From papadop at peak.org Sat Aug 1 12:04:54 2009 From: papadop at peak.org (MichaelP) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 12:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] William Rivers Pitt: But Here's the Funny Part Message-ID: http://www.truthout.org/080109A Friday 31 July 2009 by: William Rivers Pitt, t r u t h o u t | Columnist So the debate over health care reform has all but stalled out for the summer. Rep. Henry Waxman tried to keep the "public option" component of the package together, but wound up getting sold down the river by a bunch of Blue Cross Blue Shield Blue Dog Democrats who could give lessons to the GOP minority on how to thwart a presidential agenda. Obama's poll numbers took a pretty sizable hit in the last couple of weeks, at least according to Rasmussen, though there is a fairly compelling argument to be made that Rasmussen's numbers are only meaningful to Rasmussen. The president also wound up having a beer with a Harvard professor and a Cambridge cop to try to quell a story that has stepped all over the health care debate for the last week. On balance, therefore, it would be difficult to argue that this was anything other than a rough week for Democrats in general and the White House in particular. Politics being what it is, one would expect the GOP to do their level best to make some hay out of these stumbles and miscues, and for sure they have tried. Once again, however, the Republican Party gave America a clinic on how to look foolish, deranged, out of touch and downright amusing. For those in need of their daily recommended allowance of shrieking bat-poop insanity, look no further than the so-called "Birther" conspiracy currently roiling the ranks of the GOP. A holdover from the 2008 presidential campaign, the "Birther" controversy is centered around the far-Right argument that Obama was not born in America, has no birth certificate, is not an American citizen, and is not therefore a legitimate president. The actual birth certificate was produced ages ago, Hawaii proudly proclaimed itself the birthplace of the president, and the issue has been entirely settled in the minds of all but a few, who at their core simply cannot accept that a black man with an Arabic name sleeps in the White House. The rank absurdity of the Birthers' contentions hasn't kept a whole array of high-ranking Republicans from jumping into the fray to endorse the validity of this farce. "Indeed," reported Talking Points Memo on Wednesday, "prominent Congressional Republicans were openly entertaining this stuff. A bill to require birth certificates from presidential candidates has picked up 11 total co-sponsors; Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) declared that the Birthers 'have a point,' and that he doesn't discourage it. Even House GOP Vice Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Washington), a member of the leadership, was saying she wanted to see the documents." But here's the funny part. Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly, right-wing bombthrower Ann Coulter and GOP Chairman Michael Steele - three people who have repeatedly set the standard for Deranged Things Actually Said In Public - have been working overtime to kill the Birther debate because they think it's stupid. They think it's stupid. Memo to the Far Right: when you've lost the support of people like O'Reilly, Coulter and Steele, you have to step back and wonder just how far from the pack you've strayed. Elsewhere on the goofball spectrum, a couple of prominent right-wingers accused President Obama and the Democrats of being racists. Yes, they actually did. Fox News commentator Glenn Beck called Obama a racist for coming down on the side of Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. during the recent flap over his arrest. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) blasted Senate Democrats for - get this - using Sonya Sotomayor's race to divide the American people. Democrats, according to Cornyn, have been "giving cover to groups and individuals to nurture racial grievances for political advantage." Yeah, let's move on. There are just no words. Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) went out on a limb the other day to argue that the GOP's political woes of late are largely the fault of the party's far-Right Southern core. Voinovich's accusation drew a stern rebuke from fellow Republican Sen. David Vitter (R-Louisiana), who said, "I'm on the side of conservatives getting back to core conservative values. There are a lot of us from the South who hold those values, which I think the party is supposed to be about. We strayed from them in the past few years, and that's why we performed so badly in the national elections." Not content to leave it at that, Vitter went on to label Voinovich a "wishy-washy" moderate. But here's the funny part. Senator Vitter's heartfelt defense of core GOP values left out the part about how he is a known, publicly confirmed consorter with prostitutes, and admitted in 2007 to committing a "serious sin," the nature of which, one must assume, had nothing to do with failing to keep holy the Sabbath. The last word on this one belongs to Louisiana Democratic Party spokesman Kevin Franck, who replied to inquiries by Talking Points Memo with the following email message: "Last time I checked, you don't find core Southern values in the places David Vitter has been found. If David Vitter can lead his party back to their conservative values, maybe Larry Craig can give them tips on bathroom etiquette and Mark Sanford can recommend a really good restaurant in Buenos Aires." Ouch. From papadop at peak.org Sat Aug 1 20:31:08 2009 From: papadop at peak.org (MichaelP) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 20:31:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] HOW SINGLE PAYER CAME BACK ON THE TABLE Message-ID: www.michaelmunk.com Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 20:04:00 -0700 From: Michael Munk Which Palestinians might he be thinking about ? m. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_q=vol+74+number+139&as_epq=federal+register&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=100&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=images 22 July 2009 _________________________________________________________________ [Federal Register: July 22, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 139)] [Presidential Documents] [Page 36391-36394] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22jy09-136] [[Page 36391]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Part V The President ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Proclamation 8396--Captive Nations Week, 2009 Presidential Documents ___________________________________________________________________ Title 3-- The President [[Page 36393]] Proclamation 8396 of July 17, 2009 Captive Nations Week, 2009 By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation Fifty years ago, President Eisenhower issued a call of solidarity to peoples across the world living under communist rule. This first Captive Nations Week Proclamation expressed concern that too many people lacked fundamental freedoms, and it affirmed that the people of the United States stood alongside those who yearned to be free. Since this declaration, more nations have chosen the path of self-determination and respect for basic human rights. Brave American men and women have contributed to this story, making great sacrifices while serving in our Armed Forces or working in Government, private industry, and other organizations. The Cold War is now consigned to the history books, but the ideals that President Eisenhower proclaimed remain vibrant and inspiring today. Just as in years past, people still hope to have the freedom and opportunity to pursue their dreams. People, young and old, still yearn to speak their minds. Citizens still believe governments have an obligation to be honest and transparent, uphold the rule of law, and allow civic participation. We regard these universal principles as guiding values, and we stand in solidarity with those who aspire to live by them--not only because it is right, but also because our Nation's fate is connected to that of other nations. In an interdependent world, instability, disease, and hardship abroad affect us here at home. Governments that are responsive to the concerns of their citizens can better tackle these challenges and contribute to a more secure, healthy, and prosperous world. Nations must advance these values through example. At home and abroad, the United States strives to honor the principles enshrined in our Nation's founding documents. The challenges of a new century require us to summon the full range of human talents to move all nations forward. The United States stands with all governments and peoples committed to unlocking the potential of their people, and to peace, the rule of law, and respect for all citizens. The Congress, by Joint Resolution, approved July 17, 1959 (73 Stat. 212), has authorized and requested the President to issue a proclamation designating the third week of July of each year as ``Captive Nations Week.'' NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim July 19 through July 25, 2009, as Captive Nations Week. I call upon the people of the United States to reaffirm our commitment to all those seeking dignity, freedom, and justice. [[Page 36394]] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this seventeenth day of July, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth. (Presidential Sig.) From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Sun Aug 2 20:21:23 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:21:23 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] an inconvenient truth References: <200908010956050437.0018629D@smtp.totisp.net> Message-ID: <007a01ca13eb$756e0fb0$03ad57ca@jfos> Brilliant, thanks Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Patterson To: mai-not at globalproblematique.net Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 12:56 PM Subject: [Mai-not] an inconvenient truth - this cartoon says SO much about what is wrong, and what we face trying to improve things.... ______________________________________________ Mai-not mailing list Mai-not at globalproblematique.net http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From papadop at peak.org Mon Aug 3 09:49:07 2009 From: papadop at peak.org (MichaelP) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 09:49:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] Punishing hackers ? Message-ID: This piece links with lats weeks Brit highest court decision to allow extradition to the US of Gary Mckinnon for trial. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/08/03/the-purpose-of-punishment/ DISCOVER Magazine. Science, Technology and The Future What is the purpose of punishment? Seriously, I'm curious. I suppose it breaks down into two broad categories: it teaches the person punished not to transgress laws, and it is used as an example to others not to do the same. Punishment also serves other purposes, such as satisfying people's need for retribution and justice. That's all well and good in theory, but things get a little fuzzy when applied in practice. UK writer Jon Ronson presents the case of Gary McKinnon. As a young man, McKinnon was a UFO nut. Suspecting that the U.S. government was hiding secrets of alien technology, he hacked into the computers of NASA, the Pentagon, and more. His intent was probably not malicious, and he claims any damage he might have done was accidental. Moreover, McKinnon has Asperger's syndrome, and can become obsessive over certain things, such as compulsive internet use. So, what do we do with Mr. McKinnon? He did in fact hack into those systems, and knew what he did was highly illegal. However, he claims his intent was not malicious, and the evidence appears to back that up to large extent. Do we punish him, and how to do so? Given treatment and adequate supervision, he probably won't repeat his actions, so punishment won't have any real efficacy on him specifically. Punishment for him might sway other hackers from doing any harm -- "make an example of him", as the saying goes - but I suspect that hackers know well what awaits them if caught. However, if Mr. McKinnon is not punished, it may assuage the fears of hackers, tacitly encouraging them to continue (and allowing them to claim later they were not trying to be malicious, using McKinnon as a precedent). It's a tough call, in my opinion. Still, I have to wonder about how the U.S. is tackling this. McKinnon is a UK citizen, and under the new laws pushed through in the aftermath of 9/11, the U.S. can demand extradition for McKinnon, forcing him to be tried in the U.S. under our laws. The U.S. has done exactly this, and the UK has acquiesced. As things stand now, McKinnon will be forcibly relocated to the U.S. to stand trial for what the government calls "the biggest US military hack of all time". The thing is, if convicted McKinnon will go to jail. If prison were just incarceration, then I might be swayed that this is reasonable and fair retribution. But we all know that prison is far, far more than that. A lot of pretty nasty stuff will await McKinnon if (realistically, given the political climate, when) he goes to jail. For anyone, that sort of fate is terrifying. For someone with Asperger's, it's overwhelming. He has apparently been considering suicide. To me, given what I know, this situation is extremely difficult to judge. In many and perhaps most cases our criminal justice system is fair if somewhat overtaxed. But there are too many heartbreaking cases like McKinnon's, where the black-and-white print of laws and procedures seems to lack the subtlety of real life. As a scientist, I know that the Universe rarely behaves in a plain and simple matter; there are always underlying effects, multiple causes, and complicated give-and-take that muddy most people's clean version of reality. And humans can be far more complicated than the Universe at large. I think we may have such a case here. Punishment must be meted out, but what should that punishment be? I fear the shockwave from the tip of our legal lash will transfer far too large a burden compared to what is warranted. August 3rd, 2009 7:00 AM by Phil Plait in Antiscience, Piece of mind, Politics | 54 comments | From papadop at peak.org Mon Aug 3 10:11:35 2009 From: papadop at peak.org (MichaelP) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 10:11:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] MUNK: Watch Weiner stand up for single payer Message-ID: Subject: [mmopt] Watch Weiner stand up for single payer You can watch Rep Tony Weiner (who repreesents parts of Brooklyn and Queens, NY) argue for single payer here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rB6XTMPj-os&feature=related (You may have to copy and paste into your browser). Compare it with how the public option is presented in all its complexity and confusion. It was Weiner's deal with Pelosi and Waxman that may force House Dems to vote single payer up or down next month. I say drop everything else until then and lean on your own representatives for that vote.. Not everyone may agree. Here'a another take Terry Braueris writes: "Pelosi and Waxman set the trap: Progressives will get their vote (which no one with any political sophistication expects will pass). Assuming HR676 can garner 100 votes or less, watch the abstentions and not voting members of the House carefully. If the HR676 vote loses by 250 or more votes, a muscular (vs nominal) compromise public option legislation is in jeopardy. Grassroots has had its limitations and it is manifested daily. " From papadop at peak.org Mon Aug 3 12:41:05 2009 From: papadop at peak.org (MichaelP) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 12:41:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] Network neutrality in Congress, round 3: Fight! Message-ID: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/08/the-war-over-network-neutrality.ars Ars Technica: The Art of Technology Ed Markey (D-MA) is a big fan of "third time's the charm." He has introduced his plan to legislate network neutrality into a third consecutive Congress, and he has a message for ISPs: upgrade your infrastructure and don't even think about blocking or degrading traffic. By Nate Anderson | August 3, 2009 8:00 AM The war over network neutrality has been fought in the last two Congresses, and last week's introduction of the "Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009" (PDF) means that legislators will duke it out a third time. Should the bill pass, Internet service providers will not be able to "block, interfere with, discriminate against, impair, or degrade" access to any lawful content from any lawful application or device. ISPs would also be forbidden to "impose a charge" on content providers that goes "beyond the end-user charges associated with providing the service to such a provider." In other words, AT&T doesn't have to let Google "use its pipes for free," but it can only collect the money is owed through customary peering and transit arrangements. The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) -- who introduced similar legislation during the last Congressional session. During the Congressional session before that, Markey pushed network neutrality as an amendment rather than a standalone bill. Neither method has yet been successful. "The Internet has thrived and revolutionized business and the economy precisely because it started as an open technology," said co-sponsor Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) in a statement. "This bill will ensure that the non-discriminatory framework that allows the Internet to thrive and competition on the Web to flourish is preserved at a time when our economy needs it the most." The bill goes out of its way to beat the "lack of competition" drum, noting that "the overwhelming majority of residential consumers subscribe to Internet access service from 1 of only 2 wireline providers: the cable operator or the telephone company." Given this limited choice, the bill warns that ISPs "have an economic interest to discriminate in favor of their own services, content, and applications and against other providers." And thus... this bill, which defines US policy as anti-discrimination and pro-capacity upgrades, even for "applications and services that require substantial downstream and upstream bandwidth." Rulemaking and enforcement of network neutrality would be given to the Federal Communications Commission, which would also be given the unenviable job of hashing out what constitutes "reasonable network management" -- something explicitly allowed by the bill. Such management must be "narrowly tailored" and the techniques used must be "the least restrictive, least discriminatory, and least constricting of consumer choice available." Detailed rules are left to the FCC. Neutrality would also not apply to the access and transfer of unlawful information, including "theft of content," so a mythical deep packet inspection device that could block illegal P2P transfers with 100 percent accuracy would still be allowed. If enacted, the bill would allow any US Internet user to file a neutrality complaint with the FCC and receive a ruling within 90 days. If an ISP is found to be in violation, damages may have to be paid to "the complaining party," which sounds like an excellent way to deputize Internet users into probing their ISPs for discriminatory practices. Markey's last two attempts at pushing network neutrality have faltered, but with a new president and new FCC chair in place-- and both open to the concept -- the idea's political fortunes may have shifted as well. That's certainly the hope of Free Press, the media reform group that spearheaded the fight against Comcast's P2P throttling technique last year. "An army of lobbyists has been unleashed by the phone and cable companies to kill Net Neutrality so they can become the Internet's gatekeepers," said Policy Director Ben Scott. "But the momentum is shifting in the public?s favor. President Obama has repeatedly called for Net Neutrality; we have a new pro-Net Neutrality chairman now heading the Federal Communications Commission; and popular support is growing every day." From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Mon Aug 3 18:35:42 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:35:42 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Punishing hackers ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090804013543.F2168F666@fep03.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> People getting extradited to America although they don't live there and never have is getting to be a bit of a habit. There was someone a while ago sent from Australia on something similar. Are these the results of intergovernmental agreements? Does it cut the other way? What happened to those CIA thugs who were operating in Italy and scarpered when blown? And unlike this bloke they were even there when committing the offences against laws which prevail in Italy and every other civilised country in the world. Has the USA extradited them to Italy? Dion Giles At 00:49 04/08/2009, Michael wrote: >This piece links with lats weeks Brit highest court decision to >allow extradition to the US of Gary Mckinnon for trial. > > > >http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/08/03/the-purpose-of-punishment/ > >DISCOVER Magazine. Science, Technology and The Future > > > >What is the purpose of punishment? > >Seriously, I'm curious. I suppose it breaks down into two broad >categories: it teaches the person punished not to transgress laws, >and it is used as an example to others not to do the same. >Punishment also serves other purposes, such as satisfying people's >need for retribution and justice. > >That's all well and good in theory, but things get a little fuzzy >when applied in practice. > >UK writer Jon Ronson presents the case of Gary McKinnon. > >As a young man, McKinnon was a UFO nut. Suspecting that the U.S. >government was hiding secrets of alien technology, he hacked into >the computers of NASA, the Pentagon, and more. His intent was >probably not malicious, and he claims any damage he might have done >was accidental. Moreover, McKinnon has Asperger's syndrome, and can >become obsessive over certain things, such as compulsive internet use. > >So, what do we do with Mr. McKinnon? He did in fact hack into those >systems, and knew what he did was highly illegal. However, he claims >his intent was not malicious, and the evidence appears to back that >up to large extent. Do we punish him, and how to do so? > >Given treatment and adequate supervision, he probably won't repeat >his actions, so punishment won't have any real efficacy on him specifically. > >Punishment for him might sway other hackers from doing any harm -- >"make an example of him", as the saying goes - but I suspect that >hackers know well what awaits them if caught. However, if Mr. >McKinnon is not punished, it may assuage the fears of hackers, >tacitly encouraging them to continue (and allowing them to claim >later they were not trying to be malicious, using McKinnon as a precedent). > >It's a tough call, in my opinion. > >Still, I have to wonder about how the U.S. is tackling this. >McKinnon is a UK citizen, and under the new laws pushed through in >the aftermath of 9/11, the U.S. can demand extradition for McKinnon, >forcing him to be tried in the U.S. under our laws. The U.S. has >done exactly this, and the UK has acquiesced. As things stand now, >McKinnon will be forcibly relocated to the U.S. to stand trial for >what the government calls "the biggest US military hack of all time". > >The thing is, if convicted McKinnon will go to jail. If prison were >just incarceration, then I might be swayed that this is reasonable >and fair retribution. But we all know that prison is far, far more >than that. A lot of pretty nasty stuff will await McKinnon if >(realistically, given the political climate, when) he goes to jail. >For anyone, that sort of fate is >terrifying. For someone with Asperger's, it's overwhelming. He >has apparently been considering suicide. > >To me, given what I know, this situation is extremely difficult to >judge. In many and perhaps most cases our criminal justice system is >fair if somewhat overtaxed. But there are too many heartbreaking >cases like McKinnon's, where the black-and-white print of laws and >procedures seems to lack the subtlety of real life. As a scientist, >I know that the Universe rarely behaves in a plain and simple >matter; there are always underlying effects, multiple causes, and >complicated give-and-take that muddy most people's clean version of >reality. And humans can be far more complicated than the Universe at large. > >I think we may have such a case here. Punishment must be meted out, >but what should that punishment be? I fear the shockwave from the >tip of our legal lash will transfer far too large a burden compared >to what is warranted. > >August 3rd, 2009 7:00 AM by Phil Plait in Antiscience, Piece of >mind, Politics | 54 comments | > > > >_______________________________________________ >Mai-not mailing list >Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Mon Aug 3 18:38:10 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:38:10 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Network neutrality in Congress, round 3: Fight! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090804013811.AA1101105E@fep02.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> Will this mean thugs in China who block Internet traffic could be extradited to the USA to stand trial? Dion Giles >http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/08/the-war-over-network-neutrality.ars > >Ars Technica: The Art of Technology > > > >Ed Markey (D-MA) is a big fan of "third time's >the charm." He has introduced his plan to >legislate network neutrality into a third >consecutive Congress, and he has a message for >ISPs: upgrade your infrastructure and don't even >think about blocking or degrading traffic. > By Nate Anderson | > > >August 3, 2009 8:00 AM > > >The war over network neutrality has been fought >in the last two Congresses, and last week's >introduction of the "Internet Freedom >Preservation Act of 2009" (PDF) means that >legislators will duke it out a third time. >Should the bill pass, Internet service providers >will not be able to "block, interfere with, >discriminate against, impair, or degrade" access >to any lawful content from any lawful application or device. > >ISPs would also be forbidden to "impose a >charge" on content providers that goes "beyond >the end-user charges associated with providing >the service to such a provider." In other words, >AT&T doesn't have to let Google "use its pipes >for free," but it can only collect the money is >owed through customary peering and transit arrangements. > >The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Ed >Markey (D-MA) -- who introduced >similar legislation during the last >Congressional session. During the Congressional >session before that, Markey pushed network >neutrality as an amendment rather than a >standalone bill. Neither method has yet been successful. > >"The Internet has thrived and revolutionized >business and the economy precisely because it >started as an open technology," said co-sponsor >Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) in a statement. "This >bill will ensure that the >non-discriminatory framework that allows the >Internet to thrive and competition on the Web to >flourish is preserved at a time when our economy needs it the most." > >The bill goes out of its way to beat the "lack >of competition" drum, noting that "the >overwhelming majority of residential consumers >subscribe to Internet access service from 1 of >only 2 wireline providers: the cable operator or >the telephone company." Given this limited >choice, the bill warns that ISPs "have an >economic interest to discriminate in favor of >their own services, content, and applications and against other providers." > >And thus... this bill, which defines US policy >as anti-discrimination and pro-capacity >upgrades, even for "applications and services >that require substantial downstream and upstream bandwidth." > >Rulemaking and enforcement of network neutrality >would be given to the Federal Communications >Commission, which would also be given the >unenviable job of >hashing out what constitutes "reasonable >network management" -- something explicitly >allowed by the bill. Such management must >be "narrowly tailored" and the techniques >used must be "the least restrictive, least >discriminatory, and least constricting of >consumer choice available." Detailed rules are left to the FCC. > >Neutrality would also not apply to the access >and transfer of unlawful >information, including "theft of content," so >a mythical deep packet inspection device that >could block illegal P2P transfers with 100 >percent accuracy would still be allowed. > >If enacted, the bill would allow any US Internet >user to file a neutrality complaint with the FCC >and receive a ruling within 90 days. If an ISP >is found to be in violation, damages may have to >be paid to "the complaining party," which sounds >like an excellent way to deputize Internet users >into probing their ISPs for discriminatory practices. > >Markey's last two attempts at pushing network >neutrality have faltered, but with a new >president and new FCC chair in place-- and both >open to the concept -- the idea's political fortunes may have shifted as well. > >That's certainly the hope of Free Press, the >media reform group that spearheaded the fight >against Comcast's P2P throttling technique last >year. "An army of lobbyists has been unleashed >by the phone and cable companies to kill Net >Neutrality so they can become the Internet's >gatekeepers," said Policy Director Ben Scott. >"But the momentum is shifting in the public???s >favor. President Obama has repeatedly called for >Net Neutrality; we have a new pro-Net Neutrality >chairman now heading the Federal Communications >Commission; and popular support is growing every day." > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Mai-not mailing list >Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Mon Aug 3 18:57:43 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:57:43 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: U$ Market Review: Weakening Dollar, Rising Urban Unemployment Message-ID: <016a01ca14a6$f55ba0f0$15ad57ca@jfos> Global Research, August 1, 2009 The International Forecaster Excerpts: Economic crisis, and a crisis for economics - Following its failure to fix the current mess, economics has tumbled into a full-blown existential crisis. The fall has been something to behold. Not so long ago, the discipline seemed omnipotent: if you wanted to fix anything from environmental ruin to welfare policy, there was only one solution: call in an economist. But late last year, Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chief and high priest of capitalism, was forced to admit in a Congressional hearing that he had "found a flaw" in the foundations of his economic understanding. Nice euphemism. And at the weekend, a panel of leading economists wrote to the Queen trying to explain why they got it wrong. If there were such a thing as a car-crash letter, this was surely it. The world's financial system lies in ruins, as do the fiscal balances of almost every major Western nation, after having to bail out their banks and splash billions of dollars of rescue money into the broader economy. Everyone is suffering, as unemployment climbs, house prices fall, and companies rack up losses or even face collapse. Yet the economists have still failed to find their form again. At a time when the financial industry's credibility is at an all-time low, you would think Wall Street's finest would break their necks providing transparency. Not so. Stock analysts continue to promote corporate earnings lies, insisting that net income isn't really what investors need to know. Instead, their earnings estimates ignore often huge expenditures that can't help but affect a company's health.(snip) Desperate for cash, Arizona state lawmakers are considering selling the House and Senate buildings, then leasing them back over several years before assuming ownership again. Dozens of other state buildings may also be sold off and leased back as the state grapples with a huge budget deficit.(snip) Rising delinquencies among consumer and corporate borrowers are the "next wave" of the financial crisis and may affect banks that have avoided losses so far, said Deutsche Bank AG Chief Executive Officer Josef Ackermann. "This crisis has consisted of a series of earthquakes, with changing epicenters," Ackermann said late yesterday at an event in Zurich. "Bad loans are the next wave. Banks that have fared relatively well so far will also be affected by this." Deutsche Bank, Germany's biggest lender, said this week it set aside 1 billion euros ($1.4 billion) for risky loans in the second quarter. The seven-fold increase in provisions and below- forecast revenue from trading sent the Frankfurt-based bank's shares to the biggest decline in four months on July 28. "We were struck by the 44 percent increase in problem loans in the quarter," Morgan Stanley analysts Huw van Steenis and Hubert Lam said in a note today, cutting their rating on Deutsche Bank shares to "equal-weight" from "overweight."