Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood has decided to field candidates for more than half of the nation’s parliamentary seats, up from 45%, with its candidates benefiting from the party’s high level of organization in comparison to all other organizations.
Although the group intended to play a less-than-dominant role in the first post-Mubarak government, this decision will make it the deal-maker in the new government and the dominant force in drafting the nation’s first civilian constitution.
The decision is not going unnoticed by other political factions — and even by the shrewder elements of the Brotherhood, who want to avoid pitting themselves against the society in its first free elections. An article in the leading Egyptian paper Al-Ahram, translated below, reveals that all of the non-Islamist factions are organizing to counter the massive power wielded by the Brotherhood.
Ideally, the Brotherhood aims to control at least 1/3 of the seats in the parliament — giving it veto power to reject agenda items out of line with its ideological platform.
Islamist party Gamaa Islamiya, formerly a violent terrorist organization whose leaders contributed to the development of al-Qaeda, is throwing its weight behind the Brotherhood. Strategically, the Gamaa can present itself as an alternative to the Brotherhood in the next election; in the meantime, however, its votes go to strengthening religious legislation and drafting the new constitution.
The tension created by the decision shows rifts in the Muslim Brotherhood itself. Its youth wing is less doctrinal and more interested in free and fair elections. By placing high-level Brotherhood officials in the dominant positions of the new political party, and violating internal laws about participation of members in the group’s decision-making process, the Brotherhood is showing that it isn’t always so committed to playing by the rules.
Still other members are worried that the group may become too powerful too fast, leaving it unable to seize total power and poorly positioned to guide Egypt.
Although the group promises to give the party more freedom the next time around, to the average Egyptian, the Brotherhood’s moves are coming off more and more like a naked power grab. My translation follows on the next page.
[Note: the article uses the term “the organization” for the Muslim Brotherhood, and “the party” for the Freedom and Justice Party. To make it easier for the reader, references to “the organization” have been changed to “the Brotherhood.”]
(Translation)
Al-Ahram article: Declaration of Freedom and Justice Raises Severe Controversy
Cairo — Amani Majid; Alexandria — Fakri Abdul-Salaam and Tariq Ismael
The decisions of the Muslim Brotherhood Shura Council, which concluded on Saturday night, raised a great amount of controversy around the choosing of new leaders for the Freedom and Justice Party, from the leaders of the Brotherhood and over the rate of participation in the Elections of the Council of the People, as well as the relationship between the Brotherhood and its daughter party.
The decision was made to make Dr. Muhammad Mursi president for the new party, with Dr. Issam al-Eryan as deputy and Doctor Said Katanani as secretary general. Concerning this, there was condemnation by a number of the Muslim Brotherhood, not directed at the leadership itself, but at the means of election.
Dr. Muhammad Habib, the former deputy supreme guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, said, “I am sad and tortured that the right of the founders was confiscated, and especially that more than 59% of the founders are members of the Brotherhood organization, which to them was sold the call.”
And he added, “That which happened is a real confiscation of the free will of the founders, and deals with them like they are not adults.” And he stressed, “And I reject this view completely.”
And Habib said that the three leaders are members of the [Brotherhood’s] Guidance Office, which means that the leadership is imposing its control in a complete and continuous way on the party. And he added, “We hope to be a party of independent positions, fledgling experience, and seeing to the general view of public opinion.”
The question, Habib says, is what will the Brotherhood do if the government or even part of the government falls to [comes under the control of] the Freedom and Justice Party?
He criticized the Shura [council] of the Brotherhood’s decision in selecting 5% for nomination to the People’s Assembly, and he said that this decision affects the founding body of the party. He considered that ratio [to be large] and he expected that the party would win 52% of the parliamentary seats.
On the relationship between the Brotherhood and the party, Habib said the answer. For the future of the political party, he said about it that there are many currents in Egypt, including Islamic, liberal, national, and independent, and perhaps the Islamic trend can reap 53% of the seats. But the future of the party depends on the activity of the Brotherhood and their dealings with the different national forces.
As for the opinion of Dr. Omar Ali Hassan, an expert in Islamic movements, that the relationship of the Brotherhood to the party is unjustifiable, warning that it may constitute a heavy burden on the course of the Freedom and Justice Party in the future, he explained his words by saying that the Brotherhood is not defined so far as to its legal status, as it is not a popular assembly subject to oversight and accountability. This means opening the door of the floodgates to challenging to the party.
Like the Brotherhood, which is supportive of the party and has investments abroad, this presents the party also with the challenge to receive funds from abroad, and it can be charged with forming military organizations, where, perhaps, it faces a future of the same accusations as the events of the militias of al-Azhar.
Omar criticized the rise in ratios of the nomination from 3 to 4 to the final decision (from 54 to 5%), and said that the Brotherhood had already indicated its target of winning only 52% of the seats. However, this is [just] the proposed rate. He knows as well that the Brotherhood nominates members from subcontractors, who will raise this percentage.
Omar said, “I think that they want to receive 1/3 of the contested [seats] in the parliament, which gives them equal power with the other 2/3, [because the party] could stop any legislation which does not agree with its vision. And I believe that the best is dialogue with the national power, otherwise they aspire to capture opportunistic, political gains, but they will pay dearly for that.
The Brotherhood youth were divided into supporters and opponents about the new decisions. So Muhammad Mahir Akl and Muhammad Shams described the decisions [as a shock] that did not meet the expectations of the young people, especially the unresolved relationship between the MB and the party and the lack of security about this separation, as well as way of selecting party leaders. [They were] saying that the entire meeting was not positive.
Whereas, Shuruq al-Sawaaf of the Brotherhood said: “I support the decision.” And she added, what we would like is a clear relationship between the factions of the party and Brotherhood, and this turns out to be an indication that the party leadership will resign from the Guidance Office.
On the other hand, Dr. Gamal Heshmat, a member of the Shura Council of the Brotherhood, stressed that the new party leadership will continue only for the transitional period, a period of 4 years. He justified the selection of the leaders by the Shura, because the [members of the] established organization don’t know each other and for that reason the selection occurred through this means. He made it clear that this was first and last time that selection would be done through the Shura.
He added that there is a concern and apprehension from the Brotherhood about the Party of Freedom and Justice, a concern of fragmentation, since this is the first time for them. For this reason, the order is a transitional one only.
He added, “That we are human beings, we do ijtihad, but the people want the Brotherhood to be perfect. And that does not mean that our ijtihad is correct, we may make mistakes as we are making a party for the first time. We need leaders, and when it is independent and becomes mature and serious, the order will be changed.
Heshmat denied any relationship between the general leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and the party, and said, “This will be the format only on the biggest issues like elections for leadership or positions on international treaties, so as not produce any difference in the points of view of the two sides.”
He added, “That we raised the ceiling of participation now to 50%, we will not succeed in the elections, if this percentage would be correct (for participation, and it is not a contest also).”
He pointed out that political opinion will not miss the Brotherhood, but there will be a special separation in political work. The society demands going beyond the stages of controversy, and work in the field to prepare to smooth the transition to a new stage of political life in Egypt.
On the other hand, Dr. Saad al-Katanani, the general secretary of the Party of Freedom and Justice, plans to submit papers to the party next week, indicating that the number of deputies passed 7,600 and stressing they stopped receiving new deputies for the party.
In Alexandria, statements of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, after the official announcement of the formation of the Party of Freedom and Justice, provoked concerns in political circles, specifically their participation in the upcoming elections at a rate of 50%, instead of 30%. The political forces, the coalitions of the revolution, and regulatory movements expressed that this is a position contrary and contradictory to what was previously expressed by the Muslim Brotherhood after the fall of the regime and the stepping down of the previous president.
Ismail Sulaiman, S=secretary of the Tagammo [Unionist] Party, confirmed that the positions of the Muslim Brotherhood are always contradictory and arouse suspicion, perplexity, and questioning. They are always talking about organizational participation for all the political and societal segments, but now it has become a conflict to express the participation of any segment at [50%] percent. It means the returning to the ideas of the defunct national party of control and [one-party] dominance over political life.
Mr. Bassiouni, President of the Center for the Initiative to Support the Values of Tolerance and Democracy and one of the prominent political activists in Alexandria, stressed that the statements of the Muslim Brotherhood about 50% political participation are only about establishing a religious state that is inconsistent with the ideals of the revolution and encouraging young people to participate in political life. It closes the path for young people to participate in political life, confining it to the cadres and members who have the capabilities and potential of a well-financed group, as opposed to the youth’s ideas and desire for contributing [that is, donating]. He added that the Brotherhood does not have a clear political vision on various issues, to present and discuss, but they are speaking in general principles, and unclear features and concepts. They are trying to exploit religion for the realization of political gain.
The coalition of youth of the revolution in Alexandria called for unity and working together to face the element of the Muslim Brotherhood, which wants to seize political and parliamentary life, taking advantage of its previous bases of popularity and political expertise in organizing, since the revolution has allowed them freedom of movement.
In a dramatic surprise, Dr Najeh Ibrahim, the top leader of Gamaa Islamiyah, said that the Muslim Brotherhood had committed an error in its announcement of upcoming political participation at 50%, which was close to taking over majority of the disbanded National Party’s previous parliamentary seats. However, maybe this participation may give them an upper hand in drafting the next [and permanent] constitution.
Dr. Najeh Ibrahim explained that he supports the idea of a civil state, which has an Arab and Islamic [civilizationist] context, believes in pluralism and takes democracy as the means to rule, supports social justice, equality, and freedom, as well as the freedom of belief and thought under the framework of fixed principles of society. He indicated that the Gamaa Islamiyah does not presently have the capabilities to make nominations for the upcoming elections, but it will support those others who advance the ideas of integrity, honor, and reliability for the benefit of the nation.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Obama May Prosecute CIA Agents Who Got bin Laden Intel
Now for a word from the other side of his mouth........
Obama May Prosecute CIA Agents Who Got bin Laden Intel
So, Obama is "brave" for "doing the right thing" and allowing the CIA/DOD to kill bin Laden. Since when is it an act of courage for a President to do the same thing any other President would do?
Kudos to you Mr. President for other "courageous" acts such as breathing, eating, and sleeping.
But that's just media hypocrisy. You expect that from the media. That doesn't bother me all the much.
But it does bother me that Obama has indicated that he will continue to allow Attorney General Holder to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA agents involved in the "enhanced interrogations" of certain key al Qaeda figures.
Such figures as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and al Libi.
As in, the guys who gave up the name of the courier which we then tracked to bin Laden.
Which means that on the very day that Obama is in New York celebrating his own non-involvement in the killing of Oasma bin Laden he has signaled his continued support for prosecuting men who were actually involved in tracking down bin Laden.
What kind of sick egomaniac celebrates by stabbing the very men who did the dirty work necessary for tracking bin Laden down and giving us this victory?
Obama May Prosecute CIA Agents Who Got bin Laden Intel
So, Obama is "brave" for "doing the right thing" and allowing the CIA/DOD to kill bin Laden. Since when is it an act of courage for a President to do the same thing any other President would do?
Kudos to you Mr. President for other "courageous" acts such as breathing, eating, and sleeping.
But that's just media hypocrisy. You expect that from the media. That doesn't bother me all the much.
But it does bother me that Obama has indicated that he will continue to allow Attorney General Holder to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA agents involved in the "enhanced interrogations" of certain key al Qaeda figures.
Such figures as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and al Libi.
As in, the guys who gave up the name of the courier which we then tracked to bin Laden.
Which means that on the very day that Obama is in New York celebrating his own non-involvement in the killing of Oasma bin Laden he has signaled his continued support for prosecuting men who were actually involved in tracking down bin Laden.
What kind of sick egomaniac celebrates by stabbing the very men who did the dirty work necessary for tracking bin Laden down and giving us this victory?
MSM refuses to report that GM's profits were built on the backs of taxpayers
Government Motors, Dems, Obama celebrate first quarter profits made up entirely of backdoor taxpayer bailout that the press still refuses to report
The celebrations continue. Little are most people aware that even the celebration is taxpayer funded, and the lazy MSM is still not reporting that the celebration is over something that looks good on the surface but in reality is another government bailout that never seems to end: The headline over at The Detroit News: Dems, Obama campaign hail GM, Chrysler profits
The Michigan Democratic Party and President Barack Obama's reelection campaign each hailed the financial results of General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC Thursday.
You can read the rest of teh article but I'll summarize it for you in 3 words: "Obama is awesomeness." And from The Detroit Free Press: Tom Walsh: Detroit 3 recovery has staying power. Neither paper mentions that the supposed profits are made up entirely of taxpayer bailout money. How so? It's unfortunate that the online hit count for the freep and News is about 2 million each per month. My blog gets about 100k, but only those will be aware of information that I have blogged on many times. I'll summarize the backdoor bailout in two prior posts:
Bailout: GM only earned a 'profit' on paper because of $45 billion backdoor taxpayer bailout that the establishment MSM isn't reporting
Detroit News spews Obama propaganda: Feds to recoup $36 billion in bailout money, fail to mention GM receiving $45 billion tax furlough
That's right - GM is paying no taxes. Neither is Chrysler. That was a decision Obama made (the regime gave any 'private' company a tax exemption if they drank the kool-aid and took TARP money). Ford gets no such privileged treatment, taxes its taxes and still has to compete on the open market with both. For someone who gives lip service to "leveling the playing field" Obama tilted it severely to political points. And with the non-curious, lazt media at his back, he gets headlines like those at the Detroit News and Free Press and it's based on news that is misleading at best, and outright false at worse. Including the tax breaks, how much will the total loss be to US taxpayers? This much: Government to LOSE $85 Billion on Government Motors, Obama calls it a success... The original bailout was $80 billion. Put up $80 billion, end up losing $85 billion. Only in the world of the federal government is that called a success.
And to the local MSM: SHAME ON YOU!
The celebrations continue. Little are most people aware that even the celebration is taxpayer funded, and the lazy MSM is still not reporting that the celebration is over something that looks good on the surface but in reality is another government bailout that never seems to end: The headline over at The Detroit News: Dems, Obama campaign hail GM, Chrysler profits
The Michigan Democratic Party and President Barack Obama's reelection campaign each hailed the financial results of General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC Thursday.
You can read the rest of teh article but I'll summarize it for you in 3 words: "Obama is awesomeness." And from The Detroit Free Press: Tom Walsh: Detroit 3 recovery has staying power. Neither paper mentions that the supposed profits are made up entirely of taxpayer bailout money. How so? It's unfortunate that the online hit count for the freep and News is about 2 million each per month. My blog gets about 100k, but only those will be aware of information that I have blogged on many times. I'll summarize the backdoor bailout in two prior posts:
Bailout: GM only earned a 'profit' on paper because of $45 billion backdoor taxpayer bailout that the establishment MSM isn't reporting
Detroit News spews Obama propaganda: Feds to recoup $36 billion in bailout money, fail to mention GM receiving $45 billion tax furlough
That's right - GM is paying no taxes. Neither is Chrysler. That was a decision Obama made (the regime gave any 'private' company a tax exemption if they drank the kool-aid and took TARP money). Ford gets no such privileged treatment, taxes its taxes and still has to compete on the open market with both. For someone who gives lip service to "leveling the playing field" Obama tilted it severely to political points. And with the non-curious, lazt media at his back, he gets headlines like those at the Detroit News and Free Press and it's based on news that is misleading at best, and outright false at worse. Including the tax breaks, how much will the total loss be to US taxpayers? This much: Government to LOSE $85 Billion on Government Motors, Obama calls it a success... The original bailout was $80 billion. Put up $80 billion, end up losing $85 billion. Only in the world of the federal government is that called a success.
And to the local MSM: SHAME ON YOU!
Police Find IED Near Amtrak rail in Chester, Pa.
A new chapter of terror begins in America:
Police: IED Found Near Chester Train Tracks CBS Philly hat tip Armaros
CHESTER, Pa. (CBS) – Chester police are urging vigilance after they found an improvised explosive device, this afternoon, near Amtrak and Septa railroad tracks and the Commodore Barry Bridge.
Police say the device consisted of two bottles with a yellow liquid inside. They say one had a timer and wires attached by duct tape.
Police were not sure if the device was really explosive but evacuated the area as a precaution. The Delaware County bomb squad determined that it was and disarmed it.
The device was found about 2 p.m., near third and Reaney Streets. That’s underneath the bridge and not far from the tracks Septa’s Wilmington-Newark line uses.
An investigation is underway.
Police: IED Found Near Chester Train Tracks CBS Philly hat tip Armaros
CHESTER, Pa. (CBS) – Chester police are urging vigilance after they found an improvised explosive device, this afternoon, near Amtrak and Septa railroad tracks and the Commodore Barry Bridge.
Police say the device consisted of two bottles with a yellow liquid inside. They say one had a timer and wires attached by duct tape.
Police were not sure if the device was really explosive but evacuated the area as a precaution. The Delaware County bomb squad determined that it was and disarmed it.
The device was found about 2 p.m., near third and Reaney Streets. That’s underneath the bridge and not far from the tracks Septa’s Wilmington-Newark line uses.
An investigation is underway.
What’s an Outlaw to Do?
What’s an Outlaw to Do?
When all the world has gone insane … when all the news about freedom is bad … when you’re tempted to say, “Screw it” and give up hope, remember:
We are a silent army
An army of the mind. An army without hierarchy, without officers, without commands. We are an army of the intellect and the spirit that can never be targeted, bombed, or shot into submission.
We are invisible, which sometimes discourages us, but which is our secret strength.
We are masters of subversion
The subtle statement that gets our neighbors thinking. The helping hand extended. The act of independence. The idea that bursts the boundaries of the box. These are our weapons.
The power of self-defense is the defense of all. The power of one person to change minds becomes the power of many minds changed.
The power of defiance is a beginning. The far stronger power of creative disregard becomes a weapon of mass construction.
Just when change seems most unlikely … change happens.
Shrug
Withdraw your consent. Stop cooperating.
You have no obligation to bear all the world’s pains. You have no duty to accept whatever’s imposed upon you against your will. The only obligations you must carry are your self-obligations — and with creativity they may be made lighter.
You owe nothing to those who want only to use and abuse you. You owe everything to your highest self.
Live
Don’t let the bastards grind you down.
Don’t grind yourself down by focusing on the bastards. Have a life. Have your life.
Be a trickster
It tips the hierarchy. It enlivens the world. It surprises. It generates thought. It’s fun. It annoys the bastards. Why not?
Be dashing
Like a True Outlaw. It beats the heck out of being dashed.
Breathe
Pray. Meditate. Watch a sunrise. What works for you. Freedom is spiritual before (and after) it’s political.
We are everywhere
The man next to you on the subway may be a Freedom Outlaw.
The woman who does your hair. The bright young college student running for student-body president. The kid who delivers your pizza. The little girl across the street playing with her cat. You may never know them. But your allies, or potential allies, are out there. Everywhere. Anywhere.
