| Tuesday, February 21, 2006 |  |
| Black Box Voting | 0 comments |
| 21 Feb 2006 @ 13:53 Please take action and forward to your contacts. This has national implications. For the first time ever, we have the opportunity to subpoena key voting industry witnesses to get them under oath in front of a senate hearing to investigate what the Sam Hill they were doing when they created and recommended tamper-friendly voting systems. We're sure by now you're aware that Calif. did an about face and certified Diebold's entire line of products -- hackable touch screens, hackable optical scanners, and extremely hackable GEMS tabulators -- despite 100% public opposition and numerous attacks proving the sytems' fatal flaws and insecurities. But this isn't just California. Get these people under oath in California, and you get them questioned for the whole nation. Everything is at stake. We are putting some very important phone numbers and emails here along with simple instructions for what we all need to do. We have everything to lose if we don't all take a few simple steps immediately. EVERY STATE is experiencing issues with secret, privatized voting equipment examined by mysterious private contractors who won't answer any questions at all about what they do. Here is the most efficient, easiest strategy to counteract shoving illegal and insecure systems that we never asked for down our throats. This action is the culmination of years of hard-core work by Black Box Voting and others. JUST DO IT. Here are the simple, painless suggestions. See below for why they are so important. WHAT'S DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS CALL TO ACTION: 1) All we need is three out of five senators. 2) All five are interested and willing to listen 3) This is the FIRST time Black Box Voting has issued a call to action. HERE IS THE CONTACT LIST FOR THE FIVE RULES COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Urge support for subpoenas of election industry and certification insiders. (Among those who chickened out of testimony on Feb. 16: Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia and Hart Intercivic; Ciber labs, Wyle labs, and voting system examiners). IT'S ONLY 5 EMAILS/FAXES/CALLS. MAKE THEM ALL. Senator Don Perata (Chair) D (916) 651-4009 District office (510) 286-1333 Senator.Perata@sen.ca.gov Fax (510) 286-3885 Perata Senator Jim Battin (Vice-Chair) R (916) 651-4037 Jim.Battin@sen.ca.gov Fax: (951) 653-9524 Battin Senator Roy Ashburn R (916) 651-4018 senator.ashburn@sen.ca.gov Fax: (661) 323-0446 Ashburn Senator Debra Bowen D - She is on the rules committee and is also the chairperson of the Senate Elections Committee. EMAIL ONLY Debra@debrabowen.com - (Ms. Bowen is mounting this case and will be busy preparing, emails are welcomed-- See below*) Fax (310) 318-6733 Bowen Senator Gilbert Cedillo D (916) 651-4022 Fax (916) 327-8817 Cedillo This is about volume of calls logged, emails sent. Make the contacts and make sure this goes out to your list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ WHAT TO SAY: Be concise, be polite, be professional. Here's your message: You want Rules Committee support for subpoenas of election industry and certification insiders to answer the Elections Committee's questions about voting machine programming, examination and certification. A sample letter is provided below in this email. That's it. Short and simple. Polite, professional, firm. Short clear message. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SAMPLE LETTER Senator ____, California Senate Election Committee Dear Senator ____, I urge you to take a courageous stand to issue port subpeonas to key representatives and officials from Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia and Hart Intercivic, as well as Wyle and Ciber Testing Labs and state voting system examiners who fail to appear for your hearings on this matter. I also urge you to subpoena documents as needed, including the non- disclosure agreements signed between examiners and vendors, and all other documents needed to assess the integrity of the certification process. Voters must be able to ensure that voting systems are secure from tampering, either by outsiders or by insiders. If the citizenry cannot see for itself that elections are secure, that our votes are being counted as we cast them, it is only a matter of time before the very fabric of our nation is torn to pieces. Flawed, hackable systems have been approved that violate FEC guidelines. Some of these systems are so deeply flawed that they defy common sense. It is imperative that the elections industry insiders who were party to the design, examination and recommendation of these systems appear before California's Senate Election Committee in open hearings under oath to answer questions and address these serious concerns. Sincerely, [name] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FROM CALIF. SENATE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON BOWEN: "We are going to need an enormous amount of people power in the next couple of weeks. Together we can change this whole pathetic mess. Let's stand up for our democracy RIGHT NOW." "Email is great because it is easy for us to log and report -- and we can actually prove how many emails we've received!" "Please email me in support of issuing subpoenas rather than calling you will save my staff a great deal of time logging calls, and you know what kind work we have to do right now. You can always call and fax later!" Debra Bowen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CLICK HERE TO READ MORE More > |
| Monday, February 20, 2006 | |
| Kurt Vonnegut on the State of the Union: Custodians of Chaos | 0 comments |
 20 Feb 2006 @ 08:09Kurt Vonnegut on the State of the Union: Custodians of Chaos Custodians of chaos In this exclusive extract from his forthcoming memoirs, Kurt Vonnegut is horrified by the hypocrisy in contemporary US politics Saturday January 21, 2006 Guardian "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you." A lot of people think Jesus said that, because it is so much the sort of thing Jesus liked to say. But it was actually said by Confucius, a Chinese philosopher, five hundred years before there was that greatest and most humane of human beings, named Jesus Christ. The Chinese also gave us, via Marco Polo, pasta and the formula for gunpowder. The Chinese were so dumb they only used gunpowder for fireworks. And everybody was so dumb back then that nobody in either hemisphere even knew that there was another one. We've sure come a long way since then. Sometimes I wish we hadn't. I hate H-bombs and the Jerry Springer Show But back to people like Confucius and Jesus and my son the doctor, Mark, each of whom have said in their own way how we could behave more humanely and maybe make the world a less painful place. One of my favourite humans is Eugene Debs, from Terre Haute in my native state of Indiana. Get a load of this. Eugene Debs, who died back in 1926, when I was not yet four, ran five times as the Socialist party candidate for president, winning 900,000 votes, almost 6 percent of the popular vote, in 1912, if you can imagine such a ballot. He had this to say while campaigning: "As long as there is a lower class, I am in it. "As long as there is a criminal element, I am of it. "As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free." CLicK TO READ His BOOK EXCERPT More > |
| Thursday, February 16, 2006 | |
| Excerpt: How to Steal an Election | 0 comments |
| 16 Feb 2006 @ 16:41 [link] By Andrew Gumbel, AlterNet. Posted February 15, 2006. Americans cling to an idealized image of our political integrity, but a look at how we run our elections tells a very different tale. [Editor's Note: This is an edited excerpt from Steal This Vote by Andrew Gumbel, published by Nation Books.] If you do everything, you'll win. -- Lyndon Johnson A few days before the November 2004 election, Jimmy Carter was asked what would happen if, instead of flying to Zambia or Venezuela or East Timor, his widely respected international election monitoring team was invited to turn its attention to the United States. His answer was stunningly blunt. Not only would the voting system be regarded as a failure, he said, but the shortcomings were so egregious the Carter Center would never agree to monitor an election there in the first place. "We wouldn't think of it," the former president told a radio interviewer. "The American political system wouldn't measure up to any sort of international standards, for several reasons." What, after all, was to be done with a country whose newest voting machines, unlike Venezuela's, couldn't even perform recounts? A country where candidates, in contrast to the more promising emerging democracies of the Caucasus or the Balkans, were denied equal, unpaid access to the media? There were a number of reasons, in the sharply partisan atmosphere surrounding the Bush-Kerry race, to wonder whether campaign conditions didn't smack more of the Third World than the First. Every day, newspapers recounted stories of registration forms being found in garbage cans, or of voter rolls padded with the names of noncitizens, fictional characters, household pets, and the dearly departed. The Chicago Tribune, a paper that knows its voter fraud, having won a Pulitzer for its work on the infamous Daley machine, found 181,000 dead people on the registration lists of six key battleground states. READ MORE HERE |
