Ever wonder what folks working for sustainable transportation at the federal level are up against on K Street? For this Streetfilms exclusive event, we were granted unfettered access to Veronica Moss, lobbyist for Automobile Users Trade Organization (AUTO). Veronica gave us a few precious moments inside her SUV to talk about roads, traffic, cyclists, and big cities. After instructing us on proper honking techniques for "old people" and children, she also offered up some choice bons mots. Here's a sample:
"People need to be able to drive their cars - that's an American right!"
"Bikers are a pimple on the butt of any city."
If you love Veronica, make sure to check out our mockumentary on The Search for the Zozo, where she also makes an appearance.
Earth Focus An environmental news magazine that puts a human face on environmental issues by featuring under-publicized stories about how environmental changes are affecting
everyday people.
Kids see their friends riding to school and it looks like so much fun, they want to do it too. Those kids convince their parents to give it a try. As more and more families join in, the bike racks fill up. And pretty soon bikes are spilling into the garden and being locked to any available stationary object. Sometimes they arent locked at all (who is going to steal a kids bike from a school playground anyway).
Im not sure how the momentum builds. What I do know
is: Im still seeing new faces at the bike racks every day (and theyre all smiling faces). Thanks to all of the parents who have given biking a try. Youre doing your kids a huge favor, and hopefully youre having some fun too!
7 Lessons As We March to the Great Palace of Worship -
"NO WEAPON FORMED AGAINST US SHALL PROSPER." Lesson 1 We are members of this ministry and great work because the Lord Jesus Christ hath brought us, not because we were strong but indeed weak. Most assuredly, it was the call of Jesus that joined us to this ministry.
Lesson 2 As we march to the Great Palace of Worship, and threats are leveled against you from without and within, remember these several things: (A) Do not panic, (B) Exercise great patience before you speak or act, (C) Do not rail when you are reviled, (D) The Lord will show you the way out. (E) Count every obstacle in your life as joy. James 1:2 (The joy of the Lord will be your strength to overcome.) Neh. 8:10-11 When you overcome, they will be your testimonies.
Lesson 3 Jesus hath promised us He will never leave us or forsake us. Tho' the way gets weary, scary, and dark, He is with us and we will be victorious.
Lesson 4Plead the blood of Jesus over every work of Satan.
Lesson 5 Do not repeat any threats or ugly statements made to or about you. Silence the enemy at your gate. Do not spread his destructive messages, rather speak peace and blessings.
Lesson 6Remember:The battle is the Lord's. Whosoever fights you, fights against the Lord.
Lesson 7 Remember the oblation hour and observe it. (A) Before you close your eyes in sleep at night say: "Satan, you are a liar." This will rebuke all fears, threats, trials, and evil reports received during the day. (B) When you awake in the morning say, "Speak Lord, thy servant heareth." This will release all information deposited into you while you were sleep, praying, or meditating.
Could President Obama ban U.S citizens from holding gold?
Back in 1933, at a time of economic crisis, President Roosevelt forced U.S. Citizens to sell their gold at $20 an ounce - and then subsequently revalued the metal to $35. Could President Obama, a Roosevelt disciple, have similar plans in mind.
(MINE WEB) Whether one believes in the GATA premise that the gold price is being held down by a gigantic conspiracy between the Worlds Central Banks, Governments and some major banking institutions or not, there is little doubt that governmental-initiated currency manipulation does occur, and if one looks at gold as money then it is logical that some degree of manipulation here also takes place at Central Bank level. Whether one can call this a global conspiracy, or part of the general process of stabilising currencies and exchange rates, depends perhaps on which side of the fence you are sitting. In a way this is similar to the terrorist/freedom fighter debate!
But, history does tell us that the US government, in the days of a fixed gold price, did intervene in a very direct manner with President F.D. Roosevelt banning the “hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates and thus forcing US citizens to sell to Federal Reserve at $20 an ounce. Subsequently the Fed raised the price of gold to $35 an ounce.
President Obama is known to be a Roosevelt disciple and he must be well aware of what was done at the time, given the parallels of the U.S economy between the present time and the 1930s. There must be a temptation to try the same tactic, and then raise the gold price dramatically in a move which would certainly support reserves within those nations which still have major gold holdings.
Indeed, if monetary authorities worldwide sees the gold price really start to take off, this kind of process has to become even more of a temptation as a big global move into gold could exacerbate the global financial crisis in that it would show that people no longer have faith in the economic status quo (it can be argued that already they dont) and the the current crisis of confidence could be severely worsened by such a rush.
In an article published late last year, Mark Mahaffey of Hinde Capital, argued that such a possibility existed and pointed out that the fear for anyone who is in credit is that the financial system could become geared towards negating debt which, in turn, would destroy the value of their assets. One way of bypassing this threat is to buy gold. However a general shift to gold would undermine the power of central banks and their influence on the economy.
Of course the monetary situation nowadays is completely different and the banning of gold holdings, and subsequent revaluation would be much harder to accomplish domestically - and even more so globally. Back in 1933 the dollar was on the gold standard which meant that, in theory at least, each dollar could be exchanged for the same value in gold. Nowadays all currencies are effectively fiat money with no solid backing (except perhaps of a fiat dollar), and to revert to a gold standard would require an upward revaluation of the gold price beyond belief.
