failed attempt to assassinate Osama bin Laden in 1998, some U.S. officials alleged that bin Laden had been tipped off by someone in Pakistan to the fact that the U.S. was able to track his movements through his satellite phone. Counter-terrorism advisor to the National Security Council Richard Clarke said, “I have reason to believe that a retired head of the ISI was able to pass information along to Al Qaeda that the attack was coming.” And some have speculated that this “retired head of the ISI” was none other than Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul.
US President Barack Obama’s administration will raise its 10-year budget deficit forecast to about nine trillion dollars, up about two trillion from the previous forecast, a US official said Friday.
The 2010-2019 projection, due out in a report expected next week, will supercede the previous forecast of about 7.1 trillion dollars, according to an official with the White House’s Office of Management and Budget.
The OMB official requested anonymity.
The figures are expected to fuel a fierce political debate over the US deficit and debt, with Obama’s Republican critics redoubling their calls for him to abandon his plans to remake US health care and fight climate change.
On Wednesday, an Obama administration official said the White House next week would pare the estimated 2009 US budget deficit to 1.58 trillion dollars, around 262 billion dollars lower than forecast.
OMB will make the announcement when it releases its delayed annual mid-year review next week, the official said, on condition of anonymity.
In May, the administration projected a 3.998 trillion dollar budget for 2009 with a deficit of 1.841 trillion dollars, reflecting swollen spending amid the worst economic crisis on record.
The lower-than-expected figure was attributed to the administration spending less money than it had projected on bank failures and aid to the financial industry.
The 2009 deficit will clock in at around 11.2 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and new projected budget figures will come in at around 3.65 trillion dollars.
The following video was broadcast by CNN on August 21, 2009.
By Associated Press
6:34 AM CDT, August 20, 2009
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — Nearly 1,500 rice farmers are suing the German conglomerate Bayer Cropscience and affiliated companies over a genetically engineered strain of rice.
The lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in Little Rock claims the farmers’ crops were corrupted by the rice that was produced by Bayer.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced in August 2006 that traces of an unapproved genetically engineered rice had been found in U.S. supplies of long-grain rice. The lawsuit says Bayer and Riceland Foods Inc. confirmed the traces in early 2006 but didn’t tell farmers, the government or the public until July or August.
A dollar amount being sought in damages is not given in the complaint.
A spokesman for Bayer said he had not seen the lawsuit and couldn’t comment.
CC2009 Sunday Night National Conference Call/Webinar
8:45 p.m. EST – 10:30 p.m. EST
Good morning Katie,
I’m writing on this misty Sunday morning from my home in the foothills of the Adirondack Mountains in upstate New York, which has been feeling the effects of the outer bands of heavy rain from Hurricane Bill, and is just now brightening as Bill moves toward the Canadian Provinces.
I was moved to write a note to you and each of the nearly two thousand others who attended one of the eighty-eight meetings I held across America between January 3rdand May 1stof this year.
The matter is grave and pressing. I am calling for haste and immediate action.
I pray that if at all possible, you will read this note and join me tonight on a conference call.
Earlier this year we came together to discuss the desirability of convening a National Assembly of 153 men and women, (chosen by the citizens of each State and the District of Columbia), to talk about our beloved America, our Constitution, about The Rights of Free Men and about a plan to bring our government back under the control of our Constitution – a plan of, by and for the People – a plan to defend, not amend, the Constitution — a plan called Continental Congress 2009.
We acknowledged that The Creator gave to us, through our Founding Fathers, the greatest governing documents ever given to mankind – our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.
We acknowledged that the Constitution of the United States of America is being violated, that it has been violated over many years, by many administrations, by every branch of government, by each major party.
We acknowledged that these violations are increasing in number and severity.
We acknowledged it is no wonder that we suffer.
We acknowledged that America is the last bastion for freedom on this earth.
We acknowledged that The Cause of America is still the cause of the world, for the Lamp of Liberty was lit here, and nowhere else.
We acknowledged that we, The People of America, have been entrusted to live by and protect these documents for they show the pathway to freedom, not only for ourselves, but for all mankind.
You acknowledged the necessity of the Plan and your willingness to be called upon from time to time to work with others in your state toward the success of Continental Congress 2009.
You acknowledged that time is of the essence.