(snip) S&P, Fitch and Moody's face investor lawsuits and criticism by lawmakers for grading mortgage bonds too high and maintaining the ratings months after home-loan defaults surged in 2007. The California Public Employees' Retirement System, or Calpers, the largest U.S. public pension fund, sued July 9 in a case in state court in San Francisco over $1 billion in losses it blamed on "wildly inaccurate" risk assessments. Ronald Grassi, a retired California attorney, and Sally Grassi, a retired teacher, sued the New York-based companies in federal court in January for negligence, claiming they gave high ratings to the Lehman bonds to curry favor with the investment bank, which filed the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history in September. The Grassis said in court filings that they had sought safe investments and bought the bonds because they held A ratings from the companies.(snip) "The unemployment rate climbed in all of the U.S.'s biggest urban areas during June, and 18 places had joblessness of at least 15%. "For the sixth consecutive month, all 372 metropolitan areas had over-the-year unemployment rate increases," the Labor Department said in its report Wednesday. The numbers in the department's Metropolitan Area Employment and Unemployment report are not seasonally adjusted. The report said 144 metro areas reported jobless rates of at least 10%, up from six areas a year prior. El Centro, Calif., had the largest jobless rate from June 2008, at 27.5%. Yuma, Ariz., was second with 23.1%. " (bear in mind that these are only the 'official' statistics, and we all know how adept 'officials' are are massaging the figures (lieing) so as to hide the REAL nature of the Capitalist System!) full article at http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14600 ------------------------------------------------------ Provided by Australis http://www.australis.com.au/ From thinker at xplornet.com Mon Aug 3 19:01:13 2009 From: thinker at xplornet.com (Ed Deak) Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:01:13 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] Network neutrality in Congress, round 3: Fight! In-Reply-To: <20090804013811.AA1101105E@fep02.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> References: <20090804013811.AA1101105E@fep02.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> Message-ID: <20090804015744.C94BF1C9220B@smtprelay02.hostedemail.com> The real funny part of this idiocy is that while the US and other governments are going after chickenfeed, individual hackers, they're all employing hundreds in huge departments, with the top most equipment, to hack the secret sites of other governments. The Chinese could be the biggest hackers. Cheers, Ed. At 06:38 PM 03/08/2009, you wrote: >Will this mean thugs in China who block Internet >traffic could be extradited to the USA to stand trial? > >Dion Giles > > > > >>http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/08/the-war-over-network-neutrality.ars >> >>Ars Technica: The Art of Technology >> >> >> >>Ed Markey (D-MA) is a big fan of "third time's >>the charm." He has introduced his plan to >>legislate network neutrality into a third >>consecutive Congress, and he has a message for >>ISPs: upgrade your infrastructure and don't >>even think about blocking or degrading traffic. >> By Nate Anderson | >> >> >>August 3, 2009 8:00 AM >> >> >>The war over network neutrality has been fought >>in the last two Congresses, and last week's >>introduction of the "Internet Freedom >>Preservation Act of 2009" (PDF) means that >>legislators will duke it out a third time. >>Should the bill pass, Internet service >>providers will not be able to "block, interfere >>with, discriminate against, impair, or degrade" >>access to any lawful content from any lawful application or device. >> >>ISPs would also be forbidden to "impose a >>charge" on content providers that goes "beyond >>the end-user charges associated with providing >>the service to such a provider." In other >>words, AT&T doesn't have to let Google "use its >>pipes for free," but it can only collect the >>money is owed through customary peering and transit arrangements. >> >>The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Ed >>Markey (D-MA) -- who introduced >>similar legislation during the last >>Congressional session. During the Congressional >>session before that, Markey pushed network >>neutrality as an amendment rather than a >>standalone bill. Neither method has yet been successful. >> >>"The Internet has thrived and revolutionized >>business and the economy precisely because it >>started as an open technology," said co-sponsor >>Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) in a statement. >>"This bill will ensure that the >>non-discriminatory framework that allows the >>Internet to thrive and competition on the Web >>to flourish is preserved at a time when our economy needs it the most." >> >>The bill goes out of its way to beat the "lack >>of competition" drum, noting that "the >>overwhelming majority of residential consumers >>subscribe to Internet access service from 1 of >>only 2 wireline providers: the cable operator >>or the telephone company." Given this limited >>choice, the bill warns that ISPs "have an >>economic interest to discriminate in favor of >>their own services, content, and applications and against other providers." >> >>And thus... this bill, which defines US policy >>as anti-discrimination and pro-capacity >>upgrades, even for "applications and services >>that require substantial downstream and upstream bandwidth." >> >>Rulemaking and enforcement of network >>neutrality would be given to the Federal >>Communications Commission, which would also be >>given the unenviable job of >>hashing out what constitutes >>"reasonable network management" -- something >>explicitly allowed by the bill. Such management >>must be "narrowly >>tailored" and the techniques used must be >>"the least restrictive, least discriminatory, >>and least constricting of consumer choice >>available." Detailed rules are left to the FCC. >> >>Neutrality would also not apply to the access >>and transfer of unlawful >>information, including "theft of content," so >>a mythical deep packet inspection device that >>could block illegal P2P transfers with 100 >>percent accuracy would still be allowed. >> >>If enacted, the bill would allow any US >>Internet user to file a neutrality complaint >>with the FCC and receive a ruling within 90 >>days. If an ISP is found to be in violation, >>damages may have to be paid to "the complaining >>party," which sounds like an excellent way to >>deputize Internet users into probing their ISPs for discriminatory practices. >> >>Markey's last two attempts at pushing network >>neutrality have faltered, but with a new >>president and new FCC chair in place-- and both >>open to the concept -- the idea's political fortunes may have shifted as well. >> >>That's certainly the hope of Free Press, the >>media reform group that spearheaded the fight >>against Comcast's P2P throttling technique last >>year. "An army of lobbyists has been unleashed >>by the phone and cable companies to kill Net >>Neutrality so they can become the Internet's >>gatekeepers," said Policy Director Ben Scott. >>"But the momentum is shifting in the public???s >>favor. President Obama has repeatedly called >>for Net Neutrality; we have a new pro-Net >>Neutrality chairman now heading the Federal >>Communications Commission; and popular support is growing every day." >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Mai-not mailing list >>Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >>http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not > >_______________________________________________ >Mai-not mailing list >Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not > > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: >270.13.43/2280 - Release Date: 08/03/09 17:56:00 From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Mon Aug 3 19:37:25 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:37:25 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: The Pentagon's 21st Century Counterinsurgency Wars: Latin America and South Asia Message-ID: <01ab01ca14ac$80d7b0b0$15ad57ca@jfos> Exerpt: "There will soon officially be military units from fifty or more nations serving under NATO command in Afghanistan - including what is left of alleged neutral nations in Europe ( Austria , Finland , Ireland , Sweden and Switzerland ) - from four continents and the Middle East . Never before in history have soldiers from so many nations served under a common military structure in a single war theater. Afghanistan is the training and testing ground for an embryonic world army.(snip) US Transfers South American Death Squads To South Asia - Honduras: 20th Century Coup Targets 21st Century Latin American Independence Coups and counterinsurgencies engineered and supported by Washington are no longer relics of the past century. Coups of the Georgian variety and its offshoots or of the Honduran model and Vietnam-style counterinsurgency wars have been reactivated as foreign policy options of choice. What is new is the degree of international coordination now practiced by the US and its allies. Full article at http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14599 ------------------------------------------------------ Provided by Australis http://www.australis.com.au/ From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Mon Aug 3 23:41:07 2009 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:41:07 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] What's new at Links: Venezuela, Pacific & climate, Vestas sit-in, nationalise coal!, Honduras, Malaysia, Europe, Zimbabwe, Holocaust, Jonah Raskin book excerpt Message-ID: <4A77D803.4030901@greenleft.org.au> What's new at Links: Venezuela, Pacific & climate, Vestas sit-in, nationalise coal!, Honduras, Malaysia, Europe, Zimbabwe, Holocaust, Jonah Raskin book excerpt *** Subscribe free to Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 You can also follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism Visit and bookmark http://links.org.au and add it to your RSS feed (http://links.org.au/rss.xml). If you would like us to consider an article, please send it to links at dsp.org.au *Please pass on to anybody you think will be interested in /Links/. * * * Venezuela: Class struggle intensifies over battle for workers' control By Federico Fuentes Caracas -- July 25, 2009 -- On July 22, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez again declared his complete support for the proposal by industrial workers for a new model of production based on workers' control. This push from Chavez, part of the socialist revolution, aims at transforming Venezuela's basic industry. However, it faces resistance from within the state bureaucracy and the revolutionary movement. Presenting his government's "Plan Socialist Guayana 2009-2019", Chavez said the state-owned companies in basic industry have to be transformed into "socialist companies". * Read more Pacific islanders struggle for survival against global warming -- `Rich countries must slash emissions now' July 29, 2009 -- For Pacific islanders, climate change is not a threat looming somewhere in the future. Rising sea levels and unpredictable weather are having devastating effects right now. Climate change has already forced some communities to leave their traditional homes.Simon Butler spoke to two climate change activists from the Pacific about their campaign for immediate cuts to global greenhouse emissions. * Read more (Updated August 3) Capitalism vs the environment: Wind turbine workers fight factory closure with sit-in * Read more Public ownership of coal industry needed to move to 100% renewable energy and retain jobs Graham Brown is a retired coalminer and a climate change activist. He's also a member of the Upper Hunter branch of the NSW Greens party. The Hunter Valley, near the city of Newcastle, is a major source of Australia's coal exports. Brown is helping build a union and community alliance to create a "just transition" to a carbon-neutral economy. Such a transition would ensure workers in the coal industry move into alternative employment. Socialist Alliance's Zane Alcorn spoke to Brown. * Read more With Honduras, with all of Latin America -- sign the statement July 31, 2009 -- We, the undersigned social, political and solidarity organisations, faced with the ongoing coup d'?tat in Honduras and the imperialist project of installing military bases in Colombia whose objective is to throttle the hope for liberty and emancipation across the Latin American continent, declare: * Read more Malaysia: 40,000 demand `Abolish the Internal Security Act now!', hundreds arrested By S. Arutchelvan August 1, 2009 -- Parti Sosialis Malaysia -- The 40,000-strong mobilisation today in Kuala Lumpur and the thousands who did not make it because of police roadblocks gave a very clear and precise message to Malaysia's Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak: repeal the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA). * Read more A balance sheet of the European elections By Fran?ois Sabado The principal lessons of the European elections of June 7, 2009, are the following: massive abstention; progress for the right flanked by the far right; a collapse of social democracy; an increase in the votes for the ecologists; while the radical left, left reformists and anti-capitalists maintained their position, without making new advances, except in Portugal and Ireland. * Read more For jobs and the environment: Why the workers occupied the Vestas wind turbine plant Below is the text of a speech written by a Vestas worker for delivery at trade union and environmental movement meetings. It gives an excellent insight into the background of the struggle, and its wider political significance. * Read more Zimbabwe: Interviews -- The struggle for a people-driven constitution July 25, 2009 -- The first All-Stakeholders' Conference aimed at drafting a new constitution in Zimbabwe was held in Harare on July 13-14. The constitutional reform process is the result of the agreement reached between President Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) and the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), when they formed a power-sharing government in February 2009... Many in the pro-democracy movement believe the constitutional reform process is dominated by politicians and will fail to incorporate the demands of ordinary Zimbabweans suffering worst from the country's social and economic crisis. * Read more The Holocaust: `May history attest to us' -- resistance, collaboration and survival Hitler's Priests, by Kevin Spicer, Northern Illinois University Press, 2008, 369 pp. US$34.95 Who Will Write Our History? Emanuel Ringelblum, the Warsaw Ghetto, and the Oyneg Shabes Archive, by Samuel D. Kassow, Indiana University Press, 2007, 523 pP., US$34.95 Kasztner's Train: the True Story of an Unknown Hero of the Holocaust, by Anna Porter, Scribe, 2008, 548 pp., A$32.95 The Complete Maus: A Survivor's Tale, Art Spiegelman, Pantheon, 1996, 296 pp., US$35. Review by Barry Healy July 28, 2009 -- In October 2008 the Catholic Synod of Bishops convened in Rome for a four-day theological discussion. Without warning, on the first day, Pope Benedict XVI suspended discussion and ordered the 200 participants to attend a special commemoration mass for Pius XII, who was the pope between 1939 and 1958. * Read more Exclusive excerpt from Jonah Raskin's `The Mythology of Imperialism' -- `Kipling's Contrasts' [With the permission of Monthly Review Press, Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal is making available an exclusive excerpt from Jonah Raskin's The Mythology of Imperialism: A Revolutionary Critique of British Literature and Society in the Modern Age. A PDF file, available to read or download, of Chapter 2, ``Kipling's Contrasts'' is below. Readers of Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal are encouraged to purchase The Mythology of Imperialism from the Monthly Review Press website.] * Read more * * * Links seeks to promote the international exchange of information, experience of struggle, theoretical analysis and views of political strategy and tactics within the international left. It is a forum for open and constructive dialogue between active socialists coming from different political traditions. It seeks to bring together those in the international left who are opposed to neoliberal economic and social policies. It aims to promote the renewal of the socialist movement in the wake of the collapse of the bureaucratic model of "actually existing socialism" in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. ATTENTION: Sign up for regular ``what's new'' announcement emails at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 Follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Tue Aug 4 05:24:24 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:24:24 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Microsoft cyber attack on PC users Message-ID: <20090804122427.EA98810F16@fep06.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> It's all in the attachment. Dion Giles -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MS nobbles XP-Anti-Spy.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 112873 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MS nobbles XP-Anti-Spy.doc Type: application/msword Size: 77312 bytes Desc: not available URL: From creuss at bluewin.ch Tue Aug 4 07:00:35 2009 From: creuss at bluewin.ch (Christoph Reuss) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 16:00:35 +0200 Subject: [Mai-not] How WTC Top would have crumbled Without Explosives Message-ID: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozfzr3kkp_4 This is how the top (above the fire) --but not the lower floors-- of the WTC towers would have crumbled without the use of explosives on every floor... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". From siamdave at yahoo.ca Tue Aug 4 07:39:56 2009 From: siamdave at yahoo.ca (Dave Patterson) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:39:56 +0700 Subject: [Mai-not] How WTC Top would have crumbled Without Explosives In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200908042139560453.02887465@smtp.totisp.net> ahh, but you (and a few of us others) live in reality world, where steel and cement and gravity follow certain physical laws - most of our "fellow citizens" live in comicbookland, with 'reality' being whatever hollywood FX shows them on their tvs (and fox'news' tells them to believe about whatever they see), and 'laws' being whatever serves the interests of the masters at any given time - in 'fall down go boom!!!! wow!!!' land, the WTC collapses were perfectly normal .... *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 09-08-04 at 4:00 PM creuss at bluewin.ch wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozfzr3kkp_4 This is how the top (above the fire) --but not the lower floors-- of the WTC towers would have crumbled without the use of explosives on every floor... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Mai-not mailing list Mai-not at globalproblematique.net http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.43/2281 - Release Date: 08/04/09 05:57:00 From creuss at bluewin.ch Tue Aug 4 07:42:35 2009 From: creuss at bluewin.ch (Christoph Reuss) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 16:42:35 +0200 Subject: [Mai-not] Italy vs. CIA thugs (was Re: Punishing hackers ?) Message-ID: Dion Giles asked: > Are these the results of intergovernmental agreements? Does it cut > the other way? What happened to those CIA thugs who were operating > in Italy and scarpered when blown? And unlike this bloke they were > even there when committing the offences against laws which prevail in > Italy and every other civilised country in the world. Has the USA > extradited them to Italy? Burlesquoni refused to even seek their extradition from his master Dubya, and his "liberal" successor Prodi copied this refusal! (They don't want more shoot-outs in Iraq, after all...) So the Milan authorities had to prosecute 26 Americans (25 CIA agents and 1 U$AF colonel) _in absentia_. But already 10 days after the trial started, Italy's highest (constitutional) court ruled that an investigation into the role of U$ and Italian intelligence agents in the kidnapping of Abu Omar breached state secrets (by using wiretaps on agents). So critical evidence had to be removed and the trial was resumed as a mere formality after over a year. Italian agents received minor suspended sentences or fines, and AFAIK the Yanks were not brought to justice to this day. Hello Mr. lawyer Obama?? Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". From gdy52150 at spiritone.com Tue Aug 4 09:21:29 2009 From: gdy52150 at spiritone.com (glen) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:21:29 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] Microsoft cyber attack on PC users In-Reply-To: <20090804122427.EA98810F16@fep06.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> References: <20090804122427.EA98810F16@fep06.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> Message-ID: <4A786009.7070302@spiritone.com> there is one solution install Linux---the new versions are user friendly and look alot like winders Dion Giles wrote: > It's all in the attachment. > > Dion Giles > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Mai-not mailing list > Mai-not at globalproblematique.net > http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not > From papadop at peak.org Tue Aug 4 13:15:07 2009 From: papadop at peak.org (MichaelP) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 13:15:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] STATE SECRETS UNDER OBAMA Message-ID: Who'all out there accepts that the gobernment has a right'duty to utter falsehoods, or to hide the truth, in the interest of "national secutity ? M. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/us/politics/04bar.html?_r=1&ref=global-home NYT Times --Published: August 3, 2009 Obama Administration Weighs in on State Secrets, Raising Concern on the Left WASHINGTON A Supreme Court filing from the Obama administration last month has set off alarm bells on the left. The filing was a friend-of-the-court brief, and it mostly dealt with an excruciatingly technical question about the attorney-client privilege. But its last five pages were about the state secrets privilege, which was not at issue in the case. That privilege, a favorite tool of the Bush administration, allows the government to shut down lawsuits by invoking national security. The Obama administration's brief argued, though no one had asked, that the state secrets privilege was rooted in the Constitution. The federal government files friend-of-the-court briefs in the Supreme Court all the time, and it is not unusual for it to alert the court to related issues, usually to make sure that the court's ruling is no broader than it needs to be. But the filing has raised eyebrows and suspicions among liberals already disappointed that the Obama administration has not rejected a number of legal doctrines associated with the Bush administration. Jon B. Eisenberg, a lawyer for an Islamic charity in Oregon, said the filing reflected "the good old Bush-Cheney inherent presidential power theory" Mr. Eisenberg said he suspected that the administration was hoping to use the attorney-client case to invite the Supreme Court to say something helpful to it about state secrets. Mathew A. Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said there was no reason for concern. "The brief says only that the state secrets privilege, along with other governmental privileges, has a constitutional basis" Mr. Miller said, "which is a position that has been taken by the Department of Justice for many decades under administrations of both parties." On the campaign trail and in more recent statements, President Obama has indicated that he wants to limit the use of the state secrets privilege. In courtrooms, however, there has been little evidence of a new approach. The administration?s brief said the government should be allowed to appeal rulings rejecting the state secrets privilege right away, rather than after the whole case is decided. Rulings concerning the attorney-client privilege, on the other hand, the brief said, should not be subject to immediate appeal. The differing treatments are warranted, the brief argued, because the state secrets privilege is grounded in the Constitution. But that point is controversial, and the brief's account of the relevant decisions was incomplete. A federal judge in San Francisco, for instance, last year rejected a version of the constitutional argument in a case brought by Mr. Eisenberg's client, Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation. The foundation said it had been subjected to illegal surveillance in the Bush years. Both the Bush and Obama administrations have argued that the charity's suit must be dismissed under the state secrets privilege. This is where the issue of the pedigree of the privilege really matters. If the privilege is an ordinary common-law rule of evidence, Congress is probably free to alter it. If it is required by the Constitution, things get more complicated. The judge in San Francisco, Vaughn R. Walker, ruled that Congress had indeed overridden the state secrets privilege when it enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. The judge said that by setting up a secret court to consider requests for intelligence surveillance, and by setting up other domestic regulations of foreign intelligence surveillance, "Congress intended for the executive branch to relinquish its near-total control over whether the fact of unlawful surveillance could be protected as a secret." The government's recent brief cited the leading Supreme Court decision on state secrets, United States v. Reynolds in 1953, but it said nothing about Judge Walker's reading of it. "Reynolds itselF" Judge Walker wrote, " leaves little room for defendan ts' argument that the state secrets privilege is actually rooted in the Constitution. The Reynolds case concerned an Air Force accident report. The government refused to turn it over in an injury lawsuit, saying that disclosure of the report would endanger national security by revealing military secrets. When the report was finally released in 1996, it contained no secrets, but it did show that the deaths of nine men in the crash of a B-29 bomber had been caused by the Air Force's negligence. Thus, the first case in which the Supreme Court recognized the state secrets privilege illustrated how problematic it can be. By giving the executive branch close to unilateral power to have lawsuits dismissed on national security grounds, the privilege can become a way to conceal government misconduct. The recent brief from the Obama administration cited just one decision directly invoking the Constitution as the basis for the state secrets privilege. Other courts have said the state secrets privilege is rooted in the common law. The decision cited in the brief dismissed a lawsuit from a German citizen, Khaled el-Masri, who said he had been abducted and abused by the Central Intelligence Agency. A report from the Council of Europe substantially confirmed Mr. Masri's claims. The state secrets privilege, Judge Robert B. King wrote in 2007 for a unanimous three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Mr. Masri;s case, "performs a function of constitutional significance' Mr. Miller, the Justice Department spokesman, cautioned against reading too much into the recent filing. 'The brief says nothing about either the scope of the privilege or the ability of Congress to legislate in the area,' Mr. Miller said. Experts in legal ethics said the solicitor general, who represents the government in the Supreme Court, was not required to cite decisions from lower courts cutting against its position. But issues as urgent and important as the state secrets privilege deserve particularly considered treatment, as Judge King of the Fourth Circuit recognized. "This inquiry is a difficult one" he wrote, "for it pits the judiciary's search for truth against the executive's duty to maintain the nations security. From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Wed Aug 5 23:49:40 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:49:40 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fw: Whats behind carbon trading ? Message-ID: <01a501ca1662$12dc1620$4bad57ca@jfos> >From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression - and they're about to do it again MATT TAIBBIPosted Jul 13, 2009 excerpt: Here's how it works: If the bill passes, there will be limits for coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other industries on the amount of carbon emissions (a.k.a. greenhouse gases) they can produce per year. If the companies go over their allotment, they will be able to buy "allocations" or credits from other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions. President Obama conservatively estimates that about $646 billion worth of carbon credits will be auctioned in the first seven years; one of his top economic aides speculates that the real number might be twice or even three times that amount. read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29127316/the_great_american_bubble_machine/7 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Thu Aug 6 03:16:09 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 18:16:09 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Fw: Whats behind carbon trading ? In-Reply-To: <01a501ca1662$12dc1620$4bad57ca@jfos> References: <01a501ca1662$12dc1620$4bad57ca@jfos> Message-ID: <20090806101610.351DAF58B@fep03.