| Saturday, November 19, 2005 | |
| Bay Area Filipino-American authors give voice to their unique culture | 12 comments |
| 19 Nov 2005 @ 00:03 Bay Area Filipino-American authors give voice to their unique culture By Jonathan Jones, STAFF WRITER Inside Bay Area FREMONT — As Teresita Bautista sees it, before Iraq, there was Vietnam. More importantly, before Vietnam, there was the Philippines. Bautista was referring to the war between the United States and the Philippines from 1899 through 1913, once known in the U.S. as the "Philippine Insurrection," now more accurately known as the Philippine-American War. Sadly, few details from that war have made their way into American history, an issue predicted as early as the 1900s by the Chicago Chronicle, when it published a political cartoon called, "The Forbidden Book," showing U.S. President William McKinley refusing to give Uncle Sam the key to a padlocked book entitled, "True History of the War in the Philippines." The cartoon, now reprinted in "The Forbidden Book: The Philippine-American War in Political Cartoons," is a haunting reminder that history has often been written by colonizers, who, in this case, sought to portray Filipinos in the late 19th century as savages unable to rule themselves who needed to be civilized and Christianized. "We were the white man's burden," Bautista said. "We were were to be bathed in Christianity." Today, Bautista said a war that saw the deployment of 127,000 U.S. troops to the Philippines and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Filipinos between 1899 and 1902 is barely mentioned in American history textbooks, if at all. Fortunately, over the last three decades, Bautista, along with other Filipino-Americans, have worked to tell the full history. Bautista, a member of the Filipino-American Historical National Society, was one of roughly a dozen Filipino-American writers who shared their work and told stories about their families and their history at the Filipino-American Cultural Arts Festival on Saturday at Fremont Main Library. Fremont resident Victoria Santos, a Filipino-American writer and one of the organizers of the event, said the event seeks to highlight second- and third-generation Filipino-American authors who can serve as role models for a younger generation of Filipino-Americans. Santos, who was born in the U.S., said the quest for identity as a Filipino-American is an on-going journey that never seems to stop for the 400,000 Filipinos living in the Bay Area. "When I was growing up in Chicago, we read Hemingway and James Joyce," Santos said. "I never had Filipino-American authors to read. Now we have a choice of Filipino-American authors, which is essential for young people. Now they have role models who speak to their issues." Saturday's events also included San Leandro resident Oscar Penaranda, author of "Seasons by the Bay." When asked to talk about Filipino culture, Penaranda said three values came to mind: "loob," "kapwa," and "paninindigan." Penaranda, who teaches Filipino to students at Logan High School, explained that "loob" means "it's what inside that counts," "kapwa" stresses the importance of shared human experiences, while "paninindigan," emphasizes the importance of personal conviction. Other works included a vignette from "Seven Card Stud with Seven Manags Wild: An Anthology Filipino-American Writings," read by Fremont resident Gloria Bacharach, who told the story of growing up in Merced and coming to terms with her heritage through her mother. More than 50 people attended the festival, which also included a showing of Eli Africa's, "Selling Songs in Leyte," winner of the best short-video documentary at the New York International Film Festival, as well as poetry readings by students from Logan High School. Jonathan Jones covers religious, ethnic and cultural issues for The Argus. He can be reached at (510) 353-7005, or jjones@angnewspapers.com. More > |
| Thursday, July 7, 2005 | |
| The So-Called "Brain Behind Bush": Guilty of Treason? | 1 comment |
| 7 Jul 2005 @ 17:02 The So-Called "Brain Behind Bush": Guilty of Treason? 'Karl Rove: Worse than Osama bin Laden' July 05, 2005 By Ted Rall, Yahoo NEW YORK--In war collaborators are more dangerous than enemy forces, for they betray with intimate knowledge in painful detail and demoralize by their cynical example. This explains why, at the end of occupations, the newly liberated exact vengeance upon their treasonous countrymen even they allow foreign troops to conduct an orderly withdrawal. If, as state-controlled media insists, there is such a creature as a Global War on Terrorism, our enemies are underground Islamist organizations allied with or ideologically similar to those that attacked us on 9/11. But who are the collaborators? The right points to critics like Michael Moore, yours truly, and Ward Churchill, the Colorado professor who points out the gaping chasm between America's high-falooting rhetoric and its historical record. But these bête noires are guilty only of the all-American actions of criticism and dissent, not to mention speaking uncomfortable truths to liars and deniers. As far as we know, no one on what passes for the "left" (which would be the center-right anywhere else) has betrayed the United States in the GWOT. No anti-Bush progressive has made common cause with Al Qaeda, Hamas, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan or any other officially designated "terrorist" group. No American liberal has handed over classified information or worked to undermine the CIA. But it now appears that Karl Rove, GOP golden boy, has done exactly that. Last week Time magazine turned over its reporter's notes to a special prosecutor assigned to learn who told Republican columnist Bob Novak that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. The revelation, which effectively ended Plame's CIA career and may have endangered her life, followed her husband Joe Wilson's publication of a New York Times op-ed piece that embarrassed the Bush Administration by debunking its claims that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium from Niger. Time's cowardly decision to break its promise to a confidential source has had one beneficial side effect: according to Newsweek, it indicates that Karl Rove himself made the call to Novak. One might have expected Rove, the master White House political strategist who engineered Bush's 2000 coup d'état and post-9/11 permanent war public relations campaign, to have ordered a flunky underling to carry out this act of high treason. But as the Arab saying goes, arrogance diminishes wisdom. Rove, whose gaping maw recently vomited forth that Democrats didn't care about 9/11, is atypically silent. He did talk to the Time reporter but "never knowingly disclosed classified information," claims his attorney. But there's circumstantial evidence to go along with Time's leaked notes. Ari Fleischer abruptly resigned as Bush's press secretary on May 16, 2003, about the same time the White House became aware of Ambassador Wilson's plans to go public. (Wilson's article appeared July 6.) Did Fleischer quit because he didn't want to act as spokesman for Rove's plan to betray CIA agent Plame? Another interesting coincidence: Novak published his Plame column on July 14, Fleischer's last day on the job. If Newsweek's report is accurate, Karl Rove is more morally repugnant and more anti-American than Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden, after all, has no affiliation with, and therefore no presumed loyalty to, the United States. Rove, on the other hand, is a U.S. citizen and, as deputy White House chief of staff, a high-ranking official of the U.S. government sworn to uphold and defend our nation, its laws and its interests. Yet he sold out America just to get even with Joe Wilson. Osama bin Laden, conversely, is loyal to his cause. He has never exposed an Al Qaeda agent's identity to the media. "[Knowingly revealing Plame's name and undercover status to the media]...is a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act and is punishable by as much as ten years in prison," notes the Washington Post. Unmasking an intelligent agent during a time of war, however, surely rises to giving aid and comfort to America's enemies--treason. Treason is punishable by execution under the United States Code. How far up the White House food chain does the rot of treason go? "Bush has always known how to keep Rove in his place," wrote Time in 2002 about a "symbiotic relationship" that dates to 1973. This isn't some rogue "plumbers" operation. Rove would never go it alone on a high-stakes action like Valerie Plame. It's a safe bet that other, higher-ranking figures in the Bush cabal--almost certainly Dick Cheney and possibly Bush himself--signed off before Rove called Novak. For the sake of national security, those involved should be removed from office at once. Rove and his collaborators should quickly resign and face prosecution for betraying their country, but given their sense of personal entitlement impeachment is probably the best we can hope for. Congress, and all Americans, should place patriotism ahead of party loyalty. More > |