Much has been happening since our meeting: on May 21-22, a group of twenty-five leaders of Freedom-oriented organizations met at Jekyll Island and expressed their endorsement and support of CC 2009; a team of highly skilled men and women has been assembled to plan, guide and manage the development of CC 2009; web sites have been created and enhanced for each state and the District of Columbia to educate the general public about CC 2009; men and women have volunteered to guide the course and direction of CC 2009 in their states; over 325 men and women have been nominated to represent The People from their states as delegates to CC 2009; voting centers are being selected where, on October 10, the free and concerned People in each state will vote for their delegates from their field of nominees; on August 10, a contract was signed with the Pheasant Run Conference Center (located just west of Chicago) to host CC 2009.
We have reached a most critical point on the road to CC 2009.
We need you, now.
PLEASE read our latest update and PLEASE join the conference call tonight.
Click here to read update: http://www. wethepeoplefoundation.org/ UPDATE/Update2009-08-21.htm
(If this link is not working, copy and paste it into your browser please)
(If this link is not working, copy and paste it into your browser please)
Upon registering you will receive a notification email with a link to Join the Webinar. Follow the prompts to easily launch the software and be connected. You will be connected to audio using your computer’s microphone and speakers (VoIP). Or, you may select, “Use Telephone after joining the Webinar.” You will be shown to dial 916-233-3088, then the access code 171-928-365, Webinar ID 278-497-083. Once you are connected to the webinar you will be shown an audio Pin Number which will allow you, over your telephone, to hear what is being said and be heard (after requesting to be heard and unmated by the moderators).
PC-based attendees need Windows 2000, XP Home, XP Pro, 2003 Server, or Vista. Macintosh-based attendees need Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger) or newer.
P.S. For every violation of the Constitution, our nation is being undermined, our people compromised, our way and quality of life diminished – our society depraved and pauperized.P.S.S. With confidence, I can say that all of our national suffering and distress would never have happened , had our elected officials obeyed our Constitution.
National Coalition of Supporting Organiztions
|WE THE PEOPLE FOUNDATION FOR CONSTITUTIONAL EDUCATION is a 501c3 national non-profit organization devoted to the protection and defense of the Constitution of The United States of America.
Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.
Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate
The American government — which we once called our government — has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called “economic royalists,” who choose our elected officials — indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.
This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment’s hesitation, they took our money — yours and mine — to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don’t care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as “useless eaters.”
But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?
“A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street.”
There it is. Right there. We are Main Street. We must, according to our president, share the blame. He went on to say: “And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis — the Great Depression — was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy.”
This is nonsense.
The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did — knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) — was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.
Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight — and we’ve all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.
Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.
Obama’s failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.
Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:
“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
Read Rockefeller’s words again. He actually admits to working against the “best interests of the United States.”
Need more? Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.” They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.
Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn’t enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.
The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here’s what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:
“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father’s conquered.”
We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists’ attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays’ Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America’s farmers.Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks’ predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Perhaps it’s time to consider that option once again.
I’m calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.
Let’s set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn’t effective — if the politicians ignore us — we do it again. And again. And again.
The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It’s time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.
August 23, 2009
Throughout the 20th Century, mankind’s governments have sought to gain control over their populations with food, water, bio-warfare, guns, tanks, militarized death squads, militarized police, propaganda, mis-information, entertainment, and the good old original lie. The United States and the West are no different than the “third world” banana republics and dictators; its just the methods the western democracies use have been refined through trial and error. The lies become bigger and the controlled corporate media outlets push the big lie so people end up believing anything the mainstream news endorses. Point of fact – alternative news media or sources are not generally believed by the public until the story breaks on a major news outlet. Enter the FEMA Camps.
Well, in order to understand the subject, we must define a few terms. What indeed is a “camp” ? People have popularized conceptions of Dachau or Ashuwitz, gas chambers, ovens and guard towers with jackbooted thugs patrolling and killing indiscriminantly. Is that really what a FEMA camp is or would be like?
Dictionary.com defines the word camp as a place where an army or other group of persons or an individual is lodged in a tent or tents or other temporary shelter. Dictionary.com goes on to define the word concentration as a state of concentrated. To be precise, the same Website defined the term concentrated as cluster or gather together closely. From these definitions, I will deduce that a concentration camp is defined as a camp where facilities permanent or temporary, provide the means of clustering or gathering together closely persons or soldiers.