But, there is a precedent out there and while we think the idea is unlikely, it might appeal to someone who is prepared to try radical means to stabilise the economy if all other measures fail.
And - consider this thought - are shortages of gold coins from national mints due to a total underestimation of demand, or part of government policies to control gold flows into private hands. We think the former, but the conspiracy theorists no doubt have other views.
On the weekend of 13-15 March, 2008 Iraq Veterans Against the War will assemble history's largest gathering of US veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as Iraqi and Afghan survivors. In Washington DC they will testify to their first hand experiences and reveal the truth of occupation. They are currently seeking many types of support to make this happen, and are requesting that Iraq and Afghan veterans submit testimony and evidence.
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the summer soldier who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming a few bad apples instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these
wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear. For more information and to sign a statement in support of this important undertaking:
The U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved a $91.3 billion supplemental measure to finance the Iraqi and Afghan wars. An additional $80 million has been set aside to support the shutting down of Gitmo, $50 million of which is contingent on the Pentagon coming up with a plan on relocating prisoners. Another $900 million has been allocated to aid Pakistan in its battle against the Taliban.
Amendments are expected to be made when the bill makes it to the Senate floor, especially around the conditions surrounding the future of the controversial naval base in Cuba and its detainees.
The Washington Post:
The Senate measure also includes about $900 million in economic and security aid for Pakistan which is battling militant Taliban fighters spilling over its border with Afghanistan. The House bill has about $1 billion for Pakistan.
The full Senate is expected to take up its version next week and any differences with the House will have to be worked out and a single version passed by both chambers before the legislation can be sent to Obama for his signature.
To date, $830.2 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, $77.1 billion dollars have been requested in the recent supplemental that further fund these wars, for
a total of $907.3 billion dollars.
Dr. Dahlia Wasfi was born to a Jewish mother and an Iraqi father. She recently
put her medical career on hold to visit with family members in Iraq, and recently returned from a three-month stay in Basrah and Baghdad.
Dr. Wasfi described her experience in Iraq and discussed the life of Iraqis under occupation on April 27, 2006 in Washington, DC.
Whats the true cost of the war in Iraq? The total, long-term cost of everything from tanks and jet fuel and the interest on the money Washington is borrowing to the cost of caring for a double amputee for 40 years? Its probably a lot higher than you think, but try about $3 trillion. Thats the round, stunning figure economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard public finance professor Linda Bilmes came up with after several years of digging up and crunching the official government numbers, which were buried or scattered in the Pentagons impossibly sloppy accounting books. The gruesome details can be found in their new book, The Three Trillion Dollar War. I talked to Professor Bilmes on Wednesday by phone from Boston:
Q: What is your 60-second synopsis of your book and why did you write it?
A: We basically wrote the book for two reasons. First was to explain the full costs of the war, including the costs that are yet to come. Secondly, we wrote the book to show how the veterans have been shortchanged and to offer recommendations that would fix that. We really go through in the book the major cost categories and show how the war is affecting the economy. This is a book about the budgetary and economic costs of the war. But we also have three chapters about veterans’ issues, which I have been deeply involved in. We are donating 10 percent of the proceeds to veterans’ organizations. One of the purposes of the book was to really call attention to the veterans’ issues. The veterans’ issues in particular are fixable. When you think about the problems of Iraq, and some of them seem somewhat intractable and out of our control, that is a source of frustration for many Americans. But when you look at some of the situations of the returning veterans, that is something that is entirely within our ability to fix. So we were trying to call attention to those issues and how we could fix them.
Q: What does that $3 trillion price tag include?
A: It includes the cash costs of the war, which is the $600 billion that people are familiar with, which is basically the cost that we have spent to date of operations, as well as the long-term cost that we would have to spend even if we were to withdraw quickly; those include the cost of taking care of veterans, both the medical care and disability compensation over their lives; the cost of military reset, which includes both the cost of replacing all of the military and National Guard equipment and the cost of restoring the personnel forces to their prewar strength; and the cost of the interest on all of the money which we have borrowed, which is all the money paying interest on the debt.
The way that we look at it to reach $3 trillion, there are two approaches: There
is a budgetary approach or an economic approach. If you look at it from a budgetary approach you would count the operating costs, as well as future operating costs, as well as the veterans long-term costs, the military reset
cost and the interest cost. If you look at it from an economic perspective, we don’t count the interest costs because those are considered transfer payments. But we do include the social costs, which are the costs to the
economy that the government doesn’t pay, and the macroeconomic costs, which are overall economic loses to the economy. Either way, you quickly get to $3 trillion.
A: We include Afghanistan in some areas and in some areas we don’t. It’s very difficult to separate out the accounts between Iraq and Afghanistan. We have tried to estimate how much is Iraq and how much is Afghanistan. But particularly on the veterans cost, the VA doesn’t actually break out the Iraq vs. Afghan veterans. The way the military allocates its accounts, it’s difficult to follow exactly where the money is being spent.
Q: Where did you go to dig up this information?
A: It was a huge amount of work, a really, really huge amount of work to write this book and to dig up the information. We used all government sources, some of which were publicly available and much of which we needed to secure under the Freedom of Information Act, which the veterans groups did on our behalf. Basically, through a combination of information from the Congressional Research Service, the GAO, the Congressional Budget Office, the budget accounts, the Inspector General reports, congressional testimonies, audit reports all kinds of government records, as well as some other kinds of established, reputable studies from medical sources.