| Tuesday, November 9, 2004 | |
| MYTHIC DIMENSIONS of ELECTION 04, HOPE FOR AMERICA | 1 comment |
| 9 Nov 2004 @ 20:50 MYTHIC DIMENSIONS of ELECTION 04, HOPE FOR AMERICA by Steve Nelson This is a mythic time. Every five hundred years the Phoenix dies in flames and is born anew from its ashes. An old order passes away and a new world is born. According to Egyptian tradition the new Phoenix alights first atop the "world tree," an obelisk in Heliopolis, the "City of the Sun" for the new era. The Italian Renaissance centered in Rome, was nourished by cultural ferment stirring through Florence, the "city of flowers." The center of political influence for current world renaissance is Washington, DC with its 555' obelisk, the Washington Monument. The impetus for social transformation is coming through New York City, a global cultural center and many believe future capital of the world. The cultural influences of the northern U.S. (yin) and the southern U.S. (yang) meld in Washington, DC. AMERICAN MYTHOS Five hundred years ago a Native American holy man, later called "the Messenger," received a vision that would shape the world for centuries to come. Degandiwidah saw an eagle perched in the top of a great fir tree whose branches covered the whole world. This tree had four roots extending in four directions and a giant serpent coiled about its base. Degandiwidah saw that each branch of the tree was a tribe and that all tribes are united. The tree became known as the Tree of Peace, and the philosophic code of self-governance inspired by the Messenger's vision was called the Great Law of Peace. Degandiwidah and his spokesman Hiawatha brought a simple message to the warring tribes of the now New England area of the United States. This message was illustrated by showing tribesmen how easily one arrow is broken while a bundle of arrows cannot be broken. So the eagle clutching arrows became the symbol of the Iroquois Confederacy, the first representative democracy in the western world. Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson drew from the Iroquois symbols and tradition to create the new American nation. One of the first US flags had a snake and fir tree with the caption "Don't tread on me." Franklin's "Join or Die" segmented serpent, the first political cartoon, was used to rally the colonies to unite. The serpent and the eagle are totems of America. America's founders drew inspiration from the Iroquois system of government yet one important ingredient was left out: While each tribe of the Iroquois Confederacy had an elected Chief and Clan Mother representative at the Longhouse Council, America now ignores the need for gender equal representation. In the Iroquois system, the Chief was spokesperson and the Clan Mother held power to "dehorn" the Chief if the went off track in representing the agreed tribal agenda. The removal of the Chief's horned helmet by the Clan Mother meant that he could not speak for the remainder of that council session. The Iroquois long ago created a balanced system of self government including proportional representation for women and men. (The Cherokee, an original Iroquoian tribe, added further balance to their political system by having both a war chief and a peace chief, like red and blue together.) Ideally, a man and a woman would be elected to represent each state in the U.S. Senate. Establishing a gender balanced political system might seem impossible in the current milieu if not for the very fact that the Clan Mother already holds power on the psychic level. Still the balance would be better if we institutionalized it. This after all is the time of the prophesied excess yang symbolized by the triple sixes of Revelation. This number of "a man" is the sum of numbers from one to thirty six, the numbers in the magic square of the Sun, a six by six grid of numbers adding the same in every row crosswise, up and down and diagonally. This cardinal yang number needs the balancing feminine number 1080 or 108 to be in balance, otherwise its "the beast." Ergo the biggest problem in our world is imbalance between yang and yin, masculine and feminine. Many elements of the United States government derive from the Iroquois system of government. According to Manly Palmer Hall (The Secret Teachings of All Ages), Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were initiated in an Iroquois ceremony called the Ritual of the Nine Sisters. This ceremony was so like a Masonic Ritual of the Nine Muses that they were convinced the Iroquois embodied the soul of this land. So the Iroquois Eagle clutching arrows for the tribes united became the symbol of the new American Nation. The US tripartite system with its checks and balances was adapted from the Iroquois Confederacy. Native Americans were first in democratic self-government. (Forgotten Founders by Bruce Johansen). The Iroquois society also had a strong influence on the creation of the USSR. This interesting turn of events came about through the writings of amateur sociologist Lewis Morgan. Morgan was deeply interested in the Iroquois, their social system and secret societies. He was especially impressed with the willingness of those whose gardens fared well to share with those who weren't so fortunate. All were taken care of in this society and none went hungry. While Morgan's books never caught on in 19th century America (the "robber baron era" here), they were popular in Europe where they came to the attention of Marx and Engels. Thus, the Iroquois society came to be a model for the communist ideal as expressed in the Communist Manifesto. This part of the American story is told in Thomas Henry's book Wilderness Messiah. The original vision that made America great has expanded now to include the world, and the United States is being called to realize its rightful place as a leader at the Round Table of nations. Steve Nelson Astro-Mythologist Astrology in Jungian tradition for understanding personal myths and realizing natural abilities. Birth Chart Interpretation Astrological Forecasting Relocation Charting Event Timing 2625 Bucknell Ave Charlotte NC- 28207 704-375-3759 More > |
| Monday, October 20, 2003 | |
| Wealth Doesn't Mean Free Press | 1 comment |