Martial law, New Orleans, 2005.
Now that we have gone through the terms of subject matter and expanded our minds, lets look briefly at some past concentration camps in American history. First that comes to mind is the popular POW camp Andersonville during the War Between the States which was commanded by Confederate forces for the internment or concentration of Federal troops. The Federal or Union side of the conflict had its many concentration camps as well. Second is the many Native American Indian reservations set up by the Federal Government after the War Between the States as a means of controlling the nomadic Indians of the Midwestern and Southwestern regions of the United States. The “reservation” as it is still called was a piece of land reserved for the Indians by the Federal government while the US government endorsed the expansion of its citizens upon traditional Indian lands. Tensions boiled over as Federal troops would consistently come onto the reservations or concentration lands and interfere with the rituals and traditions of the Native Americans. Sometimes this conflict would lead to an all out war between the Indian tribes being concentrated on the reservations. Third, during World War 2, the United States government, fearing a threat from within from its Asian communities, collected, processed and interned or concentrated AMERICAN CITIZENS of Japanese descent in camps for the duration of the War. Can one truly argue that these events did not take place?
Anyone reading this, the chances are that you are not going to get up in the morning and go through your morning routine and walk out your front door and see a FEMA concentration camp. Why is that? Remember the definitions of the terms we went over earlier? Camps are often temporary, but can be permanent. Existing structures such as a Football Stadium or even an airport hangar can be utilized to concentrate a group of dissidents or people deemed a security risk to the State. There doesn’t necessarily have to be a Nazi-styled facilities to be a concentration camp. Ask yourselves this question: We’re there any camps in New Orleans before Katrina hit? Not that I can recall. But as soon as FEMA was on the scene, any old army-air force base or public facilities capable of sheltering or concentrating refugees from the disaster area became a concentration camp. Not a “death camp” – a concentration camp. The most notable of these camps which became the symbol of the plight of the people in New Orleans who did not get out was the New Orleans Saints NFL Stadium. After the storm, Martial Law was declared. FEMA, The National Guard and Blackwater (as it was then called) all were utilized to confiscate guns and process refugees into these concentration camps, or relief shelters. We’re law abiding citizens rights violated? Often. We’re they exterminated systematically? No. Check out this video of the Military Police and National Guard forcing people from their homes and confiscating firearms from law abiding people. And you say it can’t happen to you? What if there is a national crisis, such as a “Swine Flu” outbreak and then everyone becomes a suspect.
Enter H.R. 645. The National Emergency Centers Establishment Act was submitted by Democrat Alcee L Hastings of Florida. The bill calls for Homeland Security to use KBR, a subdivision of Haliburton, to create no fewer than six national facilities for the concentration of civilian internees on military installations.
Enter Field Manual 3-19-40 Military Police Internment / Resettlement Field Operations. This field manual is the basis of operations for the handling of all forms people in all situations. From the definitions section of Chapter 1, we can be labeled a CIVILIAN INTERNEE which as the manual defines is:
“CIVILIAN INTERNEE 1-7. A CI is a person who is interned during armed conflict or occupation if he is considered a security risk or if he needs protection because he committed an offense (insurgent, criminal) against the detaining power. A CI is protected according to the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (GC), 12 August 1949.”
The above definition is very broad. It fails to identify the “detaining power” (Can you say UN Forces deployed to US in the advent of Civil Unrest?) It also states that the “civilian internee” needs “protection” because he committed an “offense” – who makes these laws of what an “offense” is? A military commander? An international treaty organization such as the UN or NATO? A Global World Government? Below is an example of a mid-level internment camp for the field of operations of the United States military.
CORPS HOLDING AREAS 3-55. A CHA (Figure 3-4) can hold more captives for longer periods of times than a central CP. Depending on the availability of MP units to establish I/R facilities, corps MP units must be prepared to hold captives at the CHA more than 72 hours. If the CHA keeps captives more than 72 hours, MP must plan and coordinate for the increased logistics and personnel required to operate a long-term facility. The decision to hold captives longer is based on METT-TC and the availability of forces. Captives remain in the CHA until they are evacuated to an I/R facility or until hostilities end.