Q: What are some of the big-ticket items that particularly surprised, shocked or enraged you?
A: Well, I’d say that pretty much every week we were working on this book we had one of those kinds of moments where there would be something unbelievable. Some of them were big-ticket items; some of them were small-ticket items. Some of the things that stunned us, in no particular order, were the fact that we now pay enlistment bonuses of $25,000 to $40,000 for new recruits and up to $150,000 for re-enlistment bonuses. We found that if you were injured during your enlistment period, you were asked to repay your enlistment bonus on a prorated basis. So somebody who comes back without a leg is then asked to repay their bonus.
Another thing that stunned us was the fact that KBR, which is the largest contractor in Iraq, has been evading hundreds of millions of dollars a year in payroll taxes Social Security and Medicare taxes by employing its contractors through shell companies in the Cayman Islands. Another thing that stunned us was when we looked at the cost outside of the Defense department and the Veterans department. We found a number of significant costs. For example, the very significant cost of Social Security disability compensation, which is another big chunk that typically doesn’t get included. Another cost is the fact that the Department of Labor actually pays the insurance cost for contractors who are employing contractors in Iraq, both for the U.S. and foreign nationals.
If you are Halliburton, in order to do business anywhere, you have to have worker compensation insurance. Because that insurance is considered too risky and the cost would be too high, the government pays for it. The contractor
doesn’t have to pay any insurance costs. But then the insurance company also doesn’t want to provide the insurance or the benefits, because they say it would be too risky for an act of war. So if someone is injured, the Department of Labor also pays the benefits. When we found this out, we thought, “This cannot be true.” But it is true. There is a GAO report on it where they were also stunned. There are many lawsuits that are going on now because the whole issue about whether the government is paying out to these contractors or not has to do with whether or not they were injured in an act of war.
But overall, the thing that really struck me was simply the scale of the war. There have already been 1.7 million service men and women deployed, which I think is not really understood, because people tend to think about the 140,000 who are serving at this point in time. And the scale of the injuries and the survival rates are much higher now than in previous wars. In Vietnam and Korea, there were about 2.3 or 2.5 injuries per fatality. Now if you look at just the in-combat injuries, it’s 7-1. The number of people who have actually been treated already in VA hospitals and clinics is already 300,000. The number of wounded, if you include the battlefield and the non-battlefield, is over 70,000 people who have been evacuated from the theater for medical problems.
So simply understanding just how much larger the scale is than we had realized was I think the thing that surprised me the most and the fact that the government has really tried very hard to conceal this scale of injuries by suppressing the availability of the information about how many injuries there are and by making it very difficult to get hold of the information to basically understand all of this.
Q: Have the media the mainstream media, mainly been asleep on this issue of the true cost of the war?
A: Overall, I think, the media have been asleep at the wheel in terms of the cost of the war. They have unblinkingly reported the $600 billion figure of the cost of the war. They have unblinkingly reported the wounded in combat without looking beyond that. They have unblinkingly reported on the veterans’ problems. But there are major exceptions to that. In addition to the most well-known one, The Washington Post expose on the Walter Reed Hospital scandal, there also has been some really excellent reporting done in various places. Here in Boston … and in Charlotte. Early on, there was an excellent piece done in U.S. News World Report by Linda Robinson on the discrepancy
between disability ratings in the military and the VA. There has been a lot of excellent reporting done by individuals. But despite that, overall, you keep seeing again and again some of the same mistakes repeated in the mainstream media.
Q: There’s no chance that the total cost of the war was unknown merely because the Pentagon is a big dumb bureaucracy and it never put a rope around the total cost as opposed to the cost being deliberately hidden for political reasons
A: A lot of what we talk about in the book is that the government accounting system does not allow you to look at the full long-term cost of anything. The government uses cash accounting. That’s like saying if you buy a car and it cost $25,000 and you spend $5,000 on a down payment — that your car cost $5,000. But actually you still owe the $20,000 and if you took out a loan, you still owe the interest. If you are looking at how much your car is actually going to cost you, it’s going to cost you a lot more than the $5,000. Now businesses are not allowed to do that kind of accounting if they are bigger than the corner grocery store.
But amazingly enough, the federal government uses cash accounting, which means that the cost of things that take a long time huge weapons systems that are purchased over many, many years are essentially hidden from view. The government budgeting is done very inappropriately. What happens is that if you are looking at a program that is year-to-year funding funding a grant or a transfer payment or whatever what you fund in a year is what is paid out. But if you are looking at the cost of the F-22 bomber, which incidentally has not flown a single sortie in Afghanistan or Iraq, the cost over many years looks different than the cost which was estimated up front. So with many long-term projects, it’s very difficult to understand up front what the costs are particularly when you have a war like this, where we’ve borrowed all the money. So we’ve deferred a lot of the cost. All the $600 billion that we have spent has been borrowed, so it’s not like we’ve put any down payment down. This is the first time in our entire history that we’ve done this. We have not raised taxes or cut spending to pay for the war; we’ve actually cut taxes and raised spending. This is the first time since the Revolutionary War that we have borrowed from overseas for a war.
Q: What recommendations do you make in your book?