Be steady
When all around you are following fads, pursuing witch hunts, or reacting hysterically to the moment’s cynically managed news, be steady. Later, you’ll have nothing to regret while others — if they’re at all conscious — come to their senses and blush at the follies that swept them out of their sanity.
We will never “fix the world” but …
We can form a web of light around it. We can en-light-en ourselves, lighten our load, and throw some rays into the darkness.
We can go sane and lead a few along the way.
When all the world has gone insane … when all the news about freedom is bad … when you’re tempted to say, “Screw it” and give up hope, remember:
We are a silent army
An army of the mind. An army without hierarchy, without officers, without commands. We are an army of the intellect and the spirit that can never be targeted, bombed, or shot into submission.
We are invisible, which sometimes discourages us, but which is our secret strength.
We are masters of subversion
The subtle statement that gets our neighbors thinking. The helping hand extended. The act of independence. The idea that bursts the boundaries of the box. These are our weapons.
The power of self-defense is the defense of all. The power of one person to change minds becomes the power of many minds changed.
The power of defiance is a beginning. The far stronger power of creative disregard becomes a weapon of mass construction.
Just when change seems most unlikely … change happens.
Shrug
Withdraw your consent. Stop cooperating.
You have no obligation to bear all the world’s pains. You have no duty to accept whatever’s imposed upon you against your will. The only obligations you must carry are your self-obligations — and with creativity they may be made lighter.
You owe nothing to those who want only to use and abuse you. You owe everything to your highest self.
Live
Don’t let the bastards grind you down.
Don’t grind yourself down by focusing on the bastards. Have a life. Have your life.
Be a trickster
It tips the hierarchy. It enlivens the world. It surprises. It generates thought. It’s fun. It annoys the bastards. Why not?
Be dashing
Like a True Outlaw. It beats the heck out of being dashed.
Breathe
Pray. Meditate. Watch a sunrise. What works for you. Freedom is spiritual before (and after) it’s political.
We are everywhere
The man next to you on the subway may be a Freedom Outlaw.
The woman who does your hair. The bright young college student running for student-body president. The kid who delivers your pizza. The little girl across the street playing with her cat. You may never know them. But your allies, or potential allies, are out there. Everywhere. Anywhere.
Be steady
When all around you are following fads, pursuing witch hunts, or reacting hysterically to the moment’s cynically managed news, be steady. Later, you’ll have nothing to regret while others — if they’re at all conscious — come to their senses and blush at the follies that swept them out of their sanity.
We will never “fix the world” but …
We can form a web of light around it. We can en-light-en ourselves, lighten our load, and throw some rays into the darkness.
We can go sane and lead a few along the way.
Muslim Mob Attacks Christian Church in Cairo – 6 Dead
Arab Spring.
A Muslim mob attacked a Christian Church in Cairo tonight. 6 people were killed and the church was torched.
Hundreds of Muslims stood around outside the church and recorded the event with their phones.
CNN reported:
Six people were killed and 120 injured in sectarian clashes outside a church in Cairo on Saturday, officials said.
An angry group of Muslim Salafists attacked the Saint Mena Coptic Orthodox Church. They were upset over reports of a woman being held against her will after allegedly converting to Islam.
“With my own eyes I saw three people killed and dozens injured,” said Mina Adel, a Christian resident. “There’s no security here. There’s a big problem. People attacked us, and we have to protect ourselves.”
Egyptian Interior Ministry spokesman Alla Mahmoud said in a statement that six people were killed and 120 injured in the violence.
Authorities sent soldiers and police to help secure the area.
Video: Cortesy of YOUTUBE
A Muslim mob attacked a Christian Church in Cairo tonight. 6 people were killed and the church was torched.
Hundreds of Muslims stood around outside the church and recorded the event with their phones.
CNN reported:
Six people were killed and 120 injured in sectarian clashes outside a church in Cairo on Saturday, officials said.
An angry group of Muslim Salafists attacked the Saint Mena Coptic Orthodox Church. They were upset over reports of a woman being held against her will after allegedly converting to Islam.
“With my own eyes I saw three people killed and dozens injured,” said Mina Adel, a Christian resident. “There’s no security here. There’s a big problem. People attacked us, and we have to protect ourselves.”
Egyptian Interior Ministry spokesman Alla Mahmoud said in a statement that six people were killed and 120 injured in the violence.
Authorities sent soldiers and police to help secure the area.
Video: Cortesy of YOUTUBE
The Decline and Fall of the American Empire
Engineered:
One of his advisers described the President’s actions in Libya as “leading from behind.” That’s not a slogan designed for signs at the 2012 Democratic Convention, but it does accurately describe the balance that Obama now seems to be finding. It’s a different definition of leadership than America is known for, and it comes from two unspoken beliefs: that the relative power of the US is declining, as rivals like China rise, and that the US is reviled in many parts of the world. Pursuing our interests and spreading our ideals thus requires stealth and modesty as well as military strength. “It’s so at odds with the John Wayne expectation for what America is in the world,” the adviser said. “But it’s necessary for shepherding us through this phase.”
What the hell is “this phase”? Where are we “reviled” and by whom? Syria? Russia? Yemen? Somalia? Cuba?
One of his advisers described the President’s actions in Libya as “leading from behind.” That’s not a slogan designed for signs at the 2012 Democratic Convention, but it does accurately describe the balance that Obama now seems to be finding. It’s a different definition of leadership than America is known for, and it comes from two unspoken beliefs: that the relative power of the US is declining, as rivals like China rise, and that the US is reviled in many parts of the world. Pursuing our interests and spreading our ideals thus requires stealth and modesty as well as military strength. “It’s so at odds with the John Wayne expectation for what America is in the world,” the adviser said. “But it’s necessary for shepherding us through this phase.”
What the hell is “this phase”? Where are we “reviled” and by whom? Syria? Russia? Yemen? Somalia? Cuba?
So, if Obama made up the whole “we got bin Laden” story.......
So: if Obama made up the whole “we got bin Laden” story to boost his poll numbers – and I’m not saying he did, but if he did…
Written By : TrogloPundit
…then it didn’t work:
President Obama received little boost from the Navy SEALs killing of bin Laden.
Some numbers:
Gallup: 6 points (46% to 52%);
Rasmussen: no bounce (49%);
Quinnipiac: 6 points (46% to 52%);
CNN: 4 points (48% to 52%).
The “bounce” was bigger if the poll asked specifically about terror or Afghanistan, but had no legs on other issues. And:
…what bump there is probably will not last. According to Gallup, President Bush received a 7 point bump when Saddam Hussein was captured, but that gain evaporated in less than a month. Worse for Obama, according to Quinnipiac, his re-elect among independents actually went down.
We at The Trog have long believed bin Laden to be dead – long dead, likely as a result of a large, Marine-induced explosion somewhere in northern Afghanistan. Thus, when I read something like:
Senior Pakistani security officials said Osama bin Laden’s daughter had confirmed her father was captured alive and shot dead by the US Special Forces during the first few minutes of the operation carried out at the huge compound in Bilal Town, Abbottabad.
Or:
Al Qaeda released a statement on jihadist forums Friday confirming the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, according to SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors Islamist websites.
When I read that, I’m more convinced that bin Laden is dead. I’m not convinced that he’s recently dead. These statements could simply be people close to the situation trying to preserve their closeness to the situation – protecting their share of the inheritance, maybe, or their place in the existing power structure.
Thus, my point stands: the appropriate controversy isn’t that bin Laden is still alive, but that he was already dead and President Obama staged bin Laden’s death at this moment in history in order to boost his – Obama’s – poll numbers. And I’ll stick with that until I’m no longer receiving traffic from the “bin Laden dead conspiracy” google bomb.
Kind of premature, really: he’d have been better off waiting until…oh, say next September or October. But still.
And now we see that it didn’t work anyway. So at least Obama’s consistent.
Previously:
Bin Laden dead – or: let the conspiracy theories begin!
Lord knows, I’m no conspiracy theorist. But, seeing as I’m a top google hit on “Bin Laden Death Conspiracy” right now…
Written By : TrogloPundit
…then it didn’t work:
President Obama received little boost from the Navy SEALs killing of bin Laden.
Some numbers:
Gallup: 6 points (46% to 52%);
Rasmussen: no bounce (49%);
Quinnipiac: 6 points (46% to 52%);
CNN: 4 points (48% to 52%).
The “bounce” was bigger if the poll asked specifically about terror or Afghanistan, but had no legs on other issues. And:
…what bump there is probably will not last. According to Gallup, President Bush received a 7 point bump when Saddam Hussein was captured, but that gain evaporated in less than a month. Worse for Obama, according to Quinnipiac, his re-elect among independents actually went down.
We at The Trog have long believed bin Laden to be dead – long dead, likely as a result of a large, Marine-induced explosion somewhere in northern Afghanistan. Thus, when I read something like:
Senior Pakistani security officials said Osama bin Laden’s daughter had confirmed her father was captured alive and shot dead by the US Special Forces during the first few minutes of the operation carried out at the huge compound in Bilal Town, Abbottabad.
Or:
Al Qaeda released a statement on jihadist forums Friday confirming the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, according to SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors Islamist websites.
When I read that, I’m more convinced that bin Laden is dead. I’m not convinced that he’s recently dead. These statements could simply be people close to the situation trying to preserve their closeness to the situation – protecting their share of the inheritance, maybe, or their place in the existing power structure.
Thus, my point stands: the appropriate controversy isn’t that bin Laden is still alive, but that he was already dead and President Obama staged bin Laden’s death at this moment in history in order to boost his – Obama’s – poll numbers. And I’ll stick with that until I’m no longer receiving traffic from the “bin Laden dead conspiracy” google bomb.
Kind of premature, really: he’d have been better off waiting until…oh, say next September or October. But still.
And now we see that it didn’t work anyway. So at least Obama’s consistent.
Previously:
Bin Laden dead – or: let the conspiracy theories begin!
Lord knows, I’m no conspiracy theorist. But, seeing as I’m a top google hit on “Bin Laden Death Conspiracy” right now…
Thoughts on a Surreal Depression
Here in Fresno County, in the heart of California’s San Joaquin Valley, the official unemployment rate in February to March ranged between 18.1 and 18.8 percent. I suspect it is higher in the poorer southwestern portions, especially near my hometown of Selma, about two miles from my farm.
Since 2000 we have both lost jobs and gained people, and the per capita household income is about 65% of California’s average, the average home price about half the state norm.
In some sense, all the ideas that are born on the Berkeley or Stanford campus, in the CSU and UC education, political science, and sociology departments, and among the bureaus in Sacramento are reified in places like Selma — open borders, therapeutic education curricula, massive government transfers and subsidies, big government, and intrusive regulation. Together that has created the sort of utopia that a Bay Area consultant, politico, or professor dreams of, but would never live near. Again, we in California have become the most and least free of peoples — the law-biding stifled by red tape, the non-law-biding considered exempt from accountability on the basis of simple cost-to-benefit logic. A speeder on the freeway will pay a $300 ticket for going 75mph and justifies the legions of highway patrol officers now on the road; going after an unlicensed peddler or rural dumper is a money-losing proposition for government.
The subtext, however, of most of our manifold challenges here in the other California are twofold: we have had a massive increase in population, largely driven by illegal immigration from Latin America, mostly from Oaxaca province in Mexico, and we have not created a commensurate number of jobs to facilitate the influx.
I often ask business people on the coast why there are not more industries in places like Selma other than agricultural related work that is locale specific. I would sum up their responses as something like the following: Our workforce does not have the educational and linguistic skills to justify, in global terms, the amount of wages and benefits necessary to employ them, hence jobs are mostly in service and government. Software engineering, computers, or Silicon Valley-like industry are out the question. But apparently so are large manufacturing jobs, despite an abundant workforce. As I understand employers, they seem to suggest that steel pipe, electrical wire, or radios would not be better manufactured or fabricated here, and yet still cost two to three times more than a counterpart assembled abroad.
In addition, they believe that the state government would look upon any employer of a large industry not as a partner that would alleviate unemployment and lessen county expenditures, but more or less a sort of target to regulate, advise, lecture, and chastise, both to justify the expanding government regulatory work force and to achieve a fuzzy sort of social justice. There are, of course, large plants and businesses here, but hardly enough to absorb the thousands entering the work force.
The result is about one in five adults is not working in the traditional and formal sense. A morning drive through these valley towns confirms anecdotally what statistics suggest: hundreds, no, thousands, are not employed. Construction is almost nonexistent. Agriculture is recovering, but environmentally driven water cut-offs on the West Side (250,000 acres), increasing mechanization, and past poor prices have combined to reduce by tens of thousands once plentiful farm jobs.
We live in one of the most blessed climates in the world, without major floods, earthquakes, fires, or tornadoes. The soil is unmatched. The Sierra and its rich snowpack loom immediately to the east with all its recreational, hydroelectric, and timber wealth; we are but three hours from either San Francisco or Los Angeles. And yet this is now one of the most impoverished areas in the United States, statistically in many categories of income, education, and employment well behind Appalachia.
But we are experiencing a funny sort of depression, or rather a surreal sort. I grew up with stories from my grandparents of 28 people living in my present house. My grandmother, she used to brag, had a big kettle of ham bones and beans cooking nonstop each day and fed assorted relatives as they came in from the vineyard and orchard. My grandfather made one trip to Fresno (16 miles away) every 10 days for “supplies.” The pictures I have inherited from my mother show an impoverished farm — this house unpainted and in disrepair, ancient cars and implements scattered about, a sort of farm of apparent 1910 vintage, but photographed in the 1930s — one that I could still sense traces of as a little boy here in the late 1950s.
And yet all I heard were stories of happiness, hard work, and collective sacrifice. Relatives would say that the “’30s” were the worst and best years of their lives, as they related sagas of real genius involving fruit canning and curing, ad hoc repairs to equipment, and cobbled together furniture and clothing —all without spending any money. I just looked in my grandfather’s diary; he has a happy entry in 1958 about raisin prices over $200 a ton — quite in contrast to $40 a ton he received in 1936. (A ton of raisins would fill two of those huge watermelon bins you see in the supermarket.)
In contrast, in the present depression, the out of work and poor are as numerous, but both unhappier and yet far better off than prior generations. This is not the rant of some right-wing laudator temporis acti, or the death throes of an aging old white guy, but rather empirically based and shared by most of my friends in the ascendant Mexican-American middle and upper-middle classes, many of whom are becoming quite conservative.
The cars of our poorer brethren in our major discount stores are late model and often expensive. People get into them with full carts of food and clothing. Housing here is cheap and good. How to square this circle between official poverty and misery and the veneer of a well-off general public?
I’ve been discussing these disconnects with farmers, a professor or two from CSU Fresno, and local business people. All come to the same conclusions. There is a vast and completely unreported cash economy in Central California. Tile-setters, carpenters, landscapers, tree-cutters, general handymen, cooks, housekeepers, and personal attendants are all both finding work and being paid in cash. Peddlers (no income or sales taxes) are on nearly every major rural intersection. You can buy everything from a new pressure washer to tropical fruit drinks. For this essay, I stopped at one last week and surveyed their roto-tillers, lawn mowers, and chain saws, new and good brands.
New “restaurants” are sprouting all over the highways — mobile stainless-steel encased canteens with awnings and chairs set up along the road. And yet for all the cash economy, it seems almost everyone in the food stores and doctors’ offices are on food stamps, Medi-Cal, and rent subsidies. A carload of people drove in last week, inquiring about a house nearby; the occupants assured me that they had county housing vouchers.
A third ingredient is easy credit, whether for credit cards or late model cars. The result is statistically we are impoverished with near 20% unemployment; but in reality something stranger and weirder is transpiring. Prosperity and well-being are mostly assessed in relative not absolute terms. There is little appreciation of the wonders of the iPhone, whose computerized, and GPS-driven gadgetry would have been confined to millionaires ten years ago; there is frequent lamentation that the iPhone in question is not the latest model as others enjoy. A Camry is not worshipped as a wondrous machine that can get one 200 miles in 3 hours, in air-conditioned and musical luxury, only that one has a 4, not a 6 cylinder model, without leather seats and 6-disc CD.
The combination of 2 billion Indians and Chinese in the world marketplace, exporting cheap goods, has meant fewer jobs for Americans and far more material playthings now accessible to every stratum of society. Again, easy credit, combined with little shame or penalty in defaulting on what one owes, has allowed a superficial parity with the upper-middle class. Massive government transfers and relaxed eligibility have ensured households thousands of dollars in entitlements and subsidies. We have printed $5 trillion since 2009, and borrowed $1.6 trillion just this year. And the huge influx of easy government cash shows here.
Cash wages have meant augmented entitlement money and are competitive with those who are formally employed and who pay 30% of their money in payroll, health care, and federal, state, and local income tax deductions. The result is an odd sort of poverty, in which superficially the unemployed and poor to the naked eyed are almost identical to the upper middle classes.
Indeed what distinguishes the latter — the ability to pay a child’s tuition at college, frequent travel, higher end clothes and cars, a pool, or boat — seems rather superfluous. Need-based student loans and grants are now ubiquitous, one can learn more about Florence on a cable TV in-depth tour than going there, and a Lexus or Mercedes is not much different in reliability and comfort from a Honda or Nissan. I did an experiment the other day. I priced “wicker” furniture at Kmart and Wal-Mart and then drove up to an upscale North Fresno design outdoor living boutique. In short, the local version from China was about $300 for an ensemble, the high-end version was priced at $1700. To the naked eye, they were again almost identical and explain what I mean by the “veneer” of affluence. Ditto everything from jogging clothes to watches, and one can be outfitted in Selma for 10% of the cost of the brands of those popular in Palo Alto.
Some final tesserae in this confusing mosaic: The rhetoric of poverty and oppression is far more strident than the Depression-era, spread the wealth, Huey Long sort. The sense of injustice voiced by the SEIU or public employee unions suggests wide scale Dickensian malnutrition, not an epidemic of obesity so amply chronicled by the first lady.
History’s revolutions and upheavals — whether the Nika rioting in Constantinople, the periodic uprising of the turba in Rome, the French upheavals, or the Bolshevik Revolution — are rarely fueled by the starving and despised, but by the subsidized and frustrated, who either see their umbilical cord threatened, or their comfort and subsidies static rather than expansive — or their own condition surpassed by that of an envied kulak class. Perceived relative inequality rather than absolute poverty is the engine of revolution.
These are strange and dangerous times. An insolvent federal government, an exporting China and India, and an almost complete indifference to federal immigration, tax, and regulatory laws have all combined to create a well-entitled but increasingly angry population, one “empowered” and made more, not less, bitter by the last two years of governance in Washington.
Since 2000 we have both lost jobs and gained people, and the per capita household income is about 65% of California’s average, the average home price about half the state norm.