Enter the REX 84 Program: A plan for the continuity of Government in which dissidents would be rounded up and processed during the event of civil unrest in the United States. Fox New’s beloved Oliver North was involved in the planning of this operation. Representative of Oregon Democrat Peter DeFazio of the 4th District had this to say about the REX 84 Program during September of 2008 when the Stock Market crashed.
Ladies and Gentlemen, there is a plan that is in place to be executed by the Federals to lock down the cities and towns across our land and to begin gun confiscation. There is a plan to deal with mass quarantining of the population and its subsequent internment and suspension of the Constitutional rights of Citizens. Now that you know, you can plan with this in mind when a “national emergency” is declared and some group of unscrupulous people seek to gain total control over the population or portions of political dissidents – you now know what power the Federals will not hesitate to utilize for their insidious ends.
I will end my presentation with a quote from a speech that everyone knows. The “give me liberty” speech by Patrick Henry. What is not well known is is down to earth way of looking at the colonists situation:
“Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir.” – Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
August 23, 2009
On Saturday, thousands of Americans opposed to Obamacare demonstrated outside the offices of Congress critters around the country. “The organizers who brought the Tax Day Tea Party to cities around the nation this spring recruited thousands of protesters Saturday afternoon to anti-health care reform rallies staged in front of at least 100 Congressional district offices,” the Washington Post reports.
Dubbed the National Recess Rally, the nationwide event was organized to counter stage-managed pro-Obamacare events. “People just want government to stay out of their health care,” Eric Odom, executive director of American Liberty Alliance, a Libertarian organization, told the Post. “It was very little about the cost and more about government intrusion.”
According to Fox News, the American Liberty Alliance, FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity worked with The Sam Adams Alliance to organize the events.
“Obviously the idea behind this was to have a unified day for those concerned about government-controlled health care to talk outside their representatives’ offices,” Paul Miller, spokesman for The Sam Adams Alliance, a Chicago-based political organization, told Fox.
Remarkably, the corporate media gave the event a modest amount of coverage, albeit often with a typical pro-Obama spin. The Mercury News, for instance, ran the following headline on an article covering the event: “White anger fueling health care debate.”
As increasing number of Americans protest the government take-over of health care, race-baiting and sensationalistic and biased headlines, news articles, and corporate media television coverage will no longer work.
August 22, 2009
Here is a chart released by the government that claims to show the percentage of unemployed people in the United States as of July, 2009. It is a fictional snapshot of the actual number of unemployed and under-employed people.
As economics professor John Miller notes in an article posted on the Dollars&Sense website, the actual number of unemployed and — importantly — under-employed people is actually in the double-digits, probably twice the official figure. Miller writes that government figures
dramatically understate the true extent of unemployment. First, they exclude anyone without a job who is ready to work but has not actively looked for a job in the previous four weeks. The Bureau of Labor Statistics classifies such workers as “marginally attached to the labor force” so long as they have looked for work within the last year. Marginally attached workers include so-called discouraged workers who have given up looking for job-related reasons, plus others who have given up for reasons such as school and family responsibilities, ill health, or transportation problems.
The government figures also leave out out part-time workers looking for full-time work because part-time workers are “employed” even if they work as little as one hour a week, according the the bean counters and number crunchers in the district of criminals. “The vast majority of people working part time involuntarily have had their hours cut due to slack or unfavorable business conditions,” Miller explains. “The rest are working part time because they could only find part-time work.” Miller notes that “forced part-time work” is at an all-time high, going all the way back to 1956 and including the 1982 recession. In May 2009, 8.8 million workers were forced to work part time for economic reasons, in other words they were forced out of the job market by the banksters and their long-standing plot to turn the country into a third world cesspool (the latter was not stated by Mr. Miller).
During the last bankster engineered economic depression in the 1930s, the official unemployment rate was 24.9%. If we accept the premise that the actual unemployment rate is double the officially cooked figures, then the states in the above chart with 12 percent or higher unemployment are actually experiencing unemployment on par with the so-called Great Depression. If we accept the “or higher” on the chart, some parts of the country are suffering unemployment worse than the Great Depression.
The GDP is now floundering in negative territory — officially at -1.89% — which means massive job losses will continue. Conventional economic wisdom states that in order to maintain stable employment, the GDP must be around 2.5% per year and it must go much higher to make up for the catastrophic losses suffered since the “recession” began in November, 2007.