A: Many of the recommendations are about improving the government accounting system. Some of the reason why it is so difficult to understand the war is because of the way the government keeps its books. But and there’s a very big but in every area there have been particular shortcomings in the way the budgeting has been done. On the veterans side, even in 2005 and 2006 you had the budgeting for the VA being done on the basis of projections made in 2001, before the war even started. You really had an unsurprising outcome that for three years in a row the VA completely ran out of money.
Now in the Pentagon you have the fact that this is an utterly dysfunctional financial system which has flunked its financial audit every year for the last 10 years; where no one has any idea where money is going and where the fact that you have tens of billions of dollars of which in Pentagon-speak they’ve “lost visibility,” is a direct result of the fact that they are incapable of tracking and imposing financial discipline.
The government in the CFO Act of 1990 required all government agencies to have clean financial accounts. Everybody else in the government, with a huge amount of effort, has managed to do this. So the only other department apart from the Pentagon that doesn’t is the Homeland Security Department, and that’s because they are a consolidation of 22 agencies and they haven’t been able to harmonize all the systems yet. But the Pentagon has never taken this seriously. It’s not just me, but the Controller General and the Inspector General for the Pentagon and the auditors every year a chorus of all of us complain about the fact that it is not possible to execute the Pentagon budget, and that’s one of the reasons it is so difficult to track where the money is being spent.
Q: Can you describe what your politics are and whether you were for or against the war in Iraq?
A: I was against the war in Iraq, and Joe Stiglitz, my co-author, was against the war in Iraq at the outset, which we state clearly in the book. But I am also a professor of public finance. I teach budgeting and budget-accountability. I worked in the department of Commerce. I worked for many years around these issues. I really do believe this is a good-government issue. I really, really believe there should be accountability for where our tax dollars are spent and that it has been highly irresponsible not only the war in and of itself but the way that the war has been financed; the way that funding for the war has been concealed; the way that the money has not been available in a timely fashion to take care of the veterans’ needs and so forth. I honestly feel this is a good-government issue.
Q: Has your book had an impact on anybody important?
A: I think it has. Sen. Obama has quoted from it. Sen. Clinton is now talking about the trillions of dollars spent on the war. Sen. Edwards just yesterday wrote a letter to the Washington Post complaining about the two sets of books in the Pentagon. A recent poll taken last week showed that 71 percent of Americans now believe that the war is contributing to the economic downturn, which is one of the major premises of our book. I do believe people are looking at this war and thinking, “This is costing a lot” and that they are concerned about it and our book has sort of put a number around that. We hope that some of our recommendations are adopted and make it less likely that we are embroiled in such a financial fiasco in the future.
Q: Beyond the staggering human and financial cost of the war, what did you learn from doing your book that you did not already know about war?
A: What we really learned is that there is no such thing as a free war. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, wars are not good for the economy. And this war in particular has had a seriously weakening effect on the economy.
Leonard, Franklin and White Streets New York, NY United States
National Mobilization in New York City - 11:00 AM It is Time to End the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; It is Time to Address the Economic Crisis by Cutting Military Spending
“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967
Dr. King taught us we had to move beyond war if our country and our world were to be safe and prosperous and secure. He taught us that we could – and that we must – reshape our world so that poverty, racism and war no longer define our reality. And today, in this springtime of hope, to Dr. King and to the movements of which he was a part, we say “Yes We Can” organize a new world of equality and justice, a world beyond war.
Our country and our world are confronting grave problems – wars and occupations, poverty and inequality, the climate in crisis, and whole economies collapsing under the weight of war spending and greed. The election of President Barack Obama represents significant - though not yet sufficient - progress towards fulfilling Dr. King’s dream “that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Now we must advance the dream “Beyond Vietnam.”
On the April 4th anniversary of Dr. King’s prophetic “Beyond Vietnam” speech, delivered at Riverside Church, we will gather in New York City determined to lead our nation in the new direction so many long for. For the first time in too long, we will march filled with hope. Now is the time that our movements for racial justice and economic equality, our movements against the wars and occupations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and elsewhere, our movements for a new economy based on people’s needs, green union jobs and sustainability will ALL come together to say YES WE CAN! Yes We Can move beyond war. Yes We Can build a new world of justice, equality and peace.
On April 4th, we will bring our urgent message to the financial center of Wall Street. Our call will be heard in Washington, D.C. where Congress and the administration must take action to end these seemingly endless wars. Our call will be heard by millions of people around the world who share a common vision of a new world and hope for real change in the United States.
We look forward to April 4th when massive numbers of people will be in the street in a unified and nonviolent call to cut military spending and to fund human needs and ecological sustainability. Our nation must drastically reduce and redirect its military spending to reflect an entirely new foreign policy based on diplomacy and international law instead of military force, on global cooperation instead of domination, on a plan to live as a part of the world community instead of using brute power to stand astride the globe like the colossus of old.
Our nation must end torture and return to the rule of law; our justice system, that disproportionately locks up people of color must be fixed; and our economic policy must be rooted in our communities and not an out-of-date notion of trickle down growth.
Our hope is in the people. Our power has never been greater. We must build on this momentum in every school, every place of worship, every trade union hall, and every community center. A massive shift in our national priorities is crucial if we are to meet the urgent needs of our communities: for jobs, housing, health care, education, transportation, and for justice and equality.