| 20 Oct 2003 @ 23:05 Wealth Doesn't Mean Free Press News24.com 10-20-3 PARIS (AFP) -- The richest countries in the world are not necessarily those with the freest media, and some countries are more respectful of such freedoms at home than abroad, a leading journalists' rights group said on Monday. Releasing its second World Press Freedom Ranking, the Paris-based group Reporters without Borders (RSF) also took the original step of rating some countries by their behaviour in territories under occupation. That left the US-led occupation authorities in Iraq at a mediocre rating of 135 out of 166 - even lower than the rating of 124 for the ousted regime of Saddam Hussein, and way below the ranking of 31 for the United States as a country. In similar vein, the RSF report put Israel at number 146 for its actions in the Palestinian territories, as against a ranking of 44 for Israel on its home turf. The report, based on a poll of journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists, put four northern European countries - Finland, Iceland, the Netherlands and Norway - at the top of its list, running neck and neck as the countries judged to have the freest press. North Korea was listed at the bottom, ranking 166 out of 166. Cuba was ranked second to worst at 165, and the report described the country as "the world's biggest prison for journalists." China was near the bottom, at 161. Selected rankings: 1 (tied) Finland, Iceland, The Netherlands and Norway (0.50 points) 5 (tied) Denmark, Trinidad and Tobago (1.00) 7 Belgium (1.17) 8 Germany (1.33) 9 Sweden (1.50) 10 Canada (1.83) 11 Latvia (2.25) 12 (tied) Czech Republic, Estonia, Slovakia, Switzerland (2.50) 16 Austria (2.75) 17 (tied) Ireland, Lithuania, New Zealand (2.83) 20 Slovenia (3.00) 26 France (4.17) 27 United Kingdom (4.25 31 United States (American territory) (6.00) 44 (tied) Israel (Israeli territory), Japan (8.00) 49 South Korea (9.17) 50 Australia (9.25) 53 Italy (9.75) 56 Hong-Kong (11.00) 71 Brazil (16.75) 74 Mexico (17.67) 79 Kenya (18.50) 103 Nigeria (31.50) 104 Malaysia (32.00) 108 Algeria (33.00) 110 Egypt, Indonesia (34.25) 115 Turkey (35.00) 122 United Arab Emirates, Jordan (37.00) 124 Iraq (37.50) 128 India, Pakistan (39.00) 130 Palestinian Authority (39.25) 134 Afghanistan (40.17) 135 United States of America (in Iraq) (41.00) 141 Zimbabwe (45.50) 146 Israel (Occupied Territories) (49.00) 147 Colombia (49.17) 148 Russia (49.50) 149 Tunisia (50.83) 150 Nepal (51.50) 151 Belarus (52.00) 152 Oman (57.75) 153 Libya (60.00) 154 Uzbekistan (61.50) 155 Syria (67.50) 156 Saudi Arabia (71.50) 157 Bhutan (77.33) 158 Turkmenistan (82.83) 159 Vietnam (89.17) 160 Iran (89.33) 161 China (91.25) 162 Eritrea (91.50) 163 Laos (94.83) 164 Myanmar (formerly Burma) (95.50) 165 Cuba (97.83) 166 North Korea (99.50) copyright Media24 Ltd. All rights reserved. More > |
| Friday, October 17, 2003 | |
| Arnold to Settle Lawsuits for Pennies on the Dollar? | 3 comments |
| 17 Oct 2003 @ 20:07 Updates on Arnold's Win Arnold to Settle Lawsuits for Pennies on the Dollar? Reported by Katherine Yurica [Editor's note: This article has been edited to reflect several word changes for clarification purposes.] The Yurica Report has learned that only three days after Mr. Schwarzenegger won his victory in California, an aide announced that the governor-elect intends to settle pending energy fraud lawsuits. This apparently includes the suit filed by Cruz Bustamante under the California statute, Civil Code section 17200, of the Unfair Practices Act. The purpose of the act “is to safeguard the public against the creation or perpetuation of monopolies and to foster and encourage competition” the Act expressly prohibits, “unfair, dishonest, deceptive, destructive, fraudulent and discriminatory practices by which fair and honest competition is destroyed or prevented.” According to news talk show host Bernie Ward of KGO radio, San Francisco, who reported the story Friday night on his radio show, (October 10th), Schwarzenegger's aid stated that the governor-elect's administration did not want to be saddled with someone else's lawsuits. The Unfair Practices Act, however, has provisions that require businesses who profit from unfair practices to pay the victims those profits. Although the Act does not authorize recovery of damages in a representative action, according to Hiliary N. Rowen, an attorney from the law firm of Thelen Reid & Priest, “the plaintiff—who need not have been harmed by the challenged conduct—may seek injunctive and restitutionary relief, including the disgorgement of profits on behalf of all those injured.” (See Hiliary Rowen's article).This provision would make the power companies, who profited an estimated $9 billion from the California energy scam, the losers. In the meantime, Claire Cooper of the Sacramento Bee reported Friday on another lawsuit in the Federal Court. She reported the judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals seemed skeptical of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) “ contention that it acted legally three years ago, when it relied on competition among energy wholesalers to determine the cost of California's power supply and did not require them to file the rates they would charge.” California sued FERC, claiming it is due a refund of $9 billion in gouged profits because the Federal Power Act didn't authorize FERC to approve a fluctuating marketbased rate structure. The question is, does the governor-elect intend to settle the federal suit also? Mr. Schwarzenegger's announcement to settle the lawsuits comes on the heels of an article written on the eve of the election by investigative reporter Greg Palast. Palast, whose reports appear on BBC television's Newsnight, said that the Los Angeles based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights uncovered Enron internal memos regarding Mr. Schwarzenegger's secret meeting in May 2001 with Kenneth Lay, the former CEO of Enron. The intent of the power company, according to Palast, was to sabotage the Davis-Bustamante plan to win back the $9 billion dollars in illegal profits earned by power moguls. The plan has worked so far. Clearly Mr. Schwarzenegger should be questioned about his agenda. More > |
| Tuesday, September 30, 2003 | |
| The Subpoenas are Coming! | 0 comments |
| 30 Sep 2003 @ 22:48 The Subpoenas are Coming Citing a provision of the Patriot Act, the FBI is sending letters to journalists telling them to secretly prepare to turn over their notes, e-mails and sources to the bureau. Should we throw out the First Amendment to nail a hacker? By Mark Rasch Sep 29 2003 05:00AM PT Frequent readers of this space know that I am no apologist for hackers like Adrian Lamo, who, in the guise of protection, access others' computer systems without authorization, and then publicize these vulnerabilities. When Lamo did this to the New York Times, he violated two of my cardinal rules: Don't make enemies with people appointed for life by the President of the United States; and don't make enemies of people who buy their ink by the gallon. Now, in the scope of prosecuting Lamo, the FBI is doing the hacker one better by violating both of these precepts in one fell swoop. The Bureau recently sent letters to a handful of reporters who have written stories about the Lamo case -- whether or not they have actually interviewed Lamo. The letters warn them to expect subpoenas for all documents relating to the hacker, including, apparently, their own notes, e-mails, impressions, interviews with third parties, independent investigations, privileged conversations and communications, off the record statements, and expense and travel reports related to stories about Lamo. In short, everything. The notices make no mention of the protections of the First Amendment, Department of Justice regulations that restrict the authority to subpoena information from journalists, or the New York law that creates a "newsman's shield" against disclosure of certain confidential information by reporters. Instead, the FBI has threatened to put these reporters in jail unless they agree to preserve all of these records while they obtain a subpoena for them under provisions amended by the USA-PATRIOT Act. Complete Story |
| Monday, August 4, 2003 | |
| Electronic Frontier Foundation Issues E-Voting Alert | 1 comment |
 4 Aug 2003 @ 21:57Electronic Frontier Foundation Issues E-Voting Alert Supports Verifiable Voting Systems to Prevent Election Fraud Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Advisory San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation issued an action alert this week warning that electronic voting machines installed without a verifiable paper audit trail and open source software programming are vulnerable to election fraud. "Touchscreen voting machines can increase accessibility for people with disabilities, reduce the cost of printing multilingual paper ballots, and make the experience of voting less confusing," explained EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "However, without basic auditing checks, electronic voting machines dramatically raise the stakes for insider and hacking attacks resulting in election fraud." "We need to ensure that no one can hack an election," added EFF Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien. "Electronic voting technology is wonderful, but it must also be verifiable outside the voting booth." The EFF action alert provides an easy way for the public to write California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley and ask him to ensure that California's new touchscreen voting machines have a voter-verifiable paper audit trail, as well as open software source code available for easy and ongoing independent inspection. EFF recommends that Secretary of State Shelley express support for San Mateo County and other counties that have already taken great strides toward verifiable voting systems and that he require verifiable voting systems for all other California counties. More > |