Once again, the government is playing a shell game with the numbers. The GDP numbers are distorted by manipulation of the money supply, which creates inflation. If you look at the Federal Reserve’s M3 data, you will see that GDP has decreased substantially since 1990. In order to hide this from the American people, the Fed stopped publishing the M3 monetary aggregate report on March 23, 2006. The discontinuation of the M3 “detracts from the transparency the Fed preaches and adds to the suspicion that the Fed wants to hide anything showing money growth high enough to fuel inflation, just so people won’t know how bad it is and possibly react and thus make it worse,” writes Bud Conrad for Financial Sense.
Or react and storm the castle with pitch forks and raised fists.
Earlier this month, the U.S. government told the one-worlders at the European Union that at the end of the third quarter it will not meet its forecast for the annual budget deficit and the forecast must be revised to a figure in excess of 10.75%. On Saturday, Obama’s budget office said the figure will be 11.2% of GDP, a staggering $1.8 trillion, the highest deficit as a percentage of GDP since 1945 when the people were obliged to pay for the last world war created by the banksters and their international minions.
In order to give this dire situation a somewhat softer and fuzzier glow, Obama’s folks removed from the 2009 budget deficit projection $250 billion given away to the banksters.
Even if the “recession” ends this quarter — and in the meantime, you may as well wish for a pony — Obama’s number crunchers admit unemployment will continue to skyrocket. “Unemployment has continued to rise for several months after six of the past seven recessions. That’s just what it does as a lagging indicator,” write the brain surgeons over at the CIA’s favorite newspaper, the Washington Post. “What we’ll be watching for, however, is whether the gap between the officially and unofficially unemployed continues to grow. If it does, this recovery will take even longer than people think.”
Of course, we shouldn’t expect the Grand Dame of Operation Mockingbird to level with us, even if her scribes realized the truth — the “economic crisis” is an engineered affair. It is the largest and most elaborate transfer of wealth from the people to the banksters in the history of mankind.
Back when Obama signed the so-called American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — absurdly called the “stimulus” bill — he said the plan would create three and a half million jobs over a two year period and that unemployment would be less than 8 percent — 16 percent? — by June of 2009. The corporate media is now turning somersaults over an officially reported drop in unemployment — from 9.5% in June to 9.4% (multiply by two) — but with the caveat that things will get worse before they get better.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out things will get worse — much worse — and there will be no recovery at the end of the rainbow.
“There is no economy left to recover. The US manufacturing economy was lost to offshoring and free trade ideology,” economist and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts wrote last month. “The real economy was traded away for a make-believe economy. When the make-believe economy collapsed, Americans’ wealth in their real estate, pensions, and savings collapsed dramatically while their jobs disappeared.” Americans are “over their heads in debt. Jobs are disappearing. America’s consumer economy, approximately 70% of GDP, is dead. Those Americans who still have jobs are saving against the prospect of job loss. Millions are homeless. Some have moved in with family and friends; others are living in tent cities.”
“Obama’s policy, like Bush’s before him, is keyed to the enrichment of Goldman Sachs and the armament industries,” Roberts concluded.
“Will Americans realize that they are not ruled by elected representatives but by an oligarchy that owns the Washington whorehouse?” the economist wrote more recently. “Will Americans ever understand that they are impotent serfs?”
At this late hour, it remains to be seen.
By David Kravets
The Obama administration is urging a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit weighing whether a sitting U.S. president may lawfully create a spying program to eavesdrop on Americans’ electronic communications without warrants or congressional authorization.
The nearly 5-year-old case, having a tortured procedural history, is the furthest along in challenging the Bush administration’s warrantless, Terror Surveillance Program adopted in the wake of the September 11 terror attacks.
Two former American lawyers for a now-defunct Saudi charity brought the case. They allege some of their 2004 telephone conversations to Saudi Arabia were siphoned to the National Security Agency without warrants. The allegations were based on classified documents the government accidentally mailed to the two former lawyers of an Oregon chapter of the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation.
After a mountain of paperwork, a trip to the appellate courts and countless hearings and motions, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker of San Francisco ruled in June that the lawyers must make their case without the documents, which both the Bush and Obama administrations claimed were a state secret.