We have hope knowing that our powerful grassroots movements for peace and an end to militarism, for racial, gender and economic justice, for sustainable energy, for human rights and human needs, are coming together to provide the support, the pressure, and the demand in the streets that is necessary to make sure our new administration and the Congress can deliver on their promises of a new direction.
Together we can bring Dr. King’s legacy to life. Together we can build that new world. Join us in New York City on April 4
“When the same mistakes are repeated over and over again, it’s time to consider the possibility that they are not mistakes at all.” -- Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine
Little has changed since Barack Obama assumed the presidency. The imperial agenda of the United States proceeds unabated with record military spending, expanded wars and prolonged occupations. Enabled by the president’s choice of lifelong deregulators Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner to mastermind the economic “recovery”, the financial sector continues to fleece the taxpayers.
As Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin succinctly put it, “Frankly, the banks run this place.”
Then there is the Bush administration’s legacy of torture, a problem that won’t go away quietly despite Obama’s determination to “look ahead.” Unfortunately for him, the president doesn’t have the right to choose which laws he will enforce, which international treaties he will honor. (Remember how we balked at George W. Bush’s imperious signing statements?) According to George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, Obama is placing himself in legal jeopardy by refusing to meet the solemn obligations of the United States of America with respect to the crime of torture. This would be on top of the extreme political jeopardy Obama may encounter now that he has reversed virtually every position with regard the war on terror (other than his pledge to intensify the Afghan war) he advanced during his campaign. Most recently, the president has broken his promise of transparency by refusing to honor a court-ordered release of photographs that could put the lie to the assertion that the torturers were “a few bad apples.”
Somewhere along the line, Barack Obama became enamored of Wall Street. He bought the pre-meltdown line that the raft of exotic financial instruments spawned by the Street were evidence of the energy and creativity of the US economy, rather than signs of its corruption. When the crash came, Obama smartly saluted the Bush/Paulson plan to advance an initial $700 billion bailout of the scofflaws. The president hasn’t wavered since in his belief that Humpty Dumpty can and must be put back together again.
Under Bush and Obama, 13 trillion dollars have been spent, lent or guaranteed to save the country’s largest (albeit insolvent) banks. But when it came to mustering 51 Senate Democrats to help homeowners avoid foreclosure by the very banks that have been devouring his government’s bailout feast, Obama was mute. Senator Durbin again captured the moment: “The banks that are too big to fail are saying that 8 million Americans facing foreclosure are too little to count.”
At his 100 Days press conference, the president called the ethical meltdown that led Americans to torture a “mistake”. Hauled before Congress to explain the financial meltdown that gathered steam on his watch, Alan Greenspan explained his “mistake” of “presuming that the self-interests of…banks…were such that they were best capable of protecting their shareholders.” In a similar vein, we’ve heard repeatedly that the Iraq war—with no WMD’s found and no post-shock and awe plan—was another “mistake.” first-100-days-of-obama-administration
How come these brilliant, highly educated and compensated people keep making supersized “mistakes?” Perhaps because they aren’t mistakes at all.
What the United States needs more than anything is some full-bore truth-telling before we slip into a fascistic, Orwellian dystopia. We could start by admitting that we preyed upon Iraq not because that country was perceived as a threat but because, after 10 years of sanctions, Iraq was no threat at all. In fact, it was ripe for the picking. Once consumer protection was removed, the banks could freely practice their own brand of predation. Millions of Americans, hoodwinked into signing up for “no-doc” loans with teaser rates, were also ripe for the picking.
Was the financial meltdown a mistake? According to University of Texas Professor James K. Galbraith, “You had fraud in the origination of the mortgages, fraud in the underwriting, fraud in the ratings agencies.” Committing fraud is not the same as making a mistake. Fraud, according to our dictionary (American Heritage, 2nd ed.), is “deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.” Fraud is not a mistake. obama-secret-rockefeller-new-world
In 2004, the FBI warned that “rampant fraud in the mortgage industry… could become an ‘epidemic.’” The Bureau was ignored. (Interestingly, the Bureau was also ignored when it tried to sound the alarm that young Saudis with dubious visas had enrolled in US flight training schools.) Top economists including Nobel Prize winners Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman were also ignored because in fact, there was no mistake being made. As in their preemptory attack on oil-rich and strategically-located Iraq, the ruling elites were simply pursuing their private, or corporate, interests, indistinguishable in their minds from the public interest.
The American people are now suffering from all these “mistakes” and there are plenty of signs that things will not improve soon. Last month, we learned that just over half a million people lost their jobs. That was considered good news. Experts predict at least eight million foreclosures in 2009. That translates into about 30 million people without homes. Already tent cities have sprung up in cities and towns around the country. Democrats in Congress are now proposing construction of FEMA “emergency centers” on military installations across the country. Is this going to be the only “housing” that millions of foreclosed Americans will be able to afford?
Make no mistake, we the people are being taken for a very expensive ride, an unpleasant ride that our children and grandchildren will be forced to take as well. The elites that own the wealth, fund the politicians and control the message are on the verge of stealing our birthright of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in a democratic society.
The End of the Internet? Cybersecurity Act gives Obama power to shut down internet, ignore laws.
http://www.breakthematrix.com/node/35797 Shelly Roche reports in on a new Cybersecurity bill would grant the President unprecedented power to shut down the internet and ignore privacy laws.