| Sunday, August 3, 2003 | |
| Stars and Stripes Fly over Caspian Sea | 0 comments |
 3 Aug 2003 @ 22:26Stars and Stripes Fly over Caspian Sea Russia, Saint-Petersburg Date: 2003.07.04 12:19 Over the last few years the United States has openly admitted that the Caspian Sea region is of strategic interest to it. This has been set out clearly in the US' energy doctrine. In contrast to Iraq, US companies have managed to take control of 16% of the Caspian's oil reserves and 11.4% of its gas reserves without firing a shot. If you add joint US-British companies to this list, then Washington and London control 27% of the Caspian's oil reserves ad 40% of its gas reserves. Of course, the allies needed 10 years to achieve this in the Caspian, compared to a couple of months in Iraq, but the result is much the same. The US already feels itself to be in charge in the region. A recent Chinese attempt to negotiate greater participation in Kazakh oil and gas projects met fierce US opposition. Kazakhstan itself has little chance of having its own energy policy: 73% of the country's proven oil reserves are controlled by Western oil companies. The interest from George Bush's administration in Caspian oil can be explained by the fact that neither Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan nor Turkmenistan are members of OPEC. This means that energy supplies from these countries will be less dependent on the cartel's pricing policy. It is clear that the US has gained the upper hand over the world's energy masters. Many politicians now in Bush's administration were involved in strengthening the position of US business in the Caspian region. Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security advisor, was a director at Chevron. Incidentally, Rice now has a Chevron tanker named after her. Vice-President Dick Cheney was a founder, and remains a major shareholder, of Halliburton, which is a leading supplier of services to oil workers in the Caspian. The future of the oil industry in the Caspian region looks very bright indeed. Proven hydrocarbon reserves in the region amount to 7.8 billion barrels. By 2010 the region will be producing 3.8 million barrels of oil a day, which is roughly 60% of the North Sea's current, but declining output. By the same year the Caspian will be producing more oil than Norway or Brazil and experts believe that its proven oil reserves will be 1.5-2 times higher than those of the Gulf of Mexico. Unsurprisingly, at a spring session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Caspian Sea region was named a key centre of European energy security. US and British companies have concentrated their main resources in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, which have about half of the region's hydrocarbon reserves. Iran, which owns the Caspian's southern shores, is the most awkward country in the region for the US: American oil companies have yet to find a way there. The Iranian parliament even removed aspects of the government's programme for 2003 that concerned attracting foreign investment into projects in the Caspian basin. Iran is the main obstacle to US plans to develop international oil and gas projects in the Caspian. Turkmenistan is in many ways similar to Iran, but with one main difference: it is much less able to stand up to US pressure. The balance of power in the Caspian with regard to the status and division of oil and gas reserves has not changed much recently. On the one hand, Iran and Turkmenistan are in favour of dividing the Caspian Sea equally between the five countries that share its coastline. On the other hand, Russia, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan want to split the sea according to the length of coastline each country owns. On May 15, Russia, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan signed a trilateral contract on dividing the sea floor to allow natural resources to be exploited. They also appear to be drawing closer on other issues. However, Iran and Turkmenistan refuse to recognise this agreement. The seemingly endless arguments will no doubt arise again when the working group for drawing up a convention on the Caspian's legal status meets for its tenth session in Moscow in early July. The positions of the different countries are clear. Russia, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan have lined up together, which makes the business of gaining access to Caspian energy reserves much easier for international oil corporations. If this position remains unchanged, a significant part of the Caspian's riches will find themselves controlled by Russia's strategic partner: Time will tell how wise this policy is. Meanwhile, the process of dividing the Caspian's energy resources is drawing to a close. Alexei Frolov, Rosbalt News Agency. St. Petersburg Translated by Robin Jones |
| The Most Sweeping Gun Ban Ever Introduced in Congress | 1 comment |
 3 Aug 2003 @ 22:14The Most Sweeping Gun Ban Ever Introduced in Congress--Clinton Gun Ban "Reenactment" Bans Millions More Guns H.R. 2038, introduced by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), does not just "reenact" or "reauthorize" the 1994 Clinton ban, the so-called "assault weapon" law. It bans millions more guns. And it begins backdoor registration of guns. All told, it's a giant step closer to the goal stated by Clinton gun ban sponsor Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), on CBS 60 Minutes "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it." There is no 10-year sunset provision in the bill. H.R. 2038 permanently bans every gun that is currently banned and, with numerous, overlapping provisions: Bans every gun made to comply with the Clinton ban. The Clinton ban dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments new guns can have. Manufacturers and gun owners complied and new guns conform to the Clinton requirements. H.R. 2038 bans the new guns too. Bans guns exempted by name or type under the Clinton ban. Commonplace Ruger Mini-14s, Mini-30s, Ranch Rifles, .30 Caliber Carbines, and fixed-magazine semi-automatic center-fire rifles. Bans all semi-automatic shotguns. Bans Remington, Winchester, Beretta, Benelli, and other shotguns commonly used for hunting, trap, skeet, sporting clays, and self-defense. Bans them by banning their main component, called the "receiver" (Sec. 2(a)(30)(J)), and bans them because they have "any characteristic that can function as a grip"(Sec. 2(H)(ii) and (b)(42)). Any characteristic. Bans all detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles because they have "any characteristic that can function as a grip." (Sec. 2(a)(30)(D)(iii) and (iv), and (b)(41) and (42)). Any characteristic. Bans target shooting rifles. Bans the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 "Garand." Bans guns for self-defense. Bans any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isn't "sporting," even though the U.S. Constitution, the constitutions of 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states recognize the right to use guns for defense. Bans 65 named guns (the Clinton law bans 19); Bans semi-auto fixed-magazine pistols of over 10 rounds capacity; Bans frames, receivers, and parts used to repair or refurbish guns; Bans importation of magazines exempted by the Clinton ban; Bans selling a legally-owned "assault weapon" with a magazine of over 10 rounds capacity. Bans guns rarely used in crime. A fact demonstrated by every state and local law enforcement agency report on the subject. The Congressionally-mandated study of the Clinton ban found that the guns "were never used in more than a fraction of all gun murders." Begins backdoor registration. Requires manufacturers of guns, frames, receivers, and other parts to report the names of their dealers. Requires dealers to report any of the guns and parts they have in stock. Bans private sales of the guns and parts. The next step is to register individual purchasers. More > |
| Thursday, July 31, 2003 | |
| Who Killed California? | 3 comments |