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> Did you know the Zionist Bellowing Brigade attacked Matt Taibbi over this, labelling his article "antisemitic". Presumably Goldman Sachs belongs under the umbrella of "chosen by God". Dion Giles At 14:49 06/08/2009, john foster wrote: > > From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs has engineered > every major market manipulation since the Great Depression - and > they're about to do it again >MATT TAIBBIPosted Jul 13, 2009 > >excerpt: >Here's how it works: If the bill passes, there will be limits for >coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other >industries on the amount of carbon emissions (a.k.a. greenhouse >gases) they can produce per year. If the companies go over their >allotment, they will be able to buy "allocations" or credits from >other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions. >President Obama conservatively estimates that about $646 billion >worth of carbon credits will be auctioned in the first seven years; >one of his top economic aides speculates that the real number might >be twice or even three times that amount. > >read more: >Verdana>http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29127316/the_great_american_bubble_machine/7 > > > >_______________________________________________ >Mai-not mailing list >Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not From siamdave at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 7 02:58:22 2009 From: siamdave at yahoo.ca (Dave Patterson) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:58:22 +0700 Subject: [Mai-not] Fog of War In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200908071658220015.018CBD2F@smtp.totisp.net> - if anyone hasn't seen The Fog of War yet, the film about McNamara, and would like to, I just came across it on google vids - interesting. I think he lies a lot, but it is still considerable food for thought .... http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8653788864462752804&ei=PGt6SrXrO4eOwgPhrvDdAw&q=fog+of+war -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clementclarke at ozemail.com.au Fri Aug 7 04:19:42 2009 From: clementclarke at ozemail.com.au (Clem Clarke) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 19:19:42 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Beautiful 10 minute video by an American Indian talking about the Environment and explaining how we are all One Message-ID: <4A7C0DCE.50005@ozemail.com.au> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Mon Aug 10 22:40:00 2009 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 15:40:00 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] What's new at Links: Honduras, Vestas sit-in, Ssangyong sit-in, John Bellamy Foster, Venezuelan media freedom, Irish Greens, Hiroshima Message-ID: <4A810430.6040605@greenleft.org.au> What's new at Links: Honduras, Vestas sit-in, Ssangyong sit-in, John Bellamy Foster, Venezuelan media freedom, Irish Greens, Hiroshima * * * Subscribe free to Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 You can also follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism Visit and bookmark http://links.org.au and add it to your RSS feed (http://links.org.au/rss.xml). If you would like us to consider an article, please send it to links at dsp.org.au *Please pass on to anybody you think will be interested in /Links/. * * * Britain: Vestas workers end occupation, but `the campaign is anything but over' August 7, 2009 -- The Vestas workers' occupation of the Newport [Isle of Wight wind turbine] plant occupation may be over, but the campaign is very definitely not. In fact, ... "it's just getting going"! Vestas' doings will still be disrupted as they go about attempting to ``tie up'' business on the Isle of Wight. Workers, activists and locals remain wholly committed, in ever-growing numbers, to the campaign to save the green-collar jobs in Newport and Southampton. * Read more South Korea: Ssangyong workers occupy plant, win partial victory -- Class war in midst of economic crisis By Young-su Won August 6, 2009 -- After days of harsh and inhumane assaults by riot police and company thugs on striking workers occupying the Ssangyong Motor plant in Pyeongtaek, near Seoul, the Korean Metal Workers Union (KMWU) and management reached an agreement: the union accepted part of the company's redundancy proposal, saving about half the strikers' jobs, while the rest will apply for voluntary retirement or unpaid long-term leave, or accept another job with the spin-off company. * Read more Venezuela: `The democratisation of the mass media has begun' By Kiraz Janicke Caracas, August 3, 2009 -- The head of Venezuela's telecommunications agency (CONATEL) and minister of housing and infrastructure Diosdado Cabello announced on August 1 the immediate closure of 32 privately owned radio stations and two regional television stations, because their broadcast licences had expired or they had violated regulations. Cabello said the recovered licences would be handed to the community media. The minister said many of the stations were operating illegally and had failed to register or pay fees to CONATEL. Decisions are still pending on a further 206 stations. * Read more John Bellamy Foster: `The transition to socialism and the transition to an ecological society are one' (with video) The Ecological Revolution: Making Peace with the Planet By John Bellamy Foster Review by Simon Butler Karl Marx and Frederick Engels famously urged the world's workers to unite because they had a world to win, and nothing to lose but their chains. Today, the reality of climate change and worsening environmental breakdowns globally adds a further vital dimension to this strident vision of human liberation. We still have a world to win -- but we also have a world to lose. The ecological crisis is not simply the result of poor planning or bad decisions. Nor is it an unforeseeable accident. It's the inevitable outcome of an unjust economic and social system that puts business profits before all else -- even as it undermines the natural basis of life itself. With his previous books, such as Marx's Ecology and The Vulnerable Planet, and as the editor of the US-based Marxist journal Monthly Review, John Bellamy Foster has established a well-earned reputation as one of the world's most persuasive voices arguing for fundamental social change to tackle the looming ecological catastrophe. His new book, The Ecological Revolution, could not have been published at a more timely moment. It argues a solution to the ecological crisis "is now either revolutionary or it is false". * Read more Honduras coup: Dress rehearsal for imperial coups across Latin America By Felipe Stuart Cournoyer August 8, 2009 -- The people of Honduras have now suffered more than 40 days of military rule. The generals' June 28 coup, crudely re-packaged in constitutional guise, ousted the country's elected government and unleashed severe, targeted and relentless repression. Grassroots protests have matched the regime in endurance and outmatched it in political support within the country and internationally. Its scope and duration is unprecedented in Honduran history. Popular resistance is the main factor affecting the international forces attempting to shape the outcome of the crisis. It weighs heavily on the minds of the coup's authors and their international backers. * Read more The rise and fall of the Irish Greens By Joseph Healy August 8, 2009 -- Being Irish, one of the thousands who left the country during the 1980s economic crisis, I follow Irish politics closely. I joined the Green Party of England and Wales in 2002. In 2006, as part of a group of Irish Greens members in London, visited Dublin to make contact with the Irish Green Party. We went to raise the issue of support for the Irish diaspora in Britain.We met one of the party's TDs (members of the parliament, the Dail) John Gormley. However, it quickly became apparent that he was not very interested in the issue of Irish people abroad, probably because we have no votes to offer him. * Read more Honduras: Resistance front calls for boycott of the military-business dictatorship; Global day of action called for August 11 August 3, 2009 -- Tegucigalpa -- June 28 of the this year when the Honduran population was preparing to participate in a popular opinion poll on ... whether or not to convoke a Constitutional Assembly, thousands of soldiers kidnapped the constitutional president of the republic, Manuel Zelaya Rosales, and they expelled him to the neighbouring country of Costa Rica; they occupied the Presidential House; they violently closed all of the independent radio and television stations; they persecuted all the functionaries of the government and they implanted a state of siege in the whole country. * Read more Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Worst single terror attacks in history By Norm Dixon August 6 and August 9 2009 mark the 64th anniversaries of the US atomic-bomb attacks on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A tiny group of US rulers met secretly in Washington and callously ordered this indiscriminate annihilation of civilian populations. They gave no explicit warnings. They rejected all alternatives, preferring to inflict the most extreme human carnage possible. They ordered and had carried out the two worst single terror acts in human history. * Read more (Updated Aug. 6) Vestas workers: `Fight for green jobs not over ... Change should be made for the people, not for money' August 5, 6pm, 2009 -- With Mike Godley having left yesterday, we spoke to Mark, one of the six who are still inside at the Vestas sit-in. We discussed how they had to reorganise themselves now four people have left. He said that that morale was still good and how they'll "still be fighting Vestas". * Read more (Updated August 5) South Korea: Graphic photos, video -- Ssangyong sit-in workers' appeal: `Our lives are at stake' * Read more The Economist forced to back down over lies on Venezuela and Bolivia By Francisco Dominguez August 3, 2009 -- The July 18, 2009, edition of The Economist contained an article on Bolivia ("Bolivia's divisive president. The Permanent Campaign") which asserted that, "Venezuelan troops helped quell a rebellion centred on the airport at Santa Cruz in the east in 2007". The article did not bother to substantiate such a serious charge against Venezuela and was one of several unjustified and unsubstantiated allegations against the president and government of Bolivia. * Read more Wave of workplace occupations aims to reverse tide of closures; August 5: Thomas Cook workers arrested By Richie Venton August 2, 2009 -- A rash of factory and workplace occupations is spreading across the globe as workers defy the brutal consequences of the recession. Instead of surrendering to mass redundancies and outright closures - sometimes at a few minutes' notice, often without even redundancy packages - workers are occupying their workplaces as a central method of struggling for justice. Every example that wins concessions is boosting the belief of workers at other workplaces that there is an alternative to just resigning to the butchery in the boardrooms - that belligerent, militant class action can win at least something where workers have nothing to lose. * Read more * * * Links seeks to promote the international exchange of information, experience of struggle, theoretical analysis and views of political strategy and tactics within the international left. It is a forum for open and constructive dialogue between active socialists coming from different political traditions. It seeks to bring together those in the international left who are opposed to neoliberal economic and social policies. It aims to promote the renewal of the socialist movement in the wake of the collapse of the bureaucratic model of "actually existing socialism" in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. ATTENTION: Sign up for regular ``what's new'' announcement emails at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 Follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From papadop at peak.org Thu Aug 13 09:22:38 2009 From: papadop at peak.org (MichaelP) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:22:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] TOMGRAM: BIKING OUT OF IRAQ Message-ID: http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175106/withdrawing_by_bike_from_iraq posted August 13, 2009 10:40 am Tomgram: Withdrawing by Bike from Iraq On Troops That Don't Depart, Experts Who Never Leave the Scene, an Air Force That Suddenly Wasn't There, and a War That No Longer Needs a Justification By Tom Engelhardt The Bush administration invaded Iraq in March 2003 with a force of approximately 130,000 troops. Top White House and Pentagon officials like Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz were convinced that, by August, those troops, welcomed with open arms by the oppressed Iraqis, would be drawn down to 30,000-40,000 and housed in newly built, permanent military bases largely away from the country's urban areas. This was to be part of what now is called a "strategic partnership" in the Middle East. Almost five and a half years later, the United States still has approximately 130,000 troops in Iraq. Top administration officials are now talking about "modestly accelerated" rates of troop withdrawal, if all goes well. By August 2010, the Obama administration expects to have only 30,000-50,000 troops housed mainly on American mega-bases largely away from urban areas, part of a special American/Iraqi strategic partnership in the region. This passes for progress in Iraq. A HISTORY OF THE BICYCLE IN IRAQ In imagistic terms, the Bush administration biked into Iraq. Back in its salad days, when all was green and upbeat, its top officials loved the idea that they were training the eager Iraqi kid in how to ride the bike of democracy. President George W. Bush liked to talk about the moment when we might take the "training wheels" off the Iraqi bike and let the little fella ride into the democratic sunset on his own. His Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, ran with an allied image -- the difficult moment when a parent has to decide whether to take that steadying hand off the bike seat and let the tyke pedal on his own. "[Y]ou're running down the street," as he put it in 2004, "holding onto the back of the seat. You know that if you take your hand off they could fall, so you take a finger off and then two fingers, and pretty soon you're just barely touching it." Some years later, after kid and parent had made it around one of those "corners" they were always turning -- on the way to various "tipping points" in the Iraq War -- and found themselves instead at the "precipice," after Rumsfeld had, in fact, been asked to resign by his president, he wrote a final memo, the last of his famed "snowflakes," to the White House, on "new options" in Iraq. In it, he suggested: "Begin modest withdrawals of U.S. and Coalition forces (start 'taking our hand off the bicycle seat'), so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country." His tenure could qualify as the longest biking lesson in history and still, it seemed, the Iraqis couldn't do without that hand on the seat. Even when his president followed him two years later, their imagery of choice remained behind. This March, for instance, the chief American military spokesman in Iraq, Major General David G. Perkins, discussing a possible draw-down of American forces, said: "We need to take our hands off the handlebars, or the training wheels, at some point." And then, two weeks ago, Colonel Timothy R. Reese, an American adviser to the Iraqi military's Baghdad command, created a front-page New York Times stir when a memorandum he had written was leaked. In a distinctly imagistic mode, he began: "As the old saying goes, 'Guests, like fish, begin to smell after three days.' Since the signing of the 2009 Security Agreement, we are guests in Iraq, and after six years in Iraq, we now smell bad to the Iraqi nose." While the official Obama-era target for an American withdrawal remains (as it was in the last months of the Bush era) the end of 2011, Reese urged that all U.S. forces be pulled out on an expedited schedule by August 2010 -- the moment by which, according to present plans, only American "combat brigades" are to be removed. Resurrecting a Vietnam-era suggestion of Vermont Republican Senator George Aiken (ignored then, as it will be now), he headlined his memo: "It's Time for the US to Declare Victory and Go Home." And there, in the midst of a generally scathing assessment of the deficiencies of the Iraqi military (and the Iraqi government), was that bicycle again: "The SA [Bush-era Security Agreement between the U.S. and Iraq] outlines a series of gradual steps towards military withdrawal, analogous to a father teaching his kid to ride a bike without training wheels... We now have an Iraqi government that has gained its balance and thinks it knows how to ride the bike in the race. And in fact they probably do know how to ride, at least well enough for the road they are on against their current competitors. Our hand on the back of the seat is holding them back and causing resentment. We need to let go before we both tumble to the ground." It just goes to show. Under the pressure of war, images that won't go away, like people, have the capacity to change. The Iraqi child with the training wheels is now, according to Reese, old enough to enter an actual bike race. [victoryculture.gif] Who exactly will bike out of Iraq under the Obama withdrawal plan, however, still remains to be defined. After all, at the end of his memo, the most urgent call for withdrawal from Iraq yet to emerge from the higher levels of the U.S. military, Colonel Reese offers his version of a full-scale American withdrawal. "During the withdrawal period," he writes, "the USG [United States government] and GOI [government of Iraq] should develop a new strategic framework agreement that would include some lasting military presence at 1-3 large training bases, airbases, or key headquarters locations. But it should not include the presence of any combat forces save those for force protection needs or the occasional exercise." And keep in mind: his proposal has, with rare exceptions, been rejected out of hand by all and sundry, in and out of the military high command and in Washington. In other words, even the most Xtreme American biker of this moment still imagines us in Iraq forever and a day. A History of Experts on Iraq Once upon a time, the playing field, the stadium, and sports events were regularly compared to war, even considered suitable preparation for actual battle. Ever since the First Gulf War, this has been reversed. Now, war -- or at least its coverage -- is based on sports. Just as, sooner or later, the smoothest players and savviest coaches depart the "field of battle" for the press box and the TV spotlight, for pre-game, game, and post-game commentary, so the commanders of the last war now leave the battlefield for the TV booth and offer us their expertise on the next war. As former Houston Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy has had to discuss the decisions of his brother Stan, coach of the Orlando Magic, in ESPN playoff commentary, so the commanders of our previous wars cover next wars and their commanders, possibly even officers once under their own command. We now live with the ESPN version of war, including slo-mo replays, and the logos, interactive charts, and fabulous graphics of the sports world. And once anointed as experts, our John Maddens of war, like their sports counterparts, never go away. Back in April 2008, for instance, New York Times journalist David Barstow wrote a front-page expos? focused on the many retired military officers who had been hired as media consultants for the Iraq War. As a group, they made up, he suggested, a "kind of media Trojan horse," because most of them were marching to a carefully organized Pentagon campaign of disinformation on the war. In addition, most of them had ties, not acknowledged on the air, "to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess." Barstow's piece concluded: "To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as 'military analysts' whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world. Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration's wartime performance." Barstow named names and made connections. Those names included, for example, retired Air Force general and Fox News senior military analyst Thomas G. McInerney, retired Army general and NBC/MSNBC military analyst Montgomery Meigs, retired Army general and NBC/MSNBC military analyst Barry R. McCaffrey, and retired Marine Colonel and Fox News military analyst William V. Cowan. After the expos? appeared, they seem to have just carried right on with their media duties. Some of the print media has similarly adhered to the principle of once-an-expert-always-an-expert. For instance, on the fifth anniversary of Bush's disastrous invasion of Iraq, the New York Times decided to ask a range of "experts on military and foreign affairs" to look back on that fiasco -- and then rounded up the usual suspects. Of the nine experts it came up with, six were intimately involved in that catastrophe either as drumbeaters for the invasion, instigators of it, or facilitators of the occupation that followed -- Kenneth Pollack, Danielle Pletka, and Frederick Kagan (enthusiasts all), Richard Perle (aka "the prince of darkness"), L. Paul Bremer (the administration's first viceroy in Baghdad), and General Paul D. Eaton (who trained Iraqi troops in the early years of the occupation). Notably absent was anyone who had seriously opposed the invasion. The closest was Anne-Marie Slaughter, a "liberal hawk" who wrote a supportive New York Times op-ed on March 18, 2003, two days before the invasion began, headlined, "Good Reasons for Going Around the U.N." The Times anniversary spread appeared in March 2008. Jump ahead a year-plus and the Times once again launched what undoubtedly was a mighty search for experts who might consider Colonel Reese's suggestion that we take our hand off that Iraqi bike -- and came up with a typical crew of seven: One, retired Lieutenant Colonel John Nagl, is president of the Center for a New American Security, and was an advisor to General David Petraeus, former top U.S. commander in Iraq, now Centcom commander overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A second, Stephen Biddle, senior fellow for defense policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, was also an advisor to Petraeus and most recently on the "team" that advised General Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan under Petraeus, in his recent review of Afghan War strategy. A third, Anthony Cordesman, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, was on the same McChrystal team. A fourth, Thomas Ricks, former Washington Post military reporter and now senior fellow at Nagl's Center, is the author of the bestselling book The Gamble, a highly complimentary account of Petraeus's role in Iraq in which Nagl is, of course, a figure. (Ricks, by the way, has long made it clear that he believes we will be in that country for years to come.) A fifth, Kori Schake, now at the Hoover Institution, was a former national security adviser on defense issues to President George W. Bush. A sixth, Jonathan Morgenstein, is a senior national security policy fellow at Third Way, another Washington think tank, and just recently returned from Iraq where "he was a military transition team adviser to the Iraqi Army." Not surprisingly, all six of these experts, with the most modest of caveats, dismissed Reese's suggestion out of hand ("The pace of progress in Iraq will be slow, but we can't throw up our hands and walk away..."), agreeing that it was in no one's interest to expedite an American departure. Only a seventh expert, author and retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor, agreed with Reese. Consider that a little history of expertise about our recent wars. There's a corollary. If you're not anointed an expert, you're never likely to be. Among those automatically disqualified for expertise on Iraq: just about anyone who bluntly rejected the idea of invading Iraq or predicted any version of the catastrophe that ensued before it happened. Disqualified above all are any of those antiwar types who actually took to the streets of American cities by the hundreds of thousands before the invasion to raise homemade placards to its un-wisdom. They obviously knew nothing. Their very stance indicated a bias that evidently disqualified them on the spot. Someone -- I can't claim to remember who -- once made the point that within any administration you could afford to be a hawk and be wrong, just not a dove and right. When it comes to TV war commentators, that seems to hold true as well. It would, of course, be possible to imagine the antiwar equivalent of those generals-as-analysts. From the ranks of the last antiwar movement (all still active anti-warriors), you could, for example, choose Tom Hayden, Daniel Ellsberg, and Howard Zinn to offer commentary on our ongoing wars. Only you know as well as I do that that fantasy will never turn into media reality. In our world of expertise, it's unthinkable. A History of the Iraqi Air Force Recently, while Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was visiting Iraq, the top American commander in that country, General Ray Odierno, indicated that the Iraqis would not be able to defend their own airspace for the foreseeable future. Essentially, they have no air force -- or rather, at this point they have helicopters, C-130 transports, and some smaller Cesna trainers and the like, but no jet fighters. Despite the fact that a U.S. Air Force "assessment team" is being rushed to Baghdad to look for "some creative solutions" to the problem, it's clear that the Iraqi air force will remain the U.S. Air Force for some time to come (which undoubtedly means manning the giant U.S. airbase built at Balad as well). The Iraqis now want American F-16s. Unfortunately, according to New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller, General Odierno pointed out a sad truth: "it would be impossible to build and deliver them by the end of 2011, even if the Iraqis were able to afford them." And don't forget this: Iraq has no trained pilots to fly them either! Sigh... much work remains on the horizon for the U.S.A.F. Fortunately, Aviation Week reported in April that the Iraqis have a plan to overcome their problem. It's a "three-phase, 11-year improvement plan" that will move their air force from T-6 trainers to a few dozen F-16s by "the middle of the next decade" (in case you were wondering just how long the U.S.A.F. is likely to be filling in). Here, then, is the true tragedy of our moment. We want to leave Iraq. Maybe not as quickly as Colonel Reese would like, but really we do. President Obama has made that clear. Unfortunately, the Iraqis just won't let us. Imagine! They weren't even thinking about an air force until recently -- and what would a country in the Middle East be if, as Bumiller points out, it had "no way to intercept another jet that invades the country's airspace." Just who might invade Iraqi airspace remains a subject for speculation: The Israelis on their way to bomb Iran? (Not likely the U.S.A.F. would start shooting those planes down.) The Iranians on their way to bomb...? Well, who? After all, the present government in Iraq is essentially an ally of Iran. The Turks? Not really an issue when you think about it. Their planes have been invading Iraqi airspace for a while to attack Kurdish rebels and the U.S.A.F. hasn't exactly been shooting them down either. [engelhardt_photo.gif] Since it's so easy to obliterate the past, just for a moment let's recall the history of the Iraqi air force. Now that Iraq essentially has no air force, who remembers that Saddam Hussein's Iraq once had a very large and active one -- up to 950 planes in the 1980s. In 1990, according to the website GlobalSecurity.org, it still had the sixth largest air force in the world, and plenty of trained pilots to go with it. During the First Gulf War, nearly half of that air force fled to neighboring Iran (on which Iraqi planes had dropped more than their share of bombs and even poison gas in the 1980s). Those planes were never returned. Of the relatively small force that remained, many were destroyed in the First Gulf War and some of the rest, at Saddam's orders, were buried in the desert as the invasion of 2003 began. The history that's really been forgotten, though, is even more recent. Put in a nutshell, the Iraqis don't have an air force because Washington didn't want them to. Much attention has been paid to the Bush administration's lack of planning for the occupation of Iraq, but relatively little to what it did plan. Let's start with the fact that, in May 2003, L. Paul Bremer's Coalition Provisional Authority in a burst of blind pride disbanded the Iraqi Army. Pentagon plans for rebuilding it called for a future, border-patrolling Iraqi military (lite) of perhaps 40,000 men with minimal armaments and no air force to speak of. In the Middle East, this had only one meaning: from a series of newly built mega-bases already on Pentagon drawing boards as American troops crossed the Kuwaiti border in 2003, the U.S. Army and Air Force would fill in as the real Iraqi military for eons to come. Under the pressure of a fierce Sunni insurgency, the army part of that plan was soon jettisoned. But "standing up" the Iraqi military -- "As Iraqis stand up, we will stand down," was long President Bush's mantra -- has meant just that: two feet on the ground. Until relatively recently, the Iraqis were functionally not permitted to take to the skies. Now, the lack of that air force will surely come to the fore as an excuse for why any American "withdrawal" will have to have caveats and qualifications -- and why, if ours proves to be a non-withdrawal withdrawal, it will be their fault. A History of Devastation in Iraq Until the U.S. arrived in Baghdad, things seemed bad enough. There was Saddam Hussein, the megalomanic dictator -- he of the endless Disney-esque palaces and giant sculpted hands -- with his secret prisons, torture chambers, and helicopter gunships. There were the international sanctions strangling the country. There were the mass graves in the north and the south. There was an oil industry held together by scotch tape and ingenuity. It was a gruesome enough mess. That was before the invasion to "liberate" the country. Since then hundreds of thousands, possibly a million or more Iraqis have died (depending on whose figures and studies you believe). Saddam's killing fields have been dwarfed by a fierce set of destructive American military operations as well as insurgencies-cum-civil-wars-cum-terrorist-acts; major cities have been largely or partially destroyed, or ethnically cleansed; millions of Iraqis have been forced from their homes, becoming internal refugees or going into exile; untold numbers of Iraqis have been imprisoned, assassinated, tortured or abused; and the country's cultural heritage has been ransacked. Basic services -- electricity, water, food -- were terribly impaired and the economy, in the process of being privatized by the neocon overseers of the occupation, was simply wrecked. Health services were crippled. Oil production, upon which Iraq now depends for up to 90% of its government funds, has only relatively recently surpassed the worst levels of the Saddam era. Iraq, in other words, has been devastated. The American invasion and the occupation that followed acted like whirlwinds of destruction, unraveling a land already bursting with problems and potential animosities. What men begin, the gods end. If such a saying doesn't exist, it should, since the American catastrophe now seems to be morphing into an unparalleled natural disaster as well. In what once was the breadbasket of civilization, Iraqi agriculture, ignored by the occupiers, is withering and the country is desertifying at a frightening pace under the pressure of a several-year-old drought. So fierce is the process that, according to Liz Sly of the Los Angeles Times, who has written an apocalyptic account of all this, the country received only 20% of its normal rainfall in 2008, and so far in 2009 but half the usual amount. Rivers are drying up, wells are disappearing, and desperate Iraqi farmers are deserting the land for the city (where unemployment rates remain high). Everywhere dust gathers, awaiting the winds which create the monstrous duststorms that carry the precious land of Iraq into the fragile lungs of urban Iraqis. "Now," writes Sly, "the Agriculture Ministry estimates that 90% of [Iraq's] land is either desert or suffering from severe desertification, and that the remaining arable land is being eroded at the rate of 5% a year." Expecting the worst harvest in a decade and with the wheat crop at 40% of normal, the government has been forced to buy enormous amounts of grain abroad at a time when oil prices, dropping precipitously from 2008 highs, left it with far less money available. However overused the image may be, the Bush administration created the perfect storm in Iraq, a "mission accomplished" version of hell on Earth. And it's because Iraq is in such desperate shape that, of course, we, as the protectors of its fragile "stability," can't leave. A History of Justifications When we invaded Iraq, serial justifications were offered. There was the grim dictator to rid the world of. There were his killing fields. (Never again!) There was 9/11 and his "support for terrorism." (Top Bush administration officials long claimed a link between Saddam and al-Qaeda, despite convincing evidence to the contrary.) There was liberation for the Shiites and the ending of what Wolfowitz called "criminal treatment of the Iraqi people." There was the reestablishment of an American version of order in the region. There were those heavily emphasized, if nonexistent, weapons of mass destruction the dictator supposedly had squirreled away, as well as his (also nonexistent) program to get his hands on a nuclear weapon. (As Wolfowitz put it in May 2003: "The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason...") Later, when things began to take a turn for the worse and another reason was needed, there was the propagation of democracy (a great guiding principle to which the Bush administration arrived rather late in Iraq and only under pressure from Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani). Even later, when things were going far worse, there was the idea that it was far better to fight the terrorists over there than here. And, of course, as the president liked to confide to foreign leaders, there was God Himself commanding him to strike Saddam and so thwart Gog and Magog. Among the cognoscenti, of course, there were other expectations and justifications, caught best perhaps in the neoconservative quip of 2003, "Everyone wants to go to Baghdad. Real men want to go to Tehran." After all, the neocons in and around the Bush administration truly did believe that a Pax Americana in what they liked to call "the Greater Middle East" was within their shock-and-awe grasp, and possibly even a global version of the same. As for oil -- or what President Bush referred to, on the rare occasion when he mentioned it, as Iraq's "patrimony" -- mum was the word, even though that country had the world's third largest proven petroleum reserves and sat strategically at the heart of the energy heartlands of the planet. Now, with those 130,000 troops still there, not to speak of the scads of rent-a-guns and private contractors, with that overstuffed, overstaffed embassy the size of the Vatican built for 1,000 "diplomats," with that series of major bases (which the Pentagon used to call, charmingly enough, "enduring camps") still well occupied, with significant numbers of Iraqis and small numbers of Americans dying each month, with millions of Iraqis still internal or external refugees, with the land devastated, and basic services hardly restored, with ethnic tensions still running high, and a government quietly allied to Iran in place in Baghdad backed by a 250,000-man military, with an American withdrawal still officially years off, and "withdrawal" itself a matter of definition, no one even bothers to offer the slightest justification for being in Iraq. After all, why would explanations be necessary when we're getting ready to leave? If you don't believe me, go hunting for an official explanation today. Why are we in Iraq? Because we're there. Because the Iraqis need us. Because something terrible would happen if we left precipitously. So we still occupy Iraq and no one even asks why. A History of Withdrawal from Iraq There is no history of withdrawal from Iraq. Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire Project, runs the Nation Institute's TomDispatch.com. He is the author of The End of Victory Culture, a history of the Cold War and beyond, as well as of a novel, The Last Days of Publishing. He also edited The World According to TomDispatch: America in the New Age of Empire (Verso, 2008), an alternative history of the mad Bush years. A History of Imitation, or a Note on Further Reading: They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, whoever they may be. Consider this piece, then, a form of flattery, if not exactly an imitation of the style of that journalist/historian/storyteller par excellence Eduardo Galeano. No one, after all, could really imitate his distinctive style, least of all me. But the form of this post is at least inspired by a recent reading of Galeano's latest masterpiece, Mirrors: Stories of Almost Everyone. A history of the world in a mere 365 pages and hundreds of little, breath-catching vignettes, I consider it a must-read for the universe.] From jomut at yahoo.com Thu Aug 13 10:52:14 2009 From: jomut at yahoo.com (John Mutambirwa) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:52:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] logging the woodstock Message-ID: <772957.77030.qm@web31105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> John Mutambirwa (Dreaming Awake) jomut at yahoo.com chakane at hotmail.com http://www.geocities.com/jomut ? Hi, ? A correspondent of mine sent me this quite interesting commentary, from a?NYT piece written by someone who avidly participated in the goings-on then,?on the Woodstock Festival of 1969.? What grabbed my?attention is his trenchant insight into how the multi-thematic strands of social protest and vision of the future, that wove the combined efforts of the attendees together, soon became trivialized and dissipated into aimless consumerism by skillful merchandisers and entertainment overlords. ? John ================= -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Fri Aug 14 19:30:28 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 12:30:28 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fw: [S] "Terror Australis" - Counterpunch Analysis of Raids on 17 Somalian households in Melbourne Message-ID: <01fa01ca1d50$5b294160$6bad57ca@jfos> "Terror Australis" - Counterpunch Analysis of Raids on 17 Somalian households in Melbourne http://www.counterpunch.org/kampmark08122009.html The Triumph of Hypothetical Attacks Terror Australis By BINOY KAMPMARK Australia, the earth?s largest island continent, has had those customary fears associated with the nation still believing in notions of virgo intacta. Immigrations regulations are strict; intruders by leaky boats and unreliable rafts are treated with suspicion. Terrorist attacks are few and far between in a country that urbanized so rapidly it stifled the urge to revolt. Apart from the Hilton bombings in 1978, Australia has proven fairly immune from the phenomenon of political terrorism. In the previous years, that sense of security has been disturbed. A plot to blow up spectators at sporting events in Australia was foiled and seven men imprisoned after final hearings were held last year. The case was, however, marred by inconsistencies and a questionable performance by the prosecution. The desperation at getting a conviction was palpable. A few weeks ago, Australians were treated to boasts of Terror Foiled. It was claimed that suicide bombers associated with the Somali group Al-Shabaab had not succeeded in consummating their plans to storm the Holsworthy Army Barracks, a base in Sydney?s southwest, with the intent of killing numerous soldiers with assault weapons. With a certain condescending note, Time wrote about how, on August 4, Australians ?quickly began to learn the pronunciation of the Somali terrorist group?s name.? Four hundred police in a joint federal and state operation had moved across Melbourne, raiding nineteen properties. Four men were arrested that day, followed by another four the next. The men are of Lebanese and Somali background. An unhealthy, psychic state has been unearthed in these revelations: a desire, almost a wish, that Australian sites would prove worthy as genuine terrorist targets. There is a hierarchy in the west on the worthy and unworthy in the terrorist game. A condition of terror envy has taken root. ?There is,? a grave Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd argued, ?an enduring threat of terrorism at home here in Australia as well as overseas.? For the ill-directed and confused figures beavering away at Canberra?s Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Australia remained, to quote one of its supposed experts Carl Ungerer, ?a gold medal target for Al Qaeda? begging the question as to when it attained that prestigious award. In short, the terror ?threat? is everywhere, the unseen creature that strikes the unsuspecting. While it would demand a minimal economy of effort to strike at Holsworthy base, exaggeration is very much the norm in the lingua franca of anti-terrorism. A Somali-based terrorist organization intent on imposing Shari?a rule in Somalia proper does not look like a particularly strong, yet alone credible enemy for a country on the other side of the earth. Throw in an Al Qaeda link though, and you seem to rise in the ladder of terror envy. Even Somali voices have weighed into the debate. A Somali leader, the Islamic scholar Dr. Herse Hilole, claims he made murmurings about the likelihood of an attack a few years ago. ?My suspicion was that young Somali Muslims could be or may be used in the future to carry [out] some terrorist activities in Australia? (ABC News, Aug 4). The Eritrean chairman of the Melbourne-based African Think Tank, Berhan Ahmed, has been toying with the idea Australia?s failed assimilation program would pose threats to its local security. 16,000 Somalis have found refuge in Australia, fleeing the ravages of civil war. But teething problems with integration remain. Housing complexes and tenements have become breeding grounds for disaffection. Un-employment is chronic. The options are stark: the embrace of charismatic religious figures or ruinous drugs. We are left with the recurring hypothetical event, an occurrence unrealised, all the more potent for that fact. In the ?age of terror?, the hypothetical terrorist event has become the premier showcase, the determining issue on policy. ?Potentially this would have been, if it had been able to be carried out, the most serious terrorist attack on Australian soil,? claims Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Tony Negus. An entire anti-terror system is based on invoking terror, measured by ?states? of emergency, alarm and concern. An entire apparatus in coping with terrorists employs methods of fear and surveillancewhile offering the disclaimer: we are doing it to protect you while watching you. Links and evidence remain sketchy in these revelations. What was in the news as carnival fanfare has now died down, leaving the shadowy business to interrogators and trial lawyers. In a society that is currently functioning on the idea of a permanent war in times of permanent peace, we are left less clear than ever what role the Somali organization truly has in Australia. It is not a situation the authorities are necessarily keen to dispel. Public confusion, not to mention ignorance, persists in remaining the handiest of state assets. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark at gmail.com From siamdave at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 14 23:40:12 2009 From: siamdave at yahoo.ca (Dave Patterson) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:40:12 +0700 Subject: [Mai-not] Fw: [S] "Terror Australis" - Counterpunch Analysis of Raids on 17 Somalian households in Melbourne In-Reply-To: <01fa01ca1d50$5b294160$6bad57ca@jfos> References: <01fa01ca1d50$5b294160$6bad57ca@jfos> Message-ID: <200908151340120203.00E7F26B@smtp.totisp.net> They've been doing this in Canada for quite some time now - at least a couple of times a year, there will be a 'report' from some serious sounding 'intelligence' group, about "By golly, you Canadians are a prime target of al Quaeda or any other terrorist group in the world, and don't be surprised if your lack of attention doesn't lead you all into some massive tragedy soon!! - and etc etc. They, or the media, are completely uninterested in any discussion about this, such things as "Well, boss, we're not actually seeing much going on all these years later - but even if we are on a list somewhere, if we weren't invading their countries and stealing their oil and bombing their weddings and shooting kids on bikes, they probably wouldn't be quite so angry with us..' But it's like the old wisdom of the dictator has it, a scared population is much easier to control than an informed, engaged population, so those stories have to keep coming. *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 09-08-15 at 12:30 PM john foster wrote: "Terror Australis" - Counterpunch Analysis of Raids on 17 Somalian households in Melbourne http://www.counterpunch.org/kampmark08122009.html The Triumph of Hypothetical Attacks Terror Australis By BINOY KAMPMARK Australia, the earth?s largest island continent, has had those customary fears associated with the nation still believing in notions of virgo intacta. Immigrations regulations are strict; intruders by leaky boats and unreliable rafts are treated with suspicion. Terrorist attacks are few and far between in a country that urbanized so rapidly it stifled the urge to revolt. Apart from the Hilton bombings in 1978, Australia has proven fairly immune from the phenomenon of political terrorism. In the previous years, that sense of security has been disturbed. A plot to blow up spectators at sporting events in Australia was foiled and seven men imprisoned after final hearings were held last year. The case was, however, marred by inconsistencies and a questionable performance by the prosecution. The desperation at getting a conviction was palpable. A few weeks ago, Australians were treated to boasts of Terror Foiled. It was claimed that suicide bombers associated with the Somali group Al-Shabaab had not succeeded in consummating their plans to storm the Holsworthy Army Barracks, a base in Sydney?s southwest, with the intent of killing numerous soldiers with assault weapons. With a certain condescending note, Time wrote about how, on August 4, Australians ?quickly began to learn the pronunciation of the Somali terrorist group?s name.? Four hundred police in a joint federal and state operation had moved across Melbourne, raiding nineteen properties. Four men were arrested that day, followed by another four the next. The men are of Lebanese and Somali background. An unhealthy, psychic state has been unearthed in these revelations: a desire, almost a wish, that Australian sites would prove worthy as genuine terrorist targets. There is a hierarchy in the west on the worthy and unworthy in the terrorist game. A condition of terror envy has taken root. ?There is,? a grave Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd argued, ?an enduring threat of terrorism at home here in Australia as well as overseas.? For the ill-directed and confused figures beavering away at Canberra?s Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Australia remained, to quote one of its supposed experts Carl Ungerer, ?a gold medal target for Al Qaeda? begging the question as to when it attained that prestigious award. In short, the terror ?threat? is everywhere, the unseen creature that strikes the unsuspecting. While it would demand a minimal economy of effort to strike at Holsworthy base, exaggeration is very much the norm in the lingua franca of anti-terrorism. A Somali-based terrorist organization intent on imposing Shari?a rule in Somalia proper does not look like a particularly strong, yet alone credible enemy for a country on the other side of the earth. Throw in an Al Qaeda link though, and you seem to rise in the ladder of terror envy. Even Somali voices have weighed into the debate. A Somali leader, the Islamic scholar Dr. Herse Hilole, claims he made murmurings about the likelihood of an attack a few years ago. ?My suspicion was that young Somali Muslims could be or may be used in the future to carry [out] some terrorist activities in Australia? (ABC News, Aug 4). The Eritrean chairman of the Melbourne-based African Think Tank, Berhan Ahmed, has been toying with the idea Australia?s failed assimilation program would pose threats to its local security. 16,000 Somalis have found refuge in Australia, fleeing the ravages of civil war. But teething problems with integration remain. Housing complexes and tenements have become breeding grounds for disaffection. Un-employment is chronic. The options are stark: the embrace of charismatic religious figures or ruinous drugs. We are left with the recurring hypothetical event, an occurrence unrealised, all the more potent for that fact. In the ?age of terror?, the hypothetical terrorist event has become the premier showcase, the determining issue on policy. ?Potentially this would have been, if it had been able to be carried out, the most serious terrorist attack on Australian soil,? claims Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Tony Negus. An entire anti-terror system is based on invoking terror, measured by ?states? of emergency, alarm and concern. An entire apparatus in coping with terrorists employs methods of fear and surveillancewhile offering the disclaimer: we are doing it to protect you while watching you. Links and evidence remain sketchy in these revelations. What was in the news as carnival fanfare has now died down, leaving the shadowy business to interrogators and trial lawyers. In a society that is currently functioning on the idea of a permanent war in times of permanent peace, we are left less clear than ever what role the Somali organization truly has in Australia. It is not a situation the authorities are necessarily keen to dispel. Public confusion, not to mention ignorance, persists in remaining the handiest of state assets. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark at gmail.com _______________________________________________ Mai-not mailing list Mai-not at globalproblematique.net http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.57/2303 - Release Date: 08/14/09 18:10:00 From jomut at yahoo.com Sat Aug 15 10:54:13 2009 From: jomut at yahoo.com (John Mutambirwa) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:54:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mai-not] "vet" discipulus! Message-ID: <996344.72924.qm@web31101.mail.mud.yahoo.com> John Mutambirwa (Dreaming Awake) jomut at yahoo.com chakane at hotmail.com http://www.geocities.com/jomut ? Hi, ? Good to be a?grey-bearded kid and make sure that you have been properly put to pasture. ? John ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From siamdave at yahoo.ca Sun Aug 16 09:23:29 2009 From: siamdave at yahoo.ca (Dave Patterson) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:23:29 +0700 Subject: [Mai-not] the simpler way In-Reply-To: <4A7C0DCE.50005@ozemail.com.au> References: <4A7C0DCE.50005@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: <200908162323290984.00CDE598@smtp.totisp.net> The Simpler Way by Ted Trainer http://ssis.arts.unsw.edu.au/tsw/ Dion, Clem - have you heard of this guy? I don't recall him being mentioned on MAI-not before - a lot of good ideas - I've only started reading some of it, but thought you might be interested - another reason to get 'down under' one of these days, check this out in person .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From creuss at bluewin.ch Sun Aug 16 10:59:15 2009 From: creuss at bluewin.ch (Christoph Reuss) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 19:59:15 +0200 Subject: [Mai-not] the simpler way Message-ID: > The Simpler Way by Ted Trainer http://ssis.arts.unsw.edu.au/tsw/ The usual Predator nonsense of "we ALL are to blame -- no the Preds have nothing to do with the crisis they made... you & I made the billions vanish!" Chris "Make it as simple as possible -- but not simpler." --Albert Einstein ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". From thinker at xplornet.com Sun Aug 16 12:03:54 2009 From: thinker at xplornet.com (Ed Deak) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 12:03:54 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] the simpler way In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090816190006.CEC6F23C8918@smtprelay01.hostedemail.com> Also attributed to Einstein: "Deine eigene Scheise stinkt nicht" And, as we can see in our daily economic mess, he was right on this one too . Cheers, Ed. At 10:59 AM 16/08/2009, you wrote: > > The Simpler Way by Ted Trainer http://ssis.arts.unsw.edu.au/tsw/ > >The usual Predator nonsense of "we ALL are to blame -- no the Preds have >nothing to do with the crisis they made... you & I made the billions vanish!" > >Chris > >"Make it as simple as possible -- but not simpler." --Albert Einstein > > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword >"igve". > > >_______________________________________________ >Mai-not mailing list >Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.58/2306 - Release Date: >08/16/09 06:09:00 From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Sun Aug 16 18:42:59 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:42:59 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] the simpler way In-Reply-To: <200908162323290984.00CDE598@smtp.totisp.net> References: <4A7C0DCE.50005@ozemail.com.au> <200908162323290984.00CDE598@smtp.totisp.net> Message-ID: <20090817014259.ED283F797@fep04.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dnevrghm at powerup.com.au Sun Aug 16 23:56:26 2009 From: dnevrghm at powerup.com.au (Doug Everingham) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:56:26 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] [ERANet] BINARY ECONOMICS In-Reply-To: <4EE53801-98E9-4EDC-A1CA-F457F85E1558@powerup.com.au> References: <4A407D80.6020808@wanadoo.fr> <1155b3ea0906240924q5b911037rf06c6a9f8c926547@mail.gmail.com> <4EE53801-98E9-4EDC-A1CA-F457F85E1558@powerup.com.au> Message-ID: <938156B1-C556-41B4-B096-D6935EDE23D5@powerup.com.au> On 06/07/2009, at 5:43 PM, Doug Everingham wrote re: > www.binaryeconomics.net HERE IS AN EXTRACT by Doug Everingham:: Binary Economics - the modern universal paradigm __________________________________________ by Rodney Shakespeare Introduction Binary economics is the expression of a new universal paradigm or new understanding of reality that creates a new economics, a new politics, a new justice and a new morality.[1] It addresses the big environmental issues. Without the new universal paradigm - which is relevant to all societies including modern Islam - there will be no peace, nor an end to colonialism and racism.\ THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRASH IS HAPPENING. HERE IS THE SOLUTION. The Modern Universal Paradigm by Rodney Shakespeare (Foreword by Tarek el-Diwany), containing the latest developments, is now published. To purchase, click http://www.moneybooks.co.uk/ ???????????????????? In its economics aspect, binary economics is a market economics whose markets work for everybody. Furthermore, it upholds private property but private property (and the associated income) for everybody.[2] A summary might be ?a justice which creates efficiency and an efficiency which creates justice.?[3] An alternative summary is ?the use of national bank-issued interest- free loans, administered by the banking system, for the development and spreading of various forms of productive (and the associated consuming) capacity thereby creating a balance of supply and demand with producers and consumers being the same people (as required by Say?s Theorem) and forwarding social and economic justice.? No subsidy is involved. Existing money (e.g., a bank?s capital or, with permission, the deposits of customers) may be lent in ways including interest although Islamic banking practices (e.g., ?partnership?) are preferred. However, newly-created money MUST be lent interest-free for developing and spreading the real economy to every individual in the population. In its intent to involve people in ownership and participation, binary economics has affinity with distributism and with the worker cooperatives of the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy and the Mondrag?n Cooperative Corporation of Spain. A quick illustration of binary economics A quick illustration of binary economics is the interest-free funding for low-cost public housing, a waterworks, bridge, sewage works, road or hospital - the use of national bank-issued interest-free loans halves, even quarters, the cost. Two more illustrations are:- * a halving or more of the usual cost of micro-credit for poor people * the enabling of any individual in the population (from a baby to a retiree) to become a shareholder in one of the great corporations - the shares would be full-payout ones thereby creating a considerable income for the holder. NB The financial savings of individuals are not used as the source for funding the full-payout shares - the source of the financing is ultimately the national bank. The national bank is used as the source of the loans for the shares to emphasise that the national money supply is not that of a mere private grouping (as is the case today) but is society?s money supply which (although funnelled through the banking system making an administrative charge) can be interest-free for the purposes of an efficient, just economy. Indeed, where the financing of new productive capacity is concerned, interest is not necessary. Binary economics defines ?full payout? shares as net of reserves for depreciation, research and development and the earnings of full payout shares are expected to be five to nine times existing earnings. Meaning of ?binary? The ?binary? (in ?binary economics?) sometimes perplexes people. It means ?composed of two? because it suffices to view the factors in production as being but two (labor and capital) and thus there are only two ways of genuinely earning a living - by labor and/or by the ownership of productive capital. In viewing the two factors it can also be observed that humans own their own labor but they do not necessarily own the other factor - capital (which includes land). NB ?Capital? means things which create wealth e.g. seeds, hand tools, machines, patents, land, raw materials, ships, quarries, bio- technological processes, telephone networks, farm animals, trucks etc. - anything which is non-human, which can be owned and which is capable of producing an income. Binary economics is fundamentally different from all forms of conventional economics Binary economics is fundamentally different from all forms of conventional economics (be they expressions of right-wing, centrist or left-wing theory).[4] Thus, unlike most mainstream economics, binary economics accommodates belief in God, unicity and ethics.[5] It directly addresses the main environmental issues; does not assume that humans only follow their own immediate short term self interest; ends economic colonialism; appeals to people of faith and of good faith;[6] and does not assume that humans (as distinguished from capital instruments) do all, or nearly all, of the physical creation of wealth.[7] Binary economics is not a ?third way? between capitalism and socialism: it expresses a new paradigm. Binary economics co-operates with, and supports, anybody who understands the uses of the national bank-issued interest-free loan supply - in the USA an example is Dennis Kucinich and colleagues. In the 50-minute video below (2000) Harold Hudson Channer of Manhattan Neighbourhood Network tv discusses binary economics with Rodney Shakespeare, co-author of Binary Economics - the New Paradigm and Dr. Edward Wolff, the American expert on the distribution of wealth and author of Top Heavy. NB Binary economics is a developing subject. The video is highly topical but, all the time, binary economics develops (see Developments on the Present page; the Global Crisis and Solution page; and the Fifty Three False Assumptions page). ... As a study, binary economics is not reductionist,[8] does not ignore the imbalance in power relationships between people,[9] and does not assume that extensive poverty is inevitable. (NB. 55% of the world?s population lives on under $3 per day: every day an estimated 25,000 people die from the effects of dirty water).[10] Being concerned with social justice and economic justice it also notes that allegedly successful ?free market? economies show symptoms of profound failure - thus figures from the 2004 Census show that one fifth of Americans live on under $7 per day.[11] Moreover, up to one fifth of the USA population does not have health security and this happens in a country which is the richest in the world; which claims to be the embodiment of a perfect, efficient and just ?free market?; and which spends 18% of its income on health. Twenty eight million Americans have to rely on food stamps (April, 2008). Binary economics addresses weaknesses in current economic system Furthermore, binary economics addresses a number of weaknesses in the current economic system which are dismissed by conventional economics as being of no, or low, importance. The weaknesses include:? * almost all of the modern money supply is in the form of interest- bearing debt created and owned by the banking system (in the UK over 95% of the money supply is created in this way: there are similar percentages in other countries)[12] * the present money supply is generally not directed at productive (and the associated consuming) capacity but instead goes into derivatives, rising asset prices, consumer credit and putting everyone - individuals, towns, corporations, towns, cities, countries - into ever-increasing debt.[13] * at present two lots of financing are required to keep the system going - one lot for production and a separate lot for consumption. The two lots are continually inflationary yet, all the time, more and more loan money must be created (by the banking system) if the whole economic and financial system is not to collapse. Inflation is inevitable with the present system. * forms of productive capital remain narrowly owned and there is no policy to spread the ownership of productive (and the associated consuming) capacity throughout the population[14] * people do not have their own independent incomes * the practices of the IMF and World Bank which deliberately trap countries into never-ending debt; keep productive capital (and associated consuming power) narrowly owned; and, in an abuse of power, are generally bent on ripping off the wealth of poor countries * in practice, economic colonialism * in practice, racism Binary economics redresses those weaknesses. Thus economic colonialism is ended by allowing countries to have control over their own money supply, control over their own assets, and freedom from international debt. Opposition to racism has little meaning unless it is manifested in practical, everyday material improvement and binary economics provides this by spreading ownership thereby enabling the spreading of the associated incomes. Binary economics does not expropriate or take: rather it enables everybody to build. The binary competence Indeed, over time, on market principles, binary economics enables all individuals to build an independent income or binary competence. The competence (the word can be traced back to Jane Austen, Alexander Pope and William Shakespeare meaning property or means sufficient for the necessaries and conveniences of life; sufficiency without excess) is defined as:- a capital estate large enough to supply sufficient current consumer income to support at least one half of an affluent life style (measured in the context of what society as a whole can efficiently produce). Figures contained in a 1998 study by Northeast Ohio Employee Ownership Center, Kent State University, Ohio and a 2005 study from the Center for Economic and Social Justice, Washington, D.C., indicate (2005 figures) that, aged sixty five, an adult would have a binary income of about $26,000 and a capital accumulation of at least $200,000 with both figures continuing to increase after the age of sixty five.[15] Along with the competence, of course, individuals will also be free to gain income from their labour as now. As part of binary policy to develop capital ownership for each member of the population there is no estate duty (or Inheritance Tax) on death IF the estate devolves in such a way as to spread capital estates, and therefore capital ownership, to more individuals. If it does not do so, then there is a graduated tax. Other characteristics of binary economics Binary economics is of particular importance in a world where, increasingly, more of the physical contribution to production is being, and will be, done by machines and near-robots.[16] ... With binary economics national debt is lessened and national unity encouraged. Binary economics creates a stable economy and associated financial system which is not subject to unsustainable booms and resulting crashes. In binary economics there is no expropriation (as there can be in socialism, for example). Moreover, because people come to have sufficient income from their own independent capital estates much less redistribution is necessary (for example, by taxes in order to fund forms of government spending including welfare benefits). Because there is much less redistribution there is much less taxation. Binary economics cannot be inflationary: it is counter-inflationary. Nor can it lead to a global financial crisis of the sort now threatening economies and markets. It upholds the periodic political vote but deepens democracy by ensuring that all individuals have the everyday freedom stemming from an independent economic base.