Who Is ChangeWe Are Change is a citizens based grassroots peace and social justice movement working to reveal the truth behind the events of September 11th, as well as the lies of the government and corporate elite who remain suspect in this crime. In addition, we are here to aid the sick and dying first responders through fundraising and social outreach programs in order to promote awareness of those who suffer from physical, emotional, and psychological traumas they received in the aftermath of 9-11. We also seek to meet other local citizens who are interested in educating the public while engaging in peaceful demonstration about the pertinent issues that are affecting our lives each and every day. Furthermore, We Are Change is a nonpartisan independent media organization comprised of patriot journalists working to hold those engaging in activities that do not represent the wishes of We the People - by asking the hard questions that the controlled mainstream media refuses to do.
We Are Change has arisen from the remnants of our republic to fill the vacancy left by those who swore to preserve, protect and defend The Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. We seek to expose the fraud of the left/right paradigm and reveal that the world truly functions on a top/down hierarchy that threatens to destroy free society as we know it. We Are Change works to educate, motivate, and activate those striving to uncover the truth behind the private banking cartel of the military industrial complex that is directing the majority of U.S. policy, and that is actively seeking to eliminate national sovereignty and replace it with a "one world order." We will also continue to move in a direction that reconnects We the People to our nations founding principles laid out in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
We Are Change also seek an uncompromising and independent investigation into the crimes of 9-11, with subpoena power granted to obtain a long-overdue resolution for the survivors and families of the deceased. We reject the official explanation of the events leading up to, during and after the attacks of September 11th, 2001 as well as the fear-based politics and state mandated propaganda being disseminated by the Corporate Media which has facilitated the cover-up of 9-11.
As we establish citizens groups throughout the country and world, we wish to inspire a community of truth-seekers and peacemakers through creative campaigns with a commitment of nonviolence. We Are Change is not so much a group but an idea, an idea that "We the People" are the vehicles of these "ideas" and of the freedoms, liberties, and truths we are seeking all across the globe. An idea that captures the spirits of our forefathers who just desired freedom; that together, as residents of this planet, we grow like a snowball of truth and justice rolling down a mountain of tyranny growing bigger and stronger, recognizing the beauty in our differences and the diverseness of each other, but at the same time strengthening our cause because we learn and grow from each others individuality. Then as we learn to come together, that as one, you, me, him, her, us will realize that WE ARE CHANGE.
Code of Conduct
We Are Change is a peaceful organization that does not discriminate in any way. We are tolerant of all regardless of racial, religious, ethnic or sexual orientation. We denounce any individual or group that would speak in our name and that would not adhere to these precepts. Anyone violating these principles will be asked by the group to leave permanently as a destructive individual working against the goals that We Are Change is striving to achieve. As a nation in crisis and a realization that time is not on our side, there will be no tolerance for anything other than an effort to preserve national sovereignty and to seek truth and justice for all through non-violent policies based on open government, public awareness, compassion, kindness and a commitment to Constitutional law.
Human Rights Attorney Vince Warren: Obamas “Preventive Detention” Plan Goes Beyond Bush Admin Policies
We get reaction to President Obama and Vice President Dick Cheney’s dueling speeches on torture from Vince Warren, the executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Warren took part in a secret meeting Wednesday between Obama and several human rights groups. Warren says although he welcomes Obamas willingness to hear critical views, hes disappointed in Obamas new support for preventive detention.
Guest:
Vince Warren, Executive Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
The First 100 Days of the Obama Administration: Small Glimmers of Hope, but Little Real Change
The first 100 days of the Obama administration presented a historic opportunity to restore the Constitution after the Bush administration’s systematic attempts to dismantle it, right by right, while ignoring international human rights standards. Yet, despite several strong steps, the Obama presidency has failed to live up to its promises in many areas of critical importance, including human rights, torture, rendition, secrecy and surveillance.
In the 2008 elections, the people of the United States resoundingly rejected the Bush administration legacy of torture, warrantless surveillance and a seemingly endless expansion of executive power under the rubric of the “war on terror.” What remained to be seen, however, was the political willingness and commitment of the Obama administration to not only promise hope and change, but to take concrete action to free the United States, its people and the world of the attacks on civil liberties and other human rights over the past 8 years – and beyond – and to restore the Constitution and the freedoms and rights it promises.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is committed to a vision of social justice that requires resolute action to restore and expand the Constitution. The Center has taken action accordingly – from its numerous legal cases challenging attacks on dissent, unlawful detention, extraordinary rendition, torture and other abuses, to its advocacy and education work addressing those same issues – in order to support existing movements and build a national movement for change.
In its first 100 days, the Obama administration has not lived up to its promises of hope and change. The record is contradictory and shows the critical task that lies ahead if we are to push this administration to honor those promises
The future will judge the Obama administration based on how it handles these challenges. The president must initiate a significant rollback of executive power, far greater than that so far embraced by the administration, and hold high level Bush officials accountable for the crimes they committed.
The intention of this report on the first 100 days of the Obama administration – tracked against CCR’s 100 Days goals for President Obama – is to assess where it has made progress and where it has merely paused or even sustained Bush policies and to provide a guide to moving real change forward. The Obama administration can indeed fulfill its promise – by creating a historic precedent for the rule of law, reestablishing the Constitution and clearly acknowledging – despite 8 years of assertions of imperial power – that presidential power does not include automatic immunity for criminal acts.