 31 Jul 2003 @ 22:22Though his facts may or may not be accurate, doesn't this smack of just a bit of racism? Who Killed California? July 30, 2003 By Patrick J. Buchanan With Gov. Gray Davis facing recall, a budget $38 billion in deficit, and a bond rating dropped three notches by Standard & Poor's to near junk-bond status, the lowest of all 50 states, the Golden State is no more. Who killed the goose that laid the golden eggs? Certainly, Davis, who misled voters about the gravity of his budget crisis in 2002, and won re-election by demonizing his GOP rivals, deserves his 20 percent approval rating. But Gray Davis did not kill California. The United States government did. For what killed California as the golden land was massive and unrestricted immigration from the Third World, an unrepelled invasion from Mexico, and a failure to protect the U.S. manufacturing base and the wages of America's workers. During and after World War II, California became a bastion of our defense, aerospace, auto and TV industries. Hundreds of thousands were hired to become the highest-paid manufacturing workers on earth, giving California the world's highest standard of living. The average California wage once stood at 130 percent of the average U.S. wage. In the 1970s and 1980s, however, Japan, a free rider on America's defense, began to engage in predatory trade, attacking and killing, one by one, U.S. industries and capturing U.S. markets with subsidized exports. California suffered first. Our TV industry was wiped out. Our auto industry was reeling when Ronald Reagan stepped in to impose quotas on Japanese cars. Reagan also intervened to save the semiconductor industry, Big Steel and Harley-Davidson. Unlike today's free-trade fanatics, Ronald Reagan put America first. But it was under Bush-Clinton-Bush that California was irrevocably sacrificed to the gods of the Global Economy. During Bush I's term, millions of Mexicans began to flee north to seek jobs and take advantage of the health care, welfare and free education American citizens provided for their people. For one-third of the illegals, California became the destination of choice. What the U.S. government should have done was obvious, and was demanded by Americans: Enforce our immigration laws, halt the invasion, restrict immigration from the Third World. But America's politicians – out of fear of being branded xenophobic and to curry favor with Big Business, which benefits from an endless supply of low-wage labor – did almost nothing to protect America. Californians tried to defend their state. As illegals poured in by the hundreds of thousands yearly, they passed Proposition 187, denying social welfare benefits to illegal aliens who had broken the law and broken into the United States. The open-borders coalition, repudiated and routed, ran to a federal judge, who annulled the voters' victory. Davis then refused to appeal the overturning of 187 to the Supreme Court. Hispanic voters rewarded him in 2002, and California state and local budgets continued to hemorrhage. By the 1990s, an exodus of taxpayers had begun. Fed up with being fleeced to subsidize illegal aliens, Californians began leaving for Nevada, Idaho, Arizona and Colorado. Two million native-born Californians left the state in the 1990s, as immigrants, legal and illegal, sent poverty rates soaring in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and Orange counties. This, then, is what killed California: First, open borders. By failing to enforce our immigration laws, America now hosts 31 million legal immigrants and their children and 10 million illegals, most of them net tax consumers. California got the lion's share. Second, global free trade and the trade deficits it produced, now running at an annual rate of $562 billion in May. This has killed millions of manufacturing jobs, as thousands of companies closed factories here and shifted plants to Mexico, Asia and China. The Third Worldization of California is now far advanced. Yet those responsible, Bush Republicans as well as Clinton Democrats, still cannot see what they have done to our country. But what is happening in California is not confined to California. It is happening across America. Unless we elect a president who will enforce our immigration laws and defend our borders, unless we find a Congress that will jettison the free-trade madness that is denuding America of her manufacturing, what has happened to California will happen here. President Bush appears oblivious to it all – but then, so did his father before him. More > |
| Tuesday, July 29, 2003 | |
| Testosterone Implants Fuel Women Politicians | 1 comment |
 29 Jul 2003 @ 00:03Testosterone Implants Fuel Women Politicians Girl Power - With A Little Help From Male Hormones By Dr Raj Persaud The Scotsman - UK 7-28-03 A leading gynaecologist has recently claimed that female politicians are using testosterone implants to try to match their male counterparts in assertiveness and competitiveness. Malcolm Whitehead, a Harley Street doctor, said he had prescribed the hormone for a number of women who wanted to "beef up" their image in the macho world of politics. He commented: "I have prescribed testosterone implants for female politicians in Westminster who want to compete better with their male colleagues in committee meetings and parliamentary debates. They claim the hormone boosts their assertiveness and makes them feel more powerful." His extraordinary claim - recently published in the New Statesman magazine - was greeted with disbelief in Westminster - but, then again, which female MP was going to publicly admit to trying testosterone? Read On.... More > |
| Monday, July 21, 2003 | |
| Bush Cancel Elections In 2004? | 1 comment |
 21 Jul 2003 @ 12:00Unlikely, maybe a bit paranoid, improbable rather than possible but an interesting discussion none the less. BUSH TO CANCEL 2004 ELECTIONS TO STAY IN POWER...? CONSERVATIVES GOING BONKERS! ------ By Ted Rall Whether, Not Who, is the Question About the 2004 Election NEW YORK(YN)--He has canceled elections in Iraq (news - web sites). He will probably cancel them in Afghanistan (news - web sites). Will George W. Bush put the kibosh on elections in the United States next year? Frightened by Bush´s rapidly diminsihing personal power and the Democrats´ inability and/or unwillingness to stand up to him, citizens worry that he might use the "war on terrorism" as an excuse to declare a state of emergency, suspend civil liberties and jail political opponents. People who have spoken out against Bush are talking exit strategy--not Alec Baldwin style, just to make a statement, but fleeing the U.S. in order to save their skins. "Do you or your spouse have a European-born parent?" is a query making the rounds. (If you do, you can obtain dual nationality and a European Union (news - web sites) passport that would allow you to work in any EU member nation.) Those whose lineage is 100 percent American are hoping that nations like Canada and France will admit American political refugees in the event of a Bushite clampdown. To these people, whether or not the 2004 elections actually take place as scheduled is the ultimate test for American democracy. At Guantánamo Bay the United States is converting a concentration camp into a death camp where inmates will be executed without due process or legal representation. Never before in history has a U.S. president contemplated the denaturalization of native-born citizens-thus far even people executed for treason have died as Americans--but Bush has drafted legislation that would allow him to strip anyone he calls an "enemy combatant" of their citizenship and have them deported. By any objective standard he has already gone way too far, but for many it would take the cancellation or delay of the elections to confirm that we are trading in our wounded democracy for a fascist state. Lincoln considered suspending the 1864 election because of the Civil War, but ultimately tabled the idea. To date nothing has ever prevented an American presidential election from being held on time. It´s easy to come up with a scenario in which canceling the 2004 election could be made to appear reasonable. Imagine that, a few weeks before Election Day, "dirty bombs" detonate simultaneously in New York and Washington. Government, media and political institutions and personnel lie ruined in smoking rubble and ash; hundreds of thousands of people have been murdered. The economy, already teetering on the precipice, is shoved into depression. How could we conduct elections under such conditions? Republicans have already floated the don´t-change-horses-in-midstream argument. After Democratic presidential Sen. John Kerry criticized Bush recently, GOP National Committee Chairman Mark Racicot took him to task not for his specific remarks, but rather for "daring to suggest the replacement of America´s commander-in-chief at a time when America is at war." The White House website´s "frequently asked questions" section indicates that the "war" is expected to continue well beyond 2004: "There is no silver bullet, no single event or action that is going to