In some sense, all the ideas that are born on the Berkeley or Stanford campus, in the CSU and UC education, political science, and sociology departments, and among the bureaus in Sacramento are reified in places like Selma — open borders, therapeutic education curricula, massive government transfers and subsidies, big government, and intrusive regulation. Together that has created the sort of utopia that a Bay Area consultant, politico, or professor dreams of, but would never live near. Again, we in California have become the most and least free of peoples — the law-biding stifled by red tape, the non-law-biding considered exempt from accountability on the basis of simple cost-to-benefit logic. A speeder on the freeway will pay a $300 ticket for going 75mph and justifies the legions of highway patrol officers now on the road; going after an unlicensed peddler or rural dumper is a money-losing proposition for government.
The subtext, however, of most of our manifold challenges here in the other California are twofold: we have had a massive increase in population, largely driven by illegal immigration from Latin America, mostly from Oaxaca province in Mexico, and we have not created a commensurate number of jobs to facilitate the influx.
I often ask business people on the coast why there are not more industries in places like Selma other than agricultural related work that is locale specific. I would sum up their responses as something like the following: Our workforce does not have the educational and linguistic skills to justify, in global terms, the amount of wages and benefits necessary to employ them, hence jobs are mostly in service and government. Software engineering, computers, or Silicon Valley-like industry are out the question. But apparently so are large manufacturing jobs, despite an abundant workforce. As I understand employers, they seem to suggest that steel pipe, electrical wire, or radios would not be better manufactured or fabricated here, and yet still cost two to three times more than a counterpart assembled abroad.
In addition, they believe that the state government would look upon any employer of a large industry not as a partner that would alleviate unemployment and lessen county expenditures, but more or less a sort of target to regulate, advise, lecture, and chastise, both to justify the expanding government regulatory work force and to achieve a fuzzy sort of social justice. There are, of course, large plants and businesses here, but hardly enough to absorb the thousands entering the work force.
The result is about one in five adults is not working in the traditional and formal sense. A morning drive through these valley towns confirms anecdotally what statistics suggest: hundreds, no, thousands, are not employed. Construction is almost nonexistent. Agriculture is recovering, but environmentally driven water cut-offs on the West Side (250,000 acres), increasing mechanization, and past poor prices have combined to reduce by tens of thousands once plentiful farm jobs.
We live in one of the most blessed climates in the world, without major floods, earthquakes, fires, or tornadoes. The soil is unmatched. The Sierra and its rich snowpack loom immediately to the east with all its recreational, hydroelectric, and timber wealth; we are but three hours from either San Francisco or Los Angeles. And yet this is now one of the most impoverished areas in the United States, statistically in many categories of income, education, and employment well behind Appalachia.
But we are experiencing a funny sort of depression, or rather a surreal sort. I grew up with stories from my grandparents of 28 people living in my present house. My grandmother, she used to brag, had a big kettle of ham bones and beans cooking nonstop each day and fed assorted relatives as they came in from the vineyard and orchard. My grandfather made one trip to Fresno (16 miles away) every 10 days for “supplies.” The pictures I have inherited from my mother show an impoverished farm — this house unpainted and in disrepair, ancient cars and implements scattered about, a sort of farm of apparent 1910 vintage, but photographed in the 1930s — one that I could still sense traces of as a little boy here in the late 1950s.
And yet all I heard were stories of happiness, hard work, and collective sacrifice. Relatives would say that the “’30s” were the worst and best years of their lives, as they related sagas of real genius involving fruit canning and curing, ad hoc repairs to equipment, and cobbled together furniture and clothing —all without spending any money. I just looked in my grandfather’s diary; he has a happy entry in 1958 about raisin prices over $200 a ton — quite in contrast to $40 a ton he received in 1936. (A ton of raisins would fill two of those huge watermelon bins you see in the supermarket.)
In contrast, in the present depression, the out of work and poor are as numerous, but both unhappier and yet far better off than prior generations. This is not the rant of some right-wing laudator temporis acti, or the death throes of an aging old white guy, but rather empirically based and shared by most of my friends in the ascendant Mexican-American middle and upper-middle classes, many of whom are becoming quite conservative.
The cars of our poorer brethren in our major discount stores are late model and often expensive. People get into them with full carts of food and clothing. Housing here is cheap and good. How to square this circle between official poverty and misery and the veneer of a well-off general public?
I’ve been discussing these disconnects with farmers, a professor or two from CSU Fresno, and local business people. All come to the same conclusions. There is a vast and completely unreported cash economy in Central California. Tile-setters, carpenters, landscapers, tree-cutters, general handymen, cooks, housekeepers, and personal attendants are all both finding work and being paid in cash. Peddlers (no income or sales taxes) are on nearly every major rural intersection. You can buy everything from a new pressure washer to tropical fruit drinks. For this essay, I stopped at one last week and surveyed their roto-tillers, lawn mowers, and chain saws, new and good brands.
New “restaurants” are sprouting all over the highways — mobile stainless-steel encased canteens with awnings and chairs set up along the road. And yet for all the cash economy, it seems almost everyone in the food stores and doctors’ offices are on food stamps, Medi-Cal, and rent subsidies. A carload of people drove in last week, inquiring about a house nearby; the occupants assured me that they had county housing vouchers.
A third ingredient is easy credit, whether for credit cards or late model cars. The result is statistically we are impoverished with near 20% unemployment; but in reality something stranger and weirder is transpiring. Prosperity and well-being are mostly assessed in relative not absolute terms. There is little appreciation of the wonders of the iPhone, whose computerized, and GPS-driven gadgetry would have been confined to millionaires ten years ago; there is frequent lamentation that the iPhone in question is not the latest model as others enjoy. A Camry is not worshipped as a wondrous machine that can get one 200 miles in 3 hours, in air-conditioned and musical luxury, only that one has a 4, not a 6 cylinder model, without leather seats and 6-disc CD.
The combination of 2 billion Indians and Chinese in the world marketplace, exporting cheap goods, has meant fewer jobs for Americans and far more material playthings now accessible to every stratum of society. Again, easy credit, combined with little shame or penalty in defaulting on what one owes, has allowed a superficial parity with the upper-middle class. Massive government transfers and relaxed eligibility have ensured households thousands of dollars in entitlements and subsidies. We have printed $5 trillion since 2009, and borrowed $1.6 trillion just this year. And the huge influx of easy government cash shows here.
Cash wages have meant augmented entitlement money and are competitive with those who are formally employed and who pay 30% of their money in payroll, health care, and federal, state, and local income tax deductions. The result is an odd sort of poverty, in which superficially the unemployed and poor to the naked eyed are almost identical to the upper middle classes.
Indeed what distinguishes the latter — the ability to pay a child’s tuition at college, frequent travel, higher end clothes and cars, a pool, or boat — seems rather superfluous. Need-based student loans and grants are now ubiquitous, one can learn more about Florence on a cable TV in-depth tour than going there, and a Lexus or Mercedes is not much different in reliability and comfort from a Honda or Nissan. I did an experiment the other day. I priced “wicker” furniture at Kmart and Wal-Mart and then drove up to an upscale North Fresno design outdoor living boutique. In short, the local version from China was about $300 for an ensemble, the high-end version was priced at $1700. To the naked eye, they were again almost identical and explain what I mean by the “veneer” of affluence. Ditto everything from jogging clothes to watches, and one can be outfitted in Selma for 10% of the cost of the brands of those popular in Palo Alto.
Some final tesserae in this confusing mosaic: The rhetoric of poverty and oppression is far more strident than the Depression-era, spread the wealth, Huey Long sort. The sense of injustice voiced by the SEIU or public employee unions suggests wide scale Dickensian malnutrition, not an epidemic of obesity so amply chronicled by the first lady.
History’s revolutions and upheavals — whether the Nika rioting in Constantinople, the periodic uprising of the turba in Rome, the French upheavals, or the Bolshevik Revolution — are rarely fueled by the starving and despised, but by the subsidized and frustrated, who either see their umbilical cord threatened, or their comfort and subsidies static rather than expansive — or their own condition surpassed by that of an envied kulak class. Perceived relative inequality rather than absolute poverty is the engine of revolution.
These are strange and dangerous times. An insolvent federal government, an exporting China and India, and an almost complete indifference to federal immigration, tax, and regulatory laws have all combined to create a well-entitled but increasingly angry population, one “empowered” and made more, not less, bitter by the last two years of governance in Washington.
Rutgers student pleads guilty to Thought-Crime
Written By : Chris Wysocki
So now our state is prosecuting ThoughtCrime. Under penalty of incarceration Rutgers student Molly Wei will enter a re-education camp for indoctrination into “alternate lifestyles.” The State will wash away all of her improper thoughts. No doubt she will emerge a good little automaton eager to do the bidding of her INGSOC masters.
And boy oh boy do they have plans for her. Ms. Wei will ensure that another Rutgers student, Dharun Ravi, is locked up for all eternity. The verdict has already been pre-determined, because his “victim” is Tyler Joe Clementi McAllister, yet another Rutgers student, and a closeted homosexual who committed suicide by jumping off the Tallahatchee George Washington Bridge.
Will she tell the truth? Or merely recite whatever The State tells her to say?
Who cares! Truth is what The State decides is Truth! And when it comes to homosexuality, Truth is subservient to Ideology. And, Ideology says anyone who is appalled by homosexual behavior is guilty of ThoughtCrime.
The facts are this. Wei and Ravi hooked up a webcam to watch Clementi and an unidentified man “make out” (Ravi was Clementi’s roommate). That’s it. They spied on two dudes playing tonsil hockey. They may, or may not, have told a few friends about what they saw. And they allegedly planned to spy on Clementi and Mystery Man again at some indeterminate time in the future.
Several days later Clementi, who incidentally never openly admitted that he had homosexual tendencies, left a cryptic suicide note and jumped to his death.
In the ensuing brouhaha Wei and Ravi were identified as Public Enemy #1, mostly because they refused to express unwavering approval for Clementi’s homosexual dalliance. Mr. Ravi was indicted on fifteen counts of bias intimidation because he purportedly harbored anti-gay sentiments while spying on his roommate. Like I said, ThoughtCrime.
Prosecutors pounced on Wei and Ravi. They have now successfully browbeaten the diminutive Ms. Wei into submission. In exchange for her agreement to enter pre-trial intervention and “complete counseling for understanding alternate life styles” they will drop all charges against her. Oh, and she has to testify against Mr. Ravi.
I’m sure the “counseling” Ms. Wei undergoes won’t in any way prepare her for the witness stand. Snicker.
Well, certainly not overtly anyhow.
The whole thing stinks. Clementi was 19 at the time of his death. An adult. Does he not bear some responsibility for his actions? Recall the suicide of Missouri teen Megan Meier at the age of 13. A classmates’ mother created a fake MySpace profile to torment the young girl. She hung herself after reading a posting from the fake profile which said the world would be better off without her. The author of the fake profile was 49 year old Lori Drew, who used it to send a whole host of other vindictive and cruel missives to the teen before her death.
Lori Drew was never convicted of a crime.
Of course, Megan Meier wasn’t a lesbian either.
One could arguably say that the “cyberbullying” against Megan Meier directly contributed to her death. She didn’t wait 3 days. She didn’t wait 3 hours. Megan Meier was dead 20 minutes after Lori Drew’s (alleged, to avoid legal trouble I have to say “alleged”) final MySpace posting.
Prosecutors admit they do not know what motivated Tyler Clementi to kill himself. But homosexual rights dogma leaves them no choice but to find someone on whom to affix blame. All that matters is that Clementi was gay, and there was someone, somewhere who might have harbored anti-gay thoughts.
Dharun Ravi fits the bill. It doesn’t help that he’s a Grade A jerk. But I always thought that being a jerk wasn’t a crime in this country. Which would almost certainly still be true if Tyler Clementi had been caught on Candid Camera making out with a hot cheerleader instead of an unnamed gay lover.
(Cross-posted from WyBlog.us. Follow me on Twitter @WyBlog)
So now our state is prosecuting ThoughtCrime. Under penalty of incarceration Rutgers student Molly Wei will enter a re-education camp for indoctrination into “alternate lifestyles.” The State will wash away all of her improper thoughts. No doubt she will emerge a good little automaton eager to do the bidding of her INGSOC masters.
And boy oh boy do they have plans for her. Ms. Wei will ensure that another Rutgers student, Dharun Ravi, is locked up for all eternity. The verdict has already been pre-determined, because his “victim” is Tyler Joe Clementi McAllister, yet another Rutgers student, and a closeted homosexual who committed suicide by jumping off the Tallahatchee George Washington Bridge.
Will she tell the truth? Or merely recite whatever The State tells her to say?
Who cares! Truth is what The State decides is Truth! And when it comes to homosexuality, Truth is subservient to Ideology. And, Ideology says anyone who is appalled by homosexual behavior is guilty of ThoughtCrime.
The facts are this. Wei and Ravi hooked up a webcam to watch Clementi and an unidentified man “make out” (Ravi was Clementi’s roommate). That’s it. They spied on two dudes playing tonsil hockey. They may, or may not, have told a few friends about what they saw. And they allegedly planned to spy on Clementi and Mystery Man again at some indeterminate time in the future.
Several days later Clementi, who incidentally never openly admitted that he had homosexual tendencies, left a cryptic suicide note and jumped to his death.
In the ensuing brouhaha Wei and Ravi were identified as Public Enemy #1, mostly because they refused to express unwavering approval for Clementi’s homosexual dalliance. Mr. Ravi was indicted on fifteen counts of bias intimidation because he purportedly harbored anti-gay sentiments while spying on his roommate. Like I said, ThoughtCrime.
Prosecutors pounced on Wei and Ravi. They have now successfully browbeaten the diminutive Ms. Wei into submission. In exchange for her agreement to enter pre-trial intervention and “complete counseling for understanding alternate life styles” they will drop all charges against her. Oh, and she has to testify against Mr. Ravi.
I’m sure the “counseling” Ms. Wei undergoes won’t in any way prepare her for the witness stand. Snicker.
Well, certainly not overtly anyhow.
The whole thing stinks. Clementi was 19 at the time of his death. An adult. Does he not bear some responsibility for his actions? Recall the suicide of Missouri teen Megan Meier at the age of 13. A classmates’ mother created a fake MySpace profile to torment the young girl. She hung herself after reading a posting from the fake profile which said the world would be better off without her. The author of the fake profile was 49 year old Lori Drew, who used it to send a whole host of other vindictive and cruel missives to the teen before her death.
Lori Drew was never convicted of a crime.
Of course, Megan Meier wasn’t a lesbian either.
One could arguably say that the “cyberbullying” against Megan Meier directly contributed to her death. She didn’t wait 3 days. She didn’t wait 3 hours. Megan Meier was dead 20 minutes after Lori Drew’s (alleged, to avoid legal trouble I have to say “alleged”) final MySpace posting.
Prosecutors admit they do not know what motivated Tyler Clementi to kill himself. But homosexual rights dogma leaves them no choice but to find someone on whom to affix blame. All that matters is that Clementi was gay, and there was someone, somewhere who might have harbored anti-gay thoughts.
Dharun Ravi fits the bill. It doesn’t help that he’s a Grade A jerk. But I always thought that being a jerk wasn’t a crime in this country. Which would almost certainly still be true if Tyler Clementi had been caught on Candid Camera making out with a hot cheerleader instead of an unnamed gay lover.
(Cross-posted from WyBlog.us. Follow me on Twitter @WyBlog)
The president's pronouns
The president's pronouns
It's nothing new; from the beginning, it's been all about him. But the president's credit-hogging narcissism is particularly offensive in this case. Victor Davis Hanson on The FIrst-Person Presidency:
Here are a few excerpts from President Obama’s speech on Sunday night about the killing of Osama bin Laden.
“Tonight, I can report . . . And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta . . . I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden . . . I met repeatedly with my national security team . . . I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action. . . . Today, at my direction . . . I’ve made clear . . . Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear . . . Tonight, I called President Zardari . . . and my team has also spoken. . .These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief . . . Finally, let me say to the families . . . I know that it has, at times, frayed. . . .”
None of this would have been possible if a previous incarnation of Barack Obama had had his way:
In January 2007 — three weeks after President Bush announced the surge — Senator Obama introduced the “Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007.” If it had passed, that law would have removed all troops from Iraq by March 2008. Obama derided the surge in unequivocal terms both before and after its implementation: “I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.” “Here’s what we know. The surge has not worked.”
Candidate Obama criticized warrantless wiretaps, in accusing the Bush administration in the harshest terms: “This administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not.” A disinterested examination of present policy regarding both wiretaps and intercepts would show no change from the Bush administration, or indeed considerable expansion of the use of these tools.
Oh well. The famous first-class temperament isn't inclined to give credit to others or acknowledge, even tacitly, earlier misjudgments.
Linked at MichelleMalkin.com -- thanks!
It's nothing new; from the beginning, it's been all about him. But the president's credit-hogging narcissism is particularly offensive in this case. Victor Davis Hanson on The FIrst-Person Presidency:
Here are a few excerpts from President Obama’s speech on Sunday night about the killing of Osama bin Laden.
“Tonight, I can report . . . And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta . . . I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden . . . I met repeatedly with my national security team . . . I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action. . . . Today, at my direction . . . I’ve made clear . . . Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear . . . Tonight, I called President Zardari . . . and my team has also spoken. . .These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief . . . Finally, let me say to the families . . . I know that it has, at times, frayed. . . .”
None of this would have been possible if a previous incarnation of Barack Obama had had his way:
In January 2007 — three weeks after President Bush announced the surge — Senator Obama introduced the “Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007.” If it had passed, that law would have removed all troops from Iraq by March 2008. Obama derided the surge in unequivocal terms both before and after its implementation: “I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.” “Here’s what we know. The surge has not worked.”
Candidate Obama criticized warrantless wiretaps, in accusing the Bush administration in the harshest terms: “This administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not.” A disinterested examination of present policy regarding both wiretaps and intercepts would show no change from the Bush administration, or indeed considerable expansion of the use of these tools.
Oh well. The famous first-class temperament isn't inclined to give credit to others or acknowledge, even tacitly, earlier misjudgments.
Linked at MichelleMalkin.com -- thanks!
Radical Muslim Separatist Groups Now Actively Trying to Undermine Border Security Between Canada and Michigan
What do you get when you cross CAIR with Eric Holder's Justice Department and Janet Napolitano's DHS?
Long-term, I'd wager on needlessly dead Americans.
The U.S. government has launched an investigation into allegations that federal agents at several U.S.-Canada border crossings in Michigan repeatedly harassed, jailed and body searched Muslims because of their background or appearance... The investigation comes in response to complaints filed in March by the Council on American-Islamic Relations with the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security.
...every time Wissam Charafeddine of Dearborn has crossed the border into the U.S. from Canada in the last three years, he says he has been detained, fingerprinted and body searched... One time, he said, he was separated from his family and jailed in a cold cell for five hours as his 1-year-old daughter cried for milk.