[17] Conventional economics compared with binary economics A good understanding of binary economics can be obtained by contrasting various aspects with comparable aspects in conventional economics (especially mainstream neoclassical economics). The first contrast is that mainstream neoclassical economics claims to be primarily a positive economics (i.e., an analysis of ?what is?) whereas binary economics is considered (by mainstream neoclassical economists) to be primarily a normative economics (proposing an economic system that ought to be). However, as compared to mainstream neoclassical economics, binary economics undoubtedly has a superior account of physical reality (i.e., of what is) - particularly in its analysis called productiveness. Binary economics is therefore both a highly positive economics and a highly normative one. Secondly, in its physical analysis of who or what creates the wealth mainstream neoclassical economics upholds the concept of productivity (generally labour productivity) while, in complete contrast, binary economics has the new concept of productiveness giving fair credit to the contributions of both labour and capital. Binary economics believes that the binary productiveness analysis, as an understanding of physical reality, is far superior to that of mainstream neoclassical productivity. Then conventional mainstream neoclassical economics believes that interest (as opposed to administration cost) is always necessary. However, binary economics, again in complete contrast, states that, certainly where the development and spreading of productive (and the associated consuming) capacity is concerned, interest (as opposed to administration cost) is not necessary. For newly-created money, conventional economics upholds the doctrine of the time value of money whereas binary economics, noticing that money is created out of nothing by the banking system, denies the time value doctrine. Consequently, binary economics rejects conventional financial savings doctrine (that there must be financial savings prior to investment) - no financial saving is necessary if money can be created out of nothing. Indeed, what matters is whether the newly-created money is interest-free; whether it can be repaid; whether there is effective collateral; and whether it goes towards the development and spreading of various forms of productive (and the associated consuming) capacity. Furthermore, an assumption of general scarcity is at the heart of conventional economics. Binary economics, however, denies the assumption. As Amartya Sen has shown, starvation is primarily due to lack of money in the hands of the starving and not the general absence of food: thus it is human attitudes, practice and institutions which are at fault. The contrast continues. Thus conventional economics:- * is largely unconcerned that the present money supply (mostly created by fractional-reserve banking) is generally not directed at productive capacity * in practice engenders a continual inflation * conceives of a self-centred homo economicus * eschews ethics and belief in God * ignores the imbalance in power relationships between people. But binary economics views it as essential that:- * the money supply be directed at the development and spreading of productive (and the associated consuming) capacity * the money supply be not inflationary, indeed, should be counter- inflationary * recognition be made that humans are capable of going beyond self- interest * ethics and belief in God be upheld * account be taken of the imbalance in power relationships between people. Very fundamentally, binary economics rejects the claim of conventional economics that it promotes a ?free market? which is free, fair and efficient. Binary economics states that the present ?free market? is unfree, unfair and inefficient not least because the ?free market? thinks it does not matter who owns productive capital and how it is distributed and does not worry if people do not have independent incomes. Democracy and Environment In a quite remarkable way the two economics differ on the subject of democracy. Conventional economics upholds the periodic political vote (as in, for example, elections to government). Binary economics does the same but then deepens democracy by insisting that productive capital and the practical everyday power its ownership gives to individuals be widely distributed as well. In binary economics freedom is only truly achieved if all individuals are able to acquire an independent economic base. In short, binary economics upholds political democracy plus economic democracy. Perhaps most importantly of all, conventional economics is generally heedless of (or at least, not directly involved with) environmental issues but, even if it does heed them, does not have the specific mechanisms to address the environment in a large-scale way. Indeed, conventional economics generally views environmental solutions as imposing an economic cost, and a large one at that. Binary economics, however, again in complete contrast, does have the mechanisms - particularly, interest-free loans - and its solutions do not impose economic cost. At present governments impose taxation yet many people do not pay their taxes e.g., by using off-shore tax havens. This puts a larger burden on others who do not have such havens, particularly the poor. To help stop this - and while taxes are in existence - binary economics wishes to see experiment made with site value taxation and a transactions tax. Lastly, conventional economics claims that its mathematical equilibriums are a manifestation of a world-encompassing objective science expressing universal values. But binary economics denies that claim. NB. In this website the page FALSE ASSUMPTIONS sets out fifty three false basic assumptions of mainstream neoclassical economics. It only needs two or three basic assumptions to be false for the whole of an economics to be false. Brief summary A brief summary is that binary economics results in:- * capital ownership for all individuals in the population so that they produce (and thus earn) independently of whether or not they also have a conventional job * free markets * an efficient wealth creation including a balancing of supply and demand * structural economic and social justice * no inflation * proper encouragement of small and start-up businesses * sharing and participatory structures * a strong ethical sense imbuing everything * an end to riba/interest * an end to economic colonialism * public and environmental capital projects * a direct connection between money and the real economy There is also:- * an increase in political freedoms and a deepening of democracy * policy to unite inhabitants who have different linguistic, religious, geographical and ethnic backgrounds In particular, over time, binary central bank-issued interest-free loans enable a government to refrain from increasing the National Debt and enable the ownership of an economy to remain in local hands. Binary economics is beginning to be taught in universities. The first such teaching is on the Islamic Economics and Finance postgraduate program at Trisakti University, Jakarta, Indonesia - Trisakti postgraduate Islamic Economics & Finance. Trisakti is famous as the birthplace of the 1998 Indonesian reformasi revolution. It is the biggest private university in Indonesia and second only to the main state university in prestige. .. [Much larger text cut by D E ] ... Copyright ? 2007-2009 Binary Economics ? Powered by WordPress ? Using Fusable Blue theme created by Greg Scowen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Mon Aug 17 22:10:07 2009 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:10:07 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] What's new at Links: Venezuela, Peterloo, US healthcare, Woodstock, Arabic, Pakistan, Kanaky, sustainability, Vietnam, Clinton & Africa Message-ID: <4A8A37AF.900@greenleft.org.au> What's new at Links: Venezuela, Peterloo, US healthcare, Woodstock, Arabic, Pakistan, Kanaky, sustainability, Vietnam, Clinton & Africa * * * Subscribe free to Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 You can also follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism Visit and bookmark http://links.org.au and add it to your RSS feed (http://links.org.au/rss.xml). If you would like us to consider an article, please send it to links at dsp.org.au *Please pass on to anybody you think will be interested in /Links/. * * * Green Left Weekly -- Support people's power media! Green Left Weekly is a people's power alternative media project. It is Australia's leading socialist publication, with unmatched international analysis. The internet gives it a global reach, but unfortunately that doesn't pay the bills! Many of its readers and writers are brought together from many corners of the world. The level or support and respect that Green Left Weekly has generated over the years was on show with the many messages of congratulations it received during the celebrations of the paper's 800th issue. Please help write for, distribute and support it! * Read more Venezuela: Socialist party prepares for 'transition to socialism'; PSUV discussion document By Federico Fuentes, Caracas August 8, 2009 -- On August 1, United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) members across the country participated in 1556 local assemblies to discuss the reorganisation of the party's base into local ``patrols''. This push to strengthen revolutionary organising comes at a time when attacks on Venezuela's revolutionary process revolution "from outside and within have intensified", Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, also president of the PSUV, said on August 4. After his re-election in the December 2006 presidential elections, Chavez issued a call to build a "new party... from the base" and at the service "of the people and the revolution, at the service of socialism". * Read more Win a trip to Venezuela! Drawn on August 30, 2009 Win a trip to Venezuela! ...and strengthen the solidarity movement with Venezuela's revolution * Enter here The 1819 `Peterloo' massacre: class struggle in the Industrial Revolution By Graham Milner August 16, 2009 -- The Industrial Revolution began in England, and the emergence of the industrial working class brought to the fore a new social and political force in world history. The bloody events of 190 years ago, on August 16, 1819, when a mass workers' protest in Manchester demanding political reform and labour rights was broken up by the army, with considerable loss of life, stand out as a stark warning to socialist activists everywhere that the ruling classes will react with violence and terror when their power and privileges are challenged. * Read more United States: Industry-backed opponents of healthcare reform react with racism, violence By Don Fitz August 14, 2009 -- St. Louis -- Did you hear about the town hall meeting in St. Louis on August 6, where union thugs attacked a black conservative and sent him to the hospital with multiple injuries? Well, it didn't happen exactly like that. In fact, events were the opposite of what talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly broadcast and what the corporate media relayed across the US. * Read more Woodstock 40 years ago: Country Joe McDonald's and Jimi Hendrix's antiwar classics 40 years ago -- from August 15 to August 18, 1969 -- hundreds of thousands of young people gathered for three days of ``peace, love and music''. In the midst of the mass movement against the Vietnam War and the youth radicalisation it unleashed, oppostion to US imperialism's slaughter in Vietnam was personified by the performances of Country Joe McDonald's ``Feel Like I'm Fixin' to Die' Rag'' and Jimi Hendrix's searing anti-patriotic ``Star-Spangled banner'' (below, press ``Read more'' to watch). * Read more The Flame, August 2009 -- Green Left Weekly's Arabic-language supplement With the help of Socialist Alliance members in the growing Sudanese community in Australia, Green Left Weekly -- Australia's leading socialist newspaper -- is publishing a regular Arabic language supplement. The Flame covers news from the Arabic-speaking world as well as news and issues from within Australia. * Read more Pakistan: Why was Tariq Mehmood was arrested? Demand his release! By Farooq Tariq On August 9, 2009, Tariq Mehmood, a human rights activists and general secretary of the Labour Party Pakistan (LPP) in the Toba Tek Singh district issued a press release to the journalists in Toba Tek Singh. He alleged that eight Christian women were raped by Muslim fanatics in an attack on Korian village in Gojra Tehsil on July 28 attack. He also alleged that 40 women are still missing and no clue is yet found about their whereabouts. He condemned this atrocious and horrific act and demanded the government to probe the case. More than 60 houses were burnt by fanatics in the village on the accusation of blasphemy. This act led to another attack on Gojra Christian community and nine people were burnt alive. * Read more Australia: ABC TV's `Foreign Correspondent' program censors Venezuela's majority By the Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Network August 12, 2009 -- The Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Foreign Correspondent current affairs TV program screened on August 11, titled "Hugo Chavez: Total Control" did nothing to shore up the ABC's reputation for well-informed, accurate reporting. Eric Campbell's report from Venezuela was riddled with inaccuracies, half-truths and transparent biases that need to be corrected. * Read more Petition: Appeal for the immediate release of USTKE trade unionists in Kanaky August 12, 2009 -- On August 6, a general strike in Kanaky (or the French overseas territory of New Caledonia) was called off after an accord between the trade union confederation USTKE (Federation of Unions of Kanak Workers and the Exploited) and Air Caledonia was finally signed by the airline. The signing of the accord, which had been negotiated on June 11, put an end to 10 days of demonstrations, roadblocks and violent confrontations with police, motivated as much by a desire for independence and decolonisation, as by the issue of industrial justice. * Read more Sustainability: utopian and scientific By Mark Burton To make the move to a sustainable future where people are no longer threatened by an ecological catastrophe will require a number of things -- above all a strong and broad movement with effective and intelligent leadership and an accurate understanding of the current problems and how they can be overcome. Sadly, only some parts of this constellation of forces are in place today. * Read more Vietnam: Chemical companies, US authorities knew the dangers of Agent Orange By Jon Dillingham August 10, 2009, was the first Orange Day organised in Vietnam -- not only to be remembered by victims of Agent Orange but to mark Vietnam's common pain. Those responsible for exposing Vietnamese citizens and US troops to toxic defoliants kept silent about known health implications, a review of documents finds. * Read more Hillary Clinton in Africa: Promoting US corporate and military interests By Firoze Manji August 6, 2009 -- International media attention is focused on the August 3-14 visit of the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, to seven countries in Africa. Judging by the behaviour of representatives of many African governments, there are great expectations that this visit -- following so closely after US President Barack Obama's two earlier visits to Egypt and Ghana this year -- holds out vast hope for Africa. But what is the significance of Clinton's visit? Does it really hold out hope for Africa? There are three dimensions to this visit: The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA); oil and natural resource exploitation; and security. * Read more * * * Links seeks to promote the international exchange of information, experience of struggle, theoretical analysis and views of political strategy and tactics within the international left. It is a forum for open and constructive dialogue between active socialists coming from different political traditions. It seeks to bring together those in the international left who are opposed to neoliberal economic and social policies. It aims to promote the renewal of the socialist movement in the wake of the collapse of the bureaucratic model of "actually existing socialism" in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. ATTENTION: Sign up for regular ``what's new'' announcement emails at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 Follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Mon Aug 24 04:26:08 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:26:08 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] So much for the high priests Message-ID: <20090824112609.9B86AF8B9@fep06.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> Few frauds masquerading on TV as "news" are as monumentally boring as the daily parade of "expert" opinions about the economy. The latest is Ben Bernanke telling us that the recession is on the way out (his corporate mates having gouged enough trillions from the public purse for now). On that note, John Hermann has posted the following to the Economic Reform Australia list: ============================= On 30 August 1929 the Dow Jones Industrial Average peaked at 380.33. However less than two months later - on 24 October 1929 - Wall Street crashed, sending the global economy into a depression. Nine months later economic indicators predicted further declines. The stock markets, on the other hand, were rising - indicating a return to prosperity. On this basis, in June 1930, U.S. President Herbert Hoover intoned "Gentleman, you have come 60 days too late -- the depression is over." But the markets continued to tumble. And they bottomed out in July 1932, a full two years after Hoover declared mission accomplished. =========================== Dion Giles From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Sun Aug 23 19:13:46 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:13:46 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fw: Lawyer Story Message-ID: <003101ca250c$997f9130$23ad57ca@jfos> Message LAWYER STORY OF THE YEAR This took place in Charlotte , North Carolina . A lawyer purchased a box of very rare and expensive cigars, then insured them against, among other things, fire. Within a month, having smoked his entire stockpile of these great cigars, the lawyer filed a claim against the insurance company. In his claim, the lawyer stated the cigars were lost 'in a series of small fires.' The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason, that the man had consumed the cigars in the normal fashion. The lawyer sued and WON! (Stay with me. ) Delivering the ruling, the Judge agreed with the insurance company that the claim was frivolous. The Judge stated nevertheless, that the lawyer held a policy from the company, in which it had warranted that the cigars were insurable and also guaranteed that it would insure them against fire, without defining what is considered to be unacceptable 'fire' and was obligated to pay the claim. Rather than endure lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance company accepted the ruling and paid $15,000 to the lawyer for his loss of the cigars that perished in the 'fires'. NOW FOR THE BEST PART... After the lawyer cashed the cheque, the insurance company had him arrested on 24 counts of ARSON!!! With his own insurance claim and testimony from the previous case being used against him, the lawyer was convicted of intentionally burning his insured property and was sentenced to 24 months in jail and a $24,000 fine. This true story won First Place in last year's Criminal Lawyers Award contest.. ONLY IN AMERICA .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Mon Aug 24 19:49:49 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:49:49 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] How proxy government works - perfect example Message-ID: <20090825024952.D421FF865@fep04.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Mon Aug 24 20:39:57 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:39:57 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] NY referendum petition over 9/11 con clears another hurdle Message-ID: <20090825033958.DC527F7BF@fep01.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Mon Aug 24 20:51:20 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:51:20 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Item re-sent with a query about someone running interference Message-ID: <20090825035121.B5C44F699@fep04.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Mon Aug 24 22:14:27 2009 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:14:27 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] What's new at Links: Green jobs, Venezuela, Honduras, Cory Aquino & the left, new Pakistan book, Malaysia, US health, population and climate Message-ID: <4A937333.2060801@greenleft.org.au> What's new at Links: Green jobs, Venezuela, Honduras, Cory Aquino & the left, new Pakistan book, Malaysia, US health, population and climate * * * Subscribe free to Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 You can also follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism Visit and bookmark http://links.org.au and add it to your RSS feed (http://links.org.au/rss.xml). If you would like us to consider an article, please send it to links at dsp.org.au *Please pass on to anybody you think will be interested in /Links/. * * * Lucas Aerospace -- When workers said `no' to military production, `yes' to green jobs By Rob Marsden August 22, 2009 -- Socialist Resistance -- Today, the twin drivers of economic recession and the possibility of catastrophic climate change are beginning to push working people towards action. A series of small-scale but high-profile occupations of threatened factories, not just at Vestas wind turbine plant but also at Visteon car plant, where 600 workers took on the might of Ford and won a greatly enhanced redundancy package, show what is possible. In the 1970s workers at Britain's Lucas Aerospace went even further. We look back at the lessons of Lucas Aerospace. * Read more Photo essay: Venezuela's Comuna 'Renacer del Sur' -- people's power in practice By Peter Boyle August 20, 2009 -- At the base of the Bolivarian revolutionary process in Venezuela are some 30,000 communal councils. These are pictures of some of the people active in communal councils in poor barrios (neighbourhoods) in the south of the city of Valencia. They were taken in November 2008 when members of the Australian-Venezuela Solidarity Netwok brigade were hosted by the Comuna ``Renacer del Sur'' (Rebith of the South Commune). Daniel Sanchez, a leader of the Rebirth of the South Commune, and Yoly Fernandez, a community organiser in Mission Mercal, Venezuela's subsidised food program, are touring Australia in August and September to explain how "people's power" is transforming their country and creating a new socialism of the 21st century. * Read more Melbourne, August 28-29: Latin America Solidarity Conference 2009 People?s Power is changing the world Latin America Solidarity Conference 2009 August 28-29, 2009 - Victorian Trades Hall, Melbourne, Australia http://www.solidarityconference2009.org Major cracks are appearing in the global capitalist system - cracks that are being forced open by the tide of rebellions and revolutions across Latin America. Read more Win a trip to Venezuela! Drawn on August 30, 2009 Win a trip to Venezuela! ...and strengthen the solidarity movement with Venezuela's revolution * Read more Honduras: pre-revolutionary situation? By Ricardo Arturo Salgado, translated by Felipe Stuart Cournoyer August 22, 2009 -- Pre-revolutionary situation? Some analyses of the situation in Honduras are fairly static. We have to differ with many local and foreign analysts who have tried to understand the situation in Honduras by imposing pre-existing parameters and by using basic concepts of the Marxist dialectic without any scientific criterion. Many have seen a failure of the Honduran grassroots resistance, failing to understand that historical materialism is not a mathematical formula where only variables change, but rather, a way to interpret reality objectively. * Read more The Philippines left and Corazon Aquino By Reihana Mohideen August 14, 2009 - Former president of the Philippines Corazon Aquino died on August 1. Following the 1983 assassination of Benigno Aquino, her husband, Cory Aquino became the Philippine's leading bourgeois opposition figure to the US-backed dictator Ferdinand Marcos. She stood against Marcos in the 1986 presidential election. After Marcos was proclaimed the winner of the blatantly rigged election, a mass uprising - dubbed the ``people power revolution'' -- overthrew Marcos and Aquino became president. She was in office from 1986 to 1992. The Philippines left's reaction to the death of Corazon Aquino has been intriguing. * Read more Pakistan: Farooq Tariq's new book `Facing the Musharraf Dictatorship' (free download) Below is spokesperson for the Labour Party Pakistan Farooq Tariq's introduction to his new book, Facing the Musharraf Dictatorship: An Activist's Narrative. Following that is the preface by Peter Boyle, national secretary of the Democratic Socialist Perspective of Australia. Facing the Musharraf Dictatorship is available from Good Books Lahore. Email goodbooks_1 [at] yahoo.com to order a hard copy. You can also download the entire 300-page PDF file at the end of the two articles below. * Read more Honduras: Asking the right questions to reach better answers By Ricardo Arturo Salgado, translated from the Spanish by Felipe Stuart Cournoyer August 21, 2009 -- Tegucigalpa -- A lot has been written on the Honduran situation, more in solidarity with opposition to the coup than in favour of it. The media seems to feed on scandalous news -- no blood, no news. Unless what's involved is a people on the way to liberation... * Read more United States: Healthcare `town hall' meeting a charade of democracy By Billy Wharton August 19, 2009 -- The were two big winners at the recent "town hall" healthcare meeting held in the North Bronx, New York City, neighbourhood of Parkchester on August 17 - the lunatic right wing and the private health insurance industry. These victories came despite the fact that the vast majority of those who lined up to participate in the meeting supported either a single-payer system or a public option. Most came away disappointed. I got kicked out. * Read more Climate change: Why population is not the problem By Jess Moore August 9, 2009 -- We face a climate crisis and something needs to change. The world's resources are finite, as is the amount of destruction humans can do to the planet if we are to survive. There is a debate in the environment movement about whether or not curbing population is an essential part of the solution. We have a decade, maybe a decade and a half, to transform our current relationship with the planet. Of course, the starting point for environmentalists cannot be solutions. We first need to identify the cause of the crisis before we can know how to fight it. * Read more Malaysia: People's power defeats evictions at Kampung Buah Pala -- for now By the Socialist Party of Malaysia August 13, 2009 -- Pulau Pinang, Malaysia -- Today was the moment of truth for Kampung Buah Pala villagers. It was the third time that their homes have faced demolition. But it was the first time that the local villagers outnumbered the outsiders who were the majority during the previous attempt on August 4. Today, when the police, the developer and the bailiff came, the villagers did not have the luxury of the presence of state assemblymen, MPs, the state government representative or even lawyers. Only a handful of Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSM, Parti Sosialis Malaysia) members and Hindraf [a civil rights organisation] supporters were with the villagers. * Read more The coup in Honduras, ALBA and the English-speaking Caribbean By Faiz Ahmed The military coup carried out by masked soldiers in the early hours of June 28 against the democratically elected President of Honduras, Jos? Manuel Zelaya Rosales, was a bandit act with differing messages intended for different audiences. One such audience is the oligarchical groupings throughout the hemisphere, who will be emboldened by Washington's tacit tolerance of the coup makers. Another audience is the Latin American leftist and popular governments, who are being told that their agendas can be trumped by non-democratic means. And there is yet another audience: the predominantly English-speaking Caribbean governments who, like Zelaya, are far from ideologically opposed to capitalism, but are aware of their inability to improve the overall quality of life of their societies within capitalism's current configuration. * Read more * * * Links seeks to promote the international exchange of information, experience of struggle, theoretical analysis and views of political strategy and tactics within the international left. It is a forum for open and constructive dialogue between active socialists coming from different political traditions. It seeks to bring together those in the international left who are opposed to neoliberal economic and social policies. It aims to promote the renewal of the socialist movement in the wake of the collapse of the bureaucratic model of "actually existing socialism" in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. ATTENTION: Sign up for regular ``what's new'' announcement emails at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 Follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Tue Aug 25 02:25:59 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:25:59 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Top economist Michael Hudson begs to differ Message-ID: <20090825092602.CC4CAF8BA@fep06.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Tue Aug 25 16:19:46 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:19:46 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: The Great Gas Robbery Message-ID: <00d301ca260d$6710b920$2aad57ca@jfos> With the "Celtic Tiger" myth further exposed by the global financial meltdown, increasing un(der)employment, poverty and deprivation and social division, being experienced by more and more Irish citizens is largely un-necessary - as the following article reveals. Yet another example of the treachery of 'the people's representatives' and our corporate 'leaders' ... in this case the notorious Shell Corp. john The Gas Robbery In 1987 and 1992, ministers Ray Burke and Bertie Ahern made bizarre changes to the law governing Irish gas and oil exploration. They reduced the state's share in these resources from 50% to zero %, abolished royalties and slashed the tax rates. "No other country in the world has given the oil companies such favourable terms." - Mike Cunningham, former Statoil director Ireland has 100s of billions of Euros worth of gas & oil: Equal to 100,000 Euro for every person in Ireland... but oil multinationals will get it all. The global financial crisis has hit Ireland particularly hard. Most of us are feeling the squeeze... If only Ireland had valuable natural resources. Offshore gas, like Norway. Or oil, like Saudi Arabia. Cutbacks, pay freezes and the pension levy would be things of the past. We could weather the economic storm; build more schools and hospitals; introduce free health-care and education; and our gas and ESB bills would be slashed. In fact, Ireland does have some of the biggest reserves of gas and oil in Europe. According to the Government, 540 billion Euro(540,000,000,000) worth of gas and oil lies under Irish waters off our west coast. That's enough to write off our national debt more than 10 times over. Unfortunately, though, Ireland will not benefit from this wealth. Why not? THE GREAT GAS GIVEAWAY For reasons still unknown, in 1987 and 1992, ministers Ray Burke and Bertie Ahern made bizarre changes to the law governing Irish gas and oil exploration. They reduced the state's share in these resources from 50% to zero %, abolished royalties and slashed the tax rates. As it now stands: . The gas and oil is 100% owned by the oil companies who find it and bring it ashore. . The state receives no royalties. . The oil companies will pay only 25% corporation tax. (In Norway it's up to 78%) ... . But 100% of costs can be written off against tax. Remarkably, this includes costs incurred outside Ireland - all the company's accountants have to do is link these costs to the project in question. They can also write off the costs of all unsuccessful (i.e. non-gas-producing) wells. Take the Corrib Gas field. The government says it contains around 10 billion Euros worth of gas. Shell can sell this gas to Irish consumers, via Bord Gais, at full international market price. (Or it can sell it abroad if it wishes.) Either way, the proceeds will go to the shareholders of Shell, Statoil and Marathon (and will pay for public services in Norway, as Statoil is majority-owned by Norway's government). Bear this in mind the next time you hear a politician mention Ireland's "national interest" to explain why an experimental inland gas refinery and dangerous high-pressure pipeline is being forced on a small rural community in Rossport. WHY THE URGENCY? New exploration licences are being issued to oil multinationals all the time. Over the next couple of years, the government will give away hundreds of billions of euro worth of Ireland's gas and oil... ... unless we stop them. We must take control of our resources. Act now! WHAT YOU CAN DO . Find out more, read the articles on this website, create an account so we can keep you informed of latest developments and you can discuss these. . Sign this online petition: www.petitiononline.com/s2s/ . Lobby your politicians. Ask them are they going to protect your gas. . Write letters to local and national papers. . Make posters and put them up locally. . Go to Erris and see for yourself what's going on around Shell's refinery & pipeline. Contact Dublin Shell to Sea: dublins2s at gmail.com Tel: 087 8141580 -0o0o0o0- Lots more at http://www.dublins2s.com/content/gas-robbery http://www.indymedia.ie/attachments/jun2009/shadowovererris_andrewfloodjune2009.pdf http://www.ainfos.ca/ainfos15143.html The Shadow over Erris: Shell, IRMS and Bolivia ------------------------------------------------------ Provided by Australis http://www.australis.com.au/ From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Tue Aug 25 23:00:55 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 16:00:55 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: Americans - Serfs Ruled by Oligarchs Message-ID: <025e01ca2612$93c99950$2aad57ca@jfos> http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts08192009.html August 19, 2009 Americans: Serfs Ruled by Oligarchs By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS "In a little time [there will be] no middling sort. We shall have a few, and but a very few Lords, and all the rest beggars." R.L. Bushman "Rapidly you are dividing