suddenly make the threat of terrorism disappear. This broad-based and sustained effort will continue until terrorism is rooted out. The situation is similar to the Cold War, when continuous pressure from many nations caused communism to collapse from within. We will press the fight as long as it takes." The Cold War lasted 46 years; does Bush intend to remain in office that long? Our boy president has plenty of reason to worry about his election chances. A new CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll says that only 50 percent of Americans would vote for Bush over a generic unnamed Democrat--the lowest number since 9/11. Two-thirds say that Bush lied about or exaggerated the threat from Iraq´s WMDs, and a steady flow of body bags from Afghanistan and Iraq has made 53 percent aware that the occupations are going poorly. Pollsters report that most people trust Democrats to rescue the sinking economy--and few believe that Bush´s tax cuts will help them. Bush may be the kind of guy who sees 99 percent odds as 2 percent short of a sure thing, but I bet he´ll look at his $200 million campaign war chest and decide to let the people decide. He´ll surely want to win legitimately in 2004--albeit for the first time. Though they´re capable of Gestapo tactics, Bush´s people probably know that Americans wouldn´t stand for two putsches in four years. Still, you have to hand it to him: The fact that Democrats are terrified of ending up imprisoned by an American Reich is the ultimate tribute to Bush´s artful bullying--and sad confirmation of the impotence of his would-be, should-be opponents. (Ted Rall is the author of "Gas War: The Truth Behind the American Occupation of Afghanistan," an analysis of the underreported Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline project and the real motivations behind the war on terrorism. Ordering information is available at amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com.) More > |
| Friday, July 18, 2003 | |
| Nelson Mandela At 85 | 3 comments |
 18 Jul 2003 @ 12:56MANDELA AT 85 The Observer Sunday, July 6, 2003 Anthony Sampson, who has known Nelson Mandela for 50 years, pays a birthday tribute to the statesman who wants a quiet life but is still drawn to the public stage, the world icon who, in his old age, has grown angrier and more outspoken than ever. Last Wednesday, Nelson Mandela once again showed his unique moral influence, two weeks before he celebrates his eighty-fifth birthday with a banquet in Johannesburg. In Westminster Hall, he launched the Mandela-Rhodes Foundation which will bring part of the huge fortune built on diamonds and gold back to black South Africa. He heard tributes from Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, with whom he had talked at length at Number 10 beforehand. The Prime Minister made an impromptu speech explaining how Mandela 'symbolised the triumph of hope over injustice'. Mandela warmly thanked him but did not conceal their differences about the Middle East: 'We differ on one point - very strongly,' he said. Afterwards, Blair and Clinton supported the frail old man as he walked slowly down the hall between the audience of a thousand Rhodes Scholars who were clapping Mandela much more than them. It was a poignant image: the two much younger leaders still needed the moral support of the old man. How has a man with no formal political position retained such influence? Since Mandela retired as President of South Africa four years ago, when I wrote his authorised biography, I have talked to him often in London and South Africa, and have always been surprised. Since I first met him 50 years ago in Johannesburg, I have seen him in many different roles - as lawyer, revolutionary, prisoner, electioneer, President and global icon. At each stage, many people have expected a let-down or, at least, an anti-climax. But in retirement, he provides many new surprises. He has become a more outspoken and, sometimes, angry old man, protesting against injustices - and now most notably against the warlike attitudes of Britain and America in the Middle East. It's a confrontation which is now coming to a head. Yet, when he first retired, Nelson Mandela talked much about spending a quiet time with his family in his new house in his tribal village of Qunu, the poor but beautiful area of Transkei. He was content, he claimed, to leave the future of his country to his successor, President Mbeki. He no longer wanted to be known as Mr President, but as 'Madiba', his clan-name. Now, he sometimes still likes to pretend to be a forgotten figure, 'an unemployed pensioner', as he describes himself. He retells the story of a young girl who told him he was a silly old man who broke the law and went to jail. When I reintroduced my wife to him saying: 'You remember Sally?' he replied: 'Yes - but do you remember me?' Of course he knows perfectly well that everyone remembers him. (Meanwhile, his own memory remains prodigious into old age; like several of his long-term prison colleagues, his memory appears to have been improved by his time in jail, away from the distractions and soundbites of television and advertising.) The name Mandela is attached to streets, squares, scholarships and buildings across the world, and an elegant new bridge across central Johannesburg, which will be opened on his birthday. The manner of his retirement in 1999 is in itself a tribute to his achievement of a new South Africa. Five years earlier, before his own inauguration, most South Africans doubted whether elections could be held at all, in the face of violent threats by his opponents to boycott them. Now, South Africans of all colours take for granted that their country is a multiracial working democracy. This is Mandela's most valuable legacy. At his own inauguration, the new President, Thabo Mbeki, made a short, unpompous speech warning about threats elsewhere, including dangers from 'our own African predators', but he was confident about South Africa's future with a place for all races and a 'common destiny regardless of the shapes of our noses'. Read On... More > |
| Monday, July 14, 2003 | |
| Beyond Bush | 0 comments |
| 14 Jul 2003 @ 23:06 Beyond Bush by Michael Ruppert Click Link for Essay "There is no longer any serious doubt that Bush administration officials deceived us into war. The key question now is why so many influential people are in denial, unwilling to admit the obvious...But even people who aren't partisan Republicans shy away from confronting the administration's dishonest case for war, because they don't want to face the implications... After all, suppose a politician - or a journalist - admits to himself that Mr. Bush bamboozled the nation into war. Well, launching a war on false pretenses is, to say the least a breach of trust. So if you admit to yourself that such a thing happened, you have a moral obligation to demand accountability - and to do so in the face not only of a powerful, ruthless political machine but in the face of a country not yet ready to believe that its leaders have exploited 9/11 for political gain. It's a scary prospect. Yet, if we can't find people willing to take the risk - to face the truth and act on it - what will happen to our democracy?" Paul Krugman, The New York Times, June 24, 2003 Sidenote from my friend Greg: Beyond the case of whether or not Bush et. al. lied to get us into war - or if the American public believes they even care anymore at this point (unfortunately)- is the fact that the globe is rapidly running out of 'peak oil', and natural gas (which is not imported) is at a critical stage. (The US only has expensive heavy oil that costs too much to produce) Someday we may be fighting over water as well. The attempt at controlling oil production and preventing the countries of the world, as well as Opec, from switching to the Euro from the petrodollar is failing. The US economy is FAR too dependent on oil/war/organized crime (drugs)/prostitution as a baseline for global hegemony and false power. Signs of a potential market collapse include: The real estate balloon beginning to hiss (recently announced Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac corruption) The credit bubble is about to burst, with record numbers of bankruptcy's so far this year. Manipulations of derivatives in bank loan management. Manipulations of the price of Gold - based on selling futures on Gold that hasn't even been mined yet. A costly war used to divert our attention from global market meltdown. Japan, Europe, China, and Russia returning to gold-backed currency while selling the dollar. Sucker rallies on the stock market. The Euro is now worth more than the dollar. The war in Iraq has only angered the rest of the world and boycotts of American goods is accelerating (China just changed their order for airliners from Boeing to Aerbus) I continue to live for peace and mindfulness. |