...One of the 10 complaints by local Muslims involves Imam Ali Suleiman Ali, head of the Canton Mosque, one of the larger Islamic centers in metro Detroit... He described a recent border crossing in which he says agents handcuffed and detained him while asking him, "Where's your mosque?" and "What Islamic organizations do you belong to?" Ali described several other similar situations at borders or airports in the past five years.
... "Why do I have to be treated like a terrorist?"
The theme of undermining border security measures is a consistent one for this particular Imam.
Saying that body scanners violate Islamic law, Muslim-American groups are supporting a fatwa — a religious ruling — that forbids Muslims from going through the scanners at airports. The Fiqh Council of North America ... issued a fatwa last week that says going through the airport scanners would violate Islamic rules on modesty...
...Two members of the Fiqh Council are from Michigan, Imam Hassan Qazwini of the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, and Imam Ali Suleiman Ali of the Canton Mosque. “Fiqh” means Islamic jurisprudence...
...The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has a chapter in Michigan, says it endorses the fatwa. “We support the Fiqh Council’s statement on full-body scanners and believe that the religious and privacy rights of passengers can be respected while maintaining safety and security,” said Nihad Awad, national executive director of CAIR.
Their actions make it clear that CAIR and "the Fiqh Council" are dedicated to weakening America's security posture.
And it doesn't have a bit to do with religion. It has to do with promoting a political system -- Sharia law -- that just happens to be conveniently wrapped in the protective coating of a religion.
It seems perfectly obvious that Sharia is what CAIR and the other radical Muslim separatist groups are after. And with terror defenders and apologists like Eric Holder in charge of the DOJ, they're likely to get much of what they want.
Long-term, I'd wager on needlessly dead Americans.
The U.S. government has launched an investigation into allegations that federal agents at several U.S.-Canada border crossings in Michigan repeatedly harassed, jailed and body searched Muslims because of their background or appearance... The investigation comes in response to complaints filed in March by the Council on American-Islamic Relations with the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security.
...every time Wissam Charafeddine of Dearborn has crossed the border into the U.S. from Canada in the last three years, he says he has been detained, fingerprinted and body searched... One time, he said, he was separated from his family and jailed in a cold cell for five hours as his 1-year-old daughter cried for milk.
...One of the 10 complaints by local Muslims involves Imam Ali Suleiman Ali, head of the Canton Mosque, one of the larger Islamic centers in metro Detroit... He described a recent border crossing in which he says agents handcuffed and detained him while asking him, "Where's your mosque?" and "What Islamic organizations do you belong to?" Ali described several other similar situations at borders or airports in the past five years.
... "Why do I have to be treated like a terrorist?"
The theme of undermining border security measures is a consistent one for this particular Imam.
Saying that body scanners violate Islamic law, Muslim-American groups are supporting a fatwa — a religious ruling — that forbids Muslims from going through the scanners at airports. The Fiqh Council of North America ... issued a fatwa last week that says going through the airport scanners would violate Islamic rules on modesty...
...Two members of the Fiqh Council are from Michigan, Imam Hassan Qazwini of the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, and Imam Ali Suleiman Ali of the Canton Mosque. “Fiqh” means Islamic jurisprudence...
...The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has a chapter in Michigan, says it endorses the fatwa. “We support the Fiqh Council’s statement on full-body scanners and believe that the religious and privacy rights of passengers can be respected while maintaining safety and security,” said Nihad Awad, national executive director of CAIR.
Their actions make it clear that CAIR and "the Fiqh Council" are dedicated to weakening America's security posture.
And it doesn't have a bit to do with religion. It has to do with promoting a political system -- Sharia law -- that just happens to be conveniently wrapped in the protective coating of a religion.
It seems perfectly obvious that Sharia is what CAIR and the other radical Muslim separatist groups are after. And with terror defenders and apologists like Eric Holder in charge of the DOJ, they're likely to get much of what they want.
Allen West: “We cannot continue to send money to people that are not dealing with us fairly”
In an interview with Greta Van Sustren, Representative Allen West talked about what America should do with Pakistan.
A few days ago, West made news by giving a concrete and informative declaration on why the United States should cease supporting Pakistan monetarily.
In this interview, West talked more about Pakistan.
I think that when you look at the situation surrounding Usama bin Laden hiding out there in Abbottabad for now we come to understand for five years, you’re either dealing with ignorance, incompetence, or some sort of a complicit nature. And any of those three or a combination of all of those three is definitely not a reason to continue to support Pakistan with the hard- earned American taxpayer dollars.
It’s not just that also, but we know that Pakistan’s president a week ago called Hamid Karzai and admonished him not to go into a long-term security arrangement with the United States but rather join Pakistan and China. And there has to be a reason why all of these Islamic terrorist groups are flooding to Pakistan and to those tribal areas. Either they are being invited there or they feel that they will have sanctuary.
You can read West’s press release at link.
A few days ago, West made news by giving a concrete and informative declaration on why the United States should cease supporting Pakistan monetarily.
In this interview, West talked more about Pakistan.
I think that when you look at the situation surrounding Usama bin Laden hiding out there in Abbottabad for now we come to understand for five years, you’re either dealing with ignorance, incompetence, or some sort of a complicit nature. And any of those three or a combination of all of those three is definitely not a reason to continue to support Pakistan with the hard- earned American taxpayer dollars.
It’s not just that also, but we know that Pakistan’s president a week ago called Hamid Karzai and admonished him not to go into a long-term security arrangement with the United States but rather join Pakistan and China. And there has to be a reason why all of these Islamic terrorist groups are flooding to Pakistan and to those tribal areas. Either they are being invited there or they feel that they will have sanctuary.
You can read West’s press release at link.
Fatwa: Muslims must reject Mother’s Day and imitating kaafirs
Intolerance straight from Allah, via Islam Question and Answer – Mother’s Day – an historical overview and the scholars’ rulings on this holiday.
The shar’i viewpoint concerning Mother’s Day:
Islam has no need of things that are innovated by others, be it Mother’s Day of anything else. Its teachings on the honouring of mothers mean that it has no need for an innovated Mother’s Day.
Fatwas of the scholars
1. The scholars of the Standing Committee said:
Praise be to Allaah Alone and blessings and peace be upon His Messenger and his family and companions.
Firstly: Eid is a name given to a recurring occasion on which people come together, whether it is annual or monthly or weekly and so on. Eid combines a number of things: a day which recurs, such as Eid al-Fitr and Friday (Jumu’ah); gathering on that day; acts or worship and customs which are done on that day.
Secondly: whatever is done on that day as a ritual, act of worship or act of veneration that is done in order to seek reward, or that involves imitating the people of the Jaahiliyyah or similar kaafir groups is a forbidden act of innovation (bid’ah) and is included in the general meaning of the hadeeth in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours (Islam) that is not part of it will have it rejected.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim). Examples of that include celebrating the Mawlid (Prophet’s birthday), Mother’s Day, and national days, because in the first case (Prophet’s birthday) that means worshipping in a manner that Allaah has not prescribed, and because it involves imitating the Christians and other kaafirs, and in the second and third cases (Mother’s Day and national holidays) it means imitating the kaafirs…
Standing Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas, Fatawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 3/59, 61
…It is proven in the saheeh ahaadeeth that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) warned against innovations in religion and against imitating the enemies of Allaah, the Jews, Christians and other mushrikeen.
Religion of Peace & Hatred of the Dirty Kaafirs.
Happy Mother’s Day!!
The shar’i viewpoint concerning Mother’s Day:
Islam has no need of things that are innovated by others, be it Mother’s Day of anything else. Its teachings on the honouring of mothers mean that it has no need for an innovated Mother’s Day.
Fatwas of the scholars
1. The scholars of the Standing Committee said:
Praise be to Allaah Alone and blessings and peace be upon His Messenger and his family and companions.
Firstly: Eid is a name given to a recurring occasion on which people come together, whether it is annual or monthly or weekly and so on. Eid combines a number of things: a day which recurs, such as Eid al-Fitr and Friday (Jumu’ah); gathering on that day; acts or worship and customs which are done on that day.
Secondly: whatever is done on that day as a ritual, act of worship or act of veneration that is done in order to seek reward, or that involves imitating the people of the Jaahiliyyah or similar kaafir groups is a forbidden act of innovation (bid’ah) and is included in the general meaning of the hadeeth in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours (Islam) that is not part of it will have it rejected.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim). Examples of that include celebrating the Mawlid (Prophet’s birthday), Mother’s Day, and national days, because in the first case (Prophet’s birthday) that means worshipping in a manner that Allaah has not prescribed, and because it involves imitating the Christians and other kaafirs, and in the second and third cases (Mother’s Day and national holidays) it means imitating the kaafirs…
Standing Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas, Fatawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 3/59, 61
…It is proven in the saheeh ahaadeeth that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) warned against innovations in religion and against imitating the enemies of Allaah, the Jews, Christians and other mushrikeen.
Religion of Peace & Hatred of the Dirty Kaafirs.
Happy Mother’s Day!!
Wasserman Schultz: ‘We’ve really concentrated’ on oil production
Democrats patting themselves on the back for oil production increases?
Ba. Lo. Ney.
With all due respect.
Rep. Wasserman Schultz represents the party that always tells you that there’s no point in looking for new oil fields because it takes 10 years to develop them. Remember?
World-class oil fields can take that long to develop, but it’s a stupid argument against doing them. For example, fields like BP’s Thunder Horse and Atlantis, and BHP Billiton’s Shenzi together account for 100% of the 2009-10 growth in Gulf of Mexico production. All these fields were discovered 10 years ago or more, and the owners had the foresight to stick with them even through times when the oil price was as low as $10 per barrel (1999). Back then Barack Obama was still an unknown Illinois state senator, and Wasserman Schultz was in the Florida state house.
Here’s what was predicted for BP’s big fields back in 2008, before you-know-who was elected:
When running at full tilt, Thunder Horse alone will increase overall U.S. oil and gas production by 3.6 percent. Add BP’s Atlantis platform that started up last year, and the boost grows to 6.4 percent.
Onshore, fields usually don’t take so long to develop. Just in the past few years, there has been an oil drilling boom in places like North Dakota and South Texas, and those booms are partly responsible for the production uptick. But the Feds, and certainly not the Dems, deserve zero credit for the Bakken Shale and the Eagleford Shale booms. Those plays were driven by technology and entrepreneurial, independent oil men.
And we’re no where near where we should be:
U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said the slowing of permit approval will result in the loss of 250,000 barrels a day of production this year and 500,000 in 2012. [Hmmm... sounds familiar. - Ed.]
The moratorium has stopped us from looking for the next Thunder Horse or Atlantis. If the Bakken Shale were on public, not private lands, they’d be trying to shut that down, too.
Oh. Wait.
No, the answer to our energy woes lies in our private sector, not in Washington, and certainly not in the Democratic Party. And for them to try to take credit for this uptick is laughably pathetic.
While we’re at it, here’s Rep. Wasserman Schultz’s voting record on energy:
Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
Voted YES on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on scheduling permitting for new oil refineries. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
Ba. Lo. Ney.
With all due respect.
Rep. Wasserman Schultz represents the party that always tells you that there’s no point in looking for new oil fields because it takes 10 years to develop them. Remember?
World-class oil fields can take that long to develop, but it’s a stupid argument against doing them. For example, fields like BP’s Thunder Horse and Atlantis, and BHP Billiton’s Shenzi together account for 100% of the 2009-10 growth in Gulf of Mexico production. All these fields were discovered 10 years ago or more, and the owners had the foresight to stick with them even through times when the oil price was as low as $10 per barrel (1999). Back then Barack Obama was still an unknown Illinois state senator, and Wasserman Schultz was in the Florida state house.
Here’s what was predicted for BP’s big fields back in 2008, before you-know-who was elected:
When running at full tilt, Thunder Horse alone will increase overall U.S. oil and gas production by 3.6 percent. Add BP’s Atlantis platform that started up last year, and the boost grows to 6.4 percent.
Onshore, fields usually don’t take so long to develop. Just in the past few years, there has been an oil drilling boom in places like North Dakota and South Texas, and those booms are partly responsible for the production uptick. But the Feds, and certainly not the Dems, deserve zero credit for the Bakken Shale and the Eagleford Shale booms. Those plays were driven by technology and entrepreneurial, independent oil men.
And we’re no where near where we should be:
U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said the slowing of permit approval will result in the loss of 250,000 barrels a day of production this year and 500,000 in 2012. [Hmmm... sounds familiar. - Ed.]
The moratorium has stopped us from looking for the next Thunder Horse or Atlantis. If the Bakken Shale were on public, not private lands, they’d be trying to shut that down, too.
Oh. Wait.
No, the answer to our energy woes lies in our private sector, not in Washington, and certainly not in the Democratic Party. And for them to try to take credit for this uptick is laughably pathetic.
While we’re at it, here’s Rep. Wasserman Schultz’s voting record on energy:
Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
Voted YES on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on scheduling permitting for new oil refineries. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
Alternative voting goes down in flames in UK.
The basic system in the United Kingdom is what’s known as ‘first past the post:’ essentially, whoever has a plurality of votes wins. Plurality wins are in fact somewhat typical results in parliamentary systems, given that parliamentary systems tend to spawn viable third and fourth parties like rotten meat was once believed to have spawned flies*; but it can be a problem when one side of the ideological spectrum is fragmented among several different parties, and the other is not. This is the situation in England right now, in fact; which is why the Liberal Democrats (who are the junior partners in a coalition government with the Conservatives**) were pushing an alternative voting scheme where you could indicate second and third choices, until somebody hit the 50%+1 vote mark.
As the PJ Tatler noted, the goal here for the British Left was to keep their fragmentation while eliminating the bad effects from it: presumably, the ability to reassign votes in divided elections would give Leftist candidates a better chance of actually winning seats. Alas, the vote went against the Liberal Democrats 2-1; partially because the Conservatives were naturally opposed to the notion… and partially because apparently the Labour party was not entirely in favor of it, either.
As you might have guessed, I prefer the restrictive straitjacket of a two-party system - which is a not-nice way of saying that I favor a simple, straightforward method of electing people. It’s been my experience that the vast majority of people who want to ‘reform’ our current federal, first-past-the-post, we-have-two-mainstream-alternatives-so-pick-one method of doing things are generally ideologues. Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong with being an ideologue: I’m one myself. But if your ideology - or the ideology of your faction/party - isn’t succeeding in the marketplace of popular opinion, well, perhaps sometimes it’s not because the blind fools can’t recognize your genius.
We will now pause for people to assure us that in their case it’s all because of those who would hold them back; but they’ll show them! They’ll SHOW THEM ALL!!!!!
…Or something like that.
(Via Instapundit)
Moe Lane (crosspost)
*You may safely guess my opinion of third parties from my choice of metaphor.
**It made sense at the time.
As the PJ Tatler noted, the goal here for the British Left was to keep their fragmentation while eliminating the bad effects from it: presumably, the ability to reassign votes in divided elections would give Leftist candidates a better chance of actually winning seats. Alas, the vote went against the Liberal Democrats 2-1; partially because the Conservatives were naturally opposed to the notion… and partially because apparently the Labour party was not entirely in favor of it, either.
As you might have guessed, I prefer the restrictive straitjacket of a two-party system - which is a not-nice way of saying that I favor a simple, straightforward method of electing people. It’s been my experience that the vast majority of people who want to ‘reform’ our current federal, first-past-the-post, we-have-two-mainstream-alternatives-so-pick-one method of doing things are generally ideologues. Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong with being an ideologue: I’m one myself. But if your ideology - or the ideology of your faction/party - isn’t succeeding in the marketplace of popular opinion, well, perhaps sometimes it’s not because the blind fools can’t recognize your genius.
We will now pause for people to assure us that in their case it’s all because of those who would hold them back; but they’ll show them! They’ll SHOW THEM ALL!!!!!
…Or something like that.
(Via Instapundit)
Moe Lane (crosspost)
*You may safely guess my opinion of third parties from my choice of metaphor.
**It made sense at the time.
Obama's gangsta government
Friday, May 06, 2011
Obama's gangsta government
Obama's gangsta government
Kimberley Strassel points to the President's planned executive order to require all companies and their officers to list their political donations if they bid on government contacts. The Democrats tried to do this by passing the so-called Disclose Act. When they couldn't get that through the Congress, the President is expected to do what he can within the federal government to accomplish the Democrats' goal.
Companies can bid and lose out for the sin of donating to Republicans. Or they can protect their livelihoods by halting donations to the GOP altogether—which is the White House's real aim. Think of it as "not-pay to play."
Whatever you call it, the order amounts to the White House brazenly directing the power of government against its political opponents—and at a time when the president claims to want cooperation on the budget and other issues. Senate Republicans from Mitch McConnell to Susan Collins are fuming, warning this is one political sucker punch too far, an unabashedly partisan move that will damage Senate work.
Minority Leader McConnell in an interview calls the order the "crassest" political move he's ever seen. "This is almost gangster politics, to shut down people who oppose them. . . . I assure you that this going to create problems for them in many ways—seen and unseen—if they go forward."
That might not matter to a White House that's already monomaniacally focused on 2012. Democrats are obsessed with the money game, in particular rubbing out any GOP opportunities that came with the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision to restore some corporate free-speech rights. Democrats last year tried to ram through the Disclose Act, designed to muzzle those new corporate rights, while allowing unions to continue spending at will.
When the party failed to get the bill through even an overwhelmingly Democratic Senate, the White House stepped up. The draft order, which came out last month, would require federal bidders to supply a complete list of all political contributions made by the company, its political action committee, and its senior executives—going back two full years. (Richard Nixon would be impressed.) More astounding, the order requires the list to include donations made to third-party political groups—disclosure that is not currently required by law, and that is, as a result, surely unconstitutional.
Ever audacious, the White House is spinning this as "reform," claiming taxpayers deserve to know how federal dollars being paid to contractors are being spent in campaigns. This might hold (a drop of) water if the executive order also required all the (liberal) entities that get billions in taxpayer dollars via federal grants and funding—unions, environmental groups, Planned Parenthood—to disclose also. It doesn't.
So what will the federal government do with this information? Are they going to deny contracts to companies that contribute to Republican candidates? What reason would there be for the federal government to have that information except for the Democratic Party to use that information against companies?
It says something for how odious this is that one of the leaders against it is Senator Susan Collins, not your rabid Republican.
The whole reform language is "Orwellian," says Ms. Collins. It's a measure of the order's naked political nature that she's leading the pushback—spearheading a GOP letter to the president and briefing Republican senators at a policy lunch this week. This is the same Susan Collins who has bucked her party in the past on campaign-finance issues, voting for McCain-Feingold.