Among other things, the government argued in a filing (.pdf) late Thursday:
“Plaintiffs rely on a string of sheer conjecture in an attempt to prove they were subject to the alleged TSP surveillance in 2004. But the fact that the president authorized the TSP, that the government has investigated terrorist financing by charitable organizations like the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation of Saudi Arabia and its worldwide branches, that plaintiff AHIF-Oregon had been designated as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, and, indeed, that this designation had been supported by ‘classified’ ‘intelligence’ information, does not establish that the government electronically surveilled the plaintiffs under the TSP or otherwise.”
It was the fourth time the government moved to dismiss the case.
Last month, meanwhile, counsel for the Al-Haramain lawyers cited a bevy of circumstantial evidence (.pdf) that they claimed demonstrated that the two charity lawyers — Wendell Belew and Asim Gafoor — were unlawfully spied upon.
The evidence included speeches by government officials discussing an investigation that concluded with the listing of Al-Haramain as a terror organization to the FBI’s public disclosure that it monitored Al-Haramain officials.
The legal issue centers on whether future presidents may adopt a so-called Terror Surveillance Program, which was President George W. Bush’s once-secret warrantless wiretapping program disclosed in 2005 by The New York Times. Bush said his war powers granted him the power to create the TSP program.
A hearing was set for September 23.
In July 2008, Bush signed legislation authorizing the type of surveillance at issue in this case – allowing the warrantless monitoring of Americans’ electronic communications if they are communicating overseas with somebody the government believes is linked to terrorism.
Then-Sen. Barrack Obama, now president, voted for that legislation, which also immunized the nation’s telecommunication companies from lawsuits charging them with being complicit with the Bush administration’s warrantless, wiretapping program. Those lawsuits — combined into one in San Francisco federal court — are on appeal.
Sweeeeet, I got tickets to see the Pogues, (Original Line-up), at Stubb’s. Shane is one of the few people I would plunk down $45 dollars to see. To see one of the best song writers of the 21st century, (even if he is mumbling & piss drunk), I’ll dish out my hard earned money. Not to mention an incredibly talented tight band. I think their touring the country, so, look em up.
-Fred Face 8/22/09
“Vamp” Art Acevedo- Austin, Texas Police Chief
By SHELTON GREEN
A little known Texas law which goes into effect September 1, 2009 will dramatically change the way Texas law enforcement officers draw blood from suspected drunk drivers.
The way it stands now, a person involved in an accident will automatically have his or her blood drawn if they’re involved in an accident where there’s a death or serious bodily injury. However, Senate Bill 328, which passed in the last Texas legislative session, means that anyone involved in a crash, whether they’re suspected of drunk driving or not and where there’s bodily injury, severe or not, or has a child in their car, or previous D.W.I. convictions, will have blood drawn automatically within a matter of minutes.
“I was just sick and tired of Texas law that allowed the defendant to destroy the very evidence that we need to protect society,” said John Bradley, the Williamson County District Attorney.
Currently police officers in Texas have to get a search warrant to draw a person’s blood. Bradley says the process can take up to several hours.
Under S.B. 328 an officer doesn’t need a search warrant changing the blood drawing process from hours to a matter of minutes.
“Police officers are going to be saved a lot of time and energy and trouble in their D.W.I. investigations and be able to directly collect the most powerful evidence of intoxication which is the blood and the body of the drunk person,” added Bradley.
The Williamson County D.A. says he approached Senator Dan Gattis of Williamson County about authoring S.B. 328 after the December 2003 arrest of Gary Gibbs, a truck driver who was stopped in Georgetown because other drivers saw him weaving while he was driving an 18-wheeler truck.
Gibbs had seven prior D.W.I. convictions and on his 8th he was sentenced to life in prison.
Some in the community are now questioning the constitutionality of S.B. 328.
“I’m quite sure that this is going to wind up in courts,” said Jody Barton, an attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project.
“We’re going down this road of taking away more and more liberties and laws like this don’t really do anything to stop drunk driving all they really do is give the police more power to intrude upon people’s liberties,” adds Barton.
In Austin and in Williamson County staff members are being trained as pflebotomists to draw blood.
However Bradley told KVUE that there are some jurisdictions in Texas where police officers themselves are being trained to draw blood.