| Saturday, July 12, 2003 | |
| The Four Reasons | 2 comments |
 12 Jul 2003 @ 13:54The Four Reasons why "We The People" must remove the current administration of The United States of America 0. Operation Iraqi Freedom is illegal within the framework of the laws of the United States Constitution and the United Nations Charter. 1. The war on Iraq has been planned for many years by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC),an organization founded by a small group of right wing political visionaries and corporate elite dedicated to promoting American global leadership. The PNAC signatories hold the most powerful positions in the current administration and other highly influential political offices. Read their Statement of Principles and note the signatories. Read the PNAC's “Rebuilding America's Defenses” for a detail of their strategy for American hegemony. 2. Many members of the Bush Administration are convicted criminals. In 1992, the International War Crimes Tribunal found the senior officers in the first Bush administration guilty on 19 counts of Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and other criminal acts in Violation of the Charter of the United Nations, International Law, The Constitution of the United States and Laws made in Pursuance thereof, for crimes committed during “Operation Desert Storm”. View a list of our `elected' officials, their appointees, and their criminal offenses. 3. There is no longer a separation between our elected officials and industry leaders. The means of production, the means of communication, the energy industry, and the military are owned by the current administration. These psychopaths and their associates will benefit unfathomably from this and many future wars already planned by the PNAC. View information on who is making the money from our “War on Terrorism”. 4. “We the People” pay for “Operation Iraqi Freedom”, the staging of “multiple theatre wars”, and the killing of the innocent peoples of foreign lands in the name of Freedom and Democracy, while 'elected' officials pass radical legislation taking away our rights and controlling the flow of information. More > |
| Friday, July 11, 2003 | |
| How to Rig an Election in the United States | 1 comment |
 11 Jul 2003 @ 12:46How to Rig an Election in the United States Sludge Report #154 – Bigger Than Watergate! By C.D. Sludge Tuesday 08 July 2003 The story you are about to read is in this writer's view the biggest political scandal in American history, if not global history. And it is being broken today here in New Zealand. This story cuts to the bone the machinery of democracy in America today. Democracy is the only protection we have against despotic and arbitrary government, and this story is deeply disturbing. Imagine if you will that you are a political interest group that wishes to control forevermore the levers of power. Imagine further that you know you are likely to implement a highly unpopular political agenda, and you do not wish to be removed by a ballot driven backlash. One way to accomplish this outcome would be to adopt the Mugabe (Zimbabwe) or Hun Sen (Cambodia) approach. You agree to hold elections, but simultaneously arrest, imprison and beat your opponents and their supporters. You stuff ballot boxes, disenfranchise voters who are unlikely to vote for you, distort electoral boundaries and provide insufficient polling stations in areas full of opposition supporters. However as so many despots have discovered, eventually such techniques always fail – often violently. Hence, if you are a truly ambitious political dynasty you have to be a bit more subtle about your methods. Imagine then if it were possible to somehow subvert the voting process itself in such a way that you could steal elections without anybody knowing. Imagine for example if you could: secure control of the companies that make the voting machines and vote counting software; centralise vote counting systems, and politicise their supervision; legislate for the adoption of such systems throughout your domain, and provide large amounts of money for the purchase of these systems; establish systems of vote counting that effectively prevent anybody on the ground in the election – at a booth or precinct level - from seeing what is happening at a micro-level; get all the major media to sign up to a single exit-polling system that you also control – removing the risk of exit-polling showing up your shenanigans. And imagine further that you install a backdoor, or numerous backdoors, in the vote counting systems you have built that enable you to manipulate the tabulation of results in real time as they are coming in. Such a system would enable you to intervene in precisely the minimum number of races necessary to ensure that you won a majority on election night. On the basis of polling you could pick your marginal seats and thus keep your tweaking to a bare minimum. Such a system would enable you to minimise the risks of discovery of your activities. Such a system would enable you to target and remove individual political opponents who were too successful, too popular or too inquisitive. And most importantly of all, such a system would enable you to accomplish all the above without the public being in the least aware of what you were doing. When confronted with the awfulness of your programme they would be forced to concede that at least it is the result of a democratic process. How To Rig An Election In The United States So how would such a system actually work? Well one way to run such a corrupt electoral system might look like this: Each voting precinct (or booth) could be fitted with electronic voting systems, optical scanning systems, punch card voting systems or the more modern touchscreen electronic voting machines; At the close of play each day the booth/precinct supervisor could be under instructions to compile an electronic record of the votes cast in their booth; They might print out a report that contains only the details of the total votes count for that precinct/booth, and then file via modem the full electronic record of votes through to the County supervisor; The County Supervisor could be equipped with a special piece of software and a bank of modems that enables all these results to be received and tabulated in the internals of the computer; The County Supervisors themselves could be assured that their system was bullet proof, certified and contained tamper-protection mechanisms par excellence; The Country Supervisor could be given a range of tools for looking at the data within this software, but nothing to enable them to directly manipulate the results; But unbeknownst to the County Supervisor the software could actually create three separate records of the voting data; Meanwhile - also unbeknownst to the County Supervisor - these three tables of voting data could be in fact completely insecure and accessible simply through a common database programme, say Microsoft Access; Having the three tables would enable you to keep the real data in place – so the system could pass spot tests on individual precincts and booth results (should a precinct supervisor be particularly astute) -while simultaneously enabling you to manipulate the bottom line result; Finally you might also enhance the election hacker's powers by including within the software a utility to enable them to cover their tracks by changing the date and time stamps on files and remove evidence of your tampering. Read On...Fantasy Becomes Reality More > |
| Wednesday, July 9, 2003 | |
| The Two Georges, Orwell and Bush | 1 comment |
 9 Jul 2003 @ 21:45Today's "Democracy Now" The Two Georges, Orwell and Bush - A Dramatic Reading of George Orwell's Classic Work 1984 Interspersed With Recent News Clips From President Bush and Others An excerpt: But we begin at the Pentagon, yesterday. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters: "I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons ... I don't know anybody in any government or any intelligence agency who suggested that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons. That's fact number one." Well we thought of someone who suggested otherwise, his boss, President Bush: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his 'nuclear mujahideen'-- his nuclear holy warriors ... Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." Orwell Legend Comes Under Review 100 Years On More > |
Page: 1 2 Older entries >>