The administration's argument that this is about disclosure is "a fraud," she declares. The very notion "offends me deeply," she says, since the order undermines decades of work by her and others to ensure federal business is free of corruption of political influence.
The politics of the order have been so ugly that she argues the media has missed the equally profound policy implications. It's the "equivalent of repealing the Hatch Act," she argues, the seminal 1939 law designed to weed out federal pay-to-play.
It has taken decades to create a federal contracting system based on "best prices, best value, best quality," Ms. Collins says, and the effect of the Obama order is to again have "politics play a role in determining who gets contracts." Companies may choose not to bid, which will reduce competition and raise government costs. And the order puts "thousands of civil servants" who oversee contracting "in an impossible situation."
This is how partisanship enters into every aspect of life. One party crosses the line and then the other party, when it gets into power, will retaliate. A Republican president could rescind the order. Or could extend it to unions and liberal interest groups.
This order is questionable on constitutional grounds. Obama might not care figuring that the could get the information he wants in time for the 2012 election before the order could be struck down. Cynical gangsta government.
Obama's gangsta government
Obama's gangsta government
Kimberley Strassel points to the President's planned executive order to require all companies and their officers to list their political donations if they bid on government contacts. The Democrats tried to do this by passing the so-called Disclose Act. When they couldn't get that through the Congress, the President is expected to do what he can within the federal government to accomplish the Democrats' goal.
Companies can bid and lose out for the sin of donating to Republicans. Or they can protect their livelihoods by halting donations to the GOP altogether—which is the White House's real aim. Think of it as "not-pay to play."
Whatever you call it, the order amounts to the White House brazenly directing the power of government against its political opponents—and at a time when the president claims to want cooperation on the budget and other issues. Senate Republicans from Mitch McConnell to Susan Collins are fuming, warning this is one political sucker punch too far, an unabashedly partisan move that will damage Senate work.
Minority Leader McConnell in an interview calls the order the "crassest" political move he's ever seen. "This is almost gangster politics, to shut down people who oppose them. . . . I assure you that this going to create problems for them in many ways—seen and unseen—if they go forward."
That might not matter to a White House that's already monomaniacally focused on 2012. Democrats are obsessed with the money game, in particular rubbing out any GOP opportunities that came with the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision to restore some corporate free-speech rights. Democrats last year tried to ram through the Disclose Act, designed to muzzle those new corporate rights, while allowing unions to continue spending at will.
When the party failed to get the bill through even an overwhelmingly Democratic Senate, the White House stepped up. The draft order, which came out last month, would require federal bidders to supply a complete list of all political contributions made by the company, its political action committee, and its senior executives—going back two full years. (Richard Nixon would be impressed.) More astounding, the order requires the list to include donations made to third-party political groups—disclosure that is not currently required by law, and that is, as a result, surely unconstitutional.
Ever audacious, the White House is spinning this as "reform," claiming taxpayers deserve to know how federal dollars being paid to contractors are being spent in campaigns. This might hold (a drop of) water if the executive order also required all the (liberal) entities that get billions in taxpayer dollars via federal grants and funding—unions, environmental groups, Planned Parenthood—to disclose also. It doesn't.
So what will the federal government do with this information? Are they going to deny contracts to companies that contribute to Republican candidates? What reason would there be for the federal government to have that information except for the Democratic Party to use that information against companies?
It says something for how odious this is that one of the leaders against it is Senator Susan Collins, not your rabid Republican.
The whole reform language is "Orwellian," says Ms. Collins. It's a measure of the order's naked political nature that she's leading the pushback—spearheading a GOP letter to the president and briefing Republican senators at a policy lunch this week. This is the same Susan Collins who has bucked her party in the past on campaign-finance issues, voting for McCain-Feingold.
The administration's argument that this is about disclosure is "a fraud," she declares. The very notion "offends me deeply," she says, since the order undermines decades of work by her and others to ensure federal business is free of corruption of political influence.
The politics of the order have been so ugly that she argues the media has missed the equally profound policy implications. It's the "equivalent of repealing the Hatch Act," she argues, the seminal 1939 law designed to weed out federal pay-to-play.
It has taken decades to create a federal contracting system based on "best prices, best value, best quality," Ms. Collins says, and the effect of the Obama order is to again have "politics play a role in determining who gets contracts." Companies may choose not to bid, which will reduce competition and raise government costs. And the order puts "thousands of civil servants" who oversee contracting "in an impossible situation."
This is how partisanship enters into every aspect of life. One party crosses the line and then the other party, when it gets into power, will retaliate. A Republican president could rescind the order. Or could extend it to unions and liberal interest groups.
This order is questionable on constitutional grounds. Obama might not care figuring that the could get the information he wants in time for the 2012 election before the order could be struck down. Cynical gangsta government.
Obama: Which Place in History?
Which of these accomplishments do you think President Obama will most want to be remembered for:
First African-American elected to the presidency
First president since Lyndon Johnson to pass a comprehensive healthcare reform bill
First president to default on the debt
First African-American elected to the presidency
First president since Lyndon Johnson to pass a comprehensive healthcare reform bill
First president to default on the debt
Employment Situation Report, April 2011
Some are hailing the Bureau of Labor Statistics’s latest labor situation report of 244,000 jobs added during the month with unemployment rising to 9.0% as a sign that the economy has improved, the recovery “has legs”, etc. Frankly, I don’t see it. When you subtract the number of jobs added by McDonalds alone (62,000) and take into consideration the sheer size of the birth-death adjustment (some 175,000 jobs), I find that report pretty phlegmatic. It’s especially so what you take into account that a) we’re nearly two years into a recovery; b) according to the NBER the mean trough-to-peak period is 59 months in the post-war period; and c) the median is no more than 58 months. That means that we’re probably at least half-way into the recovery.
It’s all downhill from here, baby.
It’s all downhill from here, baby.
That great political thinker that is Sheryl Crow: (Video)
PLEASE.... Stick to singing!
Singer Sheryl Crow spoke with Gayle King Wednesday about her own reaction to the death of Osama bin Laden.
"It's fascinating times that we're living in," Crow said on "The Gayle King Show" on Oprah Winfrey's OWN network.
"The first thing I thought was, I felt the same way everyone else did, mixed emotions about the fact that we killed someone. ... We know that killing is not right. In this particular instance, we have such an association with this person for having dealt us such a heinous blow. So, you know, mixed emotions of finally justice has been served and, secondly, we've just killed somebody…"
Crow said she was moved by President Obama's address to the nation Sunday night.
"It's just fascinating that we have a black man, who has Muslim ties with his father, even though he's a Christian, it's amazing how far our country has come, that that's the man who took down Osama bin Laden. It makes you feel very patriotic."
"I do think that if it were any other president, I might feel different about it. But, he's one of the most conscious people I've ever met, and I've met four presidents now," said Crow. "He walks the walk
Singer Sheryl Crow spoke with Gayle King Wednesday about her own reaction to the death of Osama bin Laden.
"It's fascinating times that we're living in," Crow said on "The Gayle King Show" on Oprah Winfrey's OWN network.
"The first thing I thought was, I felt the same way everyone else did, mixed emotions about the fact that we killed someone. ... We know that killing is not right. In this particular instance, we have such an association with this person for having dealt us such a heinous blow. So, you know, mixed emotions of finally justice has been served and, secondly, we've just killed somebody…"
Crow said she was moved by President Obama's address to the nation Sunday night.
"It's just fascinating that we have a black man, who has Muslim ties with his father, even though he's a Christian, it's amazing how far our country has come, that that's the man who took down Osama bin Laden. It makes you feel very patriotic."
"I do think that if it were any other president, I might feel different about it. But, he's one of the most conscious people I've ever met, and I've met four presidents now," said Crow. "He walks the walk
Obama Victory Tour Heads to the Golf Couse
Did you really think the president wouldn’t hit the links today? Do you think Michelle is going to let him puff his Bin Laden operation victory cigar in the White House?
President Obama is playing his usual course at Andrews Air Force Base with two of his usual foursome – White House aide Marvin Nicholson and Energy Department official David Katz – as well as guest golfer Ray LaHood, the secretary of transportation.
This is, BTW, the sixth weekend in a row Obama has played, the ninth time this year, and the 67th time Obama has been golfing as president
President Obama is playing his usual course at Andrews Air Force Base with two of his usual foursome – White House aide Marvin Nicholson and Energy Department official David Katz – as well as guest golfer Ray LaHood, the secretary of transportation.
This is, BTW, the sixth weekend in a row Obama has played, the ninth time this year, and the 67th time Obama has been golfing as president
Spoilsport X (Islamic Rage Boy)
It's good to know that only a small minority of Kashmiri muslims support Osama bin Laden.
Fresh in from the Land of Islamic Rage Boy, we get word that Syed Geelani, respected imam and head of IRB's All-Parties Hurriyat Conference, has offered official prayers of mourning over the death of respected Islamic leader Osama bin Laden.
Who would've expected anything different from the Religion of Peace (And Celebrating Murderers)?
Kashmiri Muslims shout anti-US and pro-freedom slogans after offering funeral prayers in absentia for Al Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden in Srinagar on May 6, 2011. Islamist political parties called for mass protests to condemn the US operation in Pakistan which killed bin Laden on May 1. Friday is a traditional day of protest in the Muslim world, where demonstrations frequently take place after the main weekly prayers. AFP PHOTO/Tauseef MUSTAFA (Photo credit should read TAUSEEF MUSTAFA/AFP/Getty Images)
Emphasis mine, just because I've been telling you that for years now. Nice that our "informers" in the press finally pick up on the Mysterious Mosque-Protest Connection. I'll delightfully point out that we still don't see Methodists streaming out of church with banners in hand and effigies alight. Pretty strange, huh?
[ Daylife Link 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ]
PS: Notice also that there's another traditional post-Friday-prayers event that's often celebrated in Kashmir. Can you guess what it is?
PPS: There's still no sign of Islamic Rage Boy on the wires today. Has he dropped out of public life? Is he in jail? Or worse, has he finally made the inevitable journey to Jannah?
Inquiring minds want to know -- Where are our intrepid reporters when it comes to reporting on the news that people actually care about??
Update: AP has filed their first photos. Still no Islamic Rage Boy!
Kashmiri Muslim protesters shout pro-freedom and anti-American slogans after offering funeral prayers for Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden in Srinagar, India, Friday, May 6, 2011. (AP Photo/Dar Yasin)
Fresh in from the Land of Islamic Rage Boy, we get word that Syed Geelani, respected imam and head of IRB's All-Parties Hurriyat Conference, has offered official prayers of mourning over the death of respected Islamic leader Osama bin Laden.
Who would've expected anything different from the Religion of Peace (And Celebrating Murderers)?
Kashmiri Muslims shout anti-US and pro-freedom slogans after offering funeral prayers in absentia for Al Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden in Srinagar on May 6, 2011. Islamist political parties called for mass protests to condemn the US operation in Pakistan which killed bin Laden on May 1. Friday is a traditional day of protest in the Muslim world, where demonstrations frequently take place after the main weekly prayers. AFP PHOTO/Tauseef MUSTAFA (Photo credit should read TAUSEEF MUSTAFA/AFP/Getty Images)
Emphasis mine, just because I've been telling you that for years now. Nice that our "informers" in the press finally pick up on the Mysterious Mosque-Protest Connection. I'll delightfully point out that we still don't see Methodists streaming out of church with banners in hand and effigies alight. Pretty strange, huh?
[ Daylife Link 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ]
PS: Notice also that there's another traditional post-Friday-prayers event that's often celebrated in Kashmir. Can you guess what it is?
PPS: There's still no sign of Islamic Rage Boy on the wires today. Has he dropped out of public life? Is he in jail? Or worse, has he finally made the inevitable journey to Jannah?
Inquiring minds want to know -- Where are our intrepid reporters when it comes to reporting on the news that people actually care about??
Update: AP has filed their first photos. Still no Islamic Rage Boy!
Kashmiri Muslim protesters shout pro-freedom and anti-American slogans after offering funeral prayers for Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden in Srinagar, India, Friday, May 6, 2011. (AP Photo/Dar Yasin)
An Observation On Obama’s Observation On Oil Drilling
May 06, 2011
An Observation On Obama’s Observation On Oil Drilling
Here’s what he said today.
“We can’t just drill our way out of the problem,” Obama said during an energy policy speech in Indiana Friday. “If we’re serious about addressing our energy problems, we’re going to have to do more than drill.”
He is, of course, correct – we cannot solve all of our energy problems by drilling for oil in the US. We certainly cannot solve them all immediately by drilling. But by the same token, we cannot solve all our energy problems by developing alternative sources of energy – or if we can, we cannot solve them immediately, just as is the case with more oil drilling.
Now there is a tendency by some to argue that there is no use drilling more if more drilling won’t solve our energy problem today. But by that logic, there is also no point in doing the alternate energy development because there is no telling when that will bring relief, either. That means that we should do nothing, because there is no solving the problem right now. And that, my friends, is an argument that is based in unalloyed stupidity of an unprecedented variety.
Let’s face it – in 2001, we were told that drilling in ANWR and other locations was pointless because it would be a decade before we got any oil, and it was therefore rejected by the anti-drillers. Let’s assume that was right – it is ten years later, and we could sure as Hell use that oil that would be hitting the market now. If the Bush reforms in the latter part of his presidency had taken hold, some offshore oil might be flowing today, mitigating the damaging impact of high oil prices upon our economy,
So I’ll be glad to say it – let’s develop those alternative energy sources if we can. That would be a great thing, if we succeed. But, to use the great line from 2008, DRILL, BABY, DRILL. Because even if it doesn’t provide relief in the short term, the medium and long term production of more oil will ultimately be beneficial to our energy problems.
An Observation On Obama’s Observation On Oil Drilling
Here’s what he said today.
“We can’t just drill our way out of the problem,” Obama said during an energy policy speech in Indiana Friday. “If we’re serious about addressing our energy problems, we’re going to have to do more than drill.”
He is, of course, correct – we cannot solve all of our energy problems by drilling for oil in the US. We certainly cannot solve them all immediately by drilling. But by the same token, we cannot solve all our energy problems by developing alternative sources of energy – or if we can, we cannot solve them immediately, just as is the case with more oil drilling.
Now there is a tendency by some to argue that there is no use drilling more if more drilling won’t solve our energy problem today. But by that logic, there is also no point in doing the alternate energy development because there is no telling when that will bring relief, either. That means that we should do nothing, because there is no solving the problem right now. And that, my friends, is an argument that is based in unalloyed stupidity of an unprecedented variety.
Let’s face it – in 2001, we were told that drilling in ANWR and other locations was pointless because it would be a decade before we got any oil, and it was therefore rejected by the anti-drillers. Let’s assume that was right – it is ten years later, and we could sure as Hell use that oil that would be hitting the market now. If the Bush reforms in the latter part of his presidency had taken hold, some offshore oil might be flowing today, mitigating the damaging impact of high oil prices upon our economy,
So I’ll be glad to say it – let’s develop those alternative energy sources if we can. That would be a great thing, if we succeed. But, to use the great line from 2008, DRILL, BABY, DRILL. Because even if it doesn’t provide relief in the short term, the medium and long term production of more oil will ultimately be beneficial to our energy problems.
Progressives’ Revisionist Energy History (Video)
From the 912 Project: DECEPTION – Obama Regime, DNC Takes Credit For American Increase In Domestic Oil Production!
What absolute lies. What a load of horse puckey. For what country Debbie? Not the US. You must live in an alternate reality because those ‘jobs’ you speak of, have never materialized. And the economic recovery? You’re not serious right? What recovery? The Democrats/progressives/Marxists have done nothing but plummet the US into a depression that no one dare mention.
RedState: Wasserman Schultz: ‘We’ve Really Concentrated’ On Oil Production
What absolute lies. What a load of horse puckey. For what country Debbie? Not the US. You must live in an alternate reality because those ‘jobs’ you speak of, have never materialized. And the economic recovery? You’re not serious right? What recovery? The Democrats/progressives/Marxists have done nothing but plummet the US into a depression that no one dare mention.
RedState: Wasserman Schultz: ‘We’ve Really Concentrated’ On Oil Production
America’s College Bubble Next to Burst
From: National Inflation Association
The National Inflation Association (NIA) is pleased to officially announce that it will soon be releasing its hour long documentary ‘College Conspiracy’, which will expose the U.S. college education system as the largest scam in U.S. history. NIA has been producing ‘College Conspiracy’ for the past six months and plans to release the movie on May 15th. NIA members will be given the first opportunity to watch this must see documentary, which we hope will change the college education industry for the better.
NIA expects ‘College Conspiracy’ to take college education by storm and expose the facts and truth about tuition inflation to prospective college students. Almost everybody applying to college has heard the oft-repeated statistic that Americans with college degrees earn $1 million more in lifetime income than high school graduates without a degree. This is one of those statistics that gets repeated so many times that just about everybody accepts it as fact, but nobody actually does the research to confirm whether or not it is true. ‘College Conspiracy’ will prove once and for all if indeed this so-called statistic is true or just a myth.
If 70.1% of high school graduates enroll in a college or university, how does a college degree give you an advantage over the rest of the population? Back in the early 1960s, Americans didn’t need to go to college. We were a creditor nation with a strong manufacturing base. With an unemployment rate of only 5%, jobs were available to almost everybody. Less than 50% of American high school graduates enrolled into college. For those who did attend college and graduate with a degree, it was actually something special that made you stand out from the rest of the field, because not everybody had one.
American college tuition inflation has been out of control for the past decade. During the financial crisis of late-2008/early-2009, almost all goods and services in America at least temporarily declined in price. The only service in America that continued to rise in price throughout the financial crisis, besides health care, was college education. Despite real unemployment in America reaching 22%, students were brainwashed into believing that if they were lucky enough to be blessed with the privilege to get half a million dollars into debt to obtain a college degree, they will be on a path to riches and have a guaranteed successful career; whereas those who don’t attend college are destined to be failures in life.
The current college education bubble is one of the largest bubbles in U.S. history. The college bubble has been fueled by the U.S. government’s willingness to give out cheap and easy student loans to anybody who applied for them, regardless of if they will ever have the ability to pay the loans back. Student loan debt in America is now larger than credit card debt, but unlike credit card debt, student loan debt can’t be discharged in bankruptcy.
During the 1970s, college students were able to afford their own college tuition without getting into any debt, simply by working a part-time job year round or by working a full-time job during the summer. Not only that, but most college students were also able to afford their own car and a small apartment. However, since 1970, Americans have experienced a 50% decline in their standard of living due to the Federal Reserve’s dangerous and destructive monetary policies. You never heard of parents setting up college savings accounts for their children 40 years ago, but thanks to the Federal Reserve, this has become the norm.