into two classes--extreme rich and extreme poor." "Brutus" Americans think that they have "freedom and democracy" and that politicians are held accountable by elections. The fact of the matter is that the US is ruled by powerful interest groups who control politicians with campaign contributions. Our real rulers are an oligarchy of financial and military/security interests and AIPAC, which influences US foreign policy for the benefit of Israel. Have a look at economic policy. It is being run for the benefit of large financial concerns, such as Goldman Sachs. It was the banks, not the millions of Americans who have lost homes, jobs, health insurance, and pensions, that received $700 billion in TARP funds. The banks used this gift of capital to make more profits. In the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, Goldman Sachs announced record second quarter profits and large six-figure bonuses for every employee. The Federal Reserve's low interest rate policy is another gift to the banks. It lowers their cost of funds and increases their profits. With the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, banks became high-risk investment houses that trade financial instruments such as interest rate derivatives and mortgage backed securities. With abundant funds supplied virtually free by the Federal Reserve, banks are paying depositors virtually nothing on their savings. Despite the Federal Reserve's low interest rate policy, beginning October 1 banks are raising the annual percentage rate (APR) on credit card purchases and cash advances and on balances that have a penalty rate because of late payment. Banks are also raising the late fee. In the midst of the worst economy since the 1930s, heavily indebted Americans, who are losing their jobs and their homes, are to be bled into bankruptcy by the very banks that are being subsidized with TARP funds and low interest rates. Moreover, it is the American public that is on the hook for the TARP money and the low interest rates. As the US government's budget is 50 per cent or more in the red, the TARP money has to be borrowed from abroad or monetized by the Fed. This means more pressure on the US dollar's exchange value and a rise in import prices and also domestic inflation. Americans will thus pay for the TARP and low interest rate subsidies to their financial rulers with erosion in the purchasing power of the dollar. What we are experiencing is a massive redistribution of income from the American public to the financial sector. And this is occurring during a Democratic administration headed by America's first black president, with a Democratic majority in the House and Senate. Is there a government anywhere that less represents its citizens than the US government? Consider America's wars. As of the moment of writing, the out-of-pocket cost of America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is $900,000,000,000. When you add in the already incurred future costs of veterans benefits, interest on the debt, the forgone use of the resources for productive purposes, and such other costs as computed by Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University budget expert Linda Bilmes, "our" government has wasted $3,000,000,000,000--three thousand billion dollars--on two wars that have no benefit whatsoever for any American whose income does not derive from the military/security complex, about which five-star general President Eisenhower warned us. It is now a proven fact that the US invasion of Iraq was based on lies and deception of the American public. The only beneficiaries were the armaments industries, Blackwater, Halliburton, military officers who enjoy higher rates of promotion during war, and Muslim extremists whose case the US government proved by its unprovoked aggression against Muslims. No one else benefitted. Iraq was a threat to no one, and finding Saddam Hussein and executing him after a kangaroo trial had no effect whatsoever on ending the war or preventing the start of others. The cost of America's wars is a huge burden on a bankrupt country, but the cost incurred by veterans might be even higher. Homelessness is a prevalent condition of veterans, as is post-traumatic stress. American soldiers, who naively fought for the munitions industry's wars, for high compensation for the munitions CEOs, and for dividends and capital gains for the munitions shareholders, paid not only with lives and lost limbs, but also with broken marriages, ruined careers, psychiatric disorders, and prison sentences for failing to make child support payments. What did Americans gain from an unaffordable war in Iraq that lasted far longer than World War II and that put into power Shi'ites allied with Iran? The answer is obvious: nothing whatsoever. What did the armaments industry gain? Billions of dollars in profits. Obama is the presidential candidate who promised to end the war in Iraq. He hasn't. But he has escalated the war in Afghanistan, started a new war in Pakistan, intends to repeat the Yugoslav scenario in the Caucasus, and appears determined to start a war in South America. In response to the acceptance by US puppet president of Columbia, Alvaro Uribe, of seven US military bases in Columbia, Venezuela warned South American countries that the "winds or war are beginning to blow." Here we have the US government, totally dependent on the generosity of foreigners to finance its red ink, which extends in large quantities as far as the eye can see, completely under the thumb of the military/security complex, which will destroy us all in order to meet Wall Street share price expectations. Why does any American care who rules Afghanistan? The country has nothing to do with us. Did the armed services committees of the House and Senate calculate the risk of destabilizing nuclear armed Pakistan when they acquiesced to Obama's new war there, a war that has already displaced two million Pakistanis? No, of course not. The whores took their orders from the same military/security oligarchy that instructed Obama. The great American superpower and its 300 million people are being driven straight into the ground by the narrow interest of the big banks and the munitions industry. People, and not only Americans, are losing their sons, husbands, brothers, and fathers for no other reason than the profits of US armaments corporations, and the gullible American people seem proud of it. Those ribbon decals on their cars, SUVs and monster trucks proclaim their naive loyalty to the armaments industries and to the whores in Washington who promote wars. Will Americans, smashed and destroyed by "their" government's policy, which always puts Americans last, ever understand who their real enemies are? Will Americans realize that they are not ruled by elected representatives but by an oligarchy that owns the Washington whorehouse? Will Americans ever understand that they are impotent serfs? Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. This fall CounterPunch/AK Press will publish Robert's War of the Worlds: How the Economy Was Lost. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts at yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------ Provided by Australis http://www.australis.com.au/ From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Tue Aug 25 23:34:03 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:34:03 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: Americans - Serfs Ruled by Oligarchs In-Reply-To: <025e01ca2612$93c99950$2aad57ca@jfos> References: <025e01ca2612$93c99950$2aad57ca@jfos> Message-ID: <20090826063404.690FEF1B6@fep03.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> At 14:00 26/08/2009, John Foster quoted: >"Rapidly you are dividing into two classes--extreme rich and extreme >poor." "Brutus" Brutus and his colleagues were absolutely right to render unto Caesar that which was Caesar's. Mark Anthony as depicted by Shakespeare is a carbon copy of Robert Gordon Menzies, one of the worst scoundrels ever to hold the office of Prime Minister of Australia. Dion Giles From gdy52150 at spiritone.com Tue Aug 25 23:49:41 2009 From: gdy52150 at spiritone.com (glen) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:49:41 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: Americans - Serfs Ruled by Oligarchs In-Reply-To: <025e01ca2612$93c99950$2aad57ca@jfos> References: <025e01ca2612$93c99950$2aad57ca@jfos> Message-ID: <4A94DB05.7000302@spiritone.com> the whole thing is a damn charade until they can declare martial law---But first they have to drive everything into the ground so they have an excuse that the idiots sitting on couches and swilling beer will believe. I think the real shit will hit the fan in the second half of September but no later than November what we need is a good old fashioned workers rebellion john foster wrote: > http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts08192009.html > > August 19, 2009 > Americans: Serfs Ruled by Oligarchs > By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS > > "In a little time [there will be] no middling sort. We shall have a > few, and but a very few Lords, and all the rest beggars." R.L. Bushman > > "Rapidly you are dividing into two classes--extreme rich and extreme > poor." "Brutus" > > > > Americans think that they have "freedom and democracy" and that > politicians are held accountable by elections. The fact of the matter > is that the US is ruled by powerful interest groups who control > politicians with campaign contributions. Our real rulers are an > oligarchy of financial and military/security interests and AIPAC, > which influences US foreign policy for the benefit of Israel. > > Have a look at economic policy. It is being run for the benefit of > large financial concerns, such as Goldman Sachs. > > It was the banks, not the millions of Americans who have lost homes, > jobs, health insurance, and pensions, that received $700 billion in > TARP funds. The banks used this gift of capital to make more profits. > In the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great > Depression, Goldman Sachs announced record second quarter profits and > large six-figure bonuses for every employee. > > The Federal Reserve's low interest rate policy is another gift to the > banks. It lowers their cost of funds and increases their profits. > With the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, banks became > high-risk investment houses that trade financial instruments such as > interest rate derivatives and mortgage backed securities. With > abundant funds supplied virtually free by the Federal Reserve, banks > are paying depositors virtually nothing on their savings. > > Despite the Federal Reserve's low interest rate policy, beginning > October 1 banks are raising the annual percentage rate (APR) on credit > card purchases and cash advances and on balances that have a penalty > rate because of late payment. Banks are also raising the late fee. In > the midst of the worst economy since the 1930s, heavily indebted > Americans, who are losing their jobs and their homes, are to be bled > into bankruptcy by the very banks that are being subsidized with TARP > funds and low interest rates. > > Moreover, it is the American public that is on the hook for the TARP > money and the low interest rates. As the US government's budget is 50 > per cent or more in the red, the TARP money has to be borrowed from > abroad or monetized by the Fed. This means more pressure on the US > dollar's exchange value and a rise in import prices and also domestic > inflation. > > Americans will thus pay for the TARP and low interest rate subsidies > to their financial rulers with erosion in the purchasing power of the > dollar. What we are experiencing is a massive redistribution of income > from the American public to the financial sector. > > And this is occurring during a Democratic administration headed by > America's first black president, with a Democratic majority in the > House and Senate. > > Is there a government anywhere that less represents its citizens than > the US government? > > Consider America's wars. As of the moment of writing, the > out-of-pocket cost of America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is > $900,000,000,000. When you add in the already incurred future costs of > veterans benefits, interest on the debt, the forgone use of the > resources for productive purposes, and such other costs as computed by > Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University budget expert > Linda Bilmes, "our" government has wasted $3,000,000,000,000--three > thousand billion dollars--on two wars that have no benefit whatsoever > for any American whose income does not derive from the > military/security complex, about which five-star general President > Eisenhower warned us. > > It is now a proven fact that the US invasion of Iraq was based on lies > and deception of the American public. The only beneficiaries were the > armaments industries, Blackwater, Halliburton, military officers who > enjoy higher rates of promotion during war, and Muslim extremists > whose case the US government proved by its unprovoked aggression > against Muslims. No one else benefitted. Iraq was a threat to no one, > and finding Saddam Hussein and executing him after a kangaroo trial > had no effect whatsoever on ending the war or preventing the start of > others. > > The cost of America's wars is a huge burden on a bankrupt country, but > the cost incurred by veterans might be even higher. Homelessness is a > prevalent condition of veterans, as is post-traumatic stress. > American soldiers, who naively fought for the munitions industry's > wars, for high compensation for the munitions CEOs, and for dividends > and capital gains for the munitions shareholders, paid not only with > lives and lost limbs, but also with broken marriages, ruined careers, > psychiatric disorders, and prison sentences for failing to make child > support payments. > > What did Americans gain from an unaffordable war in Iraq that lasted > far longer than World War II and that put into power Shi'ites allied > with Iran? > > The answer is obvious: nothing whatsoever. > > What did the armaments industry gain? Billions of dollars in profits. > > Obama is the presidential candidate who promised to end the war in > Iraq. He hasn't. But he has escalated the war in Afghanistan, > started a new war in Pakistan, intends to repeat the Yugoslav scenario > in the Caucasus, and appears determined to start a war in South > America. In response to the acceptance by US puppet president of > Columbia, Alvaro Uribe, of seven US military bases in Columbia, > Venezuela warned South American countries that the "winds or war are > beginning to blow." > > Here we have the US government, totally dependent on the generosity of > foreigners to finance its red ink, which extends in large quantities > as far as the eye can see, completely under the thumb of the > military/security complex, which will destroy us all in order to meet > Wall Street share price expectations. > > Why does any American care who rules Afghanistan? The country has > nothing to do with us. > > Did the armed services committees of the House and Senate calculate > the risk of destabilizing nuclear armed Pakistan when they acquiesced > to Obama's new war there, a war that has already displaced two million > Pakistanis? > > No, of course not. The whores took their orders from the same > military/security oligarchy that instructed Obama. > > The great American superpower and its 300 million people are being > driven straight into the ground by the narrow interest of the big > banks and the munitions industry. People, and not only Americans, are > losing their sons, husbands, brothers, and fathers for no other reason > than the profits of US armaments corporations, and the gullible > American people seem proud of it. Those ribbon decals on their cars, > SUVs and monster trucks proclaim their naive loyalty to the armaments > industries and to the whores in Washington who promote wars. > > Will Americans, smashed and destroyed by "their" government's policy, > which always puts Americans last, ever understand who their real > enemies are? > > Will Americans realize that they are not ruled by elected > representatives but by an oligarchy that owns the Washington whorehouse? > > Will Americans ever understand that they are impotent serfs? > > Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the > Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good > Intentions. This fall CounterPunch/AK Press will publish Robert's War > of the Worlds: How the Economy Was Lost. He can be reached at: > PaulCraigRoberts at yahoo.com > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Provided by Australis > http://www.australis.com.au/ > > _______________________________________________ > Mai-not mailing list > Mai-not at globalproblematique.net > http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not > From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Wed Aug 26 00:13:58 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:13:58 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: The Globalization of Garbage Message-ID: <03b301ca261c$c8a692e0$2aad57ca@jfos> The Globalization of Garbage Following the Trail of Toxic Trash August 18, 2009 By Michael Fox Michael Fox's ZSpace Page Join ZSpace Garbage Heap in Philippines "English Trash Going Home" read the front page of Brazil's Porto Alegre journal, Correio do Povo on Monday, August 3rd. The image showed the hefty MSC Oriane tanker piled with dozens of containers. The photo's caption explained that 920 "tons of domestic and toxic trash, imported illegally and which were in Rio Grande, were embarked and will make the return trip home to England." On her way North, the tanker stopped by the Santos port in Sao Paulo and picked up another 41 containers. For Brazil, it was the welcomed resolution to what had become a small-scaled international scandal. But globally, it is not even a scratch on the surface. >From February through May of this year, roughly 1,600 tons of "domestic and toxic trash" was imported from the English Suffolk port of Felixstowe, under the guise of plastic material for recycling. But when the containers-which were delivered to two ports in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul and one in Sao Paulo-were opened, they were found to contain domestic and toxic waste including used diapers, condoms, syringes, batteries, leftover food, chemical toilet seats, computer fragments, and old medicine. "It was really frustrating to think that someone would actually send this to us," said Luis Carlos De Oliveira, a federal police officer at the Santos Port in Sao Paulo who inspected the containers personally. De Oliveira told Toward Freedom that not only was there hospital waste and bags of blood, but chorume or leachate, a foul-smelling gooey black substance "and that is only produced when you have organic waste," he said. The toxic trash shipment violated international law under the Basel Convention, and the discovery of the containers sparked uproar in Brazil. "Brazil is not the world's dump," said Roberto Messias Franco, head of Brazil's Environmental and Renewable Natural Resources Institute, IBAMA. Brazil fined five companies 408,000 Reais ($223,000 USD) each for importing the containers, including the multinational shipping companies Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) and Maersk Brasil Brasmar, which shipped the illegal trash. England's Guardian newspaper reported that Britain's Environmental Agency raided three properties and three men were arrested. Britain apologized and agreed to [accept] the trash back. According to IBAMA, only eight containers remain, still in the Southern mountain town of Caxias do Sul, waiting to be transferred to the port at Rio Grande, near Brazil's border with Uruguay. The other 81 containers carrying 1,477 tons of waste are now being shipped back to England and are scheduled to arrive later this month. "For us at IBAMA, getting this trash out of here is the conclusion of our job. It's a good sensation. We got the results we hoped for." said Ingrid Maria Furlan Oberg last week, regional head of IBAMA at the Santos Port in Sao Paulo, where 41 of the containers were shipped out in early August. "It is symbolic, because it shows that Brazil will not accept this type of behavior. Let it serve as an example for other countries." This is perhaps precisely what others need. The English trash may have made headlines in both England and Brazil, but in much of the world, this is an all too common reality. The Trail of Electronic Waste Domestic, hospital waste, or even plastics aren't of interest to most, but electronic waste is. "Most of our e-waste is getting exported, and exported to developing nations," says Barbara Kyle, National Coordinator of the U.S. based- Electronics TakeBack Coalition. "I'm not talking to the refineries, the smelters in Sweden or something, I'm talking low road." Despite a near universal international ban on exporting toxic or hazardous material, Kyle says that most of electronic waste from the United States ends up in China, India, Vietnam, or in up and coming African countries, like Ghana, and Nigeria. "It's very, very cheap to ship, and typically what's getting sent is stuff that costs more money to take it apart here," says Kyle. "People don't want to spend the money here, and over there-where people basically earn pennies an hour, essentially just bashing stuff open to reclaim the metals-they can still make the economics work for a TV or a monitor for a buck a piece maybe." CBS's 60 Minutes reported in its November 2008 special Following the Trail of Toxic E-Waste, that the illegal recycling e-trade has wreaked environmental havoc in China's Guiyu region. "Women were heating circuit boards over a coal fire, pulling out chips and pouring off the lead solder," read part of the written report. "Pollution has ruined the town. Drinking water is trucked in. Scientists have studied the area and discovered that Guiyu has the highest levels of cancer-causing dioxins in the world. They found pregnancies are six times more likely to end in miscarriage and that seven out of ten kids have too much lead in their blood." The situation is just as bad in Ghana, where PBS's recent Frontline expose, Ghana: Digital Dumping Ground, filmed an area known as Agbogbloshie, where millions of tons of e-waste each year is pulled apart and dumped into endless fields of trashed electronics parts. There are international laws against the shipping of hazardous material. Under the Basel Ban-an agreement that went in to effect in 1998-the world's 29 wealthiest most industrialized nations are banned from exporting all forms of hazardous waste to the less developed nations. However, the ban is difficult to enforce and the United States has fought against it tooth and nail. Although the U.S. signed on to the Basel Convention in 1989 (the precursor to the Ban), it is one of only three countries that has never ratified it into effect. The chances of the United States agreeing to adhere to the Basel Ban are even less likely. "Our government believes that the fact that this stuff has commodity value is more important than the fact that it's very hazardous, or the fact that its illegal from the importing country's point of view," says Kyle. She likens the electronics recycling industry in the United States to the "wild west" where there is little to no regulation, the business model of many recyclers is export, and where most of the recyclers export at least some of what they get. In response, U.S. organizations like the Basel Action Network (BAN) and Kyle's Electronics TakeBack Coalition have helped to create the e-Stewards Initiative, where member electronics recyclers must pledge not to ship their recycling abroad to developing countries. Thirty-three recyclers have so far joined the program. According to a recent BAN press release, beginning next year, the initiative "will become the continent's first ANSI-ASQ National Accreditation Board (ANAB) independently audited and accredited electronic waste recycler certification program that will forbid the dumping of toxic e-waste in developing countries, local landfills and incinerators; the use of prison labor to process e-waste; and the unauthorized release of private data contained in discarded computers." They have also waged a campaign to convince electronics manufacturers and retailers to pledge not to ship their e-waste abroad. So far, Dell and Sony have jumped on board. The steps offer important options for U.S. consumers looking to ensure that their old TV sets and leftover computers don't end up polluting a dried up river bed halfway around the planet. According to the 2005 report, The Digital Dump, by the Basel Action Network (BAN), 75% of the exported e-waste is not easily recyclable or reusable, so it is dumped into landfills or burned. Much of this is the bulky plastic of old televisions, printers and other electronic devices. Brazil Says No to Importing Garbage But plastic also has varying degrees of quality. According to De Oliveira, the Brazilian companies that imported the British trash believed they were importing much higher quality plastic than is commonly found in most of Brazil. They were obviously mistaken. Nor was it the first time that Brazil had unwillingly received a toxic shipment. IBAMA spokesperson Janete Portos says Brazilian prosecutors are still investigating the arrival of a hazardous international shipment of heavy metals that reached the Santos port in 2004, but "we had never seen anything like this," said De Oliveira. "We only have one option and that is to return the containers to the country where they came from, because we want to import other things, not trash." said Brazilian President Luiz In?cio "Lula" da Silva at the International Organic Product and Agroecology Fair in Sao Paulo on July 23rd. "We don't want to export our trash and we aren't going to import the trash of others." Brazil has been one of the most outspoken critics in Latin America against the import-export of electronic waste. "We hear that Brazil doesn't even want to take used equipment because they know that's just how people cheat; that's how they dump on countries, in sending their crap, supposedly for reuse," says Kyle. Perhaps this is part of what Brazilian Environmental Minister Carlos Minc had in mind when he met with U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change, Todd Stern on Tuesday, August 4th, to discuss the upcoming Climate convention in Copenhagen this December. Brazil's Folha de Sao Paulo reported that they also discussed possible measures to ensure that the British trash incident not be repeated. Brazil is now considering possible modifications to federal legislation to more strictly punish such crimes, and of using X-ray equipment to identify material within the containers. But in much of the developing world, it's business as usual with middle-men brokering the deal to get the toxic e-trash past customs. With the United States looking to undermine the Basel Convention and Ban, there doesn't appear to be any solution on the horizon. "We are the absolute outlier from the rest of the developed nations of the world on this topic," says Kyle. "The rest of the world is covered by the Basel Convention, and the only other countries that haven't ratified it other than us are Afghanistan and Haiti. So nobody should be taking our waste. It's a violation even to accept our e-waste, so we're violating all of those developing nation's laws by sending the waste there." *** Michael Fox is a South America-based freelance journalist, radio reporter and documentary filmmaker. He is co-director of the recently released documentary, Beyond Elections: Redefining Democracy in the Americas. For more articles, reports or videos, visit his blog. Photo from Manila.Indymedia.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment On This Article | See All Comments (1) | View sustainers that like this article Title: For this feature, you must be logged in as a sustainer, please. To become a sustainer go here! E-mail: Password: Comments Great Pacific Garbage Patch By Crip, Moorey Take a look at this while you're at it. Wikipedea says: The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, also described as the Eastern Garbage Patch or the Pacific Trash Vortex, is a gyre of marine litter in the central North Pacific Ocean located roughly between 135? to 155?W and 35? to 42?N and estimated to be twice the size of Texas.[1] The patch is characterized by exceptionally high concentrations of suspended plastic and other debris that have been trapped by the currents of the North Pacific Gyre. Despite its size and density, the patch is not visible from satellite photography. [2] And YouTube has this video about the gyre... ------------------------------------------------------ Provided by Australis http://www.australis.com.au/ From thinker at xplornet.com Wed Aug 26 07:18:06 2009 From: thinker at xplornet.com (Ed Deak) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 07:18:06 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] John F.Kennedy vs the Federal Reserve Message-ID: <20090826141412.A1B40F8889D@smtprelay03.hostedemail.com> FRIENDS SITES with Bellaciao Bellaciao hosted by It is the responsibility of the intellectual to speak the truth and to expose lies. Noam Chomsky Wednesday August 26 - 2009 To rebel is right, to disobey is a duty, to act is necessary ! Home | About us | Donation | Links | Contact | Search Articles November Saturday 22 2008 (14h33) : John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid. When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America. "United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number. President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes. Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something. Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 "Silver Certificates" were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve's control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt: 1) war (Viet Nam); and, 2) the creation of money by a privately owned central bank. His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of the private Federal Reserve Bank. Executive Order 11110 AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows: SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made. JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963 Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998: Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as amended by: EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725; EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869; EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605; EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003; EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617 The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's 1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of Clinton's 1998 and 1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO 11110. The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private Corporation. Black's Law Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve System" as: "Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves." Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said: "Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors". The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member banks. Once again, according to Black's Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money: "Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)". The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue (create) the "money" we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is: "The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving to print them". Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is exactly what the privately owned FED is! No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932: "Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it". Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990 book Crossfire:" Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency. Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks". In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963, Ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said: "The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight." In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book... a true Profile of Courage. This research report was compiled for Lawgiver. Org. by Anthony Wayne What is the Federal Reserve Bank? What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we have it? by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999 The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a country's fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it wasn't for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, including our FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but for profit. There have been three central banks in our nation's history. The first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED. What they all have in common is an insidious practice known as "fractional banking." Fractional banking or fractional lending is the ability to create money from nothing, lend it to the government or someone else and charge interest to boot. The practice evolved before banks existed. Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to individuals and merchants for storage of their gold or silver. The goldsmiths gave these "depositors" a certificate that showed the amount of gold stored. These certificates were then used to conduct business. Continue to read: http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm By : Solve et Coagula November Saturday 22 2008 From gdy52150 at spiritone.com Wed Aug 26 10:19:14 2009 From: gdy52150 at spiritone.com (glen) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:19:14 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] John F.Kennedy vs the Federal Reserve In-Reply-To: <20090826141412.A1B40F8889D@smtprelay03.hostedemail.com> References: <20090826141412.A1B40F8889D@smtprelay03.hostedemail.com> Message-ID: <4A956E92.3050403@spiritone.com> I've believed for sometime that this was the reason behind his assissination Ed Deak wrote: > > FRIENDS SITES > with Bellaciao > Bellaciao hosted by > It is the responsibility of the intellectual to speak the truth and to > expose lies. Noam Chomsky > Wednesday August 26 - 2009 To rebel is right, to disobey is a duty, to > act is necessary ! > Home | > About us | > Donation | > Links | > Contact | > Search > Articles > > November Saturday 22 2008 (14h33) : > John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve > > John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve > > On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive > Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the > Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States > Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President > Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would > soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively > researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of > Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has > never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent > Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid. > > When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in > Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, > specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to > create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately > owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 > [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury > Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates > against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the > Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. > Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into > circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a > result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into > circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States > Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury > Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that > President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the > purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the > United States of America. > > "United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free and debt-free > currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a > "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the private central bank of the > United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), > with a "United States Note" from the U.S. Treasury issued by President > Kennedy's Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says > "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States > Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial > number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number. > > President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United > States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. > Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the > nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. > paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes. > > Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely > circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve > Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed > by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. > Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from > reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in > federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent > President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given > the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the > private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new > "money". Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once > again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth > something. > > Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy > was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 "Silver Certificates" > were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from > circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all > future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve's > control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that > President Kennedy challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and > world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two > most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt: > > 1) war (Viet Nam); and, > > 2) the creation of money by a privately owned central bank. His > efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with > Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of > the private Federal Reserve Bank. > > Executive Order 11110 > > AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE > PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE > TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of > title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows: > > SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as > amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By adding at the end of > paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority > vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of > May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver > certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver > dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any > outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of > such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and > subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and (b) By revoking > subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The > amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any > right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced > in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all > such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said > amendments had not been made. > > JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963 > > Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title > 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998: > > Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as > amended by: > > EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725; > > EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869; > > EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605; > > EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003; > > EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617 > > The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's 1963 amendment, > did not change or alter any part of Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of > Clinton's 1998 and 1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also > shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO > 11110. > > The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private > Corporation. Black's Law Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve > System" as: "Network of twelve central banks to which most national > banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership > rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves." > Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in > more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, > 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said: > "Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by > commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks > elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors". > > The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member > banks. Once again, according to Black's Law Dictionary, we find that > these privately owned banks actually issue money: > > "Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal Reserve banks which > act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form > of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. > Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)". > > The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue > (create) the "money" we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking > and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session > of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which > contains a good description of what the FED is: "The Federal Reserve > is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it > never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain > the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the > Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving to print them". > > Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a > lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to > create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is > exactly what the privately owned FED is! > > No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, > who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. > In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House > pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932: > > "Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt > institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve > Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a > Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and > he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national > debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board > and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country > enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil > institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United > States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our > Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law > by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices > of the moneyed vultures who control it". > > Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States > Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, > departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which > prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of > themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit > monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who > came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by > undermining our American institutions. > > The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to > create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to > the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes > to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's interesting to > note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which > gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in > 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally > admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic > communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such > as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. > His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990 book Crossfire:" > > Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to reform American > society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning > to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and > regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not > paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who > print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved > in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which > called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes > through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve > System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of > one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the > weakened U.S. currency. > > Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at > odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, > encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were > not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that > non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation > bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks". > > In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963, > > Ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy > allegedly said: > > "The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to > destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must > inform the citizen of this plight." > > In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of > his own book... a true Profile of Courage. > > This research report was compiled for Lawgiver. Org. by Anthony Wayne > > What is the Federal Reserve Bank? > > What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we have it? > > by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999 > > The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a > country's fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure > that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain > solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency > exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, > a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it > wasn't for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the > government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, > including our FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but > for profit. > > There have been three central banks in our nation's history. The first > two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope > and size of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED. What they > all have in common is an insidious practice known as "fractional > banking." > > Fractional banking or fractional lending is the ability to create > money from nothing, lend it to the government or someone else and > charge interest to boot. The practice evolved before banks existed. > Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to individuals and > merchants for storage of their gold or silver. The goldsmiths gave > these "depositors" a certificate that showed the amount of gold > stored. These certificates were then used to conduct business. > > Continue to read: http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm > > > By : Solve et Coagula > November Saturday 22 2008 > > > _______________________________________________ > Mai-not mailing list > Mai-not at globalproblematique.net > http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not > From thinker at xplornet.com Wed Aug 26 10:57:11 2009 From: thinker at xplornet.com (Ed Deak) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:57:11 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] Japanese voters eye fresh start Message-ID: <20090826175316.8D55AE3C073@smtprelay03.hostedemail.com> Japanese Voters Eye Fresh Start Yukio Hatoyama (Public Domain) Voice of America/Wikipedia The Japanese electorate looks set to vote the LDP out of power after a near monopoly on rule since 1955, and if opinion polls are accurate, the opposition DJP and its leader, Yukio Hatoyama, will take home a landslide victory, Dr Axel Berkofsky writes for ISN Security Watch. By Axel Berkofsky for ISN Security Watch Japan's Liberal-Democratic Party (LDP) will no longer be calling the shots after 30 August, if opinion polls can be trusted. According to the polls, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) will win next week's general elections by a landslide, and its leader, Yukio Hatoyama, will become the country's new prime minister. Recent surveys conducted by Asahi Shimbun, Japan's second largest daily newspaper, and the Kyodo News agency indicate that the DPJ is set to win more than 300 of the 480 seats up for grabs in the lower house of parliament. The ruling LDP could end up with less than 100 seats, compared to the 300 seats it holds now. In other words: A sweeping victory for the DPJ and an electoral disaster for the LDP, which has ruled in Japan since 1955 with a short 11-month long interruption in 1993-1994. Japan's electorate, until now it would seem, had always chosen the LDP over the opposition, which it viewed as out of touch with the country's political realities, characterized by close and eventually unhealthy ties between politics and business, financed by Japan's banks. A (relatively) fresh face Yukio Hatoyama, the DPJ's (by Japanese standards) youngish candidate for prime minister equipped with a PhD in engineering from Stanford University, is planning to put an end to much of this, or so he claims. "Hatoyama comes from a political family (he is the grandson of Ichiro Hatoyama, one of the founding fathers of the LDP and prime minister in the 1950s), but he was never really that focused on a political career in the first place. That may give him a free-thinking angle," Christopher W Hughes, professor of international politics and Japanese studies at the University of Warwick, UK, tells ISN Security Watch. Japan's ever-cautious electorate, however, is not necessarily that impressed yet: "The Japanese people do not expect Hatoyama to change governance in Japan. I think people are just tired of the LDP and will want Hatoyama to focus on economic policies, securing solid economic growth," Yoichi Tanaka, senior account executive at the software company Omniture INC in Tokyo, tells ISN Security Watch. Indeed, there is much to fix. "Fixing the pension system, bringing the economy out of recession, reducing economic inequalities and the public deficit and increasing spending on medical care is what the Japanese electorate wants most from the DPJ," Paul Midford, associate professor and director of the Japan Program at Norwegian University for Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim, Norway, tells ISN Security Watch, citing recent opinion polls. For the time being, however, Hatoyama is in the business of promising to hand out goodies to the electorate. The party's campaign manifesto promises administrative reform and generous social spending, including: reorganizing Japan's Y207,000 billion ($2,172 billion) budget; paying parents a Y312,000 ($3,273) a year child allowance; increasing pensions; scrapping school fees and road tolls; and cutting taxes for small companies to 11 percent. How exactly the DPJ is planning to do all of this with a public debt likely to reach 200 percent of GDP this year has yet to be explained plausibly by Hatoyama and his aides. And when it comes to Japan's powerful ministerial bureaucracy, Hatoyama's plans can be summed up in a word: disempowerment. Cabinet meeting agendas, Hatoyama promises, would no longer be set by unelected administrative vice ministers, and the era of deeply embedded 'bureaucrat-led' government will be brought to an end by posting 100 party Diet members to government ministries and agencies. Further afield On the foreign policy front, Washington is concerned about Hatoyama's approach towards the US-Japan security alliance. For starters, the DPJ is likely to demand a cut in funds Tokyo is providing for the stationing of 50,000 US troops in Japan. Japan currently funds this to the tune of $5 billion annually. (The official name of this program is 'Host Nation Support', but to the annoyance of Washington, within Japan it is referred to as the 'sympathy budget'.) Furthermore, Hatoyama proposed a revision of the 1960 Japan-US Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), including provisions for the extradition of criminal suspects belonging to US forces in Japan. There is also said to be some second thoughts about Washington's realignment plans for US troops in Japan. While in February, Tokyo and Washington agreed to complete the transfer of the US Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station on Okinawa to the coastal area of Camp Schwab in Nago (Okinawa) by 2014, Hatoyama envisions a relocation outside of Okinawa. "The DPJ is divided over security, and although Hatoyama might have made a lot of promises to the old socialists about moving away from ties with the US, he will also have to please the right-wingers in the party. We may end up with a default position not that different from the LDP," says Hughes. Already Hatoyama revised his party's past fierce resistance to allow Japanese naval fuel tankers to supply US warships operating in the Indian Ocean and is reconsidering his opposition to continue dispatching destroyers to guard against pirates off the coast of Somalia. This is all part of waking up to the reality of Japan's security responsibilities, Richard Samuels, Ford International Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for International Studies at MIT in Massachusetts, tells ISN Security Watch: "In opposition, it was easy to assault the LDP at every turn. The DPJ e.g. held up host nation support for a bit, voted against deployment of tankers to the Indian Ocean. They were new. They were different. They were not the US' lap dog. But, as the election nears, voters have begun to hear the old, oft-repeated LDP message that only the LDP can govern and maintain the alliance. As folks began to fret about the possibility that the LDP might be right, the DPJ began to tack toward the center, saying that the alliance with the United States should be more 'equal', while remaining the 'centerpiece' of Japan's grand strategy," he says. DPJ up to the task? While removing the LDP from power was the DPJ's top priority for the last two years, Hatoyama will have to get down to 'real' business after 30 August, resuming Japan's economic reform process, from which the LDP under current Prime Minister Taro Aso had all but retreated. However, there is no consensus within the DPJ on economic reforms in general, and the pending privatization of Japan Post in particular - not least because Hatoyama is leading a party essentially made up of LDP defectors, ex-socialists and various other anti-LDP groups. However, "At this moment, the really important point is that the DPJ is not the LDP as far as Japan's electorate is concerned," Samuels concludes. Dr Axel Berkofsky is Adjunct Professor at the University of Milan and Senior Associate Research Fellow at the Milan-based Istituto per gli Studi di Politica Internazionale (ISPI). _ From creuss at bluewin.ch Wed Aug 26 15:06:21 2009 From: creuss at bluewin.ch (Christoph Reuss) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:06:21 +0200 Subject: [Mai-not] John F.Kennedy vs the Federal Reserve Message-ID: >> It is the responsibility of the intellectual to speak the truth and to >> expose lies. Noam Chomsky Ironic quote, considering Chomsky's cover-up of 9/11... Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". From thinker at xplornet.com Wed Aug 26 19:44:23 2009 From: thinker at xplornet.com (Ed Deak) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 19:44:23 -0700 Subject: [Mai-not] Fiat lux 238 Message-ID: <20090827024027.4706D21D6986@smtprelay01.hostedemail.com> To: record at cablerocket.com Subject: Fiat lux 238 Fiat lux 238 Aug. 8, 2009. Before getting into this week's main topic, let me refer to a few lines from Gwynne Dyer's last column on the G8 summit on climate change. I know I keep repeating certain things endlessly, but it is done with the hope of waking people up to the real reasons for the present and daily growing economic mess that's destroying humanity and the ecology all over the globe, and so , here we go once again with the most important definitions, unfortunately, way above the heads of economists and politicians, still hooked to monetarism: "Wealth can not be created, only taken from other sectors, the environment and the future. Costs can not be cut, only transferred on the same victims." The G8 conference was a clear example of these two, very simple and easily proven laws. The crimes committed by our so called "developed countries" are causing daily growing damage to the global ecology and humanity, but now the so called "developing countries"also want to jump on the same bandwagon of destruction legalized by miseducated economists and crooked politicians under the guise of " wealth creation". . As Gwynne writes: "The Indian government, for example, can not ignore the resentment felt by most Indians when their country is asked to cut its greenhouse gas emissions and slow its development to deal with a problem that India had little role in creating" This is a typical example of my statement that "wealth can not be created", but how long can these fools on either side of the world imagine they can just carry on and spew forth more destruction and pollution for their own "wealth creating" idiocies ? And what does India really intend to do with the promotion of such suicidal economic theories ? In his old BCTV days, reporter Jaz Johal did a series on India. As he was interviewing one of the business moguls, he declared with a big laugh that they intended to pull 50 million jobs from North America and Europe. In the name of "wealth creating global competition" of course. Which also proves that costs can not be cut, only transferred. Some societies have always ruined the living standards of others, stealing their possessions and lives under the criminal theories of colonization and now globalization. India and China could and should develop their self supporting and self sufficient economic systems without causing worldwide hardship to other people and ecological damage, but, under the misguided advice and plans of their, and our, economists and politicians they and the whole world is being misled, misguided into more ruins and enslavement. In my last column I called the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund criminal organizations. I stand by this statement, because they're totally under the control of the corporate mafia and have become the biggest promoters of ecological and human destruction. Totally under the control of an international self interest, ruling sector, who are now using the perceived power of imaginary money for colonization and enslavement. The societies, economies and infrastructure of every country where these organizations have set foot in have been ruined and destituted. Countries that used to be able to feed their own peoples have now been forced to import foods they can not afford to pay for, while millions of their children die of starvation and easily preventable illnesses on lands that could easily feed and save them , but are wasted on cash crops, operated by multinational agribiz corporations, to fill the pockets of " wealth creating investors". Yes, their phony GDP is jumping, while people are dying in the streets and the multinationals are raking in huge profits. Just about everything on Earth has limits, except time and human gullibility. This simple fact has been discovered thousands of years ago by predator classes, who have used the weirdest religious and now ideological beliefs to enslave and maintain their power, as we can see and document today. We keep hearing that "time is money", while the worldwide environmental destruction is going on unabated for the replacement of people with automated machinery using hundreds of times the energy inputs and wasted resources while calling it "productivity". Every time we dare to question this insane journey into oblivion, we're accused of spreading "conspiracy theories". The word conspiracy stems from the Latin "cum spero", meaning "breathing together". This means that all groups of people who gather and make decisions over anything are in fact engaged in certain forms of conspiracies. Our lords and masters have no problem calling the nazi and communist regimes conspiracies, but when it comes to themselves, any questioning of their secret gatherings and decision makings, not only influencing, but forcing government decisions for their own benefit, becomes a "conspiracy theory". Anybody with a computer should type in the names of only two of these groups of so called "powerful and influential" people, called the "Bilderbergers" and the "Trilaterals", and read of their plans and activities to set up a world government under corporate rule, as it is already happening here and now under the NAFTA and SPP rackets and their outcrop the TILMA, forced on BC, without consultation or even any parliamentary debate by the present government. Having been born and grown up as a fascist, I hate all power with a passion and one of the first things that impressed me, when I started learning about democracy, was that, at least in theory, everybody is supposed to have one vote and nobody to have any special rights and privileges. In other words, no "power". Well, economic theories and the deregulated money creation powers of the banks sure knocked a big hole into this ideal. These groups of "highly influential" people are not only permitted , but welcomed and encouraged to have their secret meetings in various countries and then force all governments to abide by their decisions. If these mafia like gangs of crooks in private jets and fancy business suits are not conspiracies, what exactly are they ? Charitable organizations, like the Fraser Institute claims to be ? From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Wed Aug 26 01:02:27 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:02:27 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: 27% of U.