Prosecutions and Accountability: Incomplete
Positive: Releasing the Torture Memos
Incomplete: Holding the Torturers Accountable
Perhaps one of the most pressing challenges facing the new administration in its first 100 days has been the question of prosecutions and accountability for former Bush administration officials who broke the law. While the Obama administration released key memoranda proving Bush administration officials’ and attorneys’ direct involvement in the creation, authorization and implementation of torture and war crimes, most public statements by President Obama and other administration officials have focused on “moving forwards” and avoiding “retribution.” The vast amount of public information pointing to criminal activity committed by high level government officials compels the Obama administration to fully and transparently investigate and hold those responsible accountable to the fullest extent of the law – not to put the issue aside. For both victims of torture and the people of the United States, moving forward means prosecuting those who committed serious crimes in order to ensure justice for victims and a permanent end to the legacy of the Bush administration’s approval of torture.
Positive: Mandating compliance with the Geneva Conventions through Executive Order
Negative: Keeping torture loopholes open in the Army Field Manual
President Obama’s January 22, 2009 executive orders mandating compliance with the Geneva Conventions and abolishing the “torture memos” of the Bush administration – as well as ordering the closure of Guantánamo within one year and shuttering CIA black sites – were a tremendous step forward. The reality of detainees’ continuing treatment today, however, and the persistence of Bush-era torture techniques added to the Army Field Manual in Appendix M, make ending torture an unfinished promise.
Ending Unlawful Detention and Extraordinary Rendition: Early Hopes Fading Fast
Positive: Shuttering the CIA Black Sites and ordering the closure of Guantánamo
Incomplete: Holding the Military Commissions on “Pause” for 120 days
Negative: Defending Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan as a new prison outside the law
President Obama issued key executive orders on January 22, 2009, addressing unlawful detention and extraordinary rendition. The orders called for the closure of the prison camp at Guantánamo within one year and ordered CIA “black sites” and detention facilities to be shuttered. The same executive order that established the Army Field Manual as the guideline for interrogation practices also addressed extraordinary rendition, the forced transfer of a person to another country to be arbitrarily detained, and interrogation under torture. While the memos ordered a study and verification that no renditions are performed to countries that torture or for the purpose of torture, the process of rendition itself – the kidnap of persons in a foreign country and their subsequent transport to another country or the U.S. – remained intact. That these executive orders were introduced so quickly upon President Obama’s inauguration sparked an initial hope; however, that spark quickly faded in the ensuing 100 days and an Obama administration detention policy that has, in practice, too frequently has resembled that of the Bush administration. In practice, the men at Guantánamo have remained imprisoned, often under inhumane conditions, and the Obama administration has defended in court the use of Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan as a new prison outside the reach of law.
Warning: Preventive detention structures remain available in the U.S. and new structures continue to pose a threat.
Discussions of preventive detention have recently come to the forefront due to numerous right-wing proposals for new “national security courts” or “preventive detention” structures that would enable the continuation of Guantánamo in the United States – detention without charge and without trial, without normal rules of evidence or standards of law. Preventive detention is, unfortunately, far from a mere threat in the United States or an issue that pertains only to those detained abroad. While structures enabling abuse and preventive detention have long existed in the United States, particularly following the passage in 1996 of immigration laws that substantially increased immigrant detention, the Bush administration made the domestic use of preventive detention a cornerstone of its so-called “war on terror” policy within the United States, a policy that was used with particular brutality against Arabs, South Asians, and Muslims. The Obama administration has been largely silent on the issue of preventive detention – particularly the existing domestic preventive detention regimes that have caused vast harm to many people who would never be charged at all or charge only with minor immigration violations without relation to criminal conduct. Preventive detention is a threat to due process, the rule of law and, most directly, to those targeted in “preventive” dragnets. It is critical that the Obama administration not only reject preventive detention in the context of Guantánamo but also in the context of the “war at home.”
Negative: Increasing “Green Scare” prosecutions of environmental activists
The Obama administration has failed to move in the first 100 Days on key issues regarding the right to dissent. The Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, however, have taken actions that led to the continued and enhanced use of “terrorism” prosecutions against animal rights and environmental activists. These actions indicate that the “Green Scare” – the repression of activists by designating them terrorists, with a specific concentration on the animal rights and environmental movement – continues in full swing. Without significant pressure from the movement for the right to dissent, positive action from President Obama, DHS and the DOJ are unlikely. The escalation of “Green Scare” prosecutions in the first 100 days of the Obama administration demonstrate not only the need for action from the Obama administration but an end to complacency among activists about attacks on the right to dissent.
Take Action
Join the Abolish the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act Coalition: abolishtheaeta.org/.
Reining in Presidential War Powers: The War Machine Rolls On
Negative: Expanding the War in Afghanistan and Pakistan
While the Obama administration revealed the series of Bush administration Office of Legal Counsel memos that laid out supreme executive power for the U.S. president and repudiated them in their entirety, presidential war powers have continued unchecked. It is incumbent upon members of Congress to take initiative to amend the War Powers Resolution, as the Center for Constitutional Rights recently recommended in its white paper on presidential war powers. To date, President Obama has continued on the path of war and occupation, promising to commit more troops to the war on Afghanistan, justifying continued occupation in Iraq, and relying on the Authorization for Use of Military Force to assert detention powers. President Obama could truly repudiate the past 8 years of unprecedented assertions of presidential war powers by taking the initiative to work with Congress to construct a War Powers Resolution that protects and affirms the checks and balances intended in the Constitution.
Ending the Abuse of the State Secrets Privilege: The Bush Years Continue
Positive: Affirming new guidelines for the Freedom of Information Act that promote openness
Negative: Continuing the abuse of the state secrets privilege in an attempt to throw torture victims’ lawsuits out of court.
The first 100 days of the Obama administration have seen a disappointing reaffirmation of the Bush administration’s frequent abuse of the state secrets privilege. The state secrets privilege, initially a privilege asserted by the federal government in an attempt to exclude evidence from the courtroom, became, under the Bush administration, a key tool in attempting to block lawsuits by torture victims, victims of warrantless surveillance and others altogether. President Obama promised a greater transparency during his campaign, and has, in some cases, delivered: his January 21, 2009 order directing a new and positive approach to the Freedom of Information Act culminated in Attorney General Eric Holder’s guidelines for FOIA, which encourage transparency and the release of information. After 8 years of the Bush administration’s intense hostility to FOIA, this is a clear step forward against excessive government secrecy. President Obama and the Department of Justice have, however, continued the Bush legacy in legal matters involving the state secrets privilege, upholding Bush-era arguments and attempts to dismiss entire lawsuits by torture victims. It remains for the Obama Administration to re-establish the standards that the Constitution demands.
Stopping Warrantless Wiretapping: Impunity and Immunity
Negative: Introducing new legal arguments relying on the Patriot Act to keep the government immune from lawsuits due to its illegal spying
The Obama administration has moved far from the positions the President Obama staked out during his candidacy. The Bush administration’s unlawful warrantless wiretapping program swept up the communications of millions of Americans – “nearly every phone call ever made,” according to press reports. In direct violation of U.S. laws and clear judicial precedent, the Bush administration’s National Security Agency engaged in a wide-ranging surveillance program that never sought or secured court approval. In cases challenging warrantless wiretapping in court, the Bush administration often defended itself by asserting the state secrets privilege, despite the widespread exposure of the program. As a candidate, President Obama denounced warrantless wiretapping, but in office, the new administration’s Department of Justice has repeatedly countered challenges to the program with state secrets claims and sovereign immunity claims.
Positive: Recognizing that the Attorney General, and not the president, has the authority to make the decision whether to prosecute torturers
Negative: Failing to renounce the Bush administration's claimed "inherent authority" in the so-called "war on terror”
It was not only the potential for an end to the lawless actions, repression, imperial arrogance, and criminal brutality of the last administration and that a new day of expanded rights would emerge that brought hope to the world in the 2008 U.S. elections – President Obama’s historic victory was seen by many as an achievement of the civil rights movement and the struggle against racism. Activists around the globe hoped for the expansion of social, racial, gender and economic justice and other human rights, the recognition of health care as a human right, respect for international law and respectful, not imperial, engagement with the rest of the world. The Bush administration’s officials and advisers oversaw and directed an unprecedented expansion of executive power. Presidential signing statements on legislation attempted to invalidate the separation of powers through an unauthorized line-item veto, and legal advisers espoused a ‘unitary executive’ theory which proposed kinglike powers for the president, unchecked by Congress or the judiciary. The so-called “war on terror” paradigm, within and without the United States, saw grave damage done to human rights and human lives, the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution. The Obama administration presents an opportunity to reconnect with the world; however, it has not seized that potential to date. The great challenge of the first 100 Days of the Obama administration can no longer be pushed aside: as the mountain of evidence grows, particularly with the administration’s release of the infamous torture memos, President Obama must allow the Department of Justice to pursue accountability for the crimes of the Bush administration without political interference or pressure. If the Obama administration acts with principle, firmness and commitment to law and justice and holds those officials accountable, it has the potential to fulfill its promise as a historic presidency. Without accountability and prosecutions, however, the first 100 Days of the Obama administration will lead to a historic disappointment and failure.
Denny Carr, MFA
Photographer and Video Artist
BIKE !!!! hase lepus trike (stroke-paralysis)
age 61 eco-friendly no-car
"I am a stroke survivor and deal daily with a speech disorder called Aphasia. This disorder is a result of my stroke in 2005. I am thankful God has given me the ability to express myself through my images and films." For more information, visit these websites: http://www.azimagery.com/
(MINE WEB) Whether one believes in the GATA premise that the gold price is being held down by a gigantic conspiracy between the Worlds Central Banks, Governments and some major banking institutions or not, there is little doubt that governmental-initiated currency manipulation does occur, and if one looks at gold as money then it is logical that some degree of manipulation here also takes place at Central Bank level. Whether one can call this a global conspiracy, or part of the general process of stabilising currencies and exchange rates, depends perhaps on which side of the fence you are sitting. In a way this is similar to the terrorist/freedom fighter debate!
On the weekend of 13-15 March, 2008 Iraq Veterans Against the War will assemble history's largest gathering of US veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as Iraqi and Afghan survivors. In Washington DC they will testify to their first hand experiences and reveal the truth of occupation. They are currently seeking many types of support to make this happen, and are requesting that Iraq and Afghan veterans submit testimony and evidence.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the summer soldier who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Posts