The biggest competitive threat to Wal-Mart today in terms of market cap ($192 billion) is not Target ($35 billion) like you might think, but is actually Amazon.com ($89 billion). Wal-Mart is able to offer the lowest prices out of all brick and mortar retailers, because of the size and scope of the company, which allows them to be profitable even at extremely low gross margins. However, while Wal-Mart’s stock price is only up 16% from where it was exactly 5 years ago, Amazon.com’s stock price is up 470% during this same time period.
Amazon.com’s stock price has risen by a 29 times higher percentage than Wal-Mart due to the fact that they sell their products over the Internet with substantially less overhead costs. NIA believes that the future of college education is over the Internet and that Americans in the future will be able to receive a better quality education from the best professors from all around the world at only a fraction of the cost of a traditional brick and mortar college education.
For the vast majority of college courses, there is absolutely nothing that students can learn in a huge multi-million dollar lecture hall with hundreds of other students that they can’t learn at home listening to that same professor on a computer. The only reason online colleges haven’t taken off yet in America and still have less than a 1% market share of U.S. higher education is because America has a college-industrial complex that cares only about profits and not educating students. The people who control the system simply don’t want the system to change, because they are making way too much money by turning American students into indentured servants.
Back in the 1980s when Americans graduated high school, they would get hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt to buy a house. Today, millions of Americans have mortgage-sized debts, but still live with their parents. All they have is a piece of paper called a college degree, that is rapidly declining in value even faster than tuitions are skyrocketing in price.
‘College Conspiracy’ was made possible by the personal stories that were submitted to us by thousands of NIA members. NIA’s staff spent the past six months traveling across the country, interviewing our country’s top expert guests in nine different states. Please tell all of you family members and friends to become members of NIA for free immediately at http://inflation.us so that they along with you can be among the first to see ‘College Conspiracy’.
The National Inflation Association (NIA) is pleased to officially announce that it will soon be releasing its hour long documentary ‘College Conspiracy’, which will expose the U.S. college education system as the largest scam in U.S. history. NIA has been producing ‘College Conspiracy’ for the past six months and plans to release the movie on May 15th. NIA members will be given the first opportunity to watch this must see documentary, which we hope will change the college education industry for the better.
NIA expects ‘College Conspiracy’ to take college education by storm and expose the facts and truth about tuition inflation to prospective college students. Almost everybody applying to college has heard the oft-repeated statistic that Americans with college degrees earn $1 million more in lifetime income than high school graduates without a degree. This is one of those statistics that gets repeated so many times that just about everybody accepts it as fact, but nobody actually does the research to confirm whether or not it is true. ‘College Conspiracy’ will prove once and for all if indeed this so-called statistic is true or just a myth.
If 70.1% of high school graduates enroll in a college or university, how does a college degree give you an advantage over the rest of the population? Back in the early 1960s, Americans didn’t need to go to college. We were a creditor nation with a strong manufacturing base. With an unemployment rate of only 5%, jobs were available to almost everybody. Less than 50% of American high school graduates enrolled into college. For those who did attend college and graduate with a degree, it was actually something special that made you stand out from the rest of the field, because not everybody had one.
American college tuition inflation has been out of control for the past decade. During the financial crisis of late-2008/early-2009, almost all goods and services in America at least temporarily declined in price. The only service in America that continued to rise in price throughout the financial crisis, besides health care, was college education. Despite real unemployment in America reaching 22%, students were brainwashed into believing that if they were lucky enough to be blessed with the privilege to get half a million dollars into debt to obtain a college degree, they will be on a path to riches and have a guaranteed successful career; whereas those who don’t attend college are destined to be failures in life.
The current college education bubble is one of the largest bubbles in U.S. history. The college bubble has been fueled by the U.S. government’s willingness to give out cheap and easy student loans to anybody who applied for them, regardless of if they will ever have the ability to pay the loans back. Student loan debt in America is now larger than credit card debt, but unlike credit card debt, student loan debt can’t be discharged in bankruptcy.
During the 1970s, college students were able to afford their own college tuition without getting into any debt, simply by working a part-time job year round or by working a full-time job during the summer. Not only that, but most college students were also able to afford their own car and a small apartment. However, since 1970, Americans have experienced a 50% decline in their standard of living due to the Federal Reserve’s dangerous and destructive monetary policies. You never heard of parents setting up college savings accounts for their children 40 years ago, but thanks to the Federal Reserve, this has become the norm.
The biggest competitive threat to Wal-Mart today in terms of market cap ($192 billion) is not Target ($35 billion) like you might think, but is actually Amazon.com ($89 billion). Wal-Mart is able to offer the lowest prices out of all brick and mortar retailers, because of the size and scope of the company, which allows them to be profitable even at extremely low gross margins. However, while Wal-Mart’s stock price is only up 16% from where it was exactly 5 years ago, Amazon.com’s stock price is up 470% during this same time period.
Amazon.com’s stock price has risen by a 29 times higher percentage than Wal-Mart due to the fact that they sell their products over the Internet with substantially less overhead costs. NIA believes that the future of college education is over the Internet and that Americans in the future will be able to receive a better quality education from the best professors from all around the world at only a fraction of the cost of a traditional brick and mortar college education.
For the vast majority of college courses, there is absolutely nothing that students can learn in a huge multi-million dollar lecture hall with hundreds of other students that they can’t learn at home listening to that same professor on a computer. The only reason online colleges haven’t taken off yet in America and still have less than a 1% market share of U.S. higher education is because America has a college-industrial complex that cares only about profits and not educating students. The people who control the system simply don’t want the system to change, because they are making way too much money by turning American students into indentured servants.
Back in the 1980s when Americans graduated high school, they would get hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt to buy a house. Today, millions of Americans have mortgage-sized debts, but still live with their parents. All they have is a piece of paper called a college degree, that is rapidly declining in value even faster than tuitions are skyrocketing in price.
‘College Conspiracy’ was made possible by the personal stories that were submitted to us by thousands of NIA members. NIA’s staff spent the past six months traveling across the country, interviewing our country’s top expert guests in nine different states. Please tell all of you family members and friends to become members of NIA for free immediately at http://inflation.us so that they along with you can be among the first to see ‘College Conspiracy’.
Survivalists: Are you part of the new subculture? (Video)
MIDWEST CITY, Okla. -- According to the most recent government data, food inflation costs for the average American family are about 4.5 percent per year. That staggering figure, coupled with growing fear about the global food trade and availability of fuel, is prompting a growing number of Oklahoma families to stock up.
This notion of "surivivalism" has been circling the American psyche for a few months now.
Glenn Beck is talking about it on his show and there are others.
The official guidelines from FEMA recommend two weeks of food immediately available for a family in case of emergency.
At Red Dawn: Hunting, Survival, Recreation, they specialize in homesteading, emergency preparedness and first-aid.
Owner Gaylon Cornsilk first dreamed up this concept about a year ago.
The doors have been open just six months and business has exploded.
Cornsilk says, "This was kinda born out of a passion to see people prepared for any kind of emergency, natural or man-made. We are growing exponentially everyday. Obviously there's an air of people starting to notice and want to prepare for what's going on around them."
Donna Harper manages the store's long-term storage food section.
Some of the pre-packaged emergency food rations last five to 25 years; the rations sell out so quickly they cannot keep enough on premises.
The average customer spends hundreds of dollars.
Harper says, "They're buying a variety of this stuff. They don't just want the survival tabs. They don't just want the emergency rations. They want the dried fruit and soups and milk and eggs. We're amazed. For the longest time we thought, 'Oh it's just us. There aren't that many of us.' But we're finding out there are a lot of us. I don't ever want to be sitting across the table from someone I love and thinking, 'Why didn't I prepare? I wish I had done more.' I don't ever want to do that."
The Behringer family from Yukon is part of a new breed of survivalists.
Their garden supplies most of the family's veggies in the summer; they freeze the rest.
They equipped their house with a built-in generator hook-up so they can keep the lights on when power fails.
Fred Behringer says, "I keep the generator full of gas and two gas cans right there with it because it's no fun to get up at 2 a.m. because your generator went off and you need to go find some more gas."
The Behringers' secret is buying staples and buying bulk.
Andrea Behringer says, "I never thought of us as survivalists. It never even crossed my mind because it just seemed practical. We don't have a lot of pre-made foods. It's mostly staples. It's your basics; beans, rice, pasta, potatoes, cans of vegetables. So if I can get a good deal on it, I will buy a whole bunch."
The Behringers say they could live comfortably for two weeks off what's in the pantry.
Whether you are stockpiling because you believe global economic meltdown is imminent or just because it is wise to buy a few extra when things are on sale, there are more and more Oklahomans choosing to load up on necessities, just in case.
This notion of "surivivalism" has been circling the American psyche for a few months now.
Glenn Beck is talking about it on his show and there are others.
The official guidelines from FEMA recommend two weeks of food immediately available for a family in case of emergency.
At Red Dawn: Hunting, Survival, Recreation, they specialize in homesteading, emergency preparedness and first-aid.
Owner Gaylon Cornsilk first dreamed up this concept about a year ago.
The doors have been open just six months and business has exploded.
Cornsilk says, "This was kinda born out of a passion to see people prepared for any kind of emergency, natural or man-made. We are growing exponentially everyday. Obviously there's an air of people starting to notice and want to prepare for what's going on around them."
Donna Harper manages the store's long-term storage food section.
Some of the pre-packaged emergency food rations last five to 25 years; the rations sell out so quickly they cannot keep enough on premises.
The average customer spends hundreds of dollars.
Harper says, "They're buying a variety of this stuff. They don't just want the survival tabs. They don't just want the emergency rations. They want the dried fruit and soups and milk and eggs. We're amazed. For the longest time we thought, 'Oh it's just us. There aren't that many of us.' But we're finding out there are a lot of us. I don't ever want to be sitting across the table from someone I love and thinking, 'Why didn't I prepare? I wish I had done more.' I don't ever want to do that."
The Behringer family from Yukon is part of a new breed of survivalists.
Their garden supplies most of the family's veggies in the summer; they freeze the rest.
They equipped their house with a built-in generator hook-up so they can keep the lights on when power fails.
Fred Behringer says, "I keep the generator full of gas and two gas cans right there with it because it's no fun to get up at 2 a.m. because your generator went off and you need to go find some more gas."
The Behringers' secret is buying staples and buying bulk.
Andrea Behringer says, "I never thought of us as survivalists. It never even crossed my mind because it just seemed practical. We don't have a lot of pre-made foods. It's mostly staples. It's your basics; beans, rice, pasta, potatoes, cans of vegetables. So if I can get a good deal on it, I will buy a whole bunch."
The Behringers say they could live comfortably for two weeks off what's in the pantry.
Whether you are stockpiling because you believe global economic meltdown is imminent or just because it is wise to buy a few extra when things are on sale, there are more and more Oklahomans choosing to load up on necessities, just in case.
Tim Geithner to Grads: Work for the Government!
Directly from the source of living proof! "You certainly don't need to be intelligent to get a job in government. It all makes perfect sense....
Tim Geithner to Grads: Work for the Government!
By Matt Cover | May 06, 2011 | 16:01
SHARE IT
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said that his advice to young professionals would be that they take time away from their careers to work for the federal government.
Speaking to a gathering of mutual fund advisors in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, Geithner was asked what his advice would be to young professionals entering the work force.
He said, “I guess what I’d say is learn about the world; make sure you try to understand the basics of economics and finance because it’s critical to everything; and at some point come try to work for your country for some time.”
Geitner explained that the economic challenges the country confronts depend both on politicians making difficult choices and federal employees with the knowledge and skills to handle them.
“[T]he economic challenges we face as a country depend a lot on getting a better understanding of economics and finance so you can get better policy outcomes from your government,” he said.
“And that depends on getting politicians willing to make tougher choices but also people in these jobs who are talented and willing to come and give part of their life – you don’t need to spend your entire life doing it – but it’s good for the country to try and attract people to do this and I hope you do that,” said Geithner.
The Treasury Department secretary also said that his time growing up abroad had made him appreciate his country and want to work for it.
“My parents gave me this great gift as a child, and that is I lived around the world and had this great chance to get a feel for the rest of the world and to look at the United States through the eyes of other countries,” said Geithner, “and that experience is what led me to want to work for my country.”
He further said it has been a “remarkably rewarding experience” working for the government and encouraged young professionals to dedicate a few years of their working lives to government.
“It was a remarkably rewarding experience and I won’t try to affect what choices they make,” he said, “but I think the country would be stronger if we could be successful in attracting people to come spend part of their lives in public service.”
According to the Bureau of Economic analysis, federal workers in 2009 made an average of $123,049 in salary and benefits, which is more than twice the average of $61,051 that workers made in the private sector. In 2010, according to the Office of Management and Budget, there were an estimated 2.65 million federal government employees.
Crossposted at CNSNews.com
Tim Geithner to Grads: Work for the Government!
By Matt Cover | May 06, 2011 | 16:01
SHARE IT
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said that his advice to young professionals would be that they take time away from their careers to work for the federal government.
Speaking to a gathering of mutual fund advisors in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, Geithner was asked what his advice would be to young professionals entering the work force.
He said, “I guess what I’d say is learn about the world; make sure you try to understand the basics of economics and finance because it’s critical to everything; and at some point come try to work for your country for some time.”
Geitner explained that the economic challenges the country confronts depend both on politicians making difficult choices and federal employees with the knowledge and skills to handle them.
“[T]he economic challenges we face as a country depend a lot on getting a better understanding of economics and finance so you can get better policy outcomes from your government,” he said.
“And that depends on getting politicians willing to make tougher choices but also people in these jobs who are talented and willing to come and give part of their life – you don’t need to spend your entire life doing it – but it’s good for the country to try and attract people to do this and I hope you do that,” said Geithner.
The Treasury Department secretary also said that his time growing up abroad had made him appreciate his country and want to work for it.
“My parents gave me this great gift as a child, and that is I lived around the world and had this great chance to get a feel for the rest of the world and to look at the United States through the eyes of other countries,” said Geithner, “and that experience is what led me to want to work for my country.”
He further said it has been a “remarkably rewarding experience” working for the government and encouraged young professionals to dedicate a few years of their working lives to government.
“It was a remarkably rewarding experience and I won’t try to affect what choices they make,” he said, “but I think the country would be stronger if we could be successful in attracting people to come spend part of their lives in public service.”
According to the Bureau of Economic analysis, federal workers in 2009 made an average of $123,049 in salary and benefits, which is more than twice the average of $61,051 that workers made in the private sector. In 2010, according to the Office of Management and Budget, there were an estimated 2.65 million federal government employees.
Crossposted at CNSNews.com
Defense: Federal agent coerced teen to violence
By NIGEL DUARA
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Defense lawyers for a Somali-American teen charged with trying to detonate a bomb at a holiday tree-lighting ceremony say a federal agent tried to coerce him into violence.
Attorneys for Mohamed O. Mohamud said in a filing Friday that emails from an agent known only as "Bill Smith" prove the teen's innocence and show the federal government is not playing fair with the evidence it is supposed to provide.
"The correspondence between Bill Smith and (Mohamud) demonstrates that Smith was acting as an agent provocateur, attempting to encourage (Mohamud) to engage in violent activity in this country," the defense team wrote.
Prosecutors had said in a filing April 7 that the emails did not relate to the facts of the case, and acknowledged that the agent was working for the government, but that the contact was brief.
Mohamud, 19, has pleaded not guilty to charges of attempting to ignite a weapon of mass destruction at a Nov. 26 Christmas tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Ore. The FBI has said that its agents were acting as his coconspirators as part of a sting and that there was never a real explosive device.
His defense attorneys, Stephen Sady and Steven Wax, appeared to be launching an entrapment defense in their arguments that the agent's emails show the government shouldn't have control over what evidence it provides to the defense. They said in the filing that the government had given them "voluminous" amounts of emails with "hundreds of lines of distracting code."
Sady and Wax argue that the agent initiated discussions about terrorism in the U.S., and that Mohamud didn't take any action based on that conversation. That, they say, shows that Mohamud wasn't predisposed to violence.
Mohamud's predisposition - his will to commit violence - is key to an entrapment defense. If the defense can show that government agents put the idea of a tree-lighting bombing into Mohamud's head, it enhances their prospects for a successful defense.
The attorneys said they were only able to understand what the agent's role in the case by backtracking through the emails. "If not for fortunate defense work, this exculpatory fact would have continued to be suppressed," they wrote.
The emails are another step in the long-running saga centering on what evidence the government must provide to the defense. Mohamud's defense argues that prosecutors don't understand what constitutes evidence that could prove their client's innocence.
Prosecutors said in April that Mohamud had continued to contact the agent even after he had stopped working on behalf of the government. "Defendant, however, on his own continued to contact Smith ... by forwarding Smith e-mails, including one that supported violent jihad," they said.
They also have said they have provided more evidence than they need to, as a courtesy to the defense team.
Sady and Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight declined to comment when contacted Saturday by The Associated Press.
Oral arguments about the discovery motions are scheduled before U.S. District Judge Garr M. King on June 1.
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Defense lawyers for a Somali-American teen charged with trying to detonate a bomb at a holiday tree-lighting ceremony say a federal agent tried to coerce him into violence.
Attorneys for Mohamed O. Mohamud said in a filing Friday that emails from an agent known only as "Bill Smith" prove the teen's innocence and show the federal government is not playing fair with the evidence it is supposed to provide.
"The correspondence between Bill Smith and (Mohamud) demonstrates that Smith was acting as an agent provocateur, attempting to encourage (Mohamud) to engage in violent activity in this country," the defense team wrote.
Prosecutors had said in a filing April 7 that the emails did not relate to the facts of the case, and acknowledged that the agent was working for the government, but that the contact was brief.
Mohamud, 19, has pleaded not guilty to charges of attempting to ignite a weapon of mass destruction at a Nov. 26 Christmas tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Ore. The FBI has said that its agents were acting as his coconspirators as part of a sting and that there was never a real explosive device.
His defense attorneys, Stephen Sady and Steven Wax, appeared to be launching an entrapment defense in their arguments that the agent's emails show the government shouldn't have control over what evidence it provides to the defense. They said in the filing that the government had given them "voluminous" amounts of emails with "hundreds of lines of distracting code."
Sady and Wax argue that the agent initiated discussions about terrorism in the U.S., and that Mohamud didn't take any action based on that conversation. That, they say, shows that Mohamud wasn't predisposed to violence.
Mohamud's predisposition - his will to commit violence - is key to an entrapment defense. If the defense can show that government agents put the idea of a tree-lighting bombing into Mohamud's head, it enhances their prospects for a successful defense.
The attorneys said they were only able to understand what the agent's role in the case by backtracking through the emails. "If not for fortunate defense work, this exculpatory fact would have continued to be suppressed," they wrote.
The emails are another step in the long-running saga centering on what evidence the government must provide to the defense. Mohamud's defense argues that prosecutors don't understand what constitutes evidence that could prove their client's innocence.
Prosecutors said in April that Mohamud had continued to contact the agent even after he had stopped working on behalf of the government. "Defendant, however, on his own continued to contact Smith ... by forwarding Smith e-mails, including one that supported violent jihad," they said.
They also have said they have provided more evidence than they need to, as a courtesy to the defense team.
Sady and Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight declined to comment when contacted Saturday by The Associated Press.
Oral arguments about the discovery motions are scheduled before U.S. District Judge Garr M. King on June 1.
Kinder eggs? This goes too far!
Mark Steyn reports that his childrens' Kinder Eggs were seized by US Customs as he and they crossed the border from Canada to the US. According to Customs: "Many of the toys that have been tested by the Consumer Product Safety Commission in the past were determined to present a choking hazard for young children....Last year, CBP officers discovered more than 25,000 of these banned chocolate eggs. More than 2,000 separate seizures were made of this product." As Steyn states, however: "And yet oddly enough generations of European and Latin American children remain unchoked."
If you don't know what Kinder Eggs are, they are hollow chocolate eggs with ingenious little assembly toys inside.
Each Summer, my wife and boys visit grandma in Germany. My wife brings back two egg cartons of twelve Kinder Eggs in each carton. Throughout the year they provide exceptional motivational rewards for the boys. My wife is as paranoid as most mothers about her childrens' safety, and as prone as most to believe most scares. The boys have collected several hundred of Kinder Egg toys. They reacted with deep disappointment this morning when I told them they are now illegal to bring into the US , then asked Mom if they could eat them all before getting on the plane home. My wife is trying to figure out something else as powerful a motivational reward as Kinder Eggs.
There's someone in Washington smiling that another motivation for individual effort has been broken and outlawed.
If you don't know what Kinder Eggs are, they are hollow chocolate eggs with ingenious little assembly toys inside.
Each Summer, my wife and boys visit grandma in Germany. My wife brings back two egg cartons of twelve Kinder Eggs in each carton. Throughout the year they provide exceptional motivational rewards for the boys. My wife is as paranoid as most mothers about her childrens' safety, and as prone as most to believe most scares. The boys have collected several hundred of Kinder Egg toys. They reacted with deep disappointment this morning when I told them they are now illegal to bring into the US , then asked Mom if they could eat them all before getting on the plane home. My wife is trying to figure out something else as powerful a motivational reward as Kinder Eggs.
There's someone in Washington smiling that another motivation for individual effort has been broken and outlawed.
House GOP Throws Down the Gauntlet on Energy
It’s a battle that’s been a long time coming. We’ve watched for at least the last year while the President and his enablers have essentially shut down various elements of domestic energy production, first through a moratorium and then through a permitorium. And judging by reader responses here there has also been a palpable sense of frustration with Congress and their seeming inability break this impasse. The time may finally be at hand when you won’t have to wait any longer.
Yesterday Hot Air was invited to sit in on a call with Congressmen Doc Hastings (chairman of the Natural Resources Committee) and Chief Deputy Whip Peter Roskam. The subject of the discussion was three bills being brought to the floor which may, if we can muster the support required, finally break the log jam.
They are:
H.R. 1229 Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act. To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to facilitate the safe and timely production of American energy resources from the Gulf of Mexico.
H.R. 1230 Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act. To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct certain offshore oil and gas lease sales, and for other purposes.
H.R. 1231 Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act. To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to require that each 5-year offshore oil and gas leasing program offer leasing in the areas with the most prospective oil and gas resources, to establish a domestic oil and natural gas production goal, and for other purposes.
We can’t expect much more of an “in your face” approach to the problem out of Congress than this, and it’s high time for it indeed. Just to cut through the required legislative jargon, these three bills would produce, among other items, two significant results in the critical areas of concern:
First, petitioners seeking drilling permits would be required by law to receive an answer to their request within thirty days. (For complex requests, two extension periods would be offered.) This gives them a fair opportunity to find out if they are in compliance with all regulations in a timely fashion, and if denied, be told specifically what needs to be done to reach compliance and get their permits.
Second, at the rate we’re currently going this could be the first time in a generation when the government did not offer a sale of leases for energy exploration. This legislative effort will ensure that new leases are made available. Further, we’re going to make sure that energy exploration is targeted to areas known to have the highest potential for actually producing. (Gee, that was complicated, wasn’t it?)
When we contacted the office of the House Committee on Natural Resources yesterday they provided Hot Air with the following statement, further clarifying what we can expect.
Today, the House will vote on legislation to expand offshore American energy production in a safe and responsible way. Part of the House Republicans’ American Energy Initiative, the Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act will create jobs, lower gasoline prices and generate new revenue by requiring offshore lease sales that were canceled by the Obama Administration. This is just one of several bills to be voted on in May that will boost our economy and reduce our dependency on unstable foreign countries.
For even more analysis, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell has an op-ed up this week stressing the importance of these pieces of legislation which you should take a look at.
America’s energy future must be made more secure and must focus on domestic energy resources. Providing the leadership and guidance America needs at this time will calm markets. It would also reassure Americans that there is a vision and plan for America to become energy independent and not have our energy prices defined by the stability of Middle Eastern dictatorships, revolutions or armed conflicts.
I know we give Congress a lot of grief at times, and some of it well deserved. But when they step up to the plate and do the right thing they deserve our support. This would be a good time to take to the phones and see this process through. Even Democrats in Congress are feeling the pressure from unemployed constituents who will soon be paying five dollars per gallon for gasoline, and the President can’t be unaware of it. It’s time to call them out on it and essentially dare them to block these bills from becoming law. I, for one, don’t think they’ll take us up on that dare.
Yesterday Hot Air was invited to sit in on a call with Congressmen Doc Hastings (chairman of the Natural Resources Committee) and Chief Deputy Whip Peter Roskam. The subject of the discussion was three bills being brought to the floor which may, if we can muster the support required, finally break the log jam.
They are:
H.R. 1229 Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act. To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to facilitate the safe and timely production of American energy resources from the Gulf of Mexico.
H.R. 1230 Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act. To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct certain offshore oil and gas lease sales, and for other purposes.
H.R. 1231 Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act. To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to require that each 5-year offshore oil and gas leasing program offer leasing in the areas with the most prospective oil and gas resources, to establish a domestic oil and natural gas production goal, and for other purposes.
We can’t expect much more of an “in your face” approach to the problem out of Congress than this, and it’s high time for it indeed. Just to cut through the required legislative jargon, these three bills would produce, among other items, two significant results in the critical areas of concern:
First, petitioners seeking drilling permits would be required by law to receive an answer to their request within thirty days. (For complex requests, two extension periods would be offered.) This gives them a fair opportunity to find out if they are in compliance with all regulations in a timely fashion, and if denied, be told specifically what needs to be done to reach compliance and get their permits.
Second, at the rate we’re currently going this could be the first time in a generation when the government did not offer a sale of leases for energy exploration. This legislative effort will ensure that new leases are made available. Further, we’re going to make sure that energy exploration is targeted to areas known to have the highest potential for actually producing. (Gee, that was complicated, wasn’t it?)
When we contacted the office of the House Committee on Natural Resources yesterday they provided Hot Air with the following statement, further clarifying what we can expect.
Today, the House will vote on legislation to expand offshore American energy production in a safe and responsible way. Part of the House Republicans’ American Energy Initiative, the Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act will create jobs, lower gasoline prices and generate new revenue by requiring offshore lease sales that were canceled by the Obama Administration. This is just one of several bills to be voted on in May that will boost our economy and reduce our dependency on unstable foreign countries.
For even more analysis, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell has an op-ed up this week stressing the importance of these pieces of legislation which you should take a look at.
America’s energy future must be made more secure and must focus on domestic energy resources. Providing the leadership and guidance America needs at this time will calm markets. It would also reassure Americans that there is a vision and plan for America to become energy independent and not have our energy prices defined by the stability of Middle Eastern dictatorships, revolutions or armed conflicts.
I know we give Congress a lot of grief at times, and some of it well deserved. But when they step up to the plate and do the right thing they deserve our support. This would be a good time to take to the phones and see this process through. Even Democrats in Congress are feeling the pressure from unemployed constituents who will soon be paying five dollars per gallon for gasoline, and the President can’t be unaware of it. It’s time to call them out on it and essentially dare them to block these bills from becoming law. I, for one, don’t think they’ll take us up on that dare.
Move Over TSA: Make Way for the Passenger “Stun” Bracelet (w/video)
With all the grousing and grumbling over enhanced pat-downs and potentially cancer-causing scanners at airport security checkpoints, you might think the Department of Homeland Security would be investigating alternatives. According to an article at The Washington Times, officials at DHS are doing just that.
One promising technology they have “expressed great interest in” a “safety” bracelet that would be worn by all passengers from the time they board an airplane to the time they disembark.
Just to clarify, the safety is all theirs—not yours. You see the bracelet is a stun device, similar to a police Taser. It is to designed to shock the wearer silly, immobilizing him for several minutes. The stun would be effectuated by security personnel on board the flight. Try complaining that your seat doesn’t recline far enough, and you might find yourself snacking on 5,000 volts of electricity instead of stale peanuts.
The bracelet, which would take the place of a boarding pass, would contain personal information about the traveler and GPS tracking software to monitor his whereabouts as well as that of his luggage. The EMD Safety Bracelet, as this technological wonder is known, may be cutting-edge 2011 but it feels like 1984 all over again.
As the following educational video illustrates, EMD stands for Electro-Muscular Disruption. That’s more government speak for “we can paralyze you for several minutes.”
So how serious is the government about acquiring the technology? Perhaps this will provide some indication. Correspondence between the inventor of the device and Paul S. Ruwaldt of DHS’s Science and Technology Directorate, Office of Research and Development, appears to have been scrubbed from the Internet. A link to the letters in the Times article and an article at Prison Planet both result in a 404 error, “The page cannot be found.” A video by Lamperd Less Lethal, Inc., the manufacturer of the EMD Safety Bracelet, has also been removed.
Fortunately, the Times article provides a one-sentence quote from a letter by Ruwaldt as an artifact. That sentence, which states “it isconceivable to envision a use [of the EMD bracelet] to improve air security, on passenger planes,” speaks volumes.
One promising technology they have “expressed great interest in” a “safety” bracelet that would be worn by all passengers from the time they board an airplane to the time they disembark.
Just to clarify, the safety is all theirs—not yours. You see the bracelet is a stun device, similar to a police Taser. It is to designed to shock the wearer silly, immobilizing him for several minutes. The stun would be effectuated by security personnel on board the flight. Try complaining that your seat doesn’t recline far enough, and you might find yourself snacking on 5,000 volts of electricity instead of stale peanuts.
The bracelet, which would take the place of a boarding pass, would contain personal information about the traveler and GPS tracking software to monitor his whereabouts as well as that of his luggage. The EMD Safety Bracelet, as this technological wonder is known, may be cutting-edge 2011 but it feels like 1984 all over again.
As the following educational video illustrates, EMD stands for Electro-Muscular Disruption. That’s more government speak for “we can paralyze you for several minutes.”
So how serious is the government about acquiring the technology? Perhaps this will provide some indication. Correspondence between the inventor of the device and Paul S. Ruwaldt of DHS’s Science and Technology Directorate, Office of Research and Development, appears to have been scrubbed from the Internet. A link to the letters in the Times article and an article at Prison Planet both result in a 404 error, “The page cannot be found.” A video by Lamperd Less Lethal, Inc., the manufacturer of the EMD Safety Bracelet, has also been removed.
Fortunately, the Times article provides a one-sentence quote from a letter by Ruwaldt as an artifact. That sentence, which states “it isconceivable to envision a use [of the EMD bracelet] to improve air security, on passenger planes,” speaks volumes.
Chancellor Merkel hit with criminal complaint for being “glad” OBL is dead
The world is officially nuts. I’m not sure how else you classify what follows. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany recently remarked on the death of mass murderer Osama bin Laden saying was “glad” he’d been killed. That prompted the following from a German judge:
But Hamburg judge Heinz Uthmann went even further. He alleges that the chancellor’s statement was nothing short of illegal, and filed a criminal complaint against Merkel midweek, the daily Hamburger Morgenpost reported Friday.
“I am a law-abiding citizen and as a judge, sworn to justice and law,” the 54-year-old told the paper, adding that Merkel’s words were “tacky and undignified.”
In his two-page document, Uthmann, a judge for 21 years, cites section 140 of the German Criminal Code, which forbids the “rewarding and approving” of crimes. In this case, Merkel endorsed a “homicide,” Uthmann claimed. The violation is punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment or a fine.
“For the daughter of a Christian pastor, the comment is astonishing and at odds with the values of human dignity, charity and the rule of law,” Uthmann told the newspaper.
Of course the judge is assuming it’s a “homicide” (certainly no proof exists that’s the case) and thus a criminal act. In fact, the Geneva Conventions will clearly show otherwise. Obviously he files his complaint with nothing more than his opinion as a basis.
So you say, it’s one extremist view, why get excited about it?
While the judge’s reaction may seem extreme, his sentiments are apparently shared by 64 percent of the German population. That was the proportion of Germans who said bin Laden’s death was “no reason to rejoice” in a poll published by broadcaster ARD on Friday.
Germany – never a bastion of human rights or individual freedoms – continues to live up to its past with a new extremist but pacifist twist. This is an example of absurdity masquerading as reason, extremism as normalcy and stupidity as compassion.
Everyone who loves freedom and hates mass murderers should be “glad” Osama bin Laden has been killed. He was a monster, just like one which once ruled the land this puffed up pratt Uthman lives in. As much as Germans claim to have been “disgusted” with the “jubilation” over OBL’s death, nonsense like this does them no favor. The disgust on this side of the Atlantic for a country that assaults free speech and protects the memory of a mass murderer by going after those who express satisfaction at his demise isn’t one that I or most anyone here would ever care to live in.
[HT: Tom W]
—
Bruce McQuain blogs at Questions and Observations (QandO), Blackfive, the Washington Examiner and the Green Room. Follow him on Twitter: @McQandO
But Hamburg judge Heinz Uthmann went even further. He alleges that the chancellor’s statement was nothing short of illegal, and filed a criminal complaint against Merkel midweek, the daily Hamburger Morgenpost reported Friday.
“I am a law-abiding citizen and as a judge, sworn to justice and law,” the 54-year-old told the paper, adding that Merkel’s words were “tacky and undignified.”
In his two-page document, Uthmann, a judge for 21 years, cites section 140 of the German Criminal Code, which forbids the “rewarding and approving” of crimes. In this case, Merkel endorsed a “homicide,” Uthmann claimed. The violation is punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment or a fine.
“For the daughter of a Christian pastor, the comment is astonishing and at odds with the values of human dignity, charity and the rule of law,” Uthmann told the newspaper.
Of course the judge is assuming it’s a “homicide” (certainly no proof exists that’s the case) and thus a criminal act. In fact, the Geneva Conventions will clearly show otherwise. Obviously he files his complaint with nothing more than his opinion as a basis.
So you say, it’s one extremist view, why get excited about it?
While the judge’s reaction may seem extreme, his sentiments are apparently shared by 64 percent of the German population. That was the proportion of Germans who said bin Laden’s death was “no reason to rejoice” in a poll published by broadcaster ARD on Friday.
Germany – never a bastion of human rights or individual freedoms – continues to live up to its past with a new extremist but pacifist twist. This is an example of absurdity masquerading as reason, extremism as normalcy and stupidity as compassion.
Everyone who loves freedom and hates mass murderers should be “glad” Osama bin Laden has been killed. He was a monster, just like one which once ruled the land this puffed up pratt Uthman lives in. As much as Germans claim to have been “disgusted” with the “jubilation” over OBL’s death, nonsense like this does them no favor. The disgust on this side of the Atlantic for a country that assaults free speech and protects the memory of a mass murderer by going after those who express satisfaction at his demise isn’t one that I or most anyone here would ever care to live in.
[HT: Tom W]
—
Bruce McQuain blogs at Questions and Observations (QandO), Blackfive, the Washington Examiner and the Green Room. Follow him on Twitter: @McQandO
Bush built the “gun” that killed Osama, Obama just pulled the trigger
Sometimes something is written which has you shaking your head in both wonder and disgust as you read it. Michael Hirsh manages that in his National Journal article entitled “Obama’s War” where he states:
Ever so gingerly, even as they praised President Obama’s success against Osama bin Laden, some former senior Bush administration officials have sought to take a little credit for the mission themselves. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, interviewed by MSNBC this week, even called the operation “a good story for continuity across two presidencies.”
That assessment couldn’t be further from the truth.
In fact, in a convoluted way, he’s right – the major kudos should go to the Bush administration.
Look, you expect a little cheerleading concerning the killing of Osama because of the desperate desire by the left to make Obama into something he’s simply not – the steely eyed Commander-in-Chief solely responsible for the result of the bin Laden raid.
But any impartial observer who knows a thing or two about how taking down someone like OBL occurs simply knows that’s not the case.
Given, Osama bin Laden was killed on Obama’s watch. He gave the order. Good for him, and thank you for making the decision. But let’s be real – it wasn’t much of a decision to make. This was America’s most wanted – heck, he was the West’s most wanted. How do you not make that decision?
But Hirsh, goes off into history revision-land in an attempt to give all the credit to Obama and none to Bush. He seems to understand that making the decision really isn’t that special so he attempts to rewrite recent history in such a way that he can, one assumes, credibly make the claim that this was all Obama. He, among a long line of journalists who may know politics, but have little knowledge of intelligence operations, makes a hash of his attempt. He attempts to convince us the only thing Obama didn’t inherit from Bush was anything to do with taking out bin Laden.
Hirsh pitches this:
From his first great public moment when, as a state senator, he called Iraq a “dumb war,” Obama indicated that he thought that George W. Bush had badly misconceived the challenge of 9/11. And very quickly upon taking office as president, Obama reoriented the war back to where, in the view of many experts, it always belonged. He discarded the idea of a “global war on terror” that conflated all terror threats from al-Qaida to Hamas to Hezbollah. Obama replaced it with a covert, laserlike focus on al-Qaida and its spawn.
This reorientation was part of Obama’s reset of America’s relations with the world. Bush, having gradually expanded his definition of the war to include all Islamic “extremists,” had condemned the United States to a kind of permanent war, one that Americans had to fight all but alone because no one else agreed on such a broadly defined enemy. (Hezbollah and Hamas, for example, arguably had legitimate political aims that al-Qaida did not, which is one reason they distanced themselves from bin Laden.) In Obama’s view, only by focusing narrowly on true transnational terrorism, and winning back all of the natural allies that the United States had lost over the previous decade, could he achieve America’s goal of uniting the world around the goal of extinguishing al-Qaida.
Very quickly after taking the presidency he “reoriented the war back to where … it always belonged?”
Nonsense. In Iraq – the”dumb” war – Obama followed the Bush plan to the letter, not changing a thing. Nothing. It still continues down the Bush timeline.
In Afghanistan, where Obama said we should be fighting, he actually surged conventional troops, and not to hunt al-Qaeda. Instead the focus of the surge were the Taliban. Again, the same focus the Bush administration had and one upon which Obama doubled down. So much for that laserlike focus on al-Qaeda.
And unfortunately for Hirsh’s narrative, the focus on al-Qaeda was already in place and functioning when Obama took office. We immediately learned, upon hearing of bin Laden’s death, that the beginning threads of intelligence came from interrogations in secret CIA prisons 4 years ago. Prisons which no longer exist under Obama, nor would have existed had he been president on 9/11. Where was Mr. Obama 4 years ago?
We also know that during the Bush administration, our intelligence community was put through a major overhaul that has yielded much better, fresher and actionable intelligence – all of which Obama “inherited.” Drone strikes generated by fresh actionable intelligence didn’t start on Mr. Obama’s watch.
Finally, a robust Special Operations Force command was created by, oh my, the “dark knight” – Donald Rumsfeld.
At the time of the Sept. 11 attacks, special operations – Navy SEALs, Army Green Berets and Delta Force, and Air Force AC-130 gunships – were generally neglected. The previous Clinton administration had not called on them to go after bin Laden or his network.
All that changed under Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld: Green Berets led the initial invasion of Afghanistan. Joint Special Operations Command enlarged and expanded its manhunting skills worldwide. The Marine Corps created its first special forces command.
“We increased the size of special operations forces,” said former Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican and former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. “We obviously increased their funding for new technical capabilities.”
One key move was to make Special Operations Command a “supported” command, not just one that did the bidding of other commands, but could plan and execute battles.
“Rumsfeld elevated special operations to where they had field command empowerment, which is something they never had before,” Mr. Hunter said. “We increased generally across the board the size and the capability of special operation commands. … We made them more robust than they were.”
Shocking, I know, but then the media cheerleaders have never been particularly concerned with facts and history when they have a narrative to peddle.
It was Bush and Rumsfeld who built the organization that eventually got bin Laden:
President George W. Bush’s war on terrorism translated into robust spending on what are affectionately called “snake eaters.”
Special Operations Command’s budget grew from $2.3 billion in 2001 to nearly $10 billion today. Manpower expanded from 45,500 to 61,500.
“It’s an order of magnitude better,” said Adm. Worthington. “The training these guys are getting, it’s 10 times what we were getting when I went through. They’re getting training right now that makes them the best in the world.”
And it’s first success in getting a high profile al-Qaeda member didn’t come last Sunday. It came in 2006, something I’m sure Mr. Hirsh would find an inconvenient fact:
In Iraq and Afghanistan, the Joint Special Operations Command has teamed with aviation units, CIA officers and agents of the eavesdropping National Security Agency to form potent manhunting groups.
This fusion first gained wide public notice in 2006, when the command, then led by Army Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, hunted down Abu Musab Zarqawi, a particularly deadly al Qaeda terrorist in Iraq.
That is the “gun” Mr. Obama inherited from Mr. Bush. And it had been fired a number of times successfully well before Mr. Obama ever darkened the entrance to the Oval Office.
Oh, and Mr. Hirsh? Even the Obama White House isn’t buying your claptrap theory:
An Obama White House official told reporters that killing bin Laden was the result of years of work.
“This remarkable achievement could not have happened without persistent effort and careful planning over many years,” the official said. “Our national security professionals did a superb job.”
Indeed.
Yes, Mr. Hirsh, Obama got Osama – but he pulled the trigger of the gun built and loaded by the Bush administration, and whether you like it or not, there’s simply no question about that.
—
Bruce McQuain blogs at Questions and Observations (QandO), Blackfive, the Washington Examiner and the Green Room. Follow him on Twitter: @McQandO
Ever so gingerly, even as they praised President Obama’s success against Osama bin Laden, some former senior Bush administration officials have sought to take a little credit for the mission themselves. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, interviewed by MSNBC this week, even called the operation “a good story for continuity across two presidencies.”
That assessment couldn’t be further from the truth.
In fact, in a convoluted way, he’s right – the major kudos should go to the Bush administration.
Look, you expect a little cheerleading concerning the killing of Osama because of the desperate desire by the left to make Obama into something he’s simply not – the steely eyed Commander-in-Chief solely responsible for the result of the bin Laden raid.
But any impartial observer who knows a thing or two about how taking down someone like OBL occurs simply knows that’s not the case.
Given, Osama bin Laden was killed on Obama’s watch. He gave the order. Good for him, and thank you for making the decision. But let’s be real – it wasn’t much of a decision to make. This was America’s most wanted – heck, he was the West’s most wanted. How do you not make that decision?
But Hirsh, goes off into history revision-land in an attempt to give all the credit to Obama and none to Bush. He seems to understand that making the decision really isn’t that special so he attempts to rewrite recent history in such a way that he can, one assumes, credibly make the claim that this was all Obama. He, among a long line of journalists who may know politics, but have little knowledge of intelligence operations, makes a hash of his attempt. He attempts to convince us the only thing Obama didn’t inherit from Bush was anything to do with taking out bin Laden.
Hirsh pitches this:
From his first great public moment when, as a state senator, he called Iraq a “dumb war,” Obama indicated that he thought that George W. Bush had badly misconceived the challenge of 9/11. And very quickly upon taking office as president, Obama reoriented the war back to where, in the view of many experts, it always belonged. He discarded the idea of a “global war on terror” that conflated all terror threats from al-Qaida to Hamas to Hezbollah. Obama replaced it with a covert, laserlike focus on al-Qaida and its spawn.
This reorientation was part of Obama’s reset of America’s relations with the world. Bush, having gradually expanded his definition of the war to include all Islamic “extremists,” had condemned the United States to a kind of permanent war, one that Americans had to fight all but alone because no one else agreed on such a broadly defined enemy. (Hezbollah and Hamas, for example, arguably had legitimate political aims that al-Qaida did not, which is one reason they distanced themselves from bin Laden.) In Obama’s view, only by focusing narrowly on true transnational terrorism, and winning back all of the natural allies that the United States had lost over the previous decade, could he achieve America’s goal of uniting the world around the goal of extinguishing al-Qaida.
Very quickly after taking the presidency he “reoriented the war back to where … it always belonged?”
Nonsense. In Iraq – the”dumb” war – Obama followed the Bush plan to the letter, not changing a thing. Nothing. It still continues down the Bush timeline.
In Afghanistan, where Obama said we should be fighting, he actually surged conventional troops, and not to hunt al-Qaeda. Instead the focus of the surge were the Taliban. Again, the same focus the Bush administration had and one upon which Obama doubled down. So much for that laserlike focus on al-Qaeda.
And unfortunately for Hirsh’s narrative, the focus on al-Qaeda was already in place and functioning when Obama took office. We immediately learned, upon hearing of bin Laden’s death, that the beginning threads of intelligence came from interrogations in secret CIA prisons 4 years ago. Prisons which no longer exist under Obama, nor would have existed had he been president on 9/11. Where was Mr. Obama 4 years ago?
We also know that during the Bush administration, our intelligence community was put through a major overhaul that has yielded much better, fresher and actionable intelligence – all of which Obama “inherited.” Drone strikes generated by fresh actionable intelligence didn’t start on Mr. Obama’s watch.
Finally, a robust Special Operations Force command was created by, oh my, the “dark knight” – Donald Rumsfeld.
At the time of the Sept. 11 attacks, special operations – Navy SEALs, Army Green Berets and Delta Force, and Air Force AC-130 gunships – were generally neglected. The previous Clinton administration had not called on them to go after bin Laden or his network.
All that changed under Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld: Green Berets led the initial invasion of Afghanistan. Joint Special Operations Command enlarged and expanded its manhunting skills worldwide. The Marine Corps created its first special forces command.
“We increased the size of special operations forces,” said former Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican and former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. “We obviously increased their funding for new technical capabilities.”
One key move was to make Special Operations Command a “supported” command, not just one that did the bidding of other commands, but could plan and execute battles.
“Rumsfeld elevated special operations to where they had field command empowerment, which is something they never had before,” Mr. Hunter said. “We increased generally across the board the size and the capability of special operation commands. … We made them more robust than they were.”
Shocking, I know, but then the media cheerleaders have never been particularly concerned with facts and history when they have a narrative to peddle.
It was Bush and Rumsfeld who built the organization that eventually got bin Laden:
President George W. Bush’s war on terrorism translated into robust spending on what are affectionately called “snake eaters.”
Special Operations Command’s budget grew from $2.3 billion in 2001 to nearly $10 billion today. Manpower expanded from 45,500 to 61,500.
“It’s an order of magnitude better,” said Adm. Worthington. “The training these guys are getting, it’s 10 times what we were getting when I went through. They’re getting training right now that makes them the best in the world.”
And it’s first success in getting a high profile al-Qaeda member didn’t come last Sunday. It came in 2006, something I’m sure Mr. Hirsh would find an inconvenient fact:
In Iraq and Afghanistan, the Joint Special Operations Command has teamed with aviation units, CIA officers and agents of the eavesdropping National Security Agency to form potent manhunting groups.
This fusion first gained wide public notice in 2006, when the command, then led by Army Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, hunted down Abu Musab Zarqawi, a particularly deadly al Qaeda terrorist in Iraq.
That is the “gun” Mr. Obama inherited from Mr. Bush. And it had been fired a number of times successfully well before Mr. Obama ever darkened the entrance to the Oval Office.
Oh, and Mr. Hirsh? Even the Obama White House isn’t buying your claptrap theory:
An Obama White House official told reporters that killing bin Laden was the result of years of work.
“This remarkable achievement could not have happened without persistent effort and careful planning over many years,” the official said. “Our national security professionals did a superb job.”
Indeed.
Yes, Mr. Hirsh, Obama got Osama – but he pulled the trigger of the gun built and loaded by the Bush administration, and whether you like it or not, there’s simply no question about that.
—
Bruce McQuain blogs at Questions and Observations (QandO), Blackfive, the Washington Examiner and the Green Room. Follow him on Twitter: @McQandO
Amish Solve Energy Crisis! (Well almost)
Home Wind Turbine – Generate Free Energy Using Home Wind Generators
It is interesting to discover how you can generate free electricity as you can save a whole lot on electrical expenses. Let us look into a couple of great environmentally friendly ways to make electricity with the use of a home wind turbine. You can choose to install this system into your home or even for your business place. Base on statistics, the amount of greenhouse gases out there has been increasing drastically. Simultaneously, we are using up more of our resources that we can’t replace every single day. The use of home wind turbines can help in putting an end to such negative activities.
Alternative energy solutions such as the use of home wind turbines are becoming increasingly popular in light of ever-escalating energy costs as they relate to fossil fuel, or else known as ‘non-renewable’, resources. With the price of a barrel of oil, for example, rising on consistent basis, it would seem a better idea indeed to start converting to alternatives sources of energy.
Home wind turbine depends on the wind to operate. Wind energy is a natural resource that can never be depleted. As a result, it is known that home wind generators has the power to create free supplies of usable electricity from the natural wind energy. Adding to that, this energy system is environmental friendly to our planet. Relating to that, it can also help to keep our planet a greener and healthier place to live in.
The way to generating free energy is by implementing a home wind turbine into your home, and that isn’t a difficult task. There are a lot of qualified professionals out there that will do an excellent work for you. Finding a professional is as simple as going online. The professionals will always quote you an estimated price so that you can decide on making the investment. Alternatively, if you wish to save more money and believe that you can manage the installation by yourself, a home wind turbine kit is what you need. This kit is not really a type of equipment you can order from a general hardware store. You will have to do some searching. The internet can be a very useful tool to help you work out where to get an ideal kit. In fact, you can build your very own home wind generators with just a few simple tools that can be easily found around your house.
The use of a home wind turbine is so economical and efficient. Being made in such a way that it does not emit any dangerous gasses into our environment is even more of a reason to truly consider this implementation. Find out more about the variety of attractive benefits you can take full advantage of so that you can put it in place. You have so much to gain and nothing to lose when you implement a wind turbine in your house.
Alternative power solutions with wind turbines are more accessible these days than ever before. And given that stocks of non-renewable energy sources such as oil and natural gas will eventually run out, it only makes sense to start switching to alternative energy sources such as the home wind turbines.
It is interesting to discover how you can generate free electricity as you can save a whole lot on electrical expenses. Let us look into a couple of great environmentally friendly ways to make electricity with the use of a home wind turbine. You can choose to install this system into your home or even for your business place. Base on statistics, the amount of greenhouse gases out there has been increasing drastically. Simultaneously, we are using up more of our resources that we can’t replace every single day. The use of home wind turbines can help in putting an end to such negative activities.
Alternative energy solutions such as the use of home wind turbines are becoming increasingly popular in light of ever-escalating energy costs as they relate to fossil fuel, or else known as ‘non-renewable’, resources. With the price of a barrel of oil, for example, rising on consistent basis, it would seem a better idea indeed to start converting to alternatives sources of energy.
Home wind turbine depends on the wind to operate. Wind energy is a natural resource that can never be depleted. As a result, it is known that home wind generators has the power to create free supplies of usable electricity from the natural wind energy. Adding to that, this energy system is environmental friendly to our planet. Relating to that, it can also help to keep our planet a greener and healthier place to live in.
The way to generating free energy is by implementing a home wind turbine into your home, and that isn’t a difficult task. There are a lot of qualified professionals out there that will do an excellent work for you. Finding a professional is as simple as going online. The professionals will always quote you an estimated price so that you can decide on making the investment. Alternatively, if you wish to save more money and believe that you can manage the installation by yourself, a home wind turbine kit is what you need. This kit is not really a type of equipment you can order from a general hardware store. You will have to do some searching. The internet can be a very useful tool to help you work out where to get an ideal kit. In fact, you can build your very own home wind generators with just a few simple tools that can be easily found around your house.
The use of a home wind turbine is so economical and efficient. Being made in such a way that it does not emit any dangerous gasses into our environment is even more of a reason to truly consider this implementation. Find out more about the variety of attractive benefits you can take full advantage of so that you can put it in place. You have so much to gain and nothing to lose when you implement a wind turbine in your house.
Alternative power solutions with wind turbines are more accessible these days than ever before. And given that stocks of non-renewable energy sources such as oil and natural gas will eventually run out, it only makes sense to start switching to alternative energy sources such as the home wind turbines.
Bilderberg-Meetings in Switzerland
Since the Financial Times Deutschland’s publication of an article on the next Bilderberg- conference being held in St. Moritz, Switzerland, various preparations for protest activities have been made. In order to make it clear, to these top-shots of politics, economy and international organizations that such secret meetings are not welcome in Switzerland, we would like to encourage everyone to come to St. Moritz and make their voices heard against this “shadow- world government”.
At the time of the conference- given the Bilderbergers having the audacity to actually show up in Switzerland- various journalists, reporters and activists will gather outside of the hotel premisses in an effort to shed some light upon the shadowy conducts of this secretive club. preparations concerning lodging, hotels, campgrounds, rallies, a press center and open-air events are under way. Freeman of the ‘Alles Schall und Rauch’-Blog, Mark Anderson of American Free Press (AFP), Daniel Estulin, Jürgen Elsässer, Charlie Skelton, the swiss WeAreChange-Chapter, Luke Rudkowski and Charlie Veitch, representatives of the Alpenparlament, and music artist such as Killez More and ‘die Bandbreite’ will gather and demand more transparency in politics. We hope to be able to rent a bus on Saturday, 11th of June, leaving from Zurich to St. Moritz for spontaneous accompanies. Further we are busy gathering equipment, establishing a press center allowing video live- streaming and organizing and setting up a performance stage. As usual we appreciate any support for all of these projects to be accomplices.
Power to the People!
(also see WeAreChange.org @ the Bilderberg-Meetings in Switzerland)
At the time of the conference- given the Bilderbergers having the audacity to actually show up in Switzerland- various journalists, reporters and activists will gather outside of the hotel premisses in an effort to shed some light upon the shadowy conducts of this secretive club. preparations concerning lodging, hotels, campgrounds, rallies, a press center and open-air events are under way. Freeman of the ‘Alles Schall und Rauch’-Blog, Mark Anderson of American Free Press (AFP), Daniel Estulin, Jürgen Elsässer, Charlie Skelton, the swiss WeAreChange-Chapter, Luke Rudkowski and Charlie Veitch, representatives of the Alpenparlament, and music artist such as Killez More and ‘die Bandbreite’ will gather and demand more transparency in politics. We hope to be able to rent a bus on Saturday, 11th of June, leaving from Zurich to St. Moritz for spontaneous accompanies. Further we are busy gathering equipment, establishing a press center allowing video live- streaming and organizing and setting up a performance stage. As usual we appreciate any support for all of these projects to be accomplices.
Power to the People!
(also see WeAreChange.org @ the Bilderberg-Meetings in Switzerland)
Fannie Mae Coming Back to the Trough
This is what happens when the government gets involved in business. Fannie Me is what is known as a government sponsored enterprise. That means that when they make money they get to keep it and pass the profits along to their executives. The beauty of it is, when they lose money, the executives still get rich and the taxpayers bail them out. Naturally, they always lose money. And yet again, they’re coming back for more.
Fannie Mae reported a net loss of $6.5 billion for the first quarter as a weakening housing market dashed hopes that the company had stabilized.
Fannie said Friday it would ask the government for a fresh taxpayer infusion of $6.2 billion after paying dividends to the Treasury. The loss follows net income of $73 million during the previous quarter.
Fannie’s loss came as it increased its loan-loss reserves after it revised down its home-price forecast for 2011, and took bigger-than-expected losses on the sale of foreclosed properties. The mortgage-finance giant booked $11 billion in credit-related expenses, up from $4.3 billion last quarter.
“Right now, we’re not seeing a lot of good things in the residential real-estate markets,” said David Hisey, acting chief financial officer for Fannie Mae.
Is there anything government doesn’t get involved in that it doesn’t screw up? Seeing that we’re in a double dip housing recession, I expect this to get worse before it gets better.
Fannie Mae reported a net loss of $6.5 billion for the first quarter as a weakening housing market dashed hopes that the company had stabilized.
Fannie said Friday it would ask the government for a fresh taxpayer infusion of $6.2 billion after paying dividends to the Treasury. The loss follows net income of $73 million during the previous quarter.
Fannie’s loss came as it increased its loan-loss reserves after it revised down its home-price forecast for 2011, and took bigger-than-expected losses on the sale of foreclosed properties. The mortgage-finance giant booked $11 billion in credit-related expenses, up from $4.3 billion last quarter.
“Right now, we’re not seeing a lot of good things in the residential real-estate markets,” said David Hisey, acting chief financial officer for Fannie Mae.
Is there anything government doesn’t get involved in that it doesn’t screw up? Seeing that we’re in a double dip housing recession, I expect this to get worse before it gets better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)