$. homeowners with a mortgage are already 'underwater' Message-ID: <010401ca283c$1beac540$1bad57ca@jfos> As homeowners head 'underwater,' another housing crisis looms Almost half of homeowners with a mortgage could be underwater by 2011, says Deutsche Bank. We asked how that will play out. EMAIL | PRINT | SHARE | RSS a.. TWITTER b.. Yahoo! Buzz c.. DIGG d.. FACEBOOK e.. DEL.ICIO.US f.. REDDIT g.. STUMBLE UPON h.. MYSPACE i.. MIXX IT Subscribe to Real Estate feed://rss.cnn.com/rss/money_realestate.rss Paste this link into your favorite RSS desktop reader See all CNNMoney.com RSS FEEDS (close) By Scott Cendrowski, reporter August 12, 2009: 12:25 PM ET Karen Weaver, global head of securitization research at Deutsche Bank Quick Vote When do you think the economy will improve? a.. In the next few months b.. In six months to a year c.. In a year or more d.. It's already on the mend or View results Big cities: Big changes in foreclosure rates Of the country's 20 largest cities, these six posted the fastest year-over-year growth and decline in their foreclosure rates during the first six months of 2009. View photos Mortgage Rates 30 yr fixed mtg 5.31% 15 yr fixed mtg 4.80% 30 yr fixed jumbo mtg 6.23% 5/1 ARM 4.61% 5/1 jumbo ARM 5.02% Find personalized rates: Rates provided by Bankrate.com. More from Fortune Recovery won't improve unemployment Bankruptcy's repeat offenders Do railroads have a free ride? FORTUNE 500 Current Issue Subscribe to Fortune NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Karen Weaver, global head of Deutsche Bank's securitization research division -- responsible for analyzing credit default swaps, collateralized mortgage obligations, and other exotic Wall Street products -- said last week that 48% of U.S. mortgage owners will end up owing more than their home is worth by 2011. The figure may have left many Americans wondering how this could be possible. But consider that 27% of U.S. homeowners with a mortgage are already "underwater." And according to Deutsche Bank, home prices may fall another 14% before hitting a bottom. Fortune spoke with Weaver to understand the implications of her recent forecast, why it will affect regions that missed the housing boom, and why still-falling home prices are hurting even the best borrowers. How many Americans are underwater? Currently we estimate that 14 million homeowners have negative equity. However, based on our home price forecast, as prices continue to fall we think that number could reach 25 million, or 48% of all mortgagors. Where does this leave us? The obvious takeaway of falling home prices and being underwater is what it does for defaults. But there's a bigger implication, which is that when we look at the economy over the past decade or two, it's been very much a consumer economy. What has been driving the consumer hasn't been gains in incomes. What has been driving them is easy credit and rising home values. And the fact that their home price was rising and they could borrow against that through home equity lines or loans or refinancing, it augurs for a very different economy going forward if people don't have that option. What mortgages are most responsible for this problem? The subprime loan borrower is more likely to use a second mortgage when purchasing a home, so they'll put down very little equity when they've purchased. So the same decline in price is going to leave them in a worse negative equity position than someone who put down 20%. On option ARMs (adjustable rate mortgages), the way those loans work is that the payments are very small. And the difference between a normal payment that would cover someone's full interest and principal, and these lower teaser payments, is added to the balance. So even if prices did nothing, an option ARM could end up with negative equity. Isn't it the case that many of those were issued at the peak? Exactly. These products -- option ARMs, subprime, etc. -- were regarded in the industry as "affordability products." What they were designed to do is to provide options to customers in areas where home prices were unaffordable. In other words, given an individual's income, it was prohibitively expensive to purchase the average home. So by creating products that lowered the payment, or lowered the amount of down-payment, it enabled more people to buy a home. It also perpetuated the bubble. To give an example, if you look at Los Angeles: At the peak of home prices in LA, only about 9% of people living in Los Angeles made sufficient income to purchase the average house. Now, a number of those people had purchased their homes beforehand, so it was moot to them. But for a first-time home buyer, it meant that it was highly unlikely that you were able to purchase a home unless you used one of these very aggressive products that stretched your [income]. This is occurring in states where speculation was rampant -- for example, Florida, California, and Nevada -- but where else? People are surprised at the extent to which subprime mortgages were used in the Midwest. In a lot of cases the Midwest has had a manufacturing recession for a while now. It's going through a paradigm shift. So in the industrial Midwest, subprime lending was more popular than some people might think. I think the surprise is prime quality mortgages. That's where the biggest deterioration could take place in the next leg. Right now about 16% of those borrowers are underwater. If our home price forecast is correct, down another 14%, we could have 41% of borrowers underwater in the prime mortgage space. That's what happens when another 14% decline occurs. Does this lead to a new wave of foreclosures? Well, we don't think that the wave has stopped in any sense. But the wave is clearly building. That is evident by looking at serious delinquencies. If you look at a chart of how many borrowers have missed more than two payments, a large portion of those people are going to end up being foreclosures. Well, that rate of serious delinquency has been rising rapidly and continues to rise, pretty much in tandem with unemployment. As long as you have serious delinquencies going up, you know for the next year and a half, a large portion of those are going to turn into foreclosures. Of subprime and Alt-A (Alternative A-paper) borrowers, about 33% of those borrowers are seriously delinquent. If you look at prime jumbo, the highest quality mortgages, 6.2% are seriously delinquent. That sounds like a low number. But two years ago that number was 1%. It's a very straight trajectory from September 2007, pretty closely mimicking unemployment. At what point of being underwater do homeowners start falling into foreclosure rapidly? Once you get to the point where negative equity is significant -- for example, 25% or more -- there have been studies that suggest you get more strategic defaults. People say, "I bought my house for $500,000, it's worth $250,000, there are 10 available for sale in my neighborhood. It makes no economic sense to spend the rest of my life trying to pay off a $500,000 debt when there's no reasonable likelihood to expect this house to go back up to $500,000." This might sound extreme, but we have borrowers who bought a $500,000 home in California at the peak of the market on $50,000 of income. So for them to devote their gross income for the next 10 years solely to paying off [their] mortgage doesn't make any sense. The Federal Reserve of Boston recently studied a similar housing crash in Massachusetts during the 1980s. What did they find? In Massachusetts, there was a downturn in their housing market in the late '80s. The Federal Reserve [Bank] of Boston put out a report last year, and in their report they looked at how many people defaulted once they had negative equity. If a borrower has equity, and they can't maintain their home, that borrower is going to sell rather than default. So the question is, once someone does have negative equity, what's the propensity to default? In Massachusetts, less than 7% of borrowers who had negative equity defaulted. This speaks to the inherent credit worthiness of mortgages -- why they're always considered to be a low-risk investment. Is it fair to say that that will play out the same now? Now, for example, if we believe the Deutsche Bank forecast and 25 million borrowers fall underwater, unfortunately we think 7% will be too low. The reason is when you look at Massachusetts in the late '80s, you had much better quality borrowers. In addition to that, unemployment in Massachusetts peaked at 9.1%. We're already at 9.5% [nationally]. In California, unemployment is at 11.5%. We do know that most people try to maintain their home. They try to keep their mortgage current. But to expect it to be as low as 7% is very wishful thinking ------------------------------------------------------ Provided by Australis http://www.australis.com.au/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 701 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 435 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 681 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 719 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 1531 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 274 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 16181 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 11977 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Fri Aug 28 16:24:39 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 09:24:39 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: The Climate Industry - Massive Climate Funding Exposed Message-ID: <011201ca283c$574774d0$1bad57ca@jfos> Massive Climate Funding Exposed Climate Money The Climate Industry: $79 billion so far - Trillions to come For the first time, the numbers from government documents have been compiled in one place. It's time to start talking of "Monopolistic Science". It's time to expose the lie that those who claim "to save the planet" are the underdogs. And it's time to get serious about auditing science, especially when it comes to pronouncements that are used to justify giant government programs and massive movements of money. Who audits the IPCC? The Summary The US government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, foreign aid, and tax breaks. Despite the billions: "audits" of the science are left to unpaid volunteers. A dedicated but largely uncoordinated grassroots movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe to test the integrity of the theory and compete with a well funded highly organized climate monopoly. They have exposed major errors. Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks are calling for more carbon-trading. And experts are predicting the carbon market will reach $2 - $10 trillion making carbon the largest single commodity traded. Meanwhile in a distracting sideshow, Exxon-Mobil Corp is repeatedly attacked for paying a grand total of $23 million to skeptics-less than a thousandth of what the US government has put in, and less than one five-thousandth of the value of carbon trading in just the single year of 2008. The large expenditure in search of a connection between carbon and climate creates enormous momentum and a powerful set of vested interests. By pouring so much money into one theory, have we inadvertently created a self-fulfilling prophesy instead of an unbiased investigation? Read the Full Report at the Science and Public Policy Institute. There doesn't necessarily need to be a conspiracy. It doesn't require any centrally coordinated deceit or covert instructions to operate. Instead it's the lack of funding for the alternatives that leaves a vacuum and creates a systemic failure. The force of monopolistic funding works like a ratchet mechanism on science. Results can move in both directions, but the funding means that only results from one side of the equation get "traction". More here: http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/23/massive-climate-funding-exposed/ ------------------------------------------------------ Provided by Australis http://www.australis.com.au/ From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Fri Aug 28 17:24:30 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 10:24:30 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: Treading a new path in Japan Message-ID: <015f01ca283f$14740940$1bad57ca@jfos> Regional integration and collective security can help realise pacifism and multilateral cooperation Treading a new path in Japan By Yukio Hatoyama, The New York Times http://www.deccanherald.com/content/21725/treading-path-japan.html In the post-Cold War period, Japan has been continually buffeted by the winds of market fundamentalism in a US-led movement that is more usually called globalisation. In the fundamentalist pursuit of capitalism people are treated not as an end but as a means. Consequently, human dignity is lost. How can we put an end to unrestrained market fundamentalism and financial capitalism, that are void of morals or moderation, in order to protect the finances and livelihoods of our citizens? That is the issue we are now facing. In these times, we must return to the idea of fraternity ? as in the French slogan ?libert?, ?galit?, fraternit?? ? as a force for moderating the danger inherent within freedom. Fraternity as I mean it can be described as a principle that aims to adjust to the excesses of the current globalised brand of capitalism and accommodate the local economic practices that have been fostered through our traditions. The recent economic crisis resulted from a way of thinking based on the idea that American-style free-market economics represents a universal and ideal economic order, and that all countries should modify the traditions and regulations governing their economies in line with global (or rather American) standards. In Japan, opinion was divided on how far the trend toward globalisation should go. Some advocated the active embrace of globalism and leaving everything up to the dictates of the market. Others favoured a more reticent approach, believing that efforts should be made to expand the social safety net and protect our traditional economic activities. Since the administration of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi (2001-2006), the Liberal Democratic Party has stressed the former, while we in the Democratic Party of Japan have tended toward the latter position. The economic order in any country is built up over long years and reflects the influence of traditions, habits and national lifestyles. But globalism has progressed without any regard for non-economic values, or for environmental issues or problems of resource restriction. If we look back on the changes in Japanese society since the end of the Cold War, I believe it is no exaggeration to say that the global economy has damaged traditional economic activities and destroyed local communities. In terms of market theory, people are simply personnel expenses. But in the real world people support the fabric of the local community and are the physical embodiment of its lifestyle, traditions and culture. An individual gains respect as a person by acquiring a job and a role within the local community and being able to maintain his family?s livelihood. Under the principle of fraternity, we would not implement policies that leave areas relating to human lives and safety ? such as agriculture, the environment and medicine ? to the mercy of globalism. Our responsibility as politicians is to refocus our attention on those non-economic values that have been thrown aside by the march of globalism. We must work on policies that regenerate the ties that bring people together, that take greater account of nature and the environment, that rebuild welfare and medical systems, that provide better education and child-rearing support, and that address wealth disparities. Another national goal that emerges from the concept of fraternity is the creation of an East Asian community. Of course, the Japan-US security pact will continue to be the cornerstone of Japanese diplomatic policy. Understanding identity But at the same time, we must not forget our identity as a nation located in Asia. I believe that the East Asian region, which is showing increasing vitality, must be recognised as Japan?s basic sphere of being. So we must continue to build frameworks for stable economic cooperation and security across the region. The financial crisis has suggested to many that the era of US unilateralism may come to an end. It has also raised doubts about the permanence of the dollar as the key global currency. I also feel that as a result of the failure of the Iraq war and the financial crisis, the era of US-led globalism is coming to an end and that we are moving toward an era of multipolarity. But at present no one country is ready to replace the United States as the dominant country. Nor is there a currency ready to replace the dollar as the world?s key currency. Although the influence of the US is declining, it will remain the world?s leading military and economic power for the next two to three decades. Current developments show clearly that China will become one of the world?s leading economic nations while also continuing to expand its military power. The size of China?s economy will surpass that of Japan in the not-too-distant future. How should Japan maintain its political and economic independence and protect its national interest when caught between the United States, which is fighting to retain its position as the world?s dominant power, and China, which is seeking ways to become dominant? This is a question of concern not only to Japan but also to the small and medium-sized nations in Asia. They want the military power of the US to function effectively for the stability of the region but want to restrain US political and economic excesses. They also want to reduce the military threat posed by our neighbour China while ensuring that China?s expanding economy develops in an orderly fashion. These are major factors accelerating regional integration. As we seek to build new structures for international cooperation, we must overcome excessive nationalism and go down a path toward rule-based economic cooperation and security. Unlike Europe, the countries of this region differ in size, development stage and political system, so economic integration cannot be achieved over the short term. However, we should nonetheless aspire to move toward regional currency integration as a natural extension of the rapid economic growth begun by Japan, followed by South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong, and then achieved by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China. We must spare no effort to build the permanent security frameworks essential to underpinning currency integration. ASEAN now account for one quarter of the world?s gross domestic product. The economic power of the East Asian region and the interdependent relationships within the region have grown wider and deeper. So the structures required for the formation of a regional economic bloc are already in place. I believe that regional integration and collective security is the path we should follow toward realising the principles of pacifism and multilateral cooperation advocated by the Japanese Constitution. It is also the appropriate path for protecting Japan?s political and economic independence and pursuing our interests in our position between the US and China. Let me conclude by quoting the words of Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, founder of the first popular movement for a united Europe, written 85 years ago in ?Pan-Europa?: ?All great historical ideas started as a utopian dream and ended with reality. Whether a particular idea remains as a utopian dream or becomes a reality depends on the number of people who believe in the ideal and their ability to act upon it.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Fri Aug 28 17:50:21 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:50:21 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: The Climate Industry - Massive Climate Funding Exposed In-Reply-To: <011201ca283c$574774d0$1bad57ca@jfos> References: <011201ca283c$574774d0$1bad57ca@jfos> Message-ID: <20090829005022.5BE61F5F5@fep06.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> Maybe there doesn't need to be a central conspiracy, but there are important players who were there at the start and are there now, not the least being the nuclear industry which has got nuclear power from being virtually off the table after Chernobyl to a position of more power and influence than ever before. "Buy our snake oil or you're all dead". Like the neoliberals who were not the flavour of the month and now run the globe after a sustained campaign starting with a small, persistent and well funded core and gaining participants along the way as they gained the funding with which to exclude opposition from "globalisatrion deniers". These movements indeed start with a central conspiracy but as they gather momentum and silence opposition they balloon out until soon they are no longer a tightly controlled conspiracy. A typical example was the Nazi movement in prewar Germany. Another was the Zionist movement of the 19th and early 20th centuries. The hypocrisy of the climate industry in Australia is monumental - waging a war on coal on the ground of CO2 emissions while feverishly transporting it to China and India to be burned there. Dion Giles At 07:24 29/08/2009, John Fostewr wrote: >Massive Climate Funding Exposed >Climate Money >The Climate Industry: $79 billion so far - Trillions to come > >For the first time, the numbers from government documents have been >compiled in one place. It's time to start talking of "Monopolistic >Science". It's time to expose the lie that those who claim "to save >the planet" are the underdogs. And it's time to get serious about >auditing science, especially when it comes to pronouncements that >are used to justify giant government programs and massive movements >of money. Who audits the IPCC? > >The Summary > >The US government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on >policies related to climate change, including science and technology >research, foreign aid, and tax breaks. >Despite the billions: "audits" of the science are left to unpaid >volunteers. A dedicated but largely uncoordinated grassroots >movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe to test the >integrity of the theory and compete with a well funded highly >organized climate monopoly. They have exposed major errors. >Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks are >calling for more carbon-trading. And experts are predicting the >carbon market will reach $2 - $10 trillion making carbon the largest >single commodity traded. >Meanwhile in a distracting sideshow, Exxon-Mobil Corp is repeatedly >attacked for paying a grand total of $23 million to skeptics-less >than a thousandth of what the US government has put in, and less >than one five-thousandth of the value of carbon trading in just the >single year of 2008. >The large expenditure in search of a connection between carbon and >climate creates enormous momentum and a powerful set of vested >interests. By pouring so much money into one theory, have we >inadvertently created a self-fulfilling prophesy instead of an >unbiased investigation? > >Read the Full Report at the Science and Public Policy Institute. >There doesn't necessarily need to be a conspiracy. It doesn't >require any centrally coordinated deceit or covert instructions to >operate. Instead it's the lack of funding for the alternatives that >leaves a vacuum and creates a systemic failure. The force of >monopolistic funding works like a ratchet mechanism on science. >Results can move in both directions, but the funding means that only >results from one side of the equation get "traction". >More here: >http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/23/massive-climate-funding-exposed/ > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------ >Provided by Australis >http://www.australis.com.au/ > >_______________________________________________ >Mai-not mailing list >Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not From creuss at bluewin.ch Sat Aug 29 05:13:45 2009 From: creuss at bluewin.ch (Christoph Reuss) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: The Climate Industry - Massive Climate Funding Exposed Message-ID: > There doesn't necessarily need to be a conspiracy. It doesn't require any > centrally coordinated deceit or covert instructions to operate. Instead it's > the lack of funding for the alternatives that leaves a vacuum and creates a > systemic failure. The force of monopolistic funding works like a ratchet > mechanism on science. Is he talking about the lack of funding for alternative propulsion technologies, and the conspiracy of car manufacturers and the oil industry against fuel-efficient cars? A little reminder: In the year 2002, the CEO of VW drove a 1-LITER car (=235 mpg) from Wolfsburg to Hamburg. (photo: tinyurl.com/ndawr2 ) But the global car industry reversed the trend of lower fuel consumption, towards 25-Liter SUVs (=9 mpg) -- while "climate advocates" like Gore and Schwarzenegger keep babbling that "we need more research before we can achieve a 80-mpg car"! Al Gore, the lawyer clown who was U$ VP during the 8 years when U$ GHG emissions increased more than ever before in history, still does a great job of discrediting the concept that CO2 is destroying the climate -- focusing on the ridiculous small AVERAGE increase of global temperature instead of the vast and destructive increases in amplitude and frequencies of weather EXTREMES. Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Sat Aug 29 20:51:38 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:51:38 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Obama may defy court to protect CIA torturers Message-ID: <20090830035139.268D310EEF@fep02.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> The ACLU is watching closely. See story and links at http://washingtonindependent.com/57079/skirting-court-order-doj-may-withhold-interrogation-documents Dion Giles From diongiles1 at aapt.net.au Sat Aug 29 22:48:07 2009 From: diongiles1 at aapt.net.au (Dion Giles) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 13:48:07 +0800 Subject: [Mai-not] Fwd: The Climate Industry - Massive Climate Funding Exposed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090830054945.1204DF534@fep06.mfe.bur.connect.com.au> "Is he talking about the lack of funding for alternative propulsion technologies, and the conspiracy of car manufacturers and the oil industry against fuel-efficient cars?" No. That is another manifestation of the ratchet effect of funding. Another was the rise of eugenics. Another was the erroneous views about the cause of gastric ulcer. Another is the codswallop about Al Qa'eda levelling the Twin Towers. The list goes on and on and all would come under the ambit of the author's description of a ratchet effect whether (a relative triviality) that particular author would agree on each occasion or not, or switch attention to them or not. But let's focus on the proposition made by the author, not on guesses about his political cred (I'm suspicious of the site on which he posted his article - read the cretinous GOP-style comments at the bottom) or on other examples of the ratchet effect of funding on science, or on technology and production decisions as in the case of fuel-efficient cars. The idea of climatic fluctuations is an interesting one. I didn't take it on board when Chris put it forward it some months ago, but the suggestion is that the global climate (or a succession of regional climates?) has gone into a sort of paroxysmal tachycardia. Independently of what has or hasn't caused it, I would appreciate a lead to any published data on the fluctuation effect - especially in the form of illustrated scientific commentary. Whatever the truth behind the conflicting scientific claims (ignoring claims by social engineers with an axe of one sort or another to grind), one fact stands out: hydrocarbons and even coal are finite resources and it is criminal to waste either - first and foremost by the brasshats and by the transport of goods to bring wages and conditions down to the lowest point. (Sirs, slash your fuel consumption. Plebs, follow your masters). A totally criminal waste is the current poisoning of the sea by Thai-based company PTTEP with vast quantities of natural gas released at the seabed off Western Australia through cost-cutting in the inserting of a pipe to collect it for sale, and further, even more blatantly criminal, insistence by Thai-based company PTTEP on leaving the stuff pouring out for maybe weeks while waiting for its own drilling equipment to arrive from overseas to start repairs, meanwhile spurning an offer by Woodside Petroleum of similar equipment and a response team nearby and ready to go. Woodside offers help in oil spill [August 25] http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,27574,25979206-2761,00.html Woodside offer rejected by oil spill company [August 30] http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/25/2666168.htm By the way I might have been unfair in my subject line "Obama may defy court to protect CIA torturers" To be strictly accurate, it should be "Obama's cronies may defy court to protect CIA torturers". (Hitler didn't do it. It was Eichmann) Dion Giles At 20:13 29/08/2009, Chreis Reuss wrote: > > There doesn't necessarily need to be a conspiracy. It doesn't require any > > centrally coordinated deceit or covert instructions to operate. > Instead it's > > the lack of funding for the alternatives that leaves a vacuum and creates a > > systemic failure. The force of monopolistic funding works like a ratchet > > mechanism on science. > >Is he talking about the lack of funding for alternative propulsion >technologies, and the conspiracy of car manufacturers and the oil industry >against fuel-efficient cars? > >A little reminder: In the year 2002, the CEO of VW drove a 1-LITER car >(=235 mpg) from Wolfsburg to Hamburg. (photo: tinyurl.com/ndawr2 ) >But the global car industry reversed the trend of lower fuel consumption, >towards 25-Liter SUVs (=9 mpg) -- while "climate advocates" like Gore and >Schwarzenegger keep babbling that "we need more research before we can >achieve a 80-mpg car"! > >Al Gore, the lawyer clown who was U$ VP during the 8 years when U$ GHG >emissions increased more than ever before in history, still does a great >job of discrediting the concept that CO2 is destroying the climate -- >focusing on the ridiculous small AVERAGE increase of global temperature >instead of the vast and destructive increases in amplitude and frequencies >of weather EXTREMES. > >Chris > > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword >"igve". > > >_______________________________________________ >Mai-not mailing list >Mai-not at globalproblematique.net >http://www.globalproblematique.net/mailman/listinfo/mai-not From jfos at vic.australis.com.au Mon Aug 31 01:12:07 2009 From: jfos at vic.australis.com.au (john foster) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:12:07 +1000 Subject: [Mai-not] Fw: Southern Poverty Law Center: The Second Wave: Return of the Militias Message-ID: <003f01ca2a12$bc22b6d0$82ad57ca@jfos> Excerpt: "Public fear and discontent in the US is obvious today in everything from the emotional healthcare debate to arguments over immigration policy, the national debt, government reaction to the global financial crisis and much more. There may be only a tiny minority of truly dangerous fanatics arming themselves for what they see as the coming violent confrontation with 'the Feds', but they now operate within a much broader context of public anger and willingness to believe the most ridiculous conspiracy theories about President Obama's 'socialist' agenda for America. To make matters worse, American militia groups are often dominated by angry whites who espouse bizarre forms of an apocalyptic Christianity infused with heavy doses of racism and anti-Semitism." -0o0o0o0o0- This month the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center released a startling report describing the recent growth of right-wing, anti-government militia groups in the United States. If the trend identified in the SPLC report - The Second Wave: Return of the Militias - is correct, the US has two significant terrorist threats on its hands - the one from abroad with which we are all familiar and a domestic one that is rising. http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2664121.htm see also: http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=392 PDF The Second Wave. Return of the Militias. A Special Report from the Southern Poverty Law Center. Montgomery, Alabama. August 2009 ... www.splcenter.org/images/dynamic/main/The_Second_Wave.pdf http://www.tolerance.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center http://wikileaks.org/wiki/ US_National_Socialist_Movement_private_emails_,until_15_Aug_2009 comment: GOD DAMN THE TALIBAN & THE KU KLUX KLAN! more: The modern American militia movement reached a peak in the mid-1990s with the controversial and deadly sieges of dissident groups at Ruby Ridge in Idaho (1992) and Waco, Texas (1993) where the 51-day siege of David Koresh's Branch Dividian sect ended in a fire that took 76 lives. Two years later Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols bombed the Alfred Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. That incredible blast - the worst domestic terrorist strike in American history - killed 168, wounded 680 and damaged buildings over a 16-block radius. Until the Waco and Oklahoma tragedies, few Americans took the militia movement seriously. The movement receded somewhat when George W. Bush entered the White House, but now it is back.... Public fear and discontent in the US is obvious today in everything from the emotional healthcare debate to arguments over immigration policy, the national debt, government reaction to the global financial crisis and much more. There may be only a tiny minority of truly dangerous fanatics arming themselves for what they see as the coming violent confrontation with 'the Feds', but they now operate within a much broader context of public anger and willingness to believe the most ridiculous conspiracy theories about President Obama's 'socialist' agenda for America. To make matters worse, American militia groups are often dominated by angry whites who espouse bizarre forms of an apocalyptic Christianity infused with heavy doses of racism and anti-Semitism. Last week's SPLC Report argues that high levels of non-white immigration and 'the declining percentage of whites overall in America' have contributed significantly to the 'threat scenarios' envisioned by militia group members. One such 'threat' particularly popular in the American west is the Azatlan or 'reconquista' theory that Mexican immigration is a forerunner of a Mexican government conspiracy to reconquer US territory (Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.) ceded to the United States after the 1848 Mexican-American War. A Fox News commentator labelled President Obama a fascist and a Marxist (an intriguing combination). Some US shock jocks have 're-floated militia conspiracy theories?alleging a secret network of government-run concentration camps.' A Republican member of the House of Representatives declared he could name 17 "socialists" in Congress and Texas Governor Rick Perry 'raised the prospect of secession several months after Obama's inauguration'. see the semi retarted, detatched from reality, kneejerk reactionary nutjobs armed to the teeth and preparing to do the lords work. http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/militia-extremists-